Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1290; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,RATWARE_GECKO_BUILD autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id t4PNIonc014115 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 01:18:50 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Yx1bW-0001GX-0f for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 00:16:18 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Yx1bV-0001GO-Iw for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 00:16:17 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.100.212]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1Yx1bT-0007ED-Ua for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 00:16:16 +0100 Received: from crusoe.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (crusoe.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.248]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id t4PNGEI8014682 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 01:16:15 +0200 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by crusoe.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C541EE1B23 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 01:16:14 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5563AD3E.2090204@posteo.de> Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 01:16:14 +0200 From: DK7FC 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: <5561CEB5.3060506@charter.net>, <5561ECC1.8030301@kpnmail.nl> <556222D3.11110.8F3A44@roelof.ndb.demon.nl> <55623C9A.4060107@charter.net> <000e01d096dd$ac91f5d0$6401a8c0@JAYDELL> <556311FA.7090205@posteo.de> <55636912.1010105@no3m.net> <55636E96.3040506@posteo.de> <55638C47.1090402@freenet.de> In-Reply-To: <55638C47.1090402@freenet.de> X-Scan-Signature: 4b5b5ebe37a4c4f430f59bc35c1947b0 Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030007050106070800090501" 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3274 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030007050106070800090501 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Am 25.05.2015 22:55, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf: > p.s. is there a possibility to filter / display only WSPR-15 decodes > from the database, and how widespread is the use of that mode ? ...there have been a few MF TA tests in WSPR-15 in the early 630m days, showing that this mode is to slow for the path on that band. These tests have not been very extended though. But most likely there is not a 'gain' of 9 dB over WSPR-2. I would assume that successful detections are even less likely in that mode over the pond. 73, Stefan --------------030007050106070800090501 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Am 25.05.2015 22:55, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf:
p.s. is there a possibility to filter / display only WSPR-15 decodes from the database, and how widespread is the use of that mode ?

...there have been a few MF TA tests in WSPR-15 in the early 630m days, showing that this mode is to slow for the path on that band. These tests have not been very extended though. But most likely there is not a 'gain' of 9 dB over WSPR-2. I would assume that successful detections are even less likely in that mode over the pond.

73, Stefan
--------------030007050106070800090501--