Thanks to the WSJT development team for the (mainly LF and MF) WSPR
decoding enhancement!
I am concluding my side by side LF and MF WSPR decoding comparison
between WSJT-X 1.8.0 and 1.9.0-rc2. Here are results from the six
night test. Each line specifies number of decodes in 1.9 / number of
decodes in 1.8, percentage of decodes in 1.8 compared to 1.9. I
never saw 1.8 decode anything 1.9 failed to decode.
02/26
LF 253/183 72%
MF 933/883 95%
02/27
LF 178/174 98%
MF 890/838 94%
02/28
LF 077/076 99%
MF 347/330 95%
03/01
LF 059/051 86%
MF 627/598 95%
03/02
LF 093/088 95%
MF 786/746 95%
03/03
LF 075/064 85%
MF 490/465 95%
On average over the six night test, 1.8 decoded 89% of what 1.9
decoded on LF, 95% on MF. I have no explanation or theory for why
the ratio remains nearly constant on MF but varies widely on LF. I
will add that my man made noise level varies more at LF than at MF
but I don't know if this is a factor.
The geomagnetic field was quiet the first night, active to minor
storm the second and has not yet recovered fully at LF and MF (at
least for high latitude paths from my location).
The number of decodes should not be considered valid for comparing
one night against another. My WSPR transmitting activity on LF
varied from WSPR-2 only to a combination of WSPR-2 and WSPR-15 which
reduced available time slots for receiving and therefore the number
of total decodes on some nights. Within a given night the numbers
should provide a valid comparison between the two versions.
This is what I saw at my station. Your results may vary. I am now
running only 1.9.0-rc2 for LF and MF WSPR monitoring.
73,
Paul N1BUG
|
