Testing HF antennas is a tricky thing to do. Simple on-air test are seldom conclusive and are more often than not, they are just plain confusing. SOTABEAMS has come up with a completely new way to test antennas, locations and to monitor propagation using the WSPR system. SOTABEAMS system consists of two parts; WSPRlite a WSPR beacon with electronic power control and DXplorer.net a data analysis website. WSPRlite sends a test transmission which is received by hundreds of stations across the world. DXplorer.net is a web based system that gathers these reports and presents them in a whole new way, allowing the user to check the DX performance of their antenna system. However, the real break-though is the ability to compare systems in real time and all over the world. DXplorer.net doesthis in a simple and intuitive way enabling you to see what difference changes to your antenna system really make to its DX performance. More information on WSPRlite and DXplorer.net is available at: http://www.sotabeams.co.uk/wsprlite
So you've machine-automated the reverse beacon system....using WSPR, and provided an analytical display for comparitive results. Frankly, I do these things on CW on a daily basis, using a real-live person, but I can understand why a machine-based system may have some value to those who don't want to call CQ on CW (thereby turning on the RBN logging), and just want to see the results. The REAL issue is not PROPAGATION, but POPULATION. I am not the only one to see a huge turn down in QSO's with the new onset of the susnpot min. For example, I will regularly turn on 20-40 RB receivers with my high gain fractal omni antennas, with decent to excellent SNR. But no answers to CQ's. Typically, I call CQ and also do something else while waiting for answers--write reports, books, check email, exercise. Three years ago I would get 50-300 Q's in a short run, no contest needed. I compare antennas all the time on RBN. If this new system gets people attune to the idea of 'being heard', that great--but its no substitute for 'being OTA'. Anyway the package sounds nice, and is clearly cost effective. I STRONGLY suggest you see the 2017 NA total solar eclipse as an opportunity to sell and showcase the system. Best of luck with the new product. 73 Chip W1YW
You must take the results from the WSPR network with a large grain of salt. Since the receiving stations are volunteers who do not have 1. A standard, identical antenna 2. Nor a standard Spherical pattern 3. Nor any sort of calibration to compensate for installation qualities, nor to compensate for the non-standard antenna pattern, the numbers are highly subjective. It's better than a subjective RST report, however!
Its a comparison, not an absolute The ratios cancel like factors. It assumes that your prop differential (in dB) via the comparison is identical for your antenna A on day 1, so when you replace or raise antenna A with antenna B, any identical differential is caused by the difference in Antenna B as an antenna system. The uncertainty is probably one or two db.
The REAL issue is not PROPAGATION, but POPULATION. I am not the only one to see a huge turn down in QSO's with the new onset of the susnpot min. For example, I will regularly turn on 20-40 RB receivers with my high gain fractal omni antennas, with decent to excellent SNR. But no answers to CQ's. Typically, I call CQ and also do something else while waiting for answers--write reports, books, check email, exercise. Three years ago I would get 50-300 Q's in a short run, no contest needed. Could it be all those hams living with HOA antenna restrictions? Sure, when propagation is good, you can load up a bedspring and make a contact. Fewer hams with EFFECTIVE outdoor antennas?
You are right. That is why DXplorer.net does not use the reported signal at all. It processes the data in a completely different way.
....and given that there are many people here with metrology backgrounds in antennas, what way is that? I don't believe there is anything new in the measurement process.
Never mind all the whingers, whiners and nitpickers ... I think this is well cool and I guess I'm gonna go buy one.
Cool... I'll probably buy one. It'll be neat to compare my field expedient antennas in a different way and give me something to play with. That's the great thing about this HOBBY, there is something for everyone's interest. There's always the 10% of haters... It's cool to look at the data in a different way. In the real world everyone doesn't have a great antenna anyway. They use what they have. Using the spectrum is what keeps our privileges from being raped by special interests. It's the same thing with contesting. Use of the spectrum... I like contesting but your signal reports are hardly accurate in contests or even in many casual qso's. This is more accurate than some dude that just wants a contact and spits out a 599 rst in a crazed dash for a piece of paper or qso verification. It's a shame, but TRUE!!! I'm not whining... simply stating facts... I love this hobby, everyone, and everything in it.
No whiners here. On the contrary: there are no NEW ways of doing differential measurements of antennas. That is good news, as it means that if properly implemented, this is a valuable tool. Please see my initial post. 73 Chip W1YW
Thank you. I actually am very supportive of antennas in the amateur arena, as with this OP. I will be buying at least one unit myself. Sorry my comments were taken in the negative by some. 73 Chip W1YW
I've used mine for the last 6 weeks and it's very interesting to see how an antenna performs on one band, while I am OTA elsewhere. Great bit of kit and very affordable.
