[Lowfer] Lowfer WSPR

[Andy - KU4XR]

--- On Thu, 3/11/10, John Andrews <w1tag at charter.net> wrote:


> So those who think that WSPR may work miracles at 1750
> meters may be disappointed. As Dex pointed out yesterday, 
> WOLF would still seem to be the leader for text-based modes, 
> as it allows build up of copy over many minutes, assuming good 
> transmitter and receiver setups.
> 
> John A.


I agree with John on this. I plan to give WSPR a run just to 
satisfy the curiousity of many. The big drawback with WSPR is
the 2 minute copy, and then throw it all out, and start over.
Where as John mentioned, WOLF keeps building on each transmission
frame. My original intentions were to run modes such as JASON,
and SMT-HELL, and I will probably do that in beacon mode.
WSPR, and WOLF each require PC timing on each end, which means for
most operators, a connection the the internet, and that will tie up
my main PC, running the program, and time sync. If I am correct;
JASON, and SMT-HELL do not require time sync on either end, SO !!
I can use an old 350 MHz laptop I bought at the flea market, set it
in the corner out of the way, run the program in beacon mode, and
forget about it. For reception, the software locks onto a signal if
it's there, and either decodes or not, errors included due to no
FEC, but not tieing up all my equipment.
If I sucessfully get my exciter working, I will try many different
modes, but most likely will beacon the ones that don't require
timing perfection.

73 all :::


Andy - KU4XR - EM75xr - Friendsville, TN. USA
LOWfer Beacon " XR " @ 185.29875 KHz ( QRSS-60 )
Coordinates:  N:  35º 43' 54" - W:  84º 3' 16"
http://www.myspace.com/beaconxr
http://webpages.charter.net/ku4xr/


--- On Thu, 3/11/10, John Andrews <w1tag at charter.net> wrote:

> From: John Andrews <w1tag at charter.net>
> Subject: [Lowfer] Lowfer WSPR
> To: "Discussion of the Lowfer (US, European, & UK) and MedFer bands" <lowfer at mailman.qth.net>
> Date: Thursday, March 11, 2010, 10:23 AM
> Just a brief comment on WSPR at
> LF...
> 
> I'm not impressed with the 2200 meter WSPR performance from
> WD2XES. I 
> had originally thought it might be the Loran lines, but
> with most of 
> those gone, things haven't really improved. That leaves a
> good 
> possibility that the AC-related squigglies we see at 1750
> and 2200 
> meters might be the culprit. They are not an issue at 600
> meters and 
> down, and WSPR does very well in that range.
> 
> Watching the intermittent copy of Dex's WSPR signal at
> 137.46 kHz last 
> week, it was obvious that the decoder was having trouble,
> as the 
> reported frequency kept jumping around. This was true with
> the R75 noise 
> blanker on or off.
> 
> Jay had consistent stable copy of Dex's signal, however,
> and that's 
> probably a testimony to the noise reduction work he has
> done. I don't 
> think this is a simple signal to noise ratio issue,
> however. The nature 
> of the noise seems to be important. In my case, the
> AC-related stuff has 
> gotten worse in recent years, and is not coming from my
> QTH, so the 
> possibilities of getting rid of it are limited on my 1/3
> acre lot.
> 
> So those who think that WSPR may work miracles at 1750
> meters may be 
> disappointed. As Dex pointed out yesterday, WOLF would
> still seem to be 
> the leader for text-based modes, as it allows build up of
> copy over many 
> minutes, assuming good transmitter and receiver setups.
> 
> John A.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Lowfer mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>