X-GM-THRID: 1243115902279400993 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.70.87.11 with SMTP id k11cs15522wxb; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.82.170.2 with SMTP id s2mr2286304bue.1185527708924; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:15:08 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f8si3246659nfh.2007.07.27.02.15.04; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:15:08 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1IELqm-0002a6-Nb for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:11:08 +0100 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1IELql-0002Zx-Ou for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:11:07 +0100 Received: from smtp.telefonica.net ([213.4.149.66] helo=ctsmtpout1.frontal.correo) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IELqk-0002Qk-A5 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:11:07 +0100 Received: from PC2 (81.33.96.253) by ctsmtpout1.frontal.correo (7.2.056.6) (authenticated as JPRADOES$telefonica.net) id 46A8D64500019B37 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:10:41 +0200 Message-ID: <000f01c7d02d$ff59cf10$2201a8c0@PC2> From: "Jose Manuel" To: References: <006901c7cfd4$8705a920$74c8e150@o> <002e01c7cfec$59c59160$05357ad5@w4o8m9> <001601c7d018$81122130$1265e150@o> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:10:37 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: LF: Re: Re: GW beacons / GI4DPE Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C7D03E.C2727820" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 943 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C7D03E.C2727820 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Rog and all, Nice copy last night of your QSO with Finbar, both signals with similar = level; in spite of QSB, almost 100% of the QSO heard here. 73 de Jos=E9, EA1PX ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gw3UEP=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 8:36 AM Subject: LF: Re: GW beacons / GI4DPE Fb Jim - hrd you wrkg Fin - wrkd him just b4 u, 599 here. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: James Moritz=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 2:20 AM Subject: LF: GW beacons / GI4DPE Dear LF Group, I had good reception of beacon signals from GW4HXO, GW3UEP and GI4DPE = on Tuesday night / Wednesday morning - All the signals got up to a 569 = sort of level at times, but with a lot of fading. When it started = getting light, all 3 signals quickly faded into the noise. I have = attached a snippet of the spectrogram showing the signals from GW4HXO = (upper) and GI4DPE (lower) which illustrates the fading, with the time = markers at 5 minute intervals. For some reason, the fading on GW4HXO's = signal seems to be deeper than GI4DPE's, although both signals are = peaking at a similar level. I also had a good CW QSO with GI4DPE tonight starting about 2335utc; = this had similar fading but never really disappeared completely, and was = 569 most of the time for about 25 minutes. I am also hearing GW3UEP's = beacon signal, which again seems to have much more fading than Finbar's = signal did.=20 Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU __________ Informaci=F3n de NOD32, revisi=F3n 2424 (20070726) = __________ Este mensaje ha sido analizado con NOD32 antivirus system http://www.nod32.com ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C7D03E.C2727820 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Rog and all,
 
Nice copy last night of your QSO with = Finbar, both=20 signals with similar level; in spite of QSB, almost 100% of the QSO = heard=20 here.
 
 
73 de Jos=E9, EA1PX
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Gw3UEP
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 = 8:36 AM
Subject: LF: Re: GW beacons /=20 GI4DPE

Fb Jim - hrd you wrkg Fin - wrkd him = just b4 u,=20 599 here.
----- Original Message -----=20
From: James Moritz
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 2:20 AM
Subject: LF: GW beacons / GI4DPE

Dear LF Group,
 
I had  good reception of beacon = signals from=20 GW4HXO, GW3UEP and GI4DPE on Tuesday night / Wednesday morning - All = the=20 signals got up to a 569 sort of level at times, but with a lot of=20 fading. When it started getting light, all 3 signals quickly = faded into=20 the noise. I have attached a snippet of the spectrogram showing the = signals=20 from GW4HXO (upper) and GI4DPE (lower) which illustrates the fading, = with the=20 time markers at 5 minute intervals. For some reason, the fading on = GW4HXO's=20 signal seems to be deeper than GI4DPE's, although both signals are = peaking at=20 a similar level.
 
I also had a good CW QSO with GI4DPE = tonight=20 starting about 2335utc; this had similar fading but never really = disappeared=20 completely, and was 569 most of the time for about 25 minutes. I am = also=20 hearing GW3UEP's beacon signal, which again seems to have much more = fading=20 than Finbar's signal did. 
 
Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de = M0BMU


__________=20 Informaci=F3n de NOD32, revisi=F3n 2424 (20070726) = __________

Este mensaje=20 ha sido analizado con NOD32 antivirus system
http://www.nod32.com
------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C7D03E.C2727820--