Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mb02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id C3A3B380000E4; Sat, 9 Feb 2013 13:48:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U4FSm-00066v-GR for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 18:47:48 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U4FSm-00066j-3y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 18:47:48 +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 1U4FSk-00023V-HG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 18:47:46 +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 r19IlPvE001920 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 9 Feb 2013 19:47:25 +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 r19IlPsl002816 for ; Sat, 9 Feb 2013 19:47:25 +0100 Message-ID: <511699B8.4000208@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:47:20 +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: <5116977F.50108@npton.plus.com> <51169844.60906@psk31.plus.com> In-Reply-To: <51169844.60906@psk31.plus.com> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: Eddie, Stand alone? Without a PC, just the PIC and a time reference and a tiny PA? Pictures please! [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 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] -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: e09cca6d8e44a91eadbdfb3e1b8aec09 Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: WSPR Test 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: 3039ac1d601651169a024c67 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Eddie, Stand alone? Without a PC, just the PIC and a time reference and a tiny PA? Pictures please! 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 09.02.2013 19:41, schrieb g3zjo: > > Hi LF WSPR'ers > > I am testing a stand alone WSPR modular system, I must apologies for the > arbitrary power level displayed as the Code is fixed on PIC and the > power level is variable.. > > Any comments on the apparent EIRP compared to other signals at the same > distance are welcome. > > The set up is not finalised, I have just temporarily added a mechanical > relay on the enable line to get it TX'ing every 10 mins. > > 73 Eddie G3ZJO > >