On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 16:42:12 -0400
<[email protected]> wrote:

> John and group
> 
> Your 'data mining' produced some misleading results and conclusions...
> 

Jay, LF,

Fair enough. 

I still think we're all better transmitting and receiving on the same
part of the spectrum - as this maximizes the number of sources and
sinks all being available at the same time, so as to discover the
propagation openings as they occur. 

Your position is that it's futile for us to occupy the same 200Hz of
WSPR-space on 500kHz. Well, as much as I disagree with this, I'm
prepared to bow to your better judgement.



As for 30m, I've been running a test there today (an average, or below
average day), in RX only mode and there are many instances of reasonably
strong stations, often 5 or more in the same timeslot, with +ve SNR, as
well as weak ones in the low negative SNR range:
 

2010-11-05 13:02 G0BYH  10.140229 +11 0 JO01hw 5 GM4SLV/2 IP90gg 935
2010-11-05 13:02 2E0POQ 10.140184 -18 0 IO91 0.5 GM4SLV/2 IP90gg 978

Here's a 29dB difference in SNR report, in the same timeslot.


Another randomly chosen period:

2010-11-05 13:36 2E0POQ 10.140184 -10 0 IO91   0.5 GM4SLV/2 IP90gg 978
2010-11-05 13:36 OK2SAM 10.140233 -26 0 JN99du 0.5 GM4SLV/2 IP90gg 1698
2010-11-05 13:36 G4TRP  10.140222 -20 0 IO90st 5   GM4SLV/2 IP90gg 1054
2010-11-05 13:36 G3RLE  10.140193  +1 0 IO83vo 1   GM4SLV/2 IP90gg 743   
2010-11-05 13:36 DK5FH  10.140167  +3 0 JO40kd 10  GM4SLV/2 IP90gg 1299

One period with 5 stations giving SNRs between +3 and -26 = okay +3dB
is not barnstorming, but it shows that it's possible to receive a couple
of good +ve SNRs and a couple of weak -ve ones at the same time....



Now, I think I'll call it a day on this one. 

I'll make this my final night on 499.6 


John
GM4SLV