[NLRS] NLRS Digest, Vol 89, Issue 27
Mark Denker
mdenker at bevcomm.net
Sun Sep 25 23:32:10 EDT 2011
I just talked to Dad, and he agreed ( and seemed to be relieved ) that both
holidays should be 'down south' - he said that ther was not much that he
could to to 'prepare for food, etc' ( not that we could not fix that ). He
is talking about Havesu, I looked up the number for the rental agency for
him, and is supposed to be calling Mr. Petersen to see if he wants to go
along. I told him he needed to get on it and let us know.....
I can go and get him both for T-day and X-mas ( at least as it stands now )
as long as somebody can get him back after T-day ... hopefully he will head
south after X-mas.
-----Original Message-----
From: nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of
nlrs-request at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 2:35 PM
To: nlrs at mailman.qth.net
Subject: NLRS Digest, Vol 89, Issue 27
Send NLRS mailing list submissions to
nlrs at mailman.qth.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
nlrs-request at mailman.qth.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
nlrs-owner at mailman.qth.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of NLRS digest..."
NLRS Daily Digest
Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/index.html
Today's Topics:
1. Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal (Bill Ockert)
2. Re: Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal (Doug Reed)
3. Re: Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal (Bill Ockert)
4. Re: Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal (Bill Ockert)
5. Re: Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
(aflowers at frontiernet.net)
6. Re: Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal (Bill Ockert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:00:36 -0500
From: "Bill Ockert" <bockert at ockert.us>
Subject: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
To: "NLRS List" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <B24117C3D9564669A302F0A638315A78 at BillPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Good morning everyone,
I have been considering a 6m beacon for EN07 for some time but rather than
sticking with the
traditional CW beacon I was thinking of an updated one. With the technology
that the WSJT
protocols made available and the margin that those protocols provides there
are likely potential
openings that are being missed.
What I am considering is a new generation of beacon that would run CW for
30 seconds in a
period, ISCAT (or similar) for 30 seconds and FSK441 for 30 seconds.
Unfortunately I immediately
ran into a rules issue. Automatic beacon operation is only allowed from
50.060 to 50.080 (97.203d)
and that segment is CW only (97.305a&c). It also appears that 6m is the
only band where automatic
beacon operation is allowed that such operation is limited to CW.
This leads to the question. I have noticed that at a beacon located in the
area is not in the 50.060
to 50.080 segment. Does anyone know how the rules are being accomodated by
that beacon? Obviously
it could be being run with a control operator either present or remote but
the control operator would need
to be available 24/7/365 if the beacon is being run that way. While
possible that seems unlikely so curious
what is being done and would appreciate hearing from anyone who knows.
And to the proposal. With the advent of the WSJT protocols the limitation
in the rules at least as far as
50MHz may be a dated. I have been thinking about petitioning the FCC for a
rule change to allow
automatic beacon operation in the 50.3 to 50.4 (or some other suitable)
segment with the argument that
use of protocols with margins greatly enhanced from the current CW beacons
would be of general usefullness
both to amateurs as a whole and specifically to folks studying propogation
on one of the more dynamic bands.
I know that I can petition as an individual and have actually started
writing the petition requesting the appropriate
change to 97.203(d). However it is likely that if a group such as Northern
Lights and / or Central States were to
sponser the petition it would get more traction from the get go.
Just some food for thought and discussion. I would especially like to hear
comments on the proposed band segment
along with possible alternates and justifications. 50.3 to 50.4 seems
fairly underused, does not show up much if at all
in the band plans and is close enough to the major weak signal activity that
most antennas should receive well there.
I also want to hear from people think this is an idiotic idea but please let
me know the reasons why.
Thanks in advance!
73 de Bill ND0B
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:47:49 -0500
From: Doug Reed <n0nas at amsat.org>
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
To: NLRS List <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <4E7CD455.3090702 at amsat.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Bill.
Interesting issue about the beacon frequency restriction.... Maybe that
is only for CW beacons? I know that <http://propnet.org/> has been doing
automated PSK31 propagation beacons on most bands. On 6M they are up at
50.291MHz. I had a PropNET 6M packet beacon station on the air before that.
As for the beacon mode, I'd say stay with CW if you want something that
anyone sitting at the radio can tune in and use. But if you want
something that will be an automated propagation beacon, then choose
either WSPRnet or PropNET. Both systems are digital beacons that listen
for other stations as well as transmit your beacon several times an
hour. Both systems report back to a central Internet site saying what
they heard and anyone can access the results on a real-time map from
their web site. So far both systems are independent and don't share
their info.
Personally, I like the glitz and eye candy of the WSPRnet web page but I
prefer the PSK31 mode used by PropNET. The main reason for my choice of
PropNET over WSPRnet is that WPRSnet can decode signals about 24dB below
the noise floor while PSK31 can dig down about 17dB below the noise.
Since I want my propagation beacon to be useful to people running 50-100
watts of SSB, I need to limit the beacon power according to those
figures. That means my PSK31 beacon should be 1 watt or less, a WSPRnet
beacon should be UNDER 100mw......
In similar fashion, I'd suggest a 6M CW beacon should be under 25 watts.
If it is heard reasonably well, that would indicate that a SSB QSO could
probably be made with 25-50 watts or more.
Back when I had the PropNET FM packet beacon station on the air, I think
I was running 25 watts from the radio. My reasoning is that FM needs a
fairly strong signal in the .5 to 1uv range to decode a packet message.
So if my 25W packet beacon was received, I know that a SSB QSO should be
possible with a similar power level. But PropNET doesn't use FM packet
beacons any more....
So if you want a beacon that anyone can tune around a radio and hear,
stay with CW. But if you want a beacon that anyone can check on the
Internet, choose PropNET or WSPRnet. So far there are not a lot of
people using 6M with either system. Most PropNET and WSPRnet activity is
on 10M or 30M. WSPRnet has a better international following,
particularly on 30M. They may be about equal on 10M.
Those are my opinions regarding beacons. Probably the biggest thing I
have against either system is the need to dedicate a fairly fast
computer and a decent sound card to either mode. And the need to use a
SSB radio. A CW beacon transmitter can be a lot simpler and could be
built from an old commercial FM radio if you wanted to.... Although
you'd probably want use a crystal oven or replace the crystal with a
more stable oscillator.
Good luck with the project!
73, Doug Reed, N0NAS.
Bill Ockert wrote:
> I have been considering a 6m beacon for EN07 for some time but rather than
> sticking with the
> traditional CW beacon I was thinking of an updated one. With the
technology
> that the WSJT
> protocols made available and the margin that those protocols provides
there
> are likely potential
> openings that are being missed.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:15:03 -0500
From: "Bill Ockert" <bockert at ockert.us>
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
To: <n0nas at amsat.org>, "NLRS List" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <ECC630B2CD87428891F63DBEE898B5DF at BillPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hi Doug,
Thanks for the comments. I had played around with propnet for
a while and that is a good sugestion. I will take a look at their site
to seehow they deal with the automatic operation restriction. Thanks for
that heads up.
As to CW, I agree. That is why I am thinking of a beacon that would
run a few modes including CW in round robin. That may be a requirement
anyway as some of the modes are experimental, I am not sure on the rules
on that now but at one point that type of system would have needed either a
voice or CW id. It may have changed to a requirement that the protocol be
published. Sort of irrelevant as if this flies I am planning CW as part of
the mix.
73 de Bill ND0B
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Reed" <n0nas at amsat.org>
To: "NLRS List" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
>
>
> Hi Bill.
>
> Interesting issue about the beacon frequency restriction.... Maybe that
> is only for CW beacons? I know that <http://propnet.org/> has been doing
> automated PSK31 propagation beacons on most bands. On 6M they are up at
> 50.291MHz. I had a PropNET 6M packet beacon station on the air before
> that.
>
> As for the beacon mode, I'd say stay with CW if you want something that
> anyone sitting at the radio can tune in and use. But if you want
> something that will be an automated propagation beacon, then choose
> either WSPRnet or PropNET. Both systems are digital beacons that listen
> for other stations as well as transmit your beacon several times an
> hour. Both systems report back to a central Internet site saying what
> they heard and anyone can access the results on a real-time map from
> their web site. So far both systems are independent and don't share
> their info.
>
> Personally, I like the glitz and eye candy of the WSPRnet web page but I
> prefer the PSK31 mode used by PropNET. The main reason for my choice of
> PropNET over WSPRnet is that WPRSnet can decode signals about 24dB below
> the noise floor while PSK31 can dig down about 17dB below the noise.
> Since I want my propagation beacon to be useful to people running 50-100
> watts of SSB, I need to limit the beacon power according to those
> figures. That means my PSK31 beacon should be 1 watt or less, a WSPRnet
> beacon should be UNDER 100mw......
>
> In similar fashion, I'd suggest a 6M CW beacon should be under 25 watts.
> If it is heard reasonably well, that would indicate that a SSB QSO could
> probably be made with 25-50 watts or more.
>
> Back when I had the PropNET FM packet beacon station on the air, I think
> I was running 25 watts from the radio. My reasoning is that FM needs a
> fairly strong signal in the .5 to 1uv range to decode a packet message.
> So if my 25W packet beacon was received, I know that a SSB QSO should be
> possible with a similar power level. But PropNET doesn't use FM packet
> beacons any more....
>
> So if you want a beacon that anyone can tune around a radio and hear,
> stay with CW. But if you want a beacon that anyone can check on the
> Internet, choose PropNET or WSPRnet. So far there are not a lot of
> people using 6M with either system. Most PropNET and WSPRnet activity is
> on 10M or 30M. WSPRnet has a better international following,
> particularly on 30M. They may be about equal on 10M.
>
> Those are my opinions regarding beacons. Probably the biggest thing I
> have against either system is the need to dedicate a fairly fast
> computer and a decent sound card to either mode. And the need to use a
> SSB radio. A CW beacon transmitter can be a lot simpler and could be
> built from an old commercial FM radio if you wanted to.... Although
> you'd probably want use a crystal oven or replace the crystal with a
> more stable oscillator.
>
> Good luck with the project!
>
> 73, Doug Reed, N0NAS.
>
> Bill Ockert wrote:
>> I have been considering a 6m beacon for EN07 for some time but rather
>> than
>> sticking with the
>> traditional CW beacon I was thinking of an updated one. With the
>> technology
>> that the WSJT
>> protocols made available and the margin that those protocols provides
>> there
>> are likely potential
>> openings that are being missed.
> ______________________________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:20:31 -0500
From: "Bill Ockert" <bockert at ockert.us>
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
To: <n0nas at amsat.org>, "NLRS List" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <FC6290D1AF264FF7BA103A5A23B83076 at BillPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
PS... Forgot to mention. No PC would be involved. As part of another
project I am putting a
DSP and radio interface into a small diecast box. It occured to me that
with different firmware
(that I would write) that is all that is needed for a beacon controller.
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:24:17 +0000 (UTC)
From: aflowers at frontiernet.net
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
To: n0nas at amsat.org
Cc: NLRS List <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID:
<858981804.1625431.1316805857429.JavaMail.root at cl01-host01.roch.ny.frontier
net.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Bill,
I'm just going to chip in my two cents to what Doug said.
The modulation methods in PSK31 and WSPR won't be of much use for aurora
propagation on VHF. From EN07 that might matter quite a bit.
PSK31 is often destroyed on VHF scatter paths do to the phase modulation
that often accompanies it (the buzzsaw sound we sometimes hear). Longer
propagation (e.g., ducting, Es) that might be of more interest to us has
less of an issue with phase distortion.
CW Skimmer does a pretty good job of copying a CW beacon, and if you want
automated reporting, have a look at the reverse beacon network filtered for
6m. It probably does pretty well, but I haven't paid that much attention to
it. It looks like the Europeans have several reporting stations, or at
least they are the ones with propagation lately. Right now you can see all
that great TE propagation from exciting places like D44 and V51 to southern
europe--most of which is beacon spots.
http://reversebeacon.net/dxsd1/dxsd1.php?f=13
K0AWU can tell you all about SDRs if you want to set up your own receiver...
Cheers,
Andy K0SM/2
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Reed" <n0nas at amsat.org>
To: "NLRS List" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 2:47:49 PM
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
Hi Bill.
Interesting issue about the beacon frequency restriction.... Maybe that
is only for CW beacons? I know that <http://propnet.org/> has been doing
automated PSK31 propagation beacons on most bands. On 6M they are up at
50.291MHz. I had a PropNET 6M packet beacon station on the air before that.
As for the beacon mode, I'd say stay with CW if you want something that
anyone sitting at the radio can tune in and use. But if you want
something that will be an automated propagation beacon, then choose
either WSPRnet or PropNET. Both systems are digital beacons that listen
for other stations as well as transmit your beacon several times an
hour. Both systems report back to a central Internet site saying what
they heard and anyone can access the results on a real-time map from
their web site. So far both systems are independent and don't share
their info.
Personally, I like the glitz and eye candy of the WSPRnet web page but I
prefer the PSK31 mode used by PropNET. The main reason for my choice of
PropNET over WSPRnet is that WPRSnet can decode signals about 24dB below
the noise floor while PSK31 can dig down about 17dB below the noise.
Since I want my propagation beacon to be useful to people running 50-100
watts of SSB, I need to limit the beacon power according to those
figures. That means my PSK31 beacon should be 1 watt or less, a WSPRnet
beacon should be UNDER 100mw......
In similar fashion, I'd suggest a 6M CW beacon should be under 25 watts.
If it is heard reasonably well, that would indicate that a SSB QSO could
probably be made with 25-50 watts or more.
Back when I had the PropNET FM packet beacon station on the air, I think
I was running 25 watts from the radio. My reasoning is that FM needs a
fairly strong signal in the .5 to 1uv range to decode a packet message.
So if my 25W packet beacon was received, I know that a SSB QSO should be
possible with a similar power level. But PropNET doesn't use FM packet
beacons any more....
So if you want a beacon that anyone can tune around a radio and hear,
stay with CW. But if you want a beacon that anyone can check on the
Internet, choose PropNET or WSPRnet. So far there are not a lot of
people using 6M with either system. Most PropNET and WSPRnet activity is
on 10M or 30M. WSPRnet has a better international following,
particularly on 30M. They may be about equal on 10M.
Those are my opinions regarding beacons. Probably the biggest thing I
have against either system is the need to dedicate a fairly fast
computer and a decent sound card to either mode. And the need to use a
SSB radio. A CW beacon transmitter can be a lot simpler and could be
built from an old commercial FM radio if you wanted to.... Although
you'd probably want use a crystal oven or replace the crystal with a
more stable oscillator.
Good luck with the project!
73, Doug Reed, N0NAS.
Bill Ockert wrote:
> I have been considering a 6m beacon for EN07 for some time but rather than
> sticking with the
> traditional CW beacon I was thinking of an updated one. With the
technology
> that the WSJT
> protocols made available and the margin that those protocols provides
there
> are likely potential
> openings that are being missed.
______________________________________________________________
NLRS mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:34:26 -0500
From: "Bill Ockert" <bockert at ockert.us>
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
To: <aflowers at frontiernet.net>, <n0nas at amsat.org>
Cc: NLRS List <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <62306D59E68740B5B68F5F1B0F8750A6 at BillPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the comments, I agree phase modulation based protocols are going
to suffer greatly in some of the
prop modes on 6m. However there are FSK based modulation schemes that are
part of WSJT that while
probably not suitable for aurora would be suitable for tropo and weak Es
openings while offering a several dB
advantage over CW. I am thinking of FSK441 as part of the mix as it would
allow a rock check for those
who play around with meteor scatter.
Rather than specific protocols at this point I am just trying to get a feel
for if this is worth persuing.
I am familiar with CW skimmer as I got curious what some of the reports
showing up on DXSherlock were and
eventually figured it out. As a Flex 5K owner I am at least passingly
familiar with SDR.
Thanks again for your comments.
73 de Bill ND0B
----- Original Message -----
From: <aflowers at frontiernet.net>
To: <n0nas at amsat.org>
Cc: "NLRS List" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
>
>
> Bill,
>
> I'm just going to chip in my two cents to what Doug said.
>
> The modulation methods in PSK31 and WSPR won't be of much use for aurora
> propagation on VHF. From EN07 that might matter quite a bit.
>
> PSK31 is often destroyed on VHF scatter paths do to the phase modulation
> that often accompanies it (the buzzsaw sound we sometimes hear). Longer
> propagation (e.g., ducting, Es) that might be of more interest to us has
> less of an issue with phase distortion.
>
> CW Skimmer does a pretty good job of copying a CW beacon, and if you want
> automated reporting, have a look at the reverse beacon network filtered
> for 6m. It probably does pretty well, but I haven't paid that much
> attention to it. It looks like the Europeans have several reporting
> stations, or at least they are the ones with propagation lately. Right
> now you can see all that great TE propagation from exciting places like
> D44 and V51 to southern europe--most of which is beacon spots.
>
> http://reversebeacon.net/dxsd1/dxsd1.php?f=13
>
> K0AWU can tell you all about SDRs if you want to set up your own
> receiver...
>
> Cheers,
> Andy K0SM/2
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Doug Reed" <n0nas at amsat.org>
> To: "NLRS List" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 2:47:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [NLRS] Beacon Question and a Modest Proposal
>
>
>
> Hi Bill.
>
> Interesting issue about the beacon frequency restriction.... Maybe that
> is only for CW beacons? I know that <http://propnet.org/> has been doing
> automated PSK31 propagation beacons on most bands. On 6M they are up at
> 50.291MHz. I had a PropNET 6M packet beacon station on the air before
> that.
>
> As for the beacon mode, I'd say stay with CW if you want something that
> anyone sitting at the radio can tune in and use. But if you want
> something that will be an automated propagation beacon, then choose
> either WSPRnet or PropNET. Both systems are digital beacons that listen
> for other stations as well as transmit your beacon several times an
> hour. Both systems report back to a central Internet site saying what
> they heard and anyone can access the results on a real-time map from
> their web site. So far both systems are independent and don't share
> their info.
>
> Personally, I like the glitz and eye candy of the WSPRnet web page but I
> prefer the PSK31 mode used by PropNET. The main reason for my choice of
> PropNET over WSPRnet is that WPRSnet can decode signals about 24dB below
> the noise floor while PSK31 can dig down about 17dB below the noise.
> Since I want my propagation beacon to be useful to people running 50-100
> watts of SSB, I need to limit the beacon power according to those
> figures. That means my PSK31 beacon should be 1 watt or less, a WSPRnet
> beacon should be UNDER 100mw......
>
> In similar fashion, I'd suggest a 6M CW beacon should be under 25 watts.
> If it is heard reasonably well, that would indicate that a SSB QSO could
> probably be made with 25-50 watts or more.
>
> Back when I had the PropNET FM packet beacon station on the air, I think
> I was running 25 watts from the radio. My reasoning is that FM needs a
> fairly strong signal in the .5 to 1uv range to decode a packet message.
> So if my 25W packet beacon was received, I know that a SSB QSO should be
> possible with a similar power level. But PropNET doesn't use FM packet
> beacons any more....
>
> So if you want a beacon that anyone can tune around a radio and hear,
> stay with CW. But if you want a beacon that anyone can check on the
> Internet, choose PropNET or WSPRnet. So far there are not a lot of
> people using 6M with either system. Most PropNET and WSPRnet activity is
> on 10M or 30M. WSPRnet has a better international following,
> particularly on 30M. They may be about equal on 10M.
>
> Those are my opinions regarding beacons. Probably the biggest thing I
> have against either system is the need to dedicate a fairly fast
> computer and a decent sound card to either mode. And the need to use a
> SSB radio. A CW beacon transmitter can be a lot simpler and could be
> built from an old commercial FM radio if you wanted to.... Although
> you'd probably want use a crystal oven or replace the crystal with a
> more stable oscillator.
>
> Good luck with the project!
>
> 73, Doug Reed, N0NAS.
>
> Bill Ockert wrote:
>> I have been considering a 6m beacon for EN07 for some time but rather
>> than
>> sticking with the
>> traditional CW beacon I was thinking of an updated one. With the
>> technology
>> that the WSJT
>> protocols made available and the margin that those protocols provides
>> there
>> are likely potential
>> openings that are being missed.
> ______________________________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
------------------------------
To make changes to your subscription, go to:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs________________________________
_______________
NLRS mailing list
NLRS at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
End of NLRS Digest, Vol 89, Issue 27
************************************
More information about the NLRS
mailing list