Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?
From: Tobias DG3LV <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 20:03:55 +0200
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
Hi Wolf, Markus !

For testing purposes you could run WSPR-2-mode twice as well instead of -15 and -2.
Better use two installations of WSPR-X into two separate directories
from Root C:\, as WSPR writes temporary *.wav and *.C2-files to its
"save"-subdirectory (even at save=none). They are deleted immediately
after decode. Maybe one instance deletes the file of the concurrent
instance. At WSPR-15 and WSPR-2 both beginn their cycle at 00:00 and
00:30, so the filenames may be identical, leaving to confusion. There
will be NO errormessages warning you!
At the beginning of WSPR-X we learned that whitespace characters in
directory-names as well as local characters (German "Umlaute") are a bad
idea. This has not changed. Best use old-fashioned DOS names like
C:\wspr_2 and C:\wspr_15 or similar. There are no errormessages or
crash, it just will not decode anything. (experience of Stefan DK7FC at
that time)
73 de dg3lv Tobias

Am 26.05.2015 um 18:56 schrieb Markus Vester:
Hi Wolf,
that's exactly what I did too, with same results: wspr-2 running and
uploading fine, no chance to test -15 due to lack of signals. But if
signals had been present on both bands, wouldn't both instances try to
access the same files in the same directory, eg. ALL_WSPR.TXT or
settings? Well, with Andy on -15 we may find out tonight.
All the best,
Markus (DF6NM)
BTW I decoded DF1VB for a while with 6.5 seconds latency, and then no
more - might have been a too large clock offset.

-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: wolf_dl4yhf <[email protected]>
An: rsgb_lf_group <[email protected]>
Verschickt: Di, 26 Mai 2015 6:27 pm
Betreff: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?

rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the info.

I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched from the same
directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the other for -15.
Not a single decode from the latter yet.

I guess as long as they run, the two instances don't interfear (:o)

   Wolf DL4YHF .

Am 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester:
Wolf, as far as I know the only way to separate them in the database
seems to be sorting by frequency (which is not very useful otherwise).
There is a peculiarity in that the hh:15 and hh:45 timestamps in the
database seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and hh:46) at
midnight UT (just happened to G4JNT entries).
Stefan, I'm not sure about not using -15 on MF. Even though fading is
faster and deeper, the WSPR decoder seems to cope well with it. After
all WSPR-2 is useful on HF where fading happens in seconds. The
spectrogram of Andy's transmission last night sometimes showed two
deep fades in one sequence, but it was decoded ok. It has been argued
that a very short and strong maximum might be utilized by -2 and not
by -15, and maybe there's not all of the theoretical 9 dB gain, but I
reckon on average it's not much less.
Laurence yes your frequencies are correct, dial *474.2 kHz*, RF: 475.6
- 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 - 475.825 WSPR-15.
I wonder if it is possible to run two instances of WSPRX side by side
on the same machine, one for -2 and one for -15? Or would they crash
one another?
73, Markus

*From:* DK7FC <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A

Am 25.05.2015 22:55, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf:
p.s. is there a possibility to filter / display only WSPR-15 decodes
from the database, and how widespread is the use of that mode ?
...there have been a few MF TA tests in WSPR-15 in the early 630m
days, showing that this mode is to slow for the path on that band.
These tests have not been very extended though. But most likely there
is not a 'gain' of 9 dB over WSPR-2. I would assume that successful
detections are even less likely in that mode over the pond.

73, Stefan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>