Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mk03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 9EFAC38000084; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:37:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U7Wvo-0007UN-7z for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:03:20 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U7Wvn-0007UA-Kb for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:03:19 +0000 Received: from smtpout1.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.29] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U7Wvk-0001n3-GS for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:03:18 +0000 Received: from AGB ([2.26.29.11]) by mwinf5d08 with ME id 1w2v1l01K0EPDVe03w2vo6; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 21:02:55 +0100 Message-ID: <62B5F7DF5C174B30BEEA75C36CDF70DB@AGB> From: "Graham" To: References: <01c201ce0df6$fca68350$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <01d001ce0df7$ec018990$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <3751D15C489E45289657A49A3266CF42@AGB> <021701ce0e05$1f0acd30$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> In-Reply-To: <021701ce0e05$1f0acd30$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:02:55 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) 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: So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem Mal.. well , basically as long as the signal to noise ratio is better than the minimum , then it should decode , so where a high field strength will decode in a high noise area ... a low signal will decode in a low one ........ there is no 'real' lower limit other than the noise floor of the equipment / location , setting the minimum 'field strength' needed to reach the lower limit [ if that makes sense ] [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.12.242.29 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 60cd3dc4440dc5d656099dfe3d5cf4d2 Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0140_01CE0E12.F0DCDE90" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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: 3039ac1d61875122911b71e5 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0140_01CE0E12.F0DCDE90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet = location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem Mal.. well , basically as long as the signal to noise ratio is better = than the minimum , then it should decode , so where a high field = strength will decode in a high noise area ... a low signal will = decode in a low one ........ there is no 'real' lower limit = other than the noise floor of the equipment / location , setting = the minimum 'field strength' needed to reach the lower limit [ = if that makes sense ]=20 On from that comes slightly more signal processing and data = processing etc , wspr is beacon , not a qso mode so time is a = problem with the web-clock , but that only reduces the CPU loading = , not a problem these days , but with fec and other additions , = s/n can be lowered=20 With the 750 ft long wire and 600 ft loop at gb4fpr , Andys = g4jnt beacon cw/psk was S7 during the day , so yes , big Ae's = do work, but the fort is surrounded with sea water and a long = way from the land ... =20 my qth was ok till bbc radio Mersey-wide added more feeds and = upped the power , now just a background of much and clatter if it = rains .....always web-sdr ...... no commercial set up has the RX = in town ! G... =20 From: mal hamilton=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 6:23 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS Graham It is all inter related. But a few fundamentals are necessary. If it is = so bad with for instance a 24 dB disadvantage I would MOVE or pack it = in. Too many excuses are used, the amateur has enough space for a reasonable = antenna but says he is concerned about what the neighbours might think. = I have heard this so many times. How much space does a 60 ft vertical = take up, less than half a sq metre. Surely when a radio amateur is looking for a property he has antennas in = mind and looks for the largest real estate he can afford. especially if interested in MF or LF.=20 So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet = location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem It is not working, as I said looking at the wspr database, some stns are = not even aware that others are active because of lack of signal for what = ever reason. mal/g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Graham=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 5:01 PM Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS May be , may be not Mal The system is reading the s/n at the Rx and not the field = strength ........ depends on the local noise level , rst 159 or = 599 , carrier still S9 , 1=3D qrm 5=3D no qrm=20 From: mal hamilton=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:49 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS Example I am receiving PA3EGO + 2dB another UK stn is showing -22 at a shorter = distance. A difference of 24 dB and this station says he is an Expert!!=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: mal hamilton=20 To: rsgb=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:42 PM Subject: LF: POOR ANTENNAS MF One thing the wspr DB shows is how poor some Receivers/Antennas are = comparing like with like approximately same distances from Transmitter.=20 g3kev ------=_NextPart_000_0140_01CE0E12.F0DCDE90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive = operator ? and=20 a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this=20 problem
 
Mal..
 
well , basically   as long  as the  = signal =20 to  noise  ratio  is better  than the  minimum = ,=20 then  it should  decode  , so   where =20 a high  field  strength  will  decode  in = a=20 high  noise area  ... a low  signal =20 will  decode  in a  low  one =20      ........ there  is no 'real'  = lower =20 limit  other  than the  noise floor  of the  = equipment=20 / location , setting  the  minimum   'field = strength' =20 needed  to  reach the  lower  limit [ if that  = makes=20 sense ]
 
On from  that  comes slightly  more  signal = processing=20 and  data  processing etc  , wspr is  beacon , = not  a=20 qso  mode so  time  is  a problem  with = the =20 web-clock  , but that  only reduces  the  CPU = loading =20 , not a problem  these  days  , but  with  = fec =20 and other  additions  , s/n can  be lowered
 
With the  750 ft  long wire  and  600 ft = loop =20 at   gb4fpr , Andys   g4jnt beacon   = cw/psk =20 was   S7   during the  day  , so  yes = , big=20 Ae's  do work, but  the  fort is  = surrounded  =20 with  sea water  and  a long  way  from = the  land=20 ... 
 
my qth  was ok  till  bbc radio  = Mersey-wide =20 added  more  feeds  and upped the  power , now  = just  a background  of  much and  clatter  if = it =20 rains .....always   web-sdr ...... no  commercial  = set=20 up  has the  RX in town !
 
G... 
 

From: mal hamilton
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 6:23 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

Graham
It is all inter related. But a few fundamentals = are=20 necessary. If it is so bad with for instance a 24 dB disadvantage I = would MOVE=20 or pack it in.
Too many excuses are used, the amateur has = enough space=20 for a reasonable antenna but says he is concerned about what the = neighbours=20 might think. I have heard this so many times. How much space does a 60 = ft=20 vertical take up, less than half a sq metre.
Surely when a radio amateur is looking for a = property he=20 has antennas in mind and looks for the largest real estate he can=20 afford.
especially if interested in MF or LF. =
So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive = operator ? and=20 a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this=20 problem
It is not working, as I said looking at the wspr = database,=20 some stns are not even aware that others are active because of lack of = signal=20 for what ever reason.
mal/g3kev
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Graham
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 = 5:01=20 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR = ANTENNAS

May be , may be not  Mal
 
The system is  reading  the  s/n   at = the =20 Rx   and  not the   field  strength=20 ........  depends on the  local  noise level = ,  =20 rst   159  or  599  , carrier  = still =20 S9  ,   1=3D qrm     5=3D no  = qrm=20
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:49 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Subject: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

Example
I am receiving PA3EGO + 2dB another UK stn is = showing=20 -22 at a shorter distance. A difference of 24 dB
and this station says he is an Expert!! =
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 mal=20 hamilton
To: rsgb
Sent: Monday, February 18, = 2013 4:42=20 PM
Subject: LF: POOR = ANTENNAS

MF
One thing the wspr DB shows is how poor = some=20 Receivers/Antennas are comparing like with like approximately same = distances=20 from Transmitter.
 
g3kev
 
------=_NextPart_000_0140_01CE0E12.F0DCDE90--