... like before, I am running two instances on the
same WSPRX installation (in c:\Programme\wsprx\ on an XP machine). This seems to
work flawlessly, with -2 and -15 decodes uploaded and interleaved correctly
in ALL_WSPR.TXT. The only surprise was that some .c2 and one .wav
file were left over in the save subdirectory, which is normally not
Using spearate DDS hardware and control program, I
did a couple of low power transmissions at either speed (not simultaneously
though ;-). Power was about 25 W into my TX Marconi at
half-height, maybe 0.1 W radiated power or so. Well I have to admit
neglecting my QRO duties to novices tonight ;-) But I was just too
lazy to push out the mast, only to pull it in again before leaving to
work tomorrow morning.
All the best,
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?
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!
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
73 de dg3lv Tobias
Am 26.05.2015 um 18:56 schrieb
> 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.
> settings? Well, with Andy on -15 we may find out
> 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.
> Von: wolf_dl4yhf <[email protected]>
rsgb_lf_group <[email protected]>
Verschickt: Di, 26 Mai 2015 6:27 pm
> Betreff: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A -
> rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the
> I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched from the
> directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the other for
> Not a single decode from the latter yet.
> I guess as
long as they run, the two instances don't interfear (:o)
> Wolf DL4YHF .
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
seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and hh:46) at
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
>> 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?
>> *From:* DK7FC <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM
>> *To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A
>> Am 25.05.2015 22:55,
>>> 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.