Message-ID: <000f01c073ea$e2ab6a00$3a47883e@default>
From: "MAL HAMILTON" <MAL@g3kev.freeserve.co.uk>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: LF: Re: Re: Apology
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 12:02:57 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>


-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Dodd <g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Date: 31 December 2000 12:52
Subject: LF: Re: Apology


>Steve GW4ALG said
>
>> As many of the the stations worked were using 136.5 +/- 200 Hz,
>> you can imagine my disappointment when QRM from the intermittent
>> carrier appeared on 136.5, with strong sidebands +/- 100 Hz
>> (already mentioned in other postings to this reflector).  I did
>> try for further contacts: I stuck it out for a couple of hours,
>> but everyone else had given up - so I went to bed too.  A
>> disappointing end to an otherwise successful day.
>
>In addition Steve sent me a direct e-mail reprimanding me for poor
>operating,  i.e using QRSS in the CW segment of the band and not
>sending QRL? before transmissions.

Some LF ops are past their sell by date and more suited to comics and
cartoons.
A little more consideration is needed by listening for a while before
transmitting and this type of abuse could be avoided.

>
>Firstly I apologize to Steve for spoiling his operating session and I
>feel that an explanation is in order.
>
>For the last few weeks several of us have been receiving VE1ZZ  using
>QRSS on 136.5kHz. This has not bothered CW operators because the
>signal is around 15 to 20dB below the noise and inaudible to CW operators.
>
>Last night, John, VE1ZJ indicated that he had installed Argo Beta1
>software and would looking for any transmissions from EU in between
>VE1ZZs transmissions. The monitoring frequency was not given.
>Previous listening/looking frequencies were below 135.8kHz but since
>then the Greek RTTY station had moved down there. Additionally, if
>VE1ZJ was monitoring VE1ZZ I reasoned that the place he would be
>looking was near VE1ZZ's frequency.
>
>After 2300 the only stations I could see was VE1ZZ on QRSS and Steve
>calling CQ a bit further up the band. (I could not respond to Steve
>because the system was set up for QRSS).  No other stations were
>present so I felt it was safe to transmit when VE1ZZ stopped. I went
>into listening mode during the planned VE1ZZ transmission times.
>
>To make things worse I appear to have had some instability with the
>transmitter driver during the transmit session just before 2359
>hours. Again I apologize to Steve (or anyone else who this affected)
>and I will be QRT until the transmitter fault is resolved. The
>problem may have been cause by the very low temperature in the LF
>shack last night.
>Steve also reported 100Hz sidebands. Have other operators noticed this?
>
>It is obvious that some procedure will be required if the proposed LF
>tests with VE in January are to be achieved without conflict. Your
>suggestions are welcome.
>
>All the best for the New Year
>
>
>--
>Regards, Peter, G3LDO
>
><g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk>
>
>
>