Hi G
Yeh, ere, get off my thread.:-)
On 10/02/2013 00:59, Graham wrote:
Ed..
Longer TX periods gave more time for propagation or QRM to give zero
results,
We have times of 2,4,8,16 , dropped 16 as that was ott , most
made TA to usa with 2 , but 4 gave another -3 dB ... 8 ? well
may be , dose seem to work over distance
It's my personal findings only, but on MF using low power, I remember my
tests with Albert and the step back in amazement, when OP4 was being
lauded as equivalent to WSPR2 due to the duty cycle difference. WSPR2
did and OP4 didn't and took twice the time to let you know, give that to
an impatient git and which wins.?
WSPR does it better quicker.
Is that wspr 15 ?
I haven't got round to coding WSPR 15 yet.
73 Eddie
G..
--------------------------------------------------
From: "g3zjo" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 12:00 AM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: WSPR Test
Hi Minto
Transmit only, Opera is very simple, I think the PIC code of your
message is still available from the software GUI menu, the timing is
merely bits / message time. Yes I just sat and coded it without
writng down any protocol, its easier than WSPR.
The main thing that annoys me with OPERA on MF is the long TX
periods. Longer TX periods gave more time for propagation or QRM to
give zero results, I feel WSPR does it better quicker.
Same here on final builds but the present nest needs to be less quick
flash, bang, vapour resistant.:-)
Eddie
On 09/02/2013 23:37, Minto Witteveen wrote:
Hi Eddy,
Where did you get the description of the OPERA protocol? And did you
write the encoding yourself?
I found a protocol description of Opera on Andy’s (G4JNT) website,
but it is reverse-engineered, and I seem to remember him complaining
about undocumented (and unannounced) protocol changes.. So I am not
sure how up to date his description is.
I understand that Opera is quite efficient, so I am still somewhat
interested… but not in just simply generating Opera timings with an
obfuscated and secret external program and then parsing this through
my PIC/AD9850 TX. Where is the fun in that?
As for a final build.. there is no such thing here @pa3bca… As soon
as it’s finished (i.e. I cannot think of additional things or
software to add) it will probably start gathering dust somewhere. Or
(more likely) I will attach a key(er) and use it for CW. Beaconing
for beaconing’s sake is not for me.
73’s and please keep us posted on results.
Minto pa3bca
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse
-----Original Message----- From: g3zjo
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 00:02
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Re: WSPR Test
Hi Minto
Nice one.
There is a 4066 on my Modulator / Mixer board too, unused here, I can
reconfigure and plug in the Key. I am not sure of any ultimate
configurations for a final build, it is still at the experimental
stage.
I have a CW / OPERA QRSS Module too, I have coded and tested OPERA it
is OK but I can't get to love it.
73 Eddie G3ZJO
On 09/02/2013 22:22, Minto Witteveen wrote:
I too have built a standalone 472 100 Watt TX with a PIC (and an
AD9850). The software I have written so far now handles CW, QRSS,
DFCW and WSPR-2 and WSPR-15 (thanks to Andy who wrote up a nice
description of the WSPR protocol).
Even with a simple ‘air cooled’ 10 MHz crystal (40 MHz with 4x
PLL) running the PIC timekeeping is quite good, and it seems good
enough to have the PIC running for more than a day and still
getting WSPR decodes. If I run it from a 12.8 TXCO it will be even
better.
I now sync the TX (for WSPR) by getting the PIC out of reset
exactly on an even minute….
I am not sure if I am going to implement Opera. There is too much
obscurity here for my liking. Apart from the difficulty of getting
a good and complete description of the protocol it’s the secrecy
itself that has no place in radio amateurism (at least that is how
I think about the issue).
As for being a despicable appliance operator: notice the 4066?
Here I can attach a key..
The PIC board will disappear. Possibly I will add a PIC to the DDS
board (will have to reposition the 7805 for it to fit). Either that
or I will add a small board with the PIC and connectors for the LCD
display, the RS232 for a terminal and possibly a rotary encoder.
Add a 24V 150 Watt Meanwell switching PSU and it’s a neat little
self-contained package.
See attachments for a photo of the current setup and a quicly drawn
schematic
73's Minto pa3bca
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse
-----Original Message----- From: g3zjo
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 20:43
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: WSPR Test
Yes I know it is always nice to see home brew, even from despicable
appliance operators.:-)
Some recycling of some of my 500KHz rock bound modules.
Eddie
On 09/02/2013 19:22, Stefan Schäfer wrote:
Am 09.02.2013 19:58, schrieb g3zjo:
No time reference just very accurate PIC timing which is good for
weeks.
Ah yes. BTW when using e.g. a netbook in /p WSPR tests it is totally
sufficient to sync the PC clock manually to your wrist watch (which
was synced at home), if necessary. So it is not really a pro-argument
for Opera that no timing is required. I've recently tested that at
home with my own transmissions...
PA, yes tiny by your standards, but it is the PA that has been
growing recently.
:-)
Pictures please!
Oh dear do you really like rats nests?
...and dirty fingers, yes ;-)
73, Stefan
Eddie
|
