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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE 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 t4QGY5Xh016798 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:34:05 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1YxHlY-0003pt-W8 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:31:44 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1YxHlY-0003pk-KE for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:31:44 +0100 Received: from mail-wg0-f46.google.com ([74.125.82.46]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1YxHlW-0001lr-KL for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:31:43 +0100 Received: by wgez8 with SMTP id z8so102260936wge.0 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 09:31:41 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=a+TFNsCSX1FVjA2s9VCeDHieU20MMUgeu0+kQXDXDN4=; b=lF84X9TXdDpxS7RaSf6dUX+jF6KVZcsigDJ3VqrHCCM7TTPEday01cknvLIMFSIpVy bLurUJ4ivhmFP5rJIaXFIhGaxFRIPgZKaCD6OwKVLS2I2LxMiRe98shY/P1f7k/coB6s +flQQsTMUL4MOGNvCvuDHKltYBc2YaQsEOrKGhTMFOIFJbaDnxyaIh6S2h+JvA/fQZqf MhBTd0UBdeRIMydFaWjf1+SKLvAQoyCSKz6ALYF+fvxjuBU3MONuF1Y+xaCVV1WxgrWI 5KJo22EwwC3/JEmrK/EnvgSbVRPyiyTD3idd+dYQqDqfcPM0qNK5CMZmSGjSwW+LM+nH Bj0Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.85.231 with SMTP id k7mr42057105wiz.93.1432657901589; Tue, 26 May 2015 09:31:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.28.136.132 with HTTP; Tue, 26 May 2015 09:31:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55649E42.3070906@freenet.de> 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> <55649E42.3070906@freenet.de> Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 17:31:41 +0100 Message-ID: From: Andy Talbot To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org, rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk X-Scan-Signature: ad9c0e3658f56f4dbb01cd425a6a8031 Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0444ef414f1a360516fea9ae 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: 3289 --f46d0444ef414f1a360516fea9ae Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I'll be putting my WSPR-15 transmission on later. Probably starting around 2100(z) Andy G4JNT On 26 May 2015 at 17:24, wolf_dl4yhf wrote: > 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 > > > --f46d0444ef414f1a360516fea9ae Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'll be putting my WSPR-15 transmission on later. =C2= =A0
Probably starting around 2100(z)

Andy =C2=A0G4JN= T

On 26 May 2015 at 17:24, wolf_dl4yhf <dl4yhf@freenet.de> w= rote:
=20 =20 =20
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,
=C2=A0 Wolf DL4YHF .


Am 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester:
=20 =20
Wolf, as far as I know the only way to separate them in the database seems to be=C2=A0sorting by frequency (which is not very useful otherwise). There is a peculiarity in that=C2=A0the 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).=C2=A0
=C2=A0
Stefan, I'm not=C2=A0sure=C2= =A0about 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=C2=A0last night sometimes showed two d= eep fades in one sequence, but=C2=A0it was decoded ok.=C2=A0It has be= en argued that a very short and strong maximum might be utilized by=C2=A0-2 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.
=C2=A0
Laurence yes your frequencies ar= e correct, dial 475.2 kHz, RF: 475.6 - 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 - 475.825 WSPR-15.
=C2=A0
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?
=C2=A0
73, Markus
=C2=A0
=C2=A0

=C2=A0
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 tha= t successful detections are even less likely in that mode over the pond.

73, Stefan


--f46d0444ef414f1a360516fea9ae--