20 Dec
2021
20 Dec
'21
6:31 p.m.
Hi All.
I was searching the internet for information when I ran across this
discussion on Moon-net from 2 decades ago.
There are a few things about it that might be of interest.
1) Now that we have modern digital modes, certainly that lower limit is
even lower.
2) The discussion moved on to a discussion about EME QSB.
SM5BSZ has said that he does not experience a significant amount of QSB
while OZ1RH concludes that much of the QSB the rest of us experience may be
due to tropo. I think this makes sense since as far North as Leif is, he
would likely experience little tropo while the rest of us down South of him
see it frequently.
On the EME logger even among many Xpol stations we observe that one station
or another may be locked out from the rest of the world. For me, this
happened early Saturday night (ARRL EME) I was nearly locked out for
several hours, then later the band seemed to return to normal. The
difference seemed to be about 6 to 10db. I attracted little attention to my
CQs when I was locked out in spite of my best efforts to TX the correct
polarity. Stations that would normally be -12db would be more like -22db
then later they became closer to -12db. I must also say that as the
evening progressed, neighbors started turning off some of their RFI
generators so I saw about a 2db improvement in the noise floor (5 to 6db vs
3 to 4db). At the same time, I was having better luck getting answers to my
CQs later. I think a lot of 2 meter EME stations suffer with noise and do
not have adaptive polarity RX, so in these multiple hours long QSB fades, I
am heard less.
This is from the EA6VQ web site. I have not heard him on in a while.
https://www.dxmaps.com/discuss/lowerlimit.html
I know there are other possibilities for sources of QSB such as Libration,
Ionosphere, noise variations and even polarity which gets most of the blame
until the station upgrades to Xpol.
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
22 Dec
22 Dec
10 a.m.
Oh what I would give to see stations at -22 :)
KU8L
On 12/20/2021 11:31 PM, Earl Shaffer via Moon-net wrote:
Hi All.
I was searching the internet for information when I ran across this
discussion on Moon-net from 2 decades ago.
There are a few things about it that might be of interest.
1) Now that we have modern digital modes, certainly that lower limit
is even lower.
2) The discussion moved on to a discussion about EME QSB.
SM5BSZ has said that he does not experience a significant amount of
QSB while OZ1RH concludes that much of the QSB the rest of us
experience may be due to tropo. I think this makes sense since as far
North as Leif is, he would likely experience little tropo while the
rest of us down South of him see it frequently.
On the EME logger even among many Xpol stations we observe that one
station or another may be locked out from the rest of the world. For
me, this happened early Saturday night (ARRL EME) I was nearly locked
out for several hours, then later the band seemed to return to normal.
The difference seemed to be about 6 to 10db. I attracted little
attention to my CQs when I was locked out in spite of my best efforts
to TX the correct polarity. Stations that would normally be -12db
would be more like -22db then later they became closer to -12db. I
must also say that as the evening progressed, neighbors started
turning off some of their RFI generators so I saw about a 2db
improvement in the noise floor (5 to 6db vs 3 to 4db). At the same
time, I was having better luck getting answers to my CQs later. I
think a lot of 2 meter EME stations suffer with noise and do not have
adaptive polarity RX, so in these multiple hours long QSB fades, I am
heard less.
This is from the EA6VQ web site. I have not heard him on in a while.
https://www.dxmaps.com/discuss/lowerlimit.html
I know there are other possibilities for sources of QSB such as
Libration, Ionosphere, noise variations and even polarity which gets
most of the blame until the station upgrades to Xpol.
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are
athttp://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
12:19 p.m.
When I was last QRV on 2m (Hard to realize my last log entry was Oct. 2017):
Running WSJT10 (JT65B) I regularly decoded -26 signals. Occasionally
down to -28 and very rarely -30.
But I was being plagued by local noise that rose my s-meter four s-units
above normal "quiet" sky which even made copying local stations
difficult, and super eme stations like HB9Q or KB8RQ impossible.
2018 I sold my 2m-8877 and built a 1500w W6PQL amp. It has yet to run
eme for a series of issues that I will not get into.
I suspect Q65 will lower the minimum quite a bit based on what I see
decoded on 6m (lowest is -35 and often -32). And that is thru a S3
noise floor (working on that issue).
Regarding encountering long periods of eme "lockout" I have experienced
that even when local noise is low. I ran adaptive-pol with MAP65 so
this is not Faraday lockout. My theory is that at my high latitude
(60.675N) ionospheric events like those the cause aurora cause increased
adsorption of RF. Tropo, as those at medium latitudes of 30 or 40
degrees experience, does not seem to happen up here (not high enough
population of stations to determine this).
On 6m, Lunar degradation is a significant effect since most stations on
this band run at gain minimums. Faraday is big one as almost all are
linear pol with no rotation. As already mentioned local noise is the
primary limit on my current 6m.
Final note on the link to 2000 that Earl discovered. AL7EB comments are
mine before I changed my call sign in 2005.
73, Ed-KL7UW
On 12/22/2021 6:00 AM, Curt via Moon-net wrote:
Oh what I would give to see stations at -22 :)
KU8L
On 12/20/2021 11:31 PM, Earl Shaffer via Moon-net wrote:
Hi All.
I was searching the internet for information when I ran across this
discussion on Moon-net from 2 decades ago.
There are a few things about it that might be of interest.
1) Now that we have modern digital modes, certainly that lower limit
is even lower.
2) The discussion moved on to a discussion about EME QSB.
SM5BSZ has said that he does not experience a significant amount of
QSB while OZ1RH concludes that much of the QSB the rest of us
experience may be due to tropo. I think this makes sense since as far
North as Leif is, he would likely experience little tropo while the
rest of us down South of him see it frequently.
On the EME logger even among many Xpol stations we observe that one
station or another may be locked out from the rest of the world. For
me, this happened early Saturday night (ARRL EME) I was nearly locked
out for several hours, then later the band seemed to return to normal.
The difference seemed to be about 6 to 10db. I attracted little
attention to my CQs when I was locked out in spite of my best efforts
to TX the correct polarity. Stations that would normally be -12db
would be more like -22db then later they became closer to -12db. I
must also say that as the evening progressed, neighbors started
turning off some of their RFI generators so I saw about a 2db
improvement in the noise floor (5 to 6db vs 3 to 4db). At the same
time, I was having better luck getting answers to my CQs later. I
think a lot of 2 meter EME stations suffer with noise and do not have
adaptive polarity RX, so in these multiple hours long QSB fades, I am
heard less.
This is from the EA6VQ web site. I have not heard him on in a while.
https://www.dxmaps.com/discuss/lowerlimit.html
I know there are other possibilities for sources of QSB such as
Libration, Ionosphere, noise variations and even polarity which gets
most of the blame until the station upgrades to Xpol.
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are
athttp://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
23 Dec
23 Dec
4:51 a.m.
Well I guess I should not be surprised that the topic has shifted from a
question about lowest level of sensitivity to one of smallest station used.
The original topic was (I believe) asking what was the lowest signal
level that was seen that provided a legitimate contact (decoded in
digital modes).
A ways back I was curious what my receiving signal sensitivity was. So
using signal source that I calibrated by measuring with my HP432A power
meter. I began adding attenuation until I found the weakest signal I
could still detect with my ears (using a 100-Hz bw filter).
I installed my signal source inside a diecast aluminum (Hammond) box
with coax connector to provide better shielding. -155dBm was the limit
That worked without leakage.
I got down to -155 dBm +/- 3 dB. Adding my antenna gain that implied I
could "barely" hear a -175 dBm signal.
Not enough to copy CW, though. I found I needed about +5 to 10 dB SNR
to do that. That is about -14 dB on the JT65 signal scale.
I can usually hear tones from a -18 dB JT65 signal. JT65 improves
sensitivity to -28 dB (based only on bw reduction from 50Hz to 5Hz).
But this is theoretical math, and the question was what folks out there
really were experiencing.
With WSJT10 (JT65B) on 2m, I was getting reliable decoding at -26 dB and
several at -28 dB. That was when band noise was quiet. MAP65 didn't do
quite as well so I will say -26 dB was lower limit.
Q65A appears to be more sensitive as I am getting many decodes at-32 dB
and an occasional -35 dB. This for 6m so not exactly fair comparison to
2m (which I am not QRV at current time). This running WSJT-X 2.5
Note: I have upgraded computers from winxp to win10, and using different
soundcards. All that affects sensitivity.
73, Ed - KL7UW
11:20 a.m.
Hi Ed and all.
I use 4xUWA12 Xpol with 18dbd gain in an Urban environment.
I recently worked a station with 12dbd gain and 500 watts. (high elevation)
I think the lowest power level
I have copied is about 250 watts, but they had a larger array.
Sky noise here almost does not matter. Perigee is better due to local noise.
I won't get into that now, but I think the FCC could do far better than
what they are doing now.
There have been sensitivity improvements in JT65b over the years.
I recently had a chance to compare Map65 v2.7, Map65 v3.0 and the latest
WSJTX.
It's a small sample, so I might update it later but here are my findings so
far.
Map65 v2.7 is good for about -27db.
Map65 v3.0 is good for about -28db.
WSJTX is good for -30db.
Map65 v3.0 gave about twice as many decodes as Map65 v2.7 on the same
station calling CQ.
WSJTX gave about 40% more decodes than Map65 v3.0.
There are a few exceptions. Only once Map65 v2.7 did a decode that Map65
v3.0 and WSJTX missed.
Another exception is that Map65 v2.7 showed a few more decodes on one
station than Map65 v3.0.
Generally Map65 v2.7 is no longer worth having in the mix. It was all I had
when I re-entered EME just a few years ago. I changed my cable lengths a
while back when I added cavities to the RX system so Delta phi changed. It
used to be zero and is now +20 degrees. I am now wondering if a correct
Delta phi correction improves or has any effect on sensitivity because
Map65 v 3.0 was doing really well. There were many times that WSJTX was
dropping the ball and Map65 v3.0 took up the slack. Yes, polarity was
matched.
My point here is that since these decoders have evolved it is important to
use the latest versions when comparing.
RE: Q65 60a on 2 meter EME. I still have not decided. JT65b has had years
to evolve to where it is today and it is very advanced. I don't see the
need for a Call3.txt to be any issue at all for JT65b so for me the
argument of Q65 NOT needing a Call3 is a non-starter. I have seen decodes
on strong stations that only transmitted for perhaps 5 or 10 seconds. I
have called (and worked) stations when I was 30 seconds late in starting. I'm
not sure Q65 can do that. Shorthand signals are said to decode at below the
-30db level and I have decoded by eye at levels below what the decoder
could do for shorthand signals. Shorthand signals are great. I can decide
within about 20 seconds into a transmission what my answer is and act
accordingly. I may choose to change polarity, log a contact or even QSY
when I start seeing 73. There are many sources of QSB on the 2 meter EME
signal and likely a variability of Urban noise is a significant part of
that apparent QSB.
I feel that JT65b signals might react to that environment better, but I'm
just not sure. I have a fast computer so decode speed is not an issue for
me anymore but many of my would be QSO partners have slower computers that
decode JT65b much faster than Q65. Perhaps this will be improved over time.
I have seen decodes on deep search on Q65 that were -30db or below, but
here, they are rare. -28db for a lower limit is more frequent and -30db on
WJSTX JT65b are very frequent.
Some of the higher frequency EME bands have much better acceptance to Q65
and I think there may be a few reasons for that. It is far more expensive
to have a microwave EME station. The microwave EMEer is far more likely to
have a fast computer. Many 23 CM EMEers have strong signals. The use of CW
and even SSB is common. They would not suffer as much from a variable noise
floor that can vary in strength in just milliseconds. I'm just guessing of
course. I have only operated 2 meter EME. 2 meter EME is easy to try,
23cm, not so much. To try 2 meter EME all one needs is to stick the back
end of a yagi into the ground with the boom aligned with the moon. If your
noise environment is low, I could work you with 500 watts on your end.
WB9UWA
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:54 AM Ed Cole via Moon-net <
moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
Well I guess I should not be surprised that the topic
has shifted from a
question about lowest level of sensitivity to one of smallest station used.
The original topic was (I believe) asking what was the lowest signal
level that was seen that provided a legitimate contact (decoded in
digital modes).
A ways back I was curious what my receiving signal sensitivity was. So
using signal source that I calibrated by measuring with my HP432A power
meter. I began adding attenuation until I found the weakest signal I
could still detect with my ears (using a 100-Hz bw filter).
I installed my signal source inside a diecast aluminum (Hammond) box
with coax connector to provide better shielding. -155dBm was the limit
That worked without leakage.
I got down to -155 dBm +/- 3 dB. Adding my antenna gain that implied I
could "barely" hear a -175 dBm signal.
Not enough to copy CW, though. I found I needed about +5 to 10 dB SNR
to do that. That is about -14 dB on the JT65 signal scale.
I can usually hear tones from a -18 dB JT65 signal. JT65 improves
sensitivity to -28 dB (based only on bw reduction from 50Hz to 5Hz).
But this is theoretical math, and the question was what folks out there
really were experiencing.
With WSJT10 (JT65B) on 2m, I was getting reliable decoding at -26 dB and
several at -28 dB. That was when band noise was quiet. MAP65 didn't do
quite as well so I will say -26 dB was lower limit.
Q65A appears to be more sensitive as I am getting many decodes at-32 dB
and an occasional -35 dB. This for 6m so not exactly fair comparison to
2m (which I am not QRV at current time). This running WSJT-X 2.5
Note: I have upgraded computers from winxp to win10, and using different
soundcards. All that affects sensitivity.
73, Ed - KL7UW
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
12:55 p.m.
Moonmen,
I hope you can see the picture of my very practical 0.8m grid dish with a
CP patch feed.
I could see the ON0EME beacon and make a digi QSO with a 4m class station.
73 - Paul - W2HRO
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 11:24 AM Earl Shaffer via Moon-net <
moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
Hi Ed and all.
I use 4xUWA12 Xpol with 18dbd gain in an Urban environment.
I recently worked a station with 12dbd gain and 500 watts. (high
elevation) I think the lowest power level
I have copied is about 250 watts, but they had a larger array.
Sky noise here almost does not matter. Perigee is better due to local
noise.
I won't get into that now, but I think the FCC could do far better than
what they are doing now.
There have been sensitivity improvements in JT65b over the years.
I recently had a chance to compare Map65 v2.7, Map65 v3.0 and the latest
WSJTX.
It's a small sample, so I might update it later but here are my findings
so far.
Map65 v2.7 is good for about -27db.
Map65 v3.0 is good for about -28db.
WSJTX is good for -30db.
Map65 v3.0 gave about twice as many decodes as Map65 v2.7 on the same
station calling CQ.
WSJTX gave about 40% more decodes than Map65 v3.0.
There are a few exceptions. Only once Map65 v2.7 did a decode that Map65
v3.0 and WSJTX missed.
Another exception is that Map65 v2.7 showed a few more decodes on one
station than Map65 v3.0.
Generally Map65 v2.7 is no longer worth having in the mix. It was all I
had when I re-entered EME just a few years ago. I changed my cable
lengths a while back when I added cavities to the RX system so Delta phi
changed. It used to be zero and is now +20 degrees. I am now wondering if
a correct Delta phi correction improves or has any effect on sensitivity
because Map65 v 3.0 was doing really well. There were many times that
WSJTX was dropping the ball and Map65 v3.0 took up the slack. Yes, polarity
was matched.
My point here is that since these decoders have evolved it is important to
use the latest versions when comparing.
RE: Q65 60a on 2 meter EME. I still have not decided. JT65b has had years
to evolve to where it is today and it is very advanced. I don't see the
need for a Call3.txt to be any issue at all for JT65b so for me the
argument of Q65 NOT needing a Call3 is a non-starter. I have seen decodes
on strong stations that only transmitted for perhaps 5 or 10 seconds. I
have called (and worked) stations when I was 30 seconds late in starting. I'm
not sure Q65 can do that. Shorthand signals are said to decode at below the
-30db level and I have decoded by eye at levels below what the decoder
could do for shorthand signals. Shorthand signals are great. I can decide
within about 20 seconds into a transmission what my answer is and act
accordingly. I may choose to change polarity, log a contact or even QSY
when I start seeing 73. There are many sources of QSB on the 2 meter EME
signal and likely a variability of Urban noise is a significant part of
that apparent QSB.
I feel that JT65b signals might react to that environment better, but I'm
just not sure. I have a fast computer so decode speed is not an issue for
me anymore but many of my would be QSO partners have slower computers that
decode JT65b much faster than Q65. Perhaps this will be improved over time.
I have seen decodes on deep search on Q65 that were -30db or below, but
here, they are rare. -28db for a lower limit is more frequent and -30db on
WJSTX JT65b are very frequent.
Some of the higher frequency EME bands have much better acceptance to Q65
and I think there may be a few reasons for that. It is far more expensive
to have a microwave EME station. The microwave EMEer is far more likely to
have a fast computer. Many 23 CM EMEers have strong signals. The use of CW
and even SSB is common. They would not suffer as much from a variable noise
floor that can vary in strength in just milliseconds. I'm just guessing of
course. I have only operated 2 meter EME. 2 meter EME is easy to try,
23cm, not so much. To try 2 meter EME all one needs is to stick the back
end of a yagi into the ground with the boom aligned with the moon. If your
noise environment is low, I could work you with 500 watts on your end.
WB9UWA
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:54 AM Ed Cole via Moon-net <
moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
Well I guess I should not be surprised that the
topic has shifted from a
question about lowest level of sensitivity to one of smallest station
used.
The original topic was (I believe) asking what was the lowest signal
level that was seen that provided a legitimate contact (decoded in
digital modes).
A ways back I was curious what my receiving signal sensitivity was. So
using signal source that I calibrated by measuring with my HP432A power
meter. I began adding attenuation until I found the weakest signal I
could still detect with my ears (using a 100-Hz bw filter).
I installed my signal source inside a diecast aluminum (Hammond) box
with coax connector to provide better shielding. -155dBm was the limit
That worked without leakage.
I got down to -155 dBm +/- 3 dB. Adding my antenna gain that implied I
could "barely" hear a -175 dBm signal.
Not enough to copy CW, though. I found I needed about +5 to 10 dB SNR
to do that. That is about -14 dB on the JT65 signal scale.
I can usually hear tones from a -18 dB JT65 signal. JT65 improves
sensitivity to -28 dB (based only on bw reduction from 50Hz to 5Hz).
But this is theoretical math, and the question was what folks out there
really were experiencing.
With WSJT10 (JT65B) on 2m, I was getting reliable decoding at -26 dB and
several at -28 dB. That was when band noise was quiet. MAP65 didn't do
quite as well so I will say -26 dB was lower limit.
Q65A appears to be more sensitive as I am getting many decodes at-32 dB
and an occasional -35 dB. This for 6m so not exactly fair comparison to
2m (which I am not QRV at current time). This running WSJT-X 2.5
Note: I have upgraded computers from winxp to win10, and using different
soundcards. All that affects sensitivity.
73, Ed - KL7UW
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
1:30 p.m.
Hi Paul.
That's impressive.
I wonder what power level is used on each end.
I know of an East coast station having trouble on 2 meters that was
wondering if he could use some of his surplus wifi antennas like you did. I
think he wanted to phase them and that likely would not be practical.
WB9UWA
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 11:55 AM Paul Andrews <w2hro.fn20(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Moonmen,
I hope you can see the picture of my very practical 0.8m grid dish with a
CP patch feed.
I could see the ON0EME beacon and make a digi QSO with a 4m class station.
73 - Paul - W2HRO
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 11:24 AM Earl Shaffer via Moon-net <
moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
> Hi Ed and all.
>
> I use 4xUWA12 Xpol with 18dbd gain in an Urban environment.
> I recently worked a station with 12dbd gain and 500 watts. (high
> elevation) I think the lowest power level
> I have copied is about 250 watts, but they had a larger array.
> Sky noise here almost does not matter. Perigee is better due to local
> noise.
> I won't get into that now, but I think the FCC could do far better than
> what they are doing now.
> There have been sensitivity improvements in JT65b over the years.
> I recently had a chance to compare Map65 v2.7, Map65 v3.0 and the latest
> WSJTX.
> It's a small sample, so I might update it later but here are my findings
> so far.
> Map65 v2.7 is good for about -27db.
> Map65 v3.0 is good for about -28db.
> WSJTX is good for -30db.
> Map65 v3.0 gave about twice as many decodes as Map65 v2.7 on the same
> station calling CQ.
> WSJTX gave about 40% more decodes than Map65 v3.0.
> There are a few exceptions. Only once Map65 v2.7 did a decode that Map65
> v3.0 and WSJTX missed.
> Another exception is that Map65 v2.7 showed a few more decodes on one
> station than Map65 v3.0.
> Generally Map65 v2.7 is no longer worth having in the mix. It was all I
> had when I re-entered EME just a few years ago. I changed my cable
> lengths a while back when I added cavities to the RX system so Delta phi
> changed. It used to be zero and is now +20 degrees. I am now wondering
> if a correct Delta phi correction improves or has any effect on sensitivity
> because Map65 v 3.0 was doing really well. There were many times that
> WSJTX was dropping the ball and Map65 v3.0 took up the slack. Yes, polarity
> was matched.
> My point here is that since these decoders have evolved it is important
> to use the latest versions when comparing.
>
> RE: Q65 60a on 2 meter EME. I still have not decided. JT65b has had years
> to evolve to where it is today and it is very advanced. I don't see the
> need for a Call3.txt to be any issue at all for JT65b so for me the
> argument of Q65 NOT needing a Call3 is a non-starter. I have seen decodes
> on strong stations that only transmitted for perhaps 5 or 10 seconds. I
> have called (and worked) stations when I was 30 seconds late in starting. I'm
> not sure Q65 can do that. Shorthand signals are said to decode at below the
> -30db level and I have decoded by eye at levels below what the decoder
> could do for shorthand signals. Shorthand signals are great. I can decide
> within about 20 seconds into a transmission what my answer is and act
> accordingly. I may choose to change polarity, log a contact or even QSY
> when I start seeing 73. There are many sources of QSB on the 2 meter EME
> signal and likely a variability of Urban noise is a significant part of
> that apparent QSB.
> I feel that JT65b signals might react to that environment better, but I'm
> just not sure. I have a fast computer so decode speed is not an issue for
> me anymore but many of my would be QSO partners have slower computers that
> decode JT65b much faster than Q65. Perhaps this will be improved over time.
> I have seen decodes on deep search on Q65 that were -30db or below, but
> here, they are rare. -28db for a lower limit is more frequent and -30db on
> WJSTX JT65b are very frequent.
>
> Some of the higher frequency EME bands have much better acceptance to Q65
> and I think there may be a few reasons for that. It is far more expensive
> to have a microwave EME station. The microwave EMEer is far more likely to
> have a fast computer. Many 23 CM EMEers have strong signals. The use of CW
> and even SSB is common. They would not suffer as much from a variable noise
> floor that can vary in strength in just milliseconds. I'm just guessing of
> course. I have only operated 2 meter EME. 2 meter EME is easy to try,
> 23cm, not so much. To try 2 meter EME all one needs is to stick the back
> end of a yagi into the ground with the boom aligned with the moon. If your
> noise environment is low, I could work you with 500 watts on your end.
>
> WB9UWA
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:54 AM Ed Cole via Moon-net <
> moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
>
>> Well I guess I should not be surprised that the topic has shifted from a
>> question about lowest level of sensitivity to one of smallest station
>> used.
>>
>> The original topic was (I believe) asking what was the lowest signal
>> level that was seen that provided a legitimate contact (decoded in
>> digital modes).
>>
>> A ways back I was curious what my receiving signal sensitivity was. So
>> using signal source that I calibrated by measuring with my HP432A power
>> meter. I began adding attenuation until I found the weakest signal I
>> could still detect with my ears (using a 100-Hz bw filter).
>>
>> I installed my signal source inside a diecast aluminum (Hammond) box
>> with coax connector to provide better shielding. -155dBm was the limit
>> That worked without leakage.
>>
>> I got down to -155 dBm +/- 3 dB. Adding my antenna gain that implied I
>> could "barely" hear a -175 dBm signal.
>>
>> Not enough to copy CW, though. I found I needed about +5 to 10 dB SNR
>> to do that. That is about -14 dB on the JT65 signal scale.
>>
>> I can usually hear tones from a -18 dB JT65 signal. JT65 improves
>> sensitivity to -28 dB (based only on bw reduction from 50Hz to 5Hz).
>>
>> But this is theoretical math, and the question was what folks out there
>> really were experiencing.
>>
>> With WSJT10 (JT65B) on 2m, I was getting reliable decoding at -26 dB and
>> several at -28 dB. That was when band noise was quiet. MAP65 didn't do
>> quite as well so I will say -26 dB was lower limit.
>>
>> Q65A appears to be more sensitive as I am getting many decodes at-32 dB
>> and an occasional -35 dB. This for 6m so not exactly fair comparison to
>> 2m (which I am not QRV at current time). This running WSJT-X 2.5
>>
>> Note: I have upgraded computers from winxp to win10, and using different
>> soundcards. All that affects sensitivity.
>>
>> 73, Ed - KL7UW
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
>> http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>>
>>
>
> --
> Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
>
> My EME array photos
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
> Detailed array photos
> http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
> Facebook
> http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
> Linkedin
> http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
> _______________________________________________
> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
> http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>
>
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
1:59 p.m.
0.8m grid dish QSO details:
W2HRO - 0.8m / 250w at feed / 0.3 dB NF preamp / CP patch feed with hybrid
K5DOG - 3.7m (extended to 4.5m) / 450w at feed / 0.3 dB NF / Septum feed
This was a relatively easy JT65 QSO with signal levels in the mid-20s.
I have a 1m offset dish I hope to test with a CP patch feed. However, I
have been distracted with work on folding fabric dishes.
73 - Paul - W2HRO
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 1:34 PM Earl Shaffer via Moon-net <
moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
Hi Paul.
That's impressive.
I wonder what power level is used on each end.
I know of an East coast station having trouble on 2 meters that was
wondering if he could use some of his surplus wifi antennas like you did. I
think he wanted to phase them and that likely would not be practical.
WB9UWA
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 11:55 AM Paul Andrews <w2hro.fn20(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Moonmen,
I hope you can see the picture of my very practical 0.8m grid dish with a
CP patch feed.
I could see the ON0EME beacon and make a digi QSO with a 4m class station.
73 - Paul - W2HRO
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 11:24 AM Earl Shaffer via Moon-net <
moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
> Hi Ed and all.
>
> I use 4xUWA12 Xpol with 18dbd gain in an Urban environment.
> I recently worked a station with 12dbd gain and 500 watts. (high
> elevation) I think the lowest power level
> I have copied is about 250 watts, but they had a larger array.
> Sky noise here almost does not matter. Perigee is better due to local
> noise.
> I won't get into that now, but I think the FCC could do far better than
> what they are doing now.
> There have been sensitivity improvements in JT65b over the years.
> I recently had a chance to compare Map65 v2.7, Map65 v3.0 and the latest
> WSJTX.
> It's a small sample, so I might update it later but here are my findings
> so far.
> Map65 v2.7 is good for about -27db.
> Map65 v3.0 is good for about -28db.
> WSJTX is good for -30db.
> Map65 v3.0 gave about twice as many decodes as Map65 v2.7 on the same
> station calling CQ.
> WSJTX gave about 40% more decodes than Map65 v3.0.
> There are a few exceptions. Only once Map65 v2.7 did a decode that Map65
> v3.0 and WSJTX missed.
> Another exception is that Map65 v2.7 showed a few more decodes on one
> station than Map65 v3.0.
> Generally Map65 v2.7 is no longer worth having in the mix. It was all I
> had when I re-entered EME just a few years ago. I changed my cable
> lengths a while back when I added cavities to the RX system so Delta phi
> changed. It used to be zero and is now +20 degrees. I am now wondering
> if a correct Delta phi correction improves or has any effect on sensitivity
> because Map65 v 3.0 was doing really well. There were many times that
> WSJTX was dropping the ball and Map65 v3.0 took up the slack. Yes, polarity
> was matched.
> My point here is that since these decoders have evolved it is important
> to use the latest versions when comparing.
>
> RE: Q65 60a on 2 meter EME. I still have not decided. JT65b has had
> years to evolve to where it is today and it is very advanced. I don't see
> the need for a Call3.txt to be any issue at all for JT65b so for me the
> argument of Q65 NOT needing a Call3 is a non-starter. I have seen decodes
> on strong stations that only transmitted for perhaps 5 or 10 seconds. I
> have called (and worked) stations when I was 30 seconds late in starting. I'm
> not sure Q65 can do that. Shorthand signals are said to decode at below the
> -30db level and I have decoded by eye at levels below what the decoder
> could do for shorthand signals. Shorthand signals are great. I can decide
> within about 20 seconds into a transmission what my answer is and act
> accordingly. I may choose to change polarity, log a contact or even QSY
> when I start seeing 73. There are many sources of QSB on the 2 meter EME
> signal and likely a variability of Urban noise is a significant part of
> that apparent QSB.
> I feel that JT65b signals might react to that environment better, but
> I'm just not sure. I have a fast computer so decode speed is not an issue
> for me anymore but many of my would be QSO partners have slower computers
> that decode JT65b much faster than Q65. Perhaps this will be improved over
> time. I have seen decodes on deep search on Q65 that were -30db or below,
> but here, they are rare. -28db for a lower limit is more frequent and
> -30db on WJSTX JT65b are very frequent.
>
> Some of the higher frequency EME bands have much better acceptance to
> Q65 and I think there may be a few reasons for that. It is far more
> expensive to have a microwave EME station. The microwave EMEer is far more
> likely to have a fast computer. Many 23 CM EMEers have strong signals. The
> use of CW and even SSB is common. They would not suffer as much from a
> variable noise floor that can vary in strength in just milliseconds. I'm
> just guessing of course. I have only operated 2 meter EME. 2 meter EME is
> easy to try, 23cm, not so much. To try 2 meter EME all one needs is to
> stick the back end of a yagi into the ground with the boom aligned with the
> moon. If your noise environment is low, I could work you with 500 watts on
> your end.
>
> WB9UWA
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:54 AM Ed Cole via Moon-net <
> moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
>
>> Well I guess I should not be surprised that the topic has shifted from
>> a
>> question about lowest level of sensitivity to one of smallest station
>> used.
>>
>> The original topic was (I believe) asking what was the lowest signal
>> level that was seen that provided a legitimate contact (decoded in
>> digital modes).
>>
>> A ways back I was curious what my receiving signal sensitivity was. So
>> using signal source that I calibrated by measuring with my HP432A power
>> meter. I began adding attenuation until I found the weakest signal I
>> could still detect with my ears (using a 100-Hz bw filter).
>>
>> I installed my signal source inside a diecast aluminum (Hammond) box
>> with coax connector to provide better shielding. -155dBm was the limit
>> That worked without leakage.
>>
>> I got down to -155 dBm +/- 3 dB. Adding my antenna gain that implied I
>> could "barely" hear a -175 dBm signal.
>>
>> Not enough to copy CW, though. I found I needed about +5 to 10 dB SNR
>> to do that. That is about -14 dB on the JT65 signal scale.
>>
>> I can usually hear tones from a -18 dB JT65 signal. JT65 improves
>> sensitivity to -28 dB (based only on bw reduction from 50Hz to 5Hz).
>>
>> But this is theoretical math, and the question was what folks out there
>> really were experiencing.
>>
>> With WSJT10 (JT65B) on 2m, I was getting reliable decoding at -26 dB
>> and
>> several at -28 dB. That was when band noise was quiet. MAP65 didn't
>> do
>> quite as well so I will say -26 dB was lower limit.
>>
>> Q65A appears to be more sensitive as I am getting many decodes at-32 dB
>> and an occasional -35 dB. This for 6m so not exactly fair comparison to
>> 2m (which I am not QRV at current time). This running WSJT-X 2.5
>>
>> Note: I have upgraded computers from winxp to win10, and using
>> different
>> soundcards. All that affects sensitivity.
>>
>> 73, Ed - KL7UW
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
>> http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>>
>>
>
> --
> Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
>
> My EME array photos
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
> Detailed array photos
> http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
> Facebook
> http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
> Linkedin
> http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
> _______________________________________________
> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
> http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>
>
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
24 Dec
24 Dec
10:29 a.m.
Paul, interesting system. I wonder if you have time to do a write up for Central states or
microwave magazine on your setup? I am sure many might get the bug to copy it to get on
the moon. Thanks Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Andrews via Moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
To: Earl Shaffer <wb9uwa(a)gmail.com>
Cc: moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
Sent: Thu, Dec 23, 2021 12:55 pm
Subject: Re: [Moon-Net] Lower limit for EME
Moonmen,
I hope you can see the picture of my very practical 0.8m grid dish with a CP patch feed.
I could see the ON0EME beacon and make a digi QSO with a 4m class station.
73 - Paul - W2HRO
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 11:24 AM Earl Shaffer via Moon-net
<moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> wrote:
Hi Ed and all.
I use 4xUWA12 Xpol with 18dbd gain in an Urban environment.I recently worked a station
with 12dbd gain and 500 watts. (high elevation) I think the lowest power levelI have
copied is about 250 watts, but they had a larger array.Sky noise here almost does not
matter. Perigee is better due to local noise.I won't get into that now, but I think
the FCC could do far better than what they are doing now.There have been sensitivity
improvements in JT65b over the years.I recently had a chance to compare Map65 v2.7, Map65
v3.0 and the latest WSJTX.It's a small sample, so I might update it later but here are
my findings so far.Map65 v2.7 is good for about -27db.Map65 v3.0 is good for
about -28db.WSJTX is good for -30db.Map65 v3.0 gave about twice as many decodes as Map65
v2.7 on the same station calling CQ.WSJTX gave about 40% more decodes than Map65
v3.0.There are a few exceptions. Only once Map65 v2.7 did a decode that Map65 v3.0 and
WSJTX missed.Another exception is that Map65 v2.7 showed a few more decodes on one station
than Map65 v3.0.Generally Map65 v2.7 is no longer worth having in the mix. It was all I
had when I re-entered EME just a few years ago. I changed my cable lengths a while back
when I added cavities to the RX system so Delta phi changed. It used to be zero and is
now +20 degrees. I am now wondering if a correct Delta phi correction improves or has any
effect on sensitivity because Map65 v 3.0 was doing really well. There were many times
that WSJTX was dropping the ball and Map65 v3.0 took up the slack. Yes, polarity was
matched.My point here is that since these decoders have evolved it is important to use the
latest versions when comparing.
RE: Q65 60a on 2 meter EME. I still have not decided. JT65b has had years to evolve to
where it is today and it is very advanced. I don't see the need for a Call3.txt to be
any issue at all for JT65b so for me the argument of Q65 NOT needing a Call3 is a
non-starter. I have seen decodes on strong stations that only transmitted for perhaps 5 or
10 seconds. I have called (and worked) stations when I was 30 seconds late in
starting. I'm not sure Q65 can do that. Shorthand signals are said to decode at below
the -30db level and I have decoded by eye at levels below what the decoder could do for
shorthand signals. Shorthand signals are great. I can decide within about 20 seconds into
a transmission what my answer is and act accordingly. I may choose to change polarity, log
a contact or even QSY when I start seeing 73. There are many sources of QSB on the 2 meter
EME signal and likely a variability of Urban noise is a significant part of that apparent
QSB.I feel that JT65b signals might react to that environment better, but I'm just not
sure. I have a fast computer so decode speed is not an issue for me anymore but many of my
would be QSO partners have slower computers that decode JT65b much faster than Q65.
Perhaps this will be improved over time. I have seen decodes on deep search on Q65 that
were -30db or below, but here, they are rare. -28db for a lower limit is more frequent
and -30db on WJSTX JT65b are very frequent.
Some of the higher frequency EME bands have much better acceptance to Q65 and I think
there may be a few reasons for that. It is far more expensive to have a microwave EME
station. The microwave EMEer is far more likely to have a fast computer. Many 23 CM EMEers
have strong signals. The use of CW and even SSB is common. They would not suffer as much
from a variable noise floor that can vary in strength in just milliseconds. I'm just
guessing of course. I have only operated 2 meter EME. 2 meter EME is easy to try, 23cm,
not so much. To try 2 meter EME all one needs is to stick the back end of a yagi into the
ground with the boom aligned with the moon. If your noise environment is low, I could work
you with 500 watts on your end.
WB9UWA
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:54 AM Ed Cole via Moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
wrote:
Well I guess I should not be surprised that the topic has shifted from a
question about lowest level of sensitivity to one of smallest station used.
The original topic was (I believe) asking what was the lowest signal
level that was seen that provided a legitimate contact (decoded in
digital modes).
A ways back I was curious what my receiving signal sensitivity was. So
using signal source that I calibrated by measuring with my HP432A power
meter. I began adding attenuation until I found the weakest signal I
could still detect with my ears (using a 100-Hz bw filter).
I installed my signal source inside a diecast aluminum (Hammond) box
with coax connector to provide better shielding. -155dBm was the limit
That worked without leakage.
I got down to -155 dBm +/- 3 dB. Adding my antenna gain that implied I
could "barely" hear a -175 dBm signal.
Not enough to copy CW, though. I found I needed about +5 to 10 dB SNR
to do that. That is about -14 dB on the JT65 signal scale.
I can usually hear tones from a -18 dB JT65 signal. JT65 improves
sensitivity to -28 dB (based only on bw reduction from 50Hz to 5Hz).
But this is theoretical math, and the question was what folks out there
really were experiencing.
With WSJT10 (JT65B) on 2m, I was getting reliable decoding at -26 dB and
several at -28 dB. That was when band noise was quiet. MAP65 didn't do
quite as well so I will say -26 dB was lower limit.
Q65A appears to be more sensitive as I am getting many decodes at-32 dB
and an occasional -35 dB. This for 6m so not exactly fair comparison to
2m (which I am not QRV at current time). This running WSJT-X 2.5
Note: I have upgraded computers from winxp to win10, and using different
soundcards. All that affects sensitivity.
73, Ed - KL7UW
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA My EME array
photoshttps://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/Facebookhttp://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer…
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735________________________…
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
2 Jan
2 Jan
11:52 a.m.
New subject: Tracking Software
I'm hoping this forum might help me ? I want to eventually do Moon
Bounce on 23cm. But right now I want to track orbital satellites, the
Moon and also the Moon Orbiters.
Nova was great and I was almost there until it now continuously crashes
on opening (even if run as administrator), as it's not supported I can
be doing with it any more.
SatPC32 sort of does the Moon as an afterthought. So is there anything
that looks good and does the job ? Support for X/Y rotors would be the
icing !
I would be very happy to pay for supported software.
Thanks Dave G4IUG Ex G8EAO
12:01 p.m.
New subject: Tracking Software
I'm hoping this forum might help me ? I want to eventually do Moon
Bounce on 23cm. But right now I want to track orbital satellites, the
Moon and also the Moon Orbiters.
Nova was great and I was almost there until it now continuously crashes
on opening (even if run as administrator), as it's not supported I can
be doing with it any more.
SatPC32 sort of does the Moon as an afterthought. So is there anything
that looks good and does the job ? Support for X/Y rotors would be the
icing !
I would be very happy to pay for supported software.
Thanks Dave G4IUG Ex G8EAO
12:14 p.m.
New subject: Tracking Software
Hello David,
I am using PSTRotator for EME, Sat and Deep Space. Using it also for Radio
Astronomy with RadioEyes...
No problems so far...
HNY 2022!!
73, Miguel
CT1BYM
A domingo, 2/01/2022, 17:07, G4IUG via Moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
escreveu:
I'm hoping this forum might help me ? I want to eventually do Moon
Bounce on 23cm. But right now I want to track orbital satellites, the
Moon and also the Moon Orbiters.
Nova was great and I was almost there until it now continuously crashes
on opening (even if run as administrator), as it's not supported I can
be doing with it any more.
SatPC32 sort of does the Moon as an afterthought. So is there anything
that looks good and does the job ? Support for X/Y rotors would be the
icing !
I would be very happy to pay for supported software.
Thanks Dave G4IUG Ex G8EAO
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
3:26 p.m.
New subject: Tracking Software
Great news, Gary!
I would love to give it a try, many thanks for your info's!!!
73, Miguel
CT1BYM
A domingo, 2/01/2022, 19:13, Gary Abercrombie <gabercr(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
Miguel,
I will soon be shipping WinTrak board kits and completed boards and
possibly some complete trackers with case and power supplies. WinTrak
supports tracking of the Moon/Sun, Planets, and celestial objects. WinTrak
can interface with GPredict for tracking satellites. WinTrak interfaces
with PstRotator via EasyComm 2 protocol so you can remote control WinTrak.
Interfacing with RadioEyes is also supported. WinTrak computes doppler and
has built in rig control for automatic doppler control for many popular
rigs. WinTrak supports a variety of weather station sensors and can be
used to park the dish in inclement weather conditions. WinTrak also has
PWM DC speed control using BTS-7960 modules which are plug-n-plug with the
WinTrak I/O board.
You can try out WinTrak by downloading the Windows 10 Installer in the
dropbox link below. Schematics, photos, and useful documents are in the
subfolders.
WinTrak interfaces with the encoders using the US Digital SEI differential
bus. This allows communication with the encoders at long distances from
the shack. I keep expanding the types of encoders that are supported. US
Digital encoders A2 and A2T interface directly without additional
hardware. The MABMPU encoder interface is used for other encoder models.
The current supported list of encoders are: Megatron MAB25, ETS25, MAB28,
ETA25 absolute encoders, DF1SR’s HH-12 and HH-12-INC, MPU9255
accelerometer, US Digital and incremental encoders, Quadrature incremental
encoders. MABMPU encoder firmware also supports several encoders using PWM
outputs.
I still support the standalone tracker RazTrak which uses a Raspberry PI
2, 3, or 4 and a RazTrak I/O board and is a complete standalone trackers
supporting a 7” touchscreen interface (or HDMI monitor). Instructions for
installing RazTrak are included in the Raspberry subfolder.
Time permitting, I may also support WinTrak on MAC OS/X. This has been on
my TODO list for quite some time. I previously built for Android also.
RazTrak documentation and reference documents are in this dropbox link.
The latest WinTrak installer is in the WinTrak subfolder.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wdkiedn1f61eajk/AAC99oPgbwnyEcljiYstjqKPa?dl=0
I am trying to determine an affordable shipping method into EU countries.
The recent handling fees imposed by EU has become a real challenge.
Gary, N8CQ
Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
Windows
*From: *Miguel Pelicano via Moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
*Sent: *Sunday, January 2, 2022 12:20 PM
*To: *moon(a)time-step.com
*Cc: *moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
*Subject: *Re: [Moon-Net] Tracking Software
Hello David,
I am using PSTRotator for EME, Sat and Deep Space. Using it also for Radio
Astronomy with RadioEyes...
No problems so far...
HNY 2022!!
73, Miguel
CT1BYM
A domingo, 2/01/2022, 17:07, G4IUG via Moon-net <
moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> escreveu:
I'm hoping this forum might help me ? I want to eventually do Moon
Bounce on 23cm. But right now I want to track orbital satellites, the
Moon and also the Moon Orbiters.
Nova was great and I was almost there until it now continuously crashes
on opening (even if run as administrator), as it's not supported I can
be doing with it any more.
SatPC32 sort of does the Moon as an afterthought. So is there anything
that looks good and does the job ? Support for X/Y rotors would be the
icing !
I would be very happy to pay for supported software.
Thanks Dave G4IUG Ex G8EAO
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
3 Jan
3 Jan
3:55 a.m.
New subject: Tracking Software
Many thanks to all those who answered via the mail list and also directly.
Nova is my preferred software if it did not fail to start and I'm now in
direct communication with W9IP about it.
It maybe the trial version of PstRotaor, but I can't seem to get a good
resolution map centred on my location ( IO80EI ) with for instance the
Moon and the ISS footprints. Compared to Nova the screen is overly
cluttered and I'm unable to turn of parts of it under the "View menu ?
I should say that my main interest is reception however I will be on
23cm EME sooner but probably later.
I am available at a moments notice on Es'Hail QO100 SSB.
Thanks Dave G4IUG
2 Jan
2 Jan
4:08 p.m.
New subject: Tracking Software
Dear Dave,
The usual reason for crash-as-startup with Nova for Windows is that a satellite orbit has
decayed but the entry is still in the database. Dig into the ...\Nova for Windows\Data
folder and delete the file Previous32.DAT. This will allow Nova to start in its default
configuration.
73,
W9IP (Nova's author)
-----Original Message-----
From: Moon-net <moon-net-bounces(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> On Behalf Of Timestep via
Moon-net
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2022 11:53 AM
To: moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
Subject: [Moon-Net] Tracking Software
I'm hoping this forum might help me ? I want to eventually do Moon Bounce on 23cm.
But right now I want to track orbital satellites, the Moon and also the Moon Orbiters.
Nova was great and I was almost there until it now continuously crashes on opening (even
if run as administrator), as it's not supported I can be doing with it any more.
SatPC32 sort of does the Moon as an afterthought. So is there anything that looks good
and does the job ? Support for X/Y rotors would be the icing !
I would be very happy to pay for supported software.
Thanks Dave G4IUG Ex G8EAO
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
23 Dec
23 Dec
1:19 p.m.
Good info, Earl. I will try to brief in reply:
I run four M2 2mXP20 with 19.2 dBd (21.35 dBi) gain. My last eme use
was back in 2017 with sw that existed then: WSJT10 and MAP65.
Also performance is from memory of then. WSJT-X did not exist, yet.
I first used it for FT8 on 6m sporadic-E contacts. Then lately on
6m-eme using Q65A (which appears to be prime mode used on 6m at this point).
I have the new MAP65 loaded with WSJT-X but not used it since dual-pol
2m array is still in the process of rebuild. I only used MAP65 on
2m-eme. I used WSJT10 for 50 and 1296 eme in the past.
Delta-phi calibration only affects polarity indications, I believe. No
affect on signal sensitivity. I will have to do that once I have all
new Superflex 1/2-inch phasing lines installed for 2m. Only two short
sections of LMR600 will be in the new 2m system. Main transmission line
is 120-foot ADA7-50A and 30-foot LDF4-50A (total Tx loss 1.7 dB). I've
decided to keep 1500w sspa in the shack and not installed at tower base
(KISS). Essentially no change from when I ran a 8877.
Initial operation on 2m probably will use WSJT-X with either JT65B or
Q65A. I've problems getting driver installed on my UADC4 so will just
use the i5 computer internal soundcard (what I currently am using on 6m).
No more to say until 2m array goes back up for some real observations.
Ditto on 1296 regarding dish mount re-build.
73, Ed-KL7UW
On 12/23/2021 7:20 AM, Earl Shaffer via Moon-net wrote:
Hi Ed and all.
I use 4xUWA12 Xpol with 18dbd gain in an Urban environment.
I recently worked a station with 12dbd gain and 500 watts. (high
elevation) I think the lowest power level
I have copied is about 250 watts, but they had a larger array.
Sky noise here almost does not matter. Perigee is better due to local noise.
I won't get into that now, but I think the FCC could do far better than
what they are doing now.
There have been sensitivity improvements in JT65b over the years.
I recently had a chance to compare Map65 v2.7, Map65 v3.0 and the latest
WSJTX.
It's a small sample, so I might update it later but here are my findings
so far.
Map65 v2.7 is good for about -27db.
Map65 v3.0 is good for about -28db.
WSJTX is good for -30db.
Map65 v3.0 gave about twice as many decodes as Map65 v2.7 on the same
station calling CQ.
WSJTX gave about 40% more decodes than Map65 v3.0.
There are a few exceptions. Only once Map65 v2.7 did a decode that Map65
v3.0 and WSJTX missed.
Another exception is that Map65 v2.7 showed a few more decodes on one
station than Map65 v3.0.
Generally Map65 v2.7 is no longer worth having in the mix. It was all I
had when I re-entered EME just a few years ago. I changed my cable
lengths a while back when I added cavities to the RX system so Delta phi
changed. It used to be zero and is now +20 degrees. I am now wondering
if a correct Delta phi correction improves or has any effect on
sensitivity because Map65 v 3.0 was doing really well. There were many
times that WSJTX was dropping the ball and Map65 v3.0 took up the slack.
Yes, polarity was matched.
My point here is that since these decoders have evolved it is important
to use the latest versions when comparing.
RE: Q65 60a on 2 meter EME. I still have not decided. JT65b has had
years to evolve to where it is today and it is very advanced. I don't
see the need for a Call3.txt to be any issue at all for JT65b so for me
the argument of Q65 NOT needing a Call3 is a non-starter. I have seen
decodes on strong stations that only transmitted for perhaps 5 or 10
seconds. I have called (and worked) stations when I was 30 seconds late
in starting. I'm not sure Q65 can do that. Shorthand signals are said to
decode at below the -30db level and I have decoded by eye at levels
below what the decoder could do for shorthand signals. Shorthand signals
are great. I can decide within about 20 seconds into a transmission what
my answer is and act accordingly. I may choose to change polarity, log a
contact or even QSY when I start seeing 73. There are many sources of
QSB on the 2 meter EME signal and likely a variability of Urban noise is
a significant part of that apparent QSB.
I feel that JT65b signals might react to that environment better, but
I'm just not sure. I have a fast computer so decode speed is not an
issue for me anymore but many of my would be QSO partners have slower
computers that decode JT65b much faster than Q65. Perhaps this will be
improved over time. I have seen decodes on deep search on Q65 that were
-30db or below, but here, they are rare. -28db for a lower limit is
more frequent and -30db on WJSTX JT65b are very frequent.
Some of the higher frequency EME bands have much better acceptance to
Q65 and I think there may be a few reasons for that. It is far more
expensive to have a microwave EME station. The microwave EMEer is far
more likely to have a fast computer. Many 23 CM EMEers have strong
signals. The use of CW and even SSB is common. They would not suffer as
much from a variable noise floor that can vary in strength in just
milliseconds. I'm just guessing of course. I have only operated 2 meter
EME. 2 meter EME is easy to try, 23cm, not so much. To try 2 meter EME
all one needs is to stick the back end of a yagi into the ground with
the boom aligned with the moon. If your noise environment is low, I
could work you with 500 watts on your end.
WB9UWA
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:54 AM Ed Cole via Moon-net
<moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com <mailto:moon-net@mailman.pe1itr.com>> wrote:
Well I guess I should not be surprised that the topic has shifted
from a
question about lowest level of sensitivity to one of smallest
station used.
The original topic was (I believe) asking what was the lowest signal
level that was seen that provided a legitimate contact (decoded in
digital modes).
A ways back I was curious what my receiving signal sensitivity was. So
using signal source that I calibrated by measuring with my HP432A power
meter. I began adding attenuation until I found the weakest signal I
could still detect with my ears (using a 100-Hz bw filter).
I installed my signal source inside a diecast aluminum (Hammond) box
with coax connector to provide better shielding. -155dBm was the limit
That worked without leakage.
I got down to -155 dBm +/- 3 dB. Adding my antenna gain that implied I
could "barely" hear a -175 dBm signal.
Not enough to copy CW, though. I found I needed about +5 to 10 dB SNR
to do that. That is about -14 dB on the JT65 signal scale.
I can usually hear tones from a -18 dB JT65 signal. JT65 improves
sensitivity to -28 dB (based only on bw reduction from 50Hz to 5Hz).
But this is theoretical math, and the question was what folks out there
really were experiencing.
With WSJT10 (JT65B) on 2m, I was getting reliable decoding at -26 dB
and
several at -28 dB. That was when band noise was quiet. MAP65
didn't do
quite as well so I will say -26 dB was lower limit.
Q65A appears to be more sensitive as I am getting many decodes at-32 dB
and an occasional -35 dB. This for 6m so not exactly fair comparison to
2m (which I am not QRV at current time). This running WSJT-X 2.5
Note: I have upgraded computers from winxp to win10, and using
different
soundcards. All that affects sensitivity.
73, Ed - KL7UW
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
<http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html>
--
Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA
My EME array photos
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bbn2ktonko8e3az/AACHBBOhf6Djk5Pf2c86Br5ja>
Detailed array photos
http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/ <http://www.gm4jjj.co.uk/WB9UWA/>
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer <http://www.facebook.com/earl.shaffer>
Linkedin
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735
<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/earl-shaffer/12/881/735>
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
516
days inactive
530
days old
16 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Curt -
Earl Shaffer -
Ed Cole -
Gary Abercrombie -
Miguel Pelicano -
mikflathead＠aol.com -
moon＠time-step.com -
nlsa＠nlsa.com -
Paul Andrews -
Timestep