Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1002; 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 t4QGTG0B016770 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:29:16 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1YxHgi-0003je-Su for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:26:44 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1YxHgi-0003jV-GP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:26:44 +0100 Received: from mout2.freenet.de ([195.4.92.92]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1YxHgd-0001jc-Ou for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:26:43 +0100 Received: from [195.4.92.142] (helo=mjail2.freenet.de) by mout2.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxHgd-00046L-5t for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:26:39 +0200 Received: from localhost ([::1]:60944 helo=mjail2.freenet.de) by mjail2.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxHgd-00081L-4R for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:26:39 +0200 Received: from mx11.freenet.de ([195.4.92.21]:51106) by mjail2.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxHee-0004c3-KC for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:24:36 +0200 Received: from xd9bf6b6b.dyn.telefonica.de ([217.191.107.107]:2143 helo=[192.168.178.21]) by mx11.freenet.de with esmtpsa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (port 465) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxHee-0007jz-3v for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:24:36 +0200 Message-ID: <55649E42.3070906@freenet.de> Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 18:24:34 +0200 From: wolf_dl4yhf User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 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> <5563AD3E.2090204@posteo.de> In-Reply-To: X-Originated-At: 217.191.107.107!2143 X-Scan-Signature: 29f208b223fe7a2cb359508e38e2ea2d Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030001050100060207060606" 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: 3288 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030001050100060207060606 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the info. I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched from the same directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the other for -15. Not a single decode from the latter yet. I guess as long as they run, the two instances don't interfear (:o) 73, Wolf DL4YHF . Am 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester: > Wolf, as far as I know the only way to separate them in the database > seems to be sorting by frequency (which is not very useful otherwise). > There is a peculiarity in that the hh:15 and hh:45 timestamps in the > database seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and hh:46) at > midnight UT (just happened to G4JNT entries). > Stefan, I'm not sure about not using -15 on MF. Even though fading is > faster and deeper, the WSPR decoder seems to cope well with it. After > all WSPR-2 is useful on HF where fading happens in seconds. The > spectrogram of Andy's transmission last night sometimes showed two > deep fades in one sequence, but it was decoded ok. It has been argued > that a very short and strong maximum might be utilized by -2 and not > by -15, and maybe there's not all of the theoretical 9 dB gain, but I > reckon on average it's not much less. > Laurence yes your frequencies are correct, dial 475.2 kHz, RF: 475.6 - > 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 - 475.825 WSPR-15. > I wonder if it is possible to run two instances of WSPRX side by side > on the same machine, one for -2 and one for -15? Or would they crash > one another? > 73, Markus > > *From:* DK7FC > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > *Subject:* Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A > > 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 --------------030001050100060207060606 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the info.

I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched from the same directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the other for -15. Not a single decode from the latter yet.

I guess as long as they run, the two instances don't interfear (:o)

73,
  Wolf DL4YHF .


Am 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester:
Wolf, as far as I know the only way to separate them in the database seems to be sorting by frequency (which is not very useful otherwise). There is a peculiarity in that the hh:15 and hh:45 timestamps in the database seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and hh:46) at midnight UT (just happened to G4JNT entries). 
 
Stefan, I'm not sure about not using -15 on MF. Even though fading is faster and deeper, the WSPR decoder seems to cope well with it. After all WSPR-2 is useful on HF where fading happens in seconds. The spectrogram of Andy's transmission last night sometimes showed two deep fades in one sequence, but it was decoded ok. It has been argued that a very short and strong maximum might be utilized by -2 and not by -15, and maybe there's not all of the theoretical 9 dB gain, but I reckon on average it's not much less.
 
Laurence yes your frequencies are correct, dial 475.2 kHz, RF: 475.6 - 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 - 475.825 WSPR-15.
 
I wonder if it is possible to run two instances of WSPRX side by side on the same machine, one for -2 and one for -15? Or would they crash one another?
 
73, Markus
 
 

 
From: DK7FC
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM
Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A

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

--------------030001050100060207060606--