Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1170; 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=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, 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 tA1L58Ju014982 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 22:05:08 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Zszlk-00053c-E3 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 21:02:28 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Zszlj-00053F-BV for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 21:02:27 +0000 Received: from out1.ip06ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.242]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1ZszkZ-000769-GT for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 21:02:26 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2DzAQBtfDZWPKyNH1wNURkBAQIPAQEBAYNeb8EbGYYAAiWBRAEBAQEBAQcBAQEBQTSEQAEBAQECASMmNQcECwcKBAEBKwICQwwIBhOIGwMKsBZxjAkFhEoBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYiQeCboRBGzCCbzGBFAWIHYpJg12pX4RncoV+AQEB X-IPAS-Result: A2DzAQBtfDZWPKyNH1wNURkBAQIPAQEBAYNeb8EbGYYAAiWBRAEBAQEBAQcBAQEBQTSEQAEBAQECASMmNQcECwcKBAEBKwICQwwIBhOIGwMKsBZxjAkFhEoBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYiQeCboRBGzCCbzGBFAWIHYpJg12pX4RncoV+AQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,230,1444690800"; d="scan'208,217";a="691724261" Received: from host-92-31-141-172.as13285.net (HELO [192.168.1.4]) ([92.31.141.172]) by out1.ip06ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2015 21:00:59 +0000 References: <1a8427.6a713177.43669029@aol.com> <5635383B.8080403@posteo.de> <56353DB4.8010007@posteo.de> <56354AA6.1020702@posteo.de> <215F3F7B3BD74CAD81A322B601746534@PCFausto> <563616A2.5010102@posteo.de> <57FD07E7F9444DC0A077F7C4102A574C@PCFausto> <1812551446399695@web10g.yandex.ru> From: Mal Hamilton X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10B500) In-Reply-To: <1812551446399695@web10g.yandex.ru> Message-Id: <2ABF267E-C281-44E8-8F1D-451DF037B75B@talktalk.net> Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 21:00:58 +0000 To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Scan-Signature: e2b7e65dcf7cf6551ab81105a525fe0f Subject: Re: LF: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-D2044A18-FDC4-4D81-96EB-2A5768E3839B Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 4777 --Apple-Mail-D2044A18-FDC4-4D81-96EB-2A5768E3839B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are no false decodes with CW fast or slow. What you hear or see is genuine. Digital mode results can be suspect I recently got a digital report but I was not TX at the time G3kev Sent from my iPhone On 1 Nov 2015, at 17:41, Roman wrote: > Hi Genossen LFers! > =20 > Whats a RX setup use FR5ZX? > =20 > =20 > 01.11.2015, 17:49, "Fausto Coletti" : >> Hi Stefan, >> =20 >> beyond the technical aspect that is certainly is the most important thing= , there are people like me >> who operated in the microwave bands and especially EME that, sometimes hu= nted a new one for months >> before being able to make the qso that, certainly does not scare me a few= hours of calling... >> Technology has made giant steps and, systems like WSPR for the study of t= he propagation, >> bring us to knowledge phenomena that we would not have discovered otherwi= se but, the charm of an >> old CW two way QSO is unsurpassed in my opinion. >> Surely it was an exceptional condition that I do not think happen again m= any times during a year but, >> the perseverance finally always pays. >> =20 >> 73, Fausto >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: DK7FC >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2015 2:41 PM >> Subject: Re: LF: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR >> =20 >> Hi Fausto, >>=20 >> Normal CW would have been possible last night! There were 90 decodes by FR= 5ZX last night. The best reports from last night are: >>=20 >> TimestampCallMHzSNRDriftGridPwrReporterRGridkmaz >> 2015-10-31 22:30 PA0A 0.475725 -20 0 JO33de = 2 FR5ZX LG78pu 9511 135=20 >> 2015-10-31 23:46 DK7FC 0.475684 -12 0 JN= 49ik 1 FR5ZX LG78pu 9095 137=20 >> 2015-11-01 00:12 DF6NM 0.475785 -20 0 JN= 59nj 1 FR5ZX LG78pu 8974 139=20 >> 2015-10-31 23:58 DJ0ABR 0.475665 -25 0 JN= 68nt 0.2 FR5ZX LG78pu 8830 140=20 >> 2015-10-31 23:42 DH5RAE 0.475753 -27 0 JN= 68qv 0.5 FR5ZX LG78pu 8826 141=20 >> 2015-10-31 23:12 IZ7SLZ 0.475777 -27 0 JN= 80nu 0.01 FR5ZX LG78pu 7941 143=20 >>=20 >> You know, a few weeks back i've tested the readability of a signal at -6 d= B and -16 dB. -6 dB was fine for a normal speed (100 Bpm) CW QSO. -16 dB was= barely audible, not fine for a QSO, maybe a call can be copied when repeate= d a few times. So i think that -12 dB should be fine for a QSO at 60 Bpm and= some concentration... But it was just a short moment within 4 hours. Not su= re if someone want to call CQ for such a long time to make a "599tu" QSO the= n :-) >>=20 >> 73, Stefan >>=20 >> PS: Could someone provide more statistical overview of last nights result= s? >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Am 01.11.2015 12:09, schrieb Fausto Coletti: >>>=20 >>> Hi Stefan, >>> =20 >>> -14 dB !!! >>> Virtually with 10 dB extra power you would get an audible CW signal...at= 9000 Km WOW. >>> =20 >>> =20 >>> 73, Fausto IK4NMF >> Nessun virus nel messaggio. >> Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com >> Versione: 2015.0.6173 / Database dei virus: 4455/10926 - Data di rilascio= : 01/11/2015 >>=20 > =20 > =20 > --=20 > 73! > Roman, RW3ADB > =20 --Apple-Mail-D2044A18-FDC4-4D81-96EB-2A5768E3839B Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There are no false decodes with CW fas= t or slow.
What you hear or see is genuine.
Digital mode= results can be suspect
I recently got a digital report but I was n= ot TX at the time

G3kev


Sent from= my iPhone

On 1 Nov 2015, at 17:41, Roman <rw3adb@YANDEX.ru> wrote:

Hi Genossen LFers!
 
Whats= a RX setup use FR5ZX?
 
 
01.11.2015, 17:4= 9, "Fausto Coletti" <faustocole= tti@alice.it>:
Hi Stefan,
 
beyond the technical aspect that is certainly is the most importan= t thing, there are people like me
who opera= ted in the microwave bands and especially EME that, sometimes hunted a new one&nb= sp;for months
before being able to make the qs= o that, certainly does <= span>not scare me a few hours of call= ing...
Technology has made giant steps and, systems like WSPR  for the study of the propagation,
bring us to knowledge phenome= na that we would not have discovered<= /span> otherwise but, the charm of an<= /span>
old CW two way QSO is unsurpass= ed in my opinion.
= Surely it was an exceptional condition that= I do not think happen again many times during a year but,
the p= erseverance finally always pays.
 = ;
73= , Fausto
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: DK7FC
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2015 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR
&nbs= p;
Hi Fausto,

Normal CW would have been possible last night! The= re were 90 decodes by FR5ZX last night. The best reports from last night are= :

TimestampCallMHzSNRDriftGridPwrReporterRGridkmaz<= /tr> PA0A  0 = <= td align=3D"left"> DJ0ABR 
 2015-10-31 22:30  0.475725&nbs= p; -20  0&n= bsp; JO33de  = ;2  FR5ZX &nb= sp;LG78pu  9511  135 
 2015-10-31= 23:46  DK7FC  0.475684  -12  JN49ik  1  FR5ZX <= /td> LG78pu  9095=   137 
 2015-11-01 00:12  D= F6NM  0.475785  -20  0  JN59nj  1  FR5ZX  LG78pu  8974  139 
 2015-10-31 23:58  0.475665&= nbsp; -25  = 0  JN68nt &n= bsp;0.2  FR5ZX  LG78pu  8830  140 
 2015-10= -31 23:42  DH5RAE  0.475753  -27  0  JN68qv = ; 0.5  FR5ZX=   LG78pu &nb= sp;8826  141 
 2015-10-31 23:12 =  IZ7SLZ  0.475777  -27  0  JN80nu  0.01  FR5ZX  LG78pu&nb= sp; 7941  1= 43 

You know, a few weeks back i've tested= the readability of a signal at -6 dB and -16 dB. -6 dB was fine for a norma= l speed (100 Bpm) CW QSO. -16 dB was barely audible, not fine for a QSO, may= be a call can be copied when repeated a few times. So i think that -12 dB sh= ould be fine for a QSO at 60 Bpm and some concentration... But it was just a= short moment within 4 hours. Not sure if someone want to call CQ for such a= long time to make a "599tu" QSO then :-)

73, Stefan

PS: Could= someone provide more statistical overview of last nights results?


Am 01.11.2015 12:09, schrieb Fausto Coletti:
Hi Stefan,
 
-14 dB !!!
Virtually with 10 dB extra power you would get an audible CW signal...at 9000 Km WOW.
 
 
73, Fausto IK4NMF=

= Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 2015.0.6173 / Database dei virus: 4455/= 10926 - Data di rilascio: 01/11/2015

 = ;
 
--
73!
Roman, RW3ADB
&n= bsp;
= --Apple-Mail-D2044A18-FDC4-4D81-96EB-2A5768E3839B--