On November 2, 2019 a miracle occurred. I found the Moon bounce data! And I have a trace of the emails that tell us what/when occurred. - JR

Gerry wrote up some details for the results which can be found at: Science Papers / Tech Notes, etc.

The broadcast was April 1, 2017.

The HAM radio bouncers were Toby and Mark:

• Toby Haynes VE7CNF (telus) ve7cnf@telus.net
• Mark Mattila VA7MM va7mm@telus.net

The WAV files they broadcast are here:

• https://jrseti.com/data/moon-bounce-wav-files/test_bpsk1000.wav
• https://jrseti.com/data/moon-bounce-wav-files/test_bpsk250.wav
• https://jrseti.com/data/moon-bounce-wav-files/test_bpsk31.wav

Jon recorded one channelizer channel from the beamformer of 1.1MHz centered at 1295.995MHz. The raw data Gerry analyzed is here. Careful, this data totals 2.5GB.

• https://jrseti.com/data/moon-b2-july-07-2016.data
• https://jrseti.com/data/moon-b2-july-07-2016.header
• https://jrseti.com/data/moon-b3-july-07-2016.data
• https://jrseti.com/data/moon-b3-july-07-2016.header

Here is the mail sent to Gerry harp from VE7CNF (telus) ve7cnf@telus.net on March 24, 2017, about these files to transmit:

Gerry,

I have attached a few .WAV files as examples of what we might transmit. These are shorter than the 1-minute files 
we could actually transmit at full power.

Each file uses binary phase-shift keying of a 1500 hz audio carrier wave to transmit ASCII text. 
File test_bpsk31.wav uses 31 Hz bandwidth, test_bpsk250.wav uses 250 Hz, and test_bpsk1000.wav 
uses 1000 Hz. Bandwidths of 63, 125, 250, and 500 Hz are also available. Data bit rates are 
the same as the bandwidths. At the end of each file is our station identifier "DE VA7MM" in morse code. 
We have to periodically transmit the identifier.

These are signals that ham operators use on frequencies from 1.8 MHz up to 1 GHz. We don't use them for moonbounce, 
as the moon path SNR is too low and phase distortion is too high. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSK31 for a 
description of the test_bpsk31.wav signal.

Our SSB transmitter will up-shift these signals to a center frequency of 1295.995 MHz.
 
The files were generated using a free windows program "FLdigi" that can be found here:
 
https://sourceforge.net/projects/fldigi/files/
http://www.w1hkj.com/FldigiHelp/index.html
 
Let me know if these signals are worth a try. We could be ready to transmit on the weekend of April 1 if you want.
 
Toby

The observation was April 1, 2017, Here is an email sent to Toby from one of their operators, Mark:

Toby, 

FYI we concluded with SETI / ATA at about 6:56 today after a long transmission of about 20 minutes in length. The 
amplifier stayed cool with only a 2 F degree increase in cooling water temperature with the continuous transmission. 

We will continue with SETI by email and will ‎send some photos of the station. Gerry has sent a concluding note 
(below), and thank you for opportunity to participate Gerry. 

This initial effort has worked well and we will make the station available anytime should SETI seek additional 
reception data for their work from the moon or other objects such as satellites. 

Mark

Then a success message reply from Gerry:

Original Message  
From: Gerald Harp
Sent: Saturday, April 1, 2017 19:07
To: VE7CNF (telus); VA7MM; seti-team; qag@list.seti.org
Subject: the moon did bounce

Hi Everyone

Success!

Well thanks very much to Toby and Mark in Vancouver, we got some good 
data with the ATA measuring their transmission bounced from the moon. 
We're using these observations to test some ideas about a large-scale 
double slit experiment. With two synthetic beams at the ATA, pointed 
toward different small parts of the moon, we want to make a quantitative 
measurement of the interference between the two beams.

As you might imagine, the moon's surface is very rough on the scale of 
the radio wavelength (~23 centimeters). So the moon acts like a diffuse 
reflector. [We're avoiding the specular reflection.] The question we 
ask is, can you still see interference between the signals on the two 
slits even though the reflector is very diffuse. My prediction is that 
we will see interference, but Stu has suggested that maybe we won't. The 
point is, we're not certain what the results will be and this is why we 
tried the experiment.

We could clearly see the reflected signal in our instruments, so we know 
we have enough signal to noise to answer the question. We won't have a 
quantitative answer for at least a couple of weeks because we're 
distracted with some other high priority work at the Institute. This 
experiment is just a side project.

Anyway, thanks to everyone who participated!

Gerry

JR observed after this observation. There was a lot of moon bounce activity. Here is a posting to Twitter:

You can view the post at https://twitter.com/jrseti/status/848298756965453824