Re: LF: Re: WSPR 503.5

[Andy Talbot <andy.g4jnt@googlemail.com>]

I disagree - ERP is the licenced figure, and its what really matters
in the propagation tests.

WSPR only allows a few values, with several dB between them, and it
really should be possible to get an estimat of antenna efficiency to
that sort of value.   Rloss / calculated Rrad is easy enough to
measure.

Andy  G4JNT
www.g4jnt.com



2009/1/25 John P-G <gm4slv@sighthound.demon.co.uk>:
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:24:23 -0000
> "Gary - G4WGT" <g4wgt@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> When I make the calculation I will insert the correct figure.
>>
> Hello Gary, LF,
>
> I'm getting a fairly reliable signal from you, with just enough QSB to
> dip under the decoding margin from time to time.
>
> As to power reporting, I see that most people on LF/MF are attempting
> to estimate ERP, and use this figure in the beacon data.
>
> There was much discussion on the WSPR forum on the merits or otherwise
> of this approach, in the HF sphere at least.
>
> It might be easier if we adopted the same approach as is recommended
> for HF use - to report the actual TX power, not ERP.
>
> I see your last beacon is reporting 3dBm! Wow... that really is "flea
> power". Of course 2mW ERP from a small antenna won't go as far as 2mW
> ERP from a large one.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
> GM4SLV
>
>