LF: Op-32 vs WSPR-2 slots

To:	<[email protected]>
Subject:	LF: Op-32 vs WSPR-2 slots
From:	"Markus Vester" <[email protected]>
Date:	Sun, 22 Jun 2014 12:47:47 +0200
Authentication-results:	mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: [email protected] does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=[email protected]; dkim=pass [email protected]; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=aol.com
Delivered-to:	[email protected]
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1403434079; bh=TgyqXE07nmYk5ogkSyep572rwpKnXWQtTyPcWyV3vzs=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=gfkvrglrC/vyMFa20wA7pCUckO98j99w5rAveT4i8p1azwVnXWH4kj/zvis1NIB4+ 3yqqre3QVdGxpq/R70kmOIrrmvxb5EeHuXHumPVeimfCu0WmoAmT025CLl8t/aCf0f Ihc5ZmmSdlmOBhwKcIon9v+ls5HQ99+ZIQc6HeR4=
Importance:	Normal
Reply-to:	[email protected]
Sender:	[email protected]

Unfortunately, the new choice of Opera passbands seems to have exacerbated the conflict within shared Opera and WSPR usage a bit - see http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26404526/opds32_140622_1006.png (spectrum graph from around 6 UT). Before the change, it was easier to resolve as Opera-32 simply resided in the upper half of the 137.4 to 137.6 kHz WSPR-2 band. Now it's sitting smack in the middle, and it has become more difficult to avoid overlap.

Best 73,

Markus (DF6NM)

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
LF: Op-32 vs WSPR-2 slots, Markus Vester <=

Previous by Date:	LF: Fw: SAQ transmissions 2014-06-29 and 2014-07-02, M0FMT
Next by Date:	LF: Re: Re: F6HCC monitoring 137 kHz, f6hcc 56
Previous by Thread:	LF: Fw: SAQ transmissions 2014-06-29 and 2014-07-02, M0FMT
Next by Thread:	LF: 21-22 June Best QRB/reports, Alex R7NT
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]