[Lowfer] WSPR comparison at 474.2 kHz

[Howell, Laurence J]

Got to admit I ran WOLF hard on the Decca at 137kHz but the listening density then was low - want too painful...

I miss that WOLF and the infinite number of free monkeys that came with it. I kinda think WSPR 15 is optimum for some  475 paths but varies a heck of a lot.



Laurence 

-----Original Message-----
From: Lowfer [mailto:lowfer-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of John Andrews
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 8:52 AM
To: Discussion of the Lowfer (US, European, & UK) and MedFer bands <lowfer at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [Lowfer] WSPR comparison at 474.2 kHz

Doug,

I had pretty good luck with WSPR-15, too. It seemed more immune to the 
squiggly-line interference that is so bad down there at night. False 
decodes were rare, and it seemed to deliver the 6 dB or so that was 
promised, sometimes more.

Of course, other modes have pretty much hit the trash heap, too. WOLF 
was my favorite, and still gives the most bang for a text-based mode. 
But you have to have the receiving end well-calibrated, and should have 
a linear PA at the sending end. That combination has pretty much killed it.

And going back further, the error-corrected BPSK modes from VE2IQ used 
to work wonders in the Lowfer band. But the style of the program was 
tougher to use than the newer GUI stuff. Although he managed to get away 
from the original hardware, it was more complicated to run than the 
easier QRSS modes that "took over" at the time. Later experiments with 
GPS-locked BPSK offered shorter decoder lock-in times, but not a big 
gain for the complexity of the setup. The "Eb-Naut" stuff they are 
playing with in EU now is another step in that direction, but may never 
reach user-friendly status.

Anyway, having all the tools is great, but there have to be enough 
people to make it worthwhile!

John, W1TAG

On 12/10/2015 9:42 AM, Douglas Williams wrote:
> That's too bad. I remember a year or two ago I was regularly decoding DK7FC
> (and I think one or two other European LF stations) with WSPR-15. As far as
> I can remember, I've only managed to decode him once or twice using WSPR-2.
> WSPR-15 is clearly superior for LF DX.
______________________________________________________________
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
Post must be less than 50KB total for message plus attachment!

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html