PS: Isn't it amazing, the somewhat brighter blurry pixels arround 10:15
in spectrogram 1, sent in less than 15 minutes, contain "WD2XNS FN31
30(dBm)"!
Am 25.01.2013 15:35, schrieb Stefan Schäfer:
LF,
Here are two spectrograms showing traces of positive and negative
decodes in WSPR-15.
1:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/74746618/Files%20for%20exchange/WSPR15_25.JAN_10.20UTC.jpg
| Timestamp |
Call |
MHz |
SNR |
Drift |
Grid |
Pwr |
Reporter |
RGrid |
km |
az |
| 2013-01-25 10:15 |
WD2XNS |
0.137611 |
-38 |
0 |
FN31ls |
1 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3520 |
163 |
| 2013-01-25 09:15 |
WD2XNS |
0.137611 |
-36 |
0 |
FN31ls |
1 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3520 |
163 |
2.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/74746618/Files%20for%20exchange/WSPR15_25.JAN_05.50UTC.jpg
| 2013-01-25 05:45 |
WD2XNS |
0.137611 |
-34 |
0 |
FN31ls |
1 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3520 |
163 |
| 2013-01-25 05:15 |
WE2XEB |
0.137621 |
-35 |
0 |
FN12lq |
5 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3732 |
156 |
| 2013-01-25 05:15 |
WD2XNS |
0.137611 |
-31 |
0 |
FN31ls |
1 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3520 |
163 |
| 2013-01-25 04:45 |
WE2XEB |
0.137621 |
-37 |
0 |
FN12lq |
5 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3732 |
156 |
| 2013-01-25 04:45 |
WD2XNS |
0.137611 |
-33 |
0 |
FN31ls |
1 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3520 |
163 |
| 2013-01-25 04:15 |
WD2XNS |
0.137611 |
-36 |
0 |
FN31ls |
1 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3520 |
163 |
| 2013-01-25 04:15 |
WE2XEB |
0.137621 |
-36 |
0 |
FN12lq |
5 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3732 |
156 |
| 2013-01-25 03:45 |
WD2XNS |
0.137611 |
-37 |
0 |
FN31ls |
1 |
YV7MAE |
FK81bd |
3520 |
163 |
Somehow there seems to be a time difference of 5 minutes in the
spectrogram's time marker, probably coming from the setup process.
The lowest decodes SNR, here -38 dB, looks quite weak! I would have
thought that it looks stronger. So maybe WSPR-15 is a bit more
sensitive than i expected. Comments welcome.
73, Stefan/DK7FC
Am 24.01.2013 23:23, schrieb Stefan Schäfer:
LF,
I've added a temporary grabber window to the YV grabber,
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74746618/LF/YV7MAE_LF_Grabber.html
which
displays the WSPR-15 LF range. The spectrogram uses the same scroll
rate and FFT settings as the typical QRSS-60 grabber windows.
The idea is to compare the SNR indicated by WSPR-15 to the subjective
visual SNR. Of course the RF energy is spread out to a few FFT bins, so
the brightness or SNR must be lower compared to a QRSS trace. But
anyway it will be interesting and give some idea about the performance
of WSPR-15 compared to QRSS-60 or DFCW-90.
73, Stefan/DK7FC
|
|
