Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS
From: "Graham" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:02:55 -0000
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <021701ce0e05$1f0acd30$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
References: <01c201ce0df6$fca68350$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <01d001ce0df7$ec018990$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <3751D15C489E45289657A49A3266CF42@AGB> <021701ce0e05$1f0acd30$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem
 
Mal..
 
well , basically   as long  as the  signal  to  noise  ratio  is better  than the  minimum , then  it should  decode  , so   where  a high  field  strength  will  decode  in a high  noise area  ... a low  signal  will  decode  in a  low  one       ........ there  is no 'real'  lower  limit  other  than the  noise floor  of the  equipment / location , setting  the  minimum   'field strength'  needed  to  reach the  lower  limit [ if that  makes sense ]
 
On from  that  comes slightly  more  signal processing and  data  processing etc  , wspr is  beacon , not  a qso  mode so  time  is  a problem  with the  web-clock  , but that  only reduces  the  CPU loading  , not a problem  these  days  , but  with  fec  and other  additions  , s/n can  be lowered
 
With the  750 ft  long wire  and  600 ft loop  at   gb4fpr , Andys   g4jnt beacon   cw/psk  was   S7   during the  day  , so  yes , big Ae's  do work, but  the  fort is  surrounded   with  sea water  and  a long  way  from the  land ... 
 
my qth  was ok  till  bbc radio  Mersey-wide  added  more  feeds  and upped the  power , now  just  a background  of  much and  clatter  if it  rains .....always   web-sdr ...... no  commercial  set up  has the  RX in town !
 
G... 
 

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

Graham
It is all inter related. But a few fundamentals are necessary. If it is so bad with for instance a 24 dB disadvantage I would MOVE or pack it in.
Too many excuses are used, the amateur has enough space for a reasonable antenna but says he is concerned about what the neighbours might think. I have heard this so many times. How much space does a 60 ft vertical take up, less than half a sq metre.
Surely when a radio amateur is looking for a property he has antennas in mind and looks for the largest real estate he can afford.
especially if interested in MF or LF.
So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem
It is not working, as I said looking at the wspr database, some stns are not even aware that others are active because of lack of signal for what ever reason.
mal/g3kev
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Graham
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

May be , may be not  Mal
 
The system is  reading  the  s/n   at the  Rx   and  not the   field  strength ........  depends on the  local  noise level ,   rst   159  or  599  , carrier  still  S9  ,   1= qrm     5= no  qrm
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:49 PM
Subject: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

Example
I am receiving PA3EGO + 2dB another UK stn is showing -22 at a shorter distance. A difference of 24 dB
and this station says he is an Expert!!
 
 
----- Original Message -----
To: rsgb
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:42 PM
Subject: LF: POOR ANTENNAS

MF
One thing the wspr DB shows is how poor some Receivers/Antennas are comparing like with like approximately same distances from Transmitter.
 
g3kev
 
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>