Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_PASS,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 X-Spam-DCC: wuwien: mailn 1290; 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 v4NGXFRu000392 for ; Tue, 23 May 2017 18:33:17 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1dDCg4-0002Eb-Jg for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 23 May 2017 17:28:56 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1dDCg4-0002ES-2y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 23 May 2017 17:28:56 +0100 Received: from omr-a012e.mx.aol.com ([204.29.186.61]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1dDCg0-0004dY-Ip for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 23 May 2017 17:28:54 +0100 Received: from mtaomg-mac02.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mac02.mx.aol.com [172.26.222.208]) by omr-a012e.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 4352438000B5 for ; Tue, 23 May 2017 12:28:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from core-ace07g.mail.aol.com (core-ace07.mail.aol.com [172.27.23.7]) by mtaomg-mac02.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id E7BC638000083 for ; Tue, 23 May 2017 12:28:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 80.146.228.71 by webprd-a101.mail.aol.com (10.72.52.238) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 23 May 2017 12:28:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 12:28:49 -0400 From: Markus Vester To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-Id: <15c3623b5a5-117a-aa88@webprd-a101.mail.aol.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: JAS STD X-Originating-IP: [80.146.228.71] x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20150623; t=1495556930; bh=nszcj3YkM9d4uWul2pW1P1YNgIHxkGF7agOd6YD2NBA=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jkyP6H8Ym/Qc8Y8lHfEnYxxWHW6c7vbSD9UCFT4y3dO+KcGDI0SkQiQU8b+eWgoT9 onsAezqyoX/fan4dou3m4OW6nyhaNTOfK+Cha1xcVcQcYLeRSka8Y5uafrsA0Hb90q Ff8Xoct/yHvDxehGhtFvfbtWOT1NeIyQYfPjPCUQ= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1aded05924634176dd X-Scan-Signature: 34d483c57c7a6bf26c25db3c8765d5fc Subject: Re: LF: NA VLF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_52210_1761554482.1495556928931" 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 Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 11741 ------=_Part_52210_1761554482.1495556928931 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable D'oh, pity! That message sounded so plausible, and at 0.5 dB EbN0 I wasn't = suspecting a false decode. Joe, could you perhaps remind me of your EbNaut timing parameters again? I = seem to have missed an email mentioning them. I don't think that mutual QRM would have been much of a problem. The two si= gnals would be perfectly orthogonal if you used identical symbol timing and= chose a carrier frequency spacing which is a multiple of the inverse symbo= l period (i.e. 0.05 or 0.1 Hz for Stefan's 20 s symbols).=20 Best 73, Markus =20 -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: jcraig An: rsgb_lf_group Verschickt: Di, 23. Mai 2017 17:12 Betreff: Re: LF: NA VLF Paul and Markus, Thank-you for the encouragement and patience, but infortunately the=20 message received does not match the one that was sent, assuminmg the sending was done correctly. Can we try again? Hopefully I am not causing QRM to Stefan's QTC on 8270.1 Hz. If so I can QSY back to 8277 Hz! Can we try his suggestion for a daytime attempt to take advantage of the lower QRN or will the S/N be too low? Also, are the sigs stable enough? Stefan suggested a GPS module that could be used with Spec Lab to generate a disciplined carrier. The WX should be more stable now. Last night the ERP decreased and the phase probably shifted too. 73 Joe VO1NA On Tue, 23 May 2017, Markus Vester wrote: > Paul and Joe, > > great news! Your patience has finally paid off. Congratulations to both o= n this excellent piece of work! > > 73, > Markus (DF6NM) > > -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung----- > Von: Paul Nicholson > An: rsgb_lf_group > Verschickt: Di, 23. Mai 2017 12:07 > Betreff: Re: LF: NA VLF > > > > Overnight 22nd/23rd was fairly quiet and the decoder turned up > > 'VO!' > > at Eb/N0 =3D +0.5dB, BER 42.7% with constant reference phase, > peaking at frequency of 8270.0070925 Hz + 6 uHz. > > Rank 7430 in the decoder list. > Carrier S/N: 12.81 dB in 39.2 uHz, > -31.26 dB in 1Hz, > -65.24 dB in 2.5kHz > > -- > Paul Nicholson > -- ------=_Part_52210_1761554482.1495556928931 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
D'oh, pity! That message sounded so plausible, and at 0.= 5 dB EbN0 I wasn't suspecting a false decode.

Joe, could you pe= rhaps remind me of your EbNaut timing parameters again? I seem to have= missed an email mentioning them.

I don't think that = mutual QRM would have been much of a problem. The two signal= s would be perfectly orthogonal if you used identical symbol= timing and chose a carrier frequency spacing which is a multiple= of the inverse symbol period (i.e. 0.05 or 0.1 Hz for Stefan's 20 s s= ymbols). 

Best 73,
Markus
 


-----Urspr= =C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: jcraig <jcraig@mun.ca>
An: = rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Verschickt: Di, 23. M= ai 2017 17:12
Betreff: Re: LF: NA VLF

Paul and Markus,
<= br>Thank-you for the encouragement and patience, but infortunately the
= message received does not match the one that was sent, assuminmg the
sen= ding was done correctly. Can we try again?

Hopefully I am not causi= ng QRM to Stefan's QTC on 8270.1 Hz. If so I can
QSY back to 8277 Hz! C= an we try his suggestion for a daytime attempt to
take advantage of the = lower QRN or will the S/N be too low?

Also, are the sigs stable enou= gh? Stefan suggested a GPS module that
could be used with Spec Lab to ge= nerate a disciplined carrier. The WX
should be more stable now. Last n= ight the ERP decreased and the phase
probably shifted too.

73Joe VO1NA

On Tue, 23 May 2017, Markus Vester wrote:

> Pau= l and Joe,
>
> great news! Your patience has finally paid off. = Congratulations to both on this excellent piece of work!
>
> 73= ,
> Markus (DF6NM)
>
> -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung= -----
> Von: Paul Nicholson <vlf0403@abelian.org>
> An: rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
&g= t; Verschickt: Di, 23. Mai 2017 12:07
> Betreff: Re: LF: NA VLF
&g= t;
>
>
> Overnight 22nd/23rd was fairly quiet and the dec= oder turned up
>
> 'VO!'
>
> at Eb/N0 =3D +0.5dB, B= ER 42.7% with constant reference phase,
> peaking at frequency of 827= 0.0070925 Hz + 6 uHz.
>
> Rank 7430 in the decoder list.
>= ; Carrier S/N: 12.81 dB in 39.2 uHz,
> -31.26 dB in 1Hz,
> -65.= 24 dB in 2.5kHz
>
> --
> Paul Nicholson
> --
------=_Part_52210_1761554482.1495556928931--