Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS, T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 X-Spam-DCC: : mailn 1480; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by lipkowski.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u1) with ESMTP id v2RJHw8q017470 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:17:59 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1csa10-0007Gk-Dt for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:09:18 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1csa0z-0007Gb-Lf for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:09:17 +0100 Received: from resqmta-po-10v.sys.comcast.net ([2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:169]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1csa0w-0003Jx-OS for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:09:16 +0100 Received: from resomta-po-20v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.244]) by resqmta-po-10v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id sa0XcXZq0iWLusa0scTBDE; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:09:10 +0000 X-DKIM-Result: Domain=comcast.net Result=Signature OK DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20161114; t=1490641750; bh=lgITWprCZAJbVSuM2ak8cXyInK/Gy5y3eaV8WZaWnfY=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=m0idLThLI1YkZ6qhgU41CCurWGVSKeTvsSPombS0yphEtRD0Fp2twExAcUp1iTNbi tVdYLp3WDOr12U48yJ0c9jc5nDpYDDlBVdEVwx2VKXHE2bP7ZEjseNtJTKBQ4b3L+M gl5Zb/J/vXbLgWlRNbbt3uMdigk4zQEFqsYFkWLL/u9PxrZ3UkpaqOOpOWdwoofyMD Kn8kMd82jcGnQ0Jh3Yxif2Kw2WuDVU+6dluP6Kgrqzm0b3QoQfOnmuTji2QQvb9N1R vGnvGjFvWbH5Hw5/zt8avRTqQavcj+DSY2Dy8giTotXuSIx95wjVOqxtSP9ftEgWVn zQheS16pUZqhQ== Received: from Owner ([166.177.59.207]) by resomta-po-20v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id sa0hchwXNZLS3sa0lcpTRV; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:09:08 +0000 From: To: References: <93ae1c86-9b2e-8313-069f-8b0d941b49c8@abelian.org> <00ad01d2a674$93a2c1a0$bae844e0$@comcast.net> <98427971-ab65-50d0-8451-acb68ba1eb55@abelian.org> In-Reply-To: <98427971-ab65-50d0-8451-acb68ba1eb55@abelian.org> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:08:45 -0400 Message-ID: <001601d2a72d$99d55e70$cd801b50$@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGEk4+ydSDvSCCmGQr1u7Smz8OzTwLyznVPAmB+/QiiGpj7UA== Content-Language: en-us X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfKTHB2nqd9IYXMjsukG2VR+Ed2oZY5VdReJdOY2Y7mXTZWqTNEQNkRX29SZ6Ou9eTuwpulGEQB7c6xrJMpgh2JTBHAUNktEru93aXpZZqN/mfA1l53Fn L7BLUYkfq3jG9M91gB0S3mBCNI95ro9mMwYbV6/4WsdV6tp3XPjff2Zw X-Scan-Signature: ce0e5a4ae990e5a63db3ab7aea21191b Subject: RE: LF: RE: DK7FC in Todmorden at 2970 Hz Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 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 2.75 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by lipkowski.org id v2RJHw8q017470 Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 11034 Hello Paul and Stefan, I thought it would be interesting as a guide for future testing to know if path loss at 2970 Hz 100km – 1000km (a mode-sensitive combination with no validated models) is closer to the plot* that Stefan sent some months ago, or to the FDTD examples** (which show deep nulls, probably not at the exact frequencies for ionospheric and ground conditions during your tests, but indicators of the potential depths and widths of nulls at 2970 Hz, 100 km – 1000 km). I had hoped to use the far field results (140 km, 303 km, 502 km and 881 km) to estimate path loss, but I’m not sure if Paul’s stacking process is more akin to coherent integration of the time-domain data (guessing not) or averaging in the frequency domain, or something different. Paul, is there a basic description of your stacking process (“FFT-averaging” for example), that would enable me to convert stacked-data results to path loss? I have been calculating path loss for the results in which stacking was not used (coherently integrated data); but can’t calculate path loss for stacked-data results because I’m not sure what type of stacking is used. Can you point me in the right direction Paul? * (based on analytic expressions using a modal approximation) ** (FDTD inherently solving for all modes) 73, Jim AA5BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Paul Nicholson Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 5:15 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: RE: DK7FC in Todmorden at 2970 Hz > Does this meet the criterion that you were thinking > of in your comments March 21st and March 22nd? Exceeds. About 5 sigma, exactly the right frequency, roughly the correct bearing, E and H with the expected relative phase, even the E/H ratio is about right for a distant signal (as opposed to local interference). Now I'm trying to resolve the signal in a narrower bandwidth without stacking. -- Paul Nicholson --