Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mj01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 91D2838000099; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 09:39:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UDbYu-000486-VA for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:12:48 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.34] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UDbYu-00047x-IU for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:12:48 +0000 Received: from out1.ip05ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.241]) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UDbYs-0004I0-Ql for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:12:47 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApMBADOeOFFOlmQ+/2dsb2JhbAANNsREgXKDHgEBAQEBAjIBBVELCQ8JFg8JAwIBAgFFEwgBAYgGFac9hSmNb48TFoMqA5ZLk3o X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,802,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="411167566" Received: from host-78-150-100-62.as13285.net (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([78.150.100.62]) by out1.ip05ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 07 Mar 2013 14:07:24 +0000 Message-ID: <51389F1C.4030408@psk31.plus.com> Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:07:24 +0000 From: g3zjo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <5137C5F4.60500@broadpark.no> <5137D595.7030403@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <51386F9F.8090607@broadpark.no> In-Reply-To: <51386F9F.8090607@broadpark.no> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130307-0, 07/03/2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay2.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: Sorry Steinar I wasn't thinking, all these mode experiments.:-) Can you use 474.200 dial and a tone freq to put JT9-2 just below WSPR as we did previously. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Scan-Signature: 290c8768709872f914a4ca71ad6bfe49 Subject: Re: LF: Compare digital modes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: 3039ac1d7b955138a69222f9 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Sorry Steinar I wasn't thinking, all these mode experiments.:-) Can you use 474.200 dial and a tone freq to put JT9-2 just below WSPR as we did previously. 73 Eddie On 07/03/2013 10:44, Steinar Aanesland wrote: > As you probably know Joe has released the ver 0.5, r3038 of WSJT-X. > What I really want to try is some JT9 (-2 or -5) contacts on 630m :) > > LA5VNA Steinar > > > > > > loc:JO59jq > > > Den 07.03.2013 00:47, skrev Stefan Schäfer: >> Thanks for the links Steinar. Also to Jay/W1VD. >> >> And thanks all for an active day! Here and on the band(s). >> >> 73, Stefan/DK7FC >> >> PS: What will we do tomorrow? :-) >> >> Am 06.03.2013 23:40, schrieb Steinar Aanesland: >>> Hi all >>> >>> If you want to compare digital modes , take a look at this document : >>> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/16381257/Path%20%20Sim.pdf >>> >>> >>> Anthony Bombardiere, K2MO are using this Path Simulator >>> by Moe Wheatley, AE4JY : >>> http://www.moetronix.com/ae4jy/pathsim.htm >>> >>> >> >> > > >