Re: LF: Re: Re: WSPR

[Scott Tilley <sthed475@telus.net>]

Hey Mal

Would you consider firing up a QRSS beacon for a couple of hours before 
and during your sunrise in the NA waterhole  137778.0Hz +/- 3Hz?
DCF39 has been audible for the last couple of nights and it may be our 
time to get a signal from EU into the west coast of NA.  I'd like to see 
how the path works while open and see whether there is a possibility of 
QSO in the future.
Here's your chance at another first...

TU es 73
Scott


mal hamilton wrote:
> Two points
>
> Why waste 2.4 kHz when QRS only needs a few Hz with a better S/N ratio.
>
> You agree that a faint trace is visible. If this faint trace was QRS 
> mode only a few Hz bandwidth would be necessary to read the 
> intellegence and the signal/noise would be superior.
> G3KEV
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clemens Paul" <cpaul@gmx.net>
> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:23 PM
> Subject: LF: Re: WSPR
>
>
> > Mal,
> >
> > > WSPR reports amongst stns indicate reception reports usually minus 
> > > dB. Most of these
> > > stations are usually PLUS
> > > dB with me or very close to that figure.
> > WSPR refers the indicated SNR to a BW of 2,4kHz.
> > So if your receiving BW is say 100Hz your actual SNR is better by 
> > ~14dB than WSPR
> > reports.
> >
> > > A trace of the signal is visible long before a decode takes place, 
> > > therefore why
> > > not use QRS in
> > >the first place.
> >
> > This may be an issue of your RX/soundcard setup.
> > I can assure you that with my Perseus SDR RX,set to a RBW of less 
> > than one Hertz
> > for the display,I can decode every WSPR signal which shows even only 
> > a faint trace on
> > the waterfall diagram.
> > At least this is my experience so far.
> >
> > 73
> > Clemens
> > DL4RAJ
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: mal hamilton
> > To: rsgb
> > Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:37 PM
> > Subject: LF: WSPR
> >
> >
> > WSPR reports amongst stns indicate reception reports usually minus 
> > dB. Most of these stations
> > are usually PLUS dB with me or very close to that figure.
> > So what does that prove. I would say it depends on the RX antenna and 
> > not necessarily
> > propagation. A large antenna yields better results than a small loop 
> > or active whip.
> > When I switch from my 1/4 wave inv L for 500 khz to a smaller 40 m 
> > resonated loop for 500 the
> > signals then do go down to a minus db figure.
> > So what is all this all ABOUT ?
> > There is also the TX pwr to consider. Two transmitters from the same 
> > location one using QRO
> > and the other QRP will be received at different levels at a specified 
> > RX location. There is a
> > lot of misrepresentation and misleading information by WSPR operator
> > A trace of the signal is visible long before a decode takes place, 
> > therefore why not use QRS
> > in the first place.
> >
> > G3KEV
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.55/2489 - Release Date: 
> > 11/08/09 07:37:00
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.55/2489 - Release Date: 
> 11/08/09 07:37:00