Topband: Anyone using WSPR or WSPR-X?

[John Langridge]

Mike,

WSPR uses a low baud rate interleving process plus averaging to fight through noisy weak signal condx.  The worse thing you can do is run excessive filtering or noise blanking because it can confuse the decoder and in many cases lead to false decodes or no decodes at all.  The WSPR algorythm handles those things already and really likes to have a full USB BW to measure from.  Anything less will result in errors in S/N data.

Most of those WSPR guys on traditional HF are running very QRP.  QRO certainly works but you will no doubt raise some eyebrows if you fire up at high power.  Its really designed for low power and after some time, you can establishing what S/N you need to accomplish a QSO running X amount of power on CW or whatever mode.  On 630-meters for normal, aural CW, that can range from -8 db to -12 db S/N as reported by WSPR.  What that really translates to is another story.  I suspect on 160-meters the values are quite similar.


As Larry has stated, there is a lot of value in this mode in determining up-to-the-minute band condx that can lead to QSO's.  That's one of the reasons we use it.  It beats blindly CQing for extended periods of time.


73!

John KB5NJD / WG2XIQ



________________________________
 From: Mike Waters <mikewate at gmail.com>
To: topband <topband at contesting.com> 
Sent: Monday, September 1, 2014 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Anyone using WSPR or WSPR-X?
 

How well does WSPR work when the band is full of static crashes? If so, is
100 watts too much with 20 over 9 QRN? Just trying to learn.

I have it working both RX and TX (5W) on 30 meters right now. :-)

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com



_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband