Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: Re: defence of WSPR Signals

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Re: Re: defence of WSPR Signals
From: "mal hamilton" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:59:50 +0100
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]

----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Sergeant" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 5:00 PM
Subject: LF: Re: defence of WSPR Signals

On 21 Sep 2009 at 13:17, Peter Cleall wrote:

I have always been interested in propagation.
These WSPR signals are seen by some as repetitious rubbish.
Well having spent a few days looking at WSPR I would tend to fit best
in the 'repetitious rubbish' group.... WSPR is specifically designed
for weak signal reception, and there is certainly a case of doing this
to catch openings to our friends in W and BY land. But at a local level
I don't think it serves much purpose - it is true that you can
automatically monitor propagation and QSB rates, but a 2 minute
sampling time is FAR too long to get any sensible figures from this. At
my QTH every signal I have copied has been perfectly readable by ear,
some by a very considerable margin. Once you have monitored for a few
hours there is little more to be gained and it is a painfully slow mode
to even consider as a QSO mode.

The USA amateurs are fortunate in having a considerably wider band than
us. To have what is effective beacon transmissions there for long
periods in our 3kHz is not the best use of our space.

I shall be very shortly re-configuring my vertical back to its Top Band
mode for the winter season. If the future of 500kHz lies only in WSPR
beaconing it is a sad life being an amateur and I have far more useful
things to do on the other bands.

73 Dave G3YMC


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG -
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.111/2386 - Release Date: 09/21/09 05:51:00

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>