Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dc04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A5EC23800009E; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:56:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U0wTd-0002r3-Kv for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:55:01 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U0wTd-0002qs-2d for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:55:01 +0000 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.100.212]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U0wTb-0006et-34 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:54:59 +0000 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id r0VFsbMG022171 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:54:38 +0100 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id r0VFsbfa015171 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:54:37 +0100 Message-ID: <510A93B8.4000208@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:54:32 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <5109921A.10101@psk31.plus.com> <937E72B3-2E36-4319-9E54-28F12868734E@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <937E72B3-2E36-4319-9E54-28F12868734E@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Roger, Why not trying WSPR-15, just for the fun? There are a few new stations such as G4FEC who is relatively local to you. I saw that UA0AET is copied by UA0SNV, not a long time ago. Since UA0AET is a strong signal, there may be some success to the west! I'll join in in the next slot, beginning 16 UTC... [...] Content analysis details: (-0.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [129.206.100.212 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.1 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: d7fcd9b75df8d1b09ddef9df028bd9ae Subject: Re: LF: 137.5kHz WSPR2 tonight Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d4084510a94250059 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Roger, Why not trying WSPR-15, just for the fun? There are a few new stations such as G4FEC who is relatively local to you. I saw that UA0AET is copied by UA0SNV, not a long time ago. Since UA0AET is a strong signal, there may be some success to the west! I'll join in in the next slot, beginning 16 UTC... 73, Stefan/DK7FC PS: Just got some old RAM for my old PC where the LF/MF grabbers are running on. It will rise the space from 2x256MB to 2x512MB. Maybe this helps so that WSPR-15 works here too, RX wise... Am 31.01.2013 01:29, schrieb Roger Lapthorn: > Thanks Eddie. > > I think WSPR2 is roughly equivalent to QRSS10, so some 5dB(?) better than QRSS3. It is possible that people did not detect the QRSS3 signal because of this, but more probable that the "manual" decode required did not happen. > > There is NO doubt in my mind that WSPR in all its flavours is an excellent research tool because of the Internet feedback. > > 73s > Roger > (137kHz WSPR2 still running overnight) > > On 30 Jan 2013, at 21:35, g3zjo wrote: > > >> Hi Roger >> >> I did take a look for you last night but QRM levels here, interference like heavy theater curtains, means 136KHz is a no go area for me unless whoever it is stops doing what ever it is. >> >> I am also doing it the difficult way still, running my 200uW TX on WSPR and QRSS on 475KHz producing regular spots from the UK, DL, PA and F. However confirming my previous tests the QRSS3 may as well not be there. Not one report received even from a UK station. >> This is with the QRSS between WSPR transmissions in the WSPR window. If the mode was the slightest bit comparable then surely it would produce a comment even if those seeing the signal cannot resolve a call sign or the unique identification Morse symbol. >> >> I will now duck whilst it is mathematically proven that all who are decoding the WSPR are copying the QRSS3 just fine.:-) >> >> Eddie >> >> On 30/01/2013 17:08, Roger Lapthorn wrote: >> >>> My LF WSPR2 tests using the earth-electrode antenna and 30uW ERP max continue this evening. With 2 unique reports yesterday (G8HUH 250km and M0GXM 18km, both multiple times), I'm hopeful that others will copy me this evening. >>> >>> Please take a look for me if you get a chance. All spots really appreciated. >>> >>> 73s >>> Roger G3XBM >>> -- >>> -- >>> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/ >>> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk >>> https://sites.google.com/site/sub9khz/ >>> http://qss2.blogspot.com/ >>> http://www.youtube.com/user/G3XBM >>> >> >> >