Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-de02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 5F5DC380000BF; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:11:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UXIkO-00070v-V8 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:10:04 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UXIkO-00070m-A6 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:10:04 +0100 Received: from omr-d02.mx.aol.com ([205.188.109.194]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UXIkL-0002u3-Op for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:10:03 +0100 Received: from mtaout-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.51.134]) by omr-d02.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 8A7C570026ABF for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:55:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Black (188-195-246-26-dynip.superkabel.de [188.195.246.26]) by mtaout-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPA id EBD39E0000A9 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:55:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <30B51BE26CE840C199634AB5473A3506@Black> From: "Markus Vester" To: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:55:17 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18463 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1367358922; bh=OJPu+iM36ONB0qLp3IClHPuotI1UZHVEjNNy0oj5ZlM=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=SbnTYs148enkjiaPmNKJTv92J2etO1Od50A9elTJywnD6nX+UU7xS4bhulez8hEze eB8j4ruCNQlvmwcBr82Xl8J/h2EhvN8Te2spu+A7FsNanfuMsYcrV4z3kWNCGManmd NKt56xrIExW2JSe92ca9Hcd0rpEc11UmVCaYFfJg= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:356979392:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) 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: Hi Graham, going by my experience with Op-32 correlation experiments on LF, I would much rather have separate frequency bands for Op and WSPR. I also believe that 100 Hz for Opera-32 is much wider than necessary (that's 400 channels of 0.25 Hz bandwidth). It would be more economical and also computationally efficient to restrict the range to say 25 Hz (similar to WSPR-15). [...] Content analysis details: (-2.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [205.188.109.194 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (markusvester[at]aol.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -2.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: d5ac66e7920295f519efeb68ecc59e6f Subject: LF: Re: SUGGESTED TEMPORARY CHANGE TO [OPERA ] MF QRG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01CE45FE.2A70AC40" 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, LINES_OF_YELLING,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-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-de02.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : mx.aol.com DKIM : fail X-AOL-OVERRIDE-PIK-REASON: Y x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40ca5180418b2189 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_0005_01CE45FE.2A70AC40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Graham, going by my experience with Op-32 correlation experiments on LF, I would = much rather have separate frequency bands for Op and WSPR. I also = believe that 100 Hz for Opera-32 is much wider than necessary (that's = 400 channels of 0.25 Hz bandwidth). It would be more economical and also = computationally efficient to restrict the range to say 25 Hz (similar to = WSPR-15). All this would be easier if the audio frequencies weren't hardcoded into = the Opera software. 73, Markus (DF6NM) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Graham=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:26 PM Subject: LF: SUGGESTED TEMPORARY CHANGE TO [OPERA ] MF QRG=20 SUGGESTED TEMPORARY CHANGE TO MF QRG =20 Its proposed to drop the MF Opera operating QRG to 474.2 dial set = USB As it would appear , the WSPR qrg is not to move back to the = original 477 spot any time soon, to enable dual monitoring of = Opera and WSPR as was the original status , Opera tones being = arranged to fall out side the wspr pass band , the two modes = coexist on the same dial-set usb qrg=20 No change to the software is envisaged as an eventual return to = 477 is anticipated once any band planning is implemented, or = more normal use is made of the mid band.=20 The move was previously suggested, but not implemented to prevent = a clash with wspr-15 activity , which now appears to of subsided = . Where as it was unlikely to compromise the Opera decode engine , = it was evident from events that conversely wspr could of been = affected. =20 Comments any one ? Tnx- Graham ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01CE45FE.2A70AC40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Graham,
 
going by my experience with = Op-32 correlation=20 experiments on LF, I would much rather have separate frequency = bands for Op=20 and WSPR. I also believe that 100 Hz for Opera-32 is much wider = than=20 necessary (that's 400 channels of 0.25 Hz bandwidth). It would be = more=20 economical and also computationally efficient to restrict = the=20 range to say 25 Hz (similar to WSPR-15).
 
All this would be easier if the audio = frequencies=20 weren't hardcoded into the Opera software.
 
73, Markus (DF6NM)
 
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Graham=20
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:26 PM
Subject: LF: SUGGESTED TEMPORARY CHANGE TO [OPERA ] MF QRG=20

SUGGESTED TEMPORARY   CHANGE TO MF   QRG  =
 
Its proposed to drop the MF Opera   operating   = QRG=20 to   474.2 dial set USB
 
As it  would  appear , the  WSPR   = qrg  is=20 not to  move  back to  the  original  477  = spot  any time  soon, to  enable   dual =20 monitoring  of  Opera and  WSPR  as was  = the =20 original  status , Opera tones being  arranged to  = fall  out=20 side the  wspr  pass  band , the  two  = modes =20 coexist on the  same  dial-set usb qrg
 
No  change to  the  software is  = envisaged =20 as  an  eventual  return to 477  is  = anticipated =20 once  any  band  planning  is  implemented, = or =20 more normal use  is made of the  mid  band.
 
The  move was  previously  suggested, = but =20 not  implemented  to  prevent a   clash =20 with  wspr-15   activity , which now appears to  = of =20 subsided .
 
Where  as  it was  unlikely  to  = compromise=20 the  Opera  decode  engine , it was evident from  = events=20 that  conversely  wspr  could  of  been = affected. =20
 
Comments   any one ?
 
Tnx- Graham
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01CE45FE.2A70AC40--