X-GM-THRID: 1243738813340145809 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.70.87.11 with SMTP id k11cs222371wxb; Thu, 2 Aug 2007 23:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.79.19 with SMTP id c19mr1982682fgb.1186121762523; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 2si6197651nfv.2007.08.02.23.15.59; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:16:02 -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 1IGqO1-0001As-Oi for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:11:45 +0100 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1IGqO1-0001Aj-5W for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:11:45 +0100 Received: from mk-filter-1-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.100.52]) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <500kcs@uku.co.uk>) id 1IGqNy-0007Vv-4f for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:11:45 +0100 X-Trace: 11924198-mk-filter-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com-B2C-$THROTTLED-DYNAMIC-CUSTOMER-DYNAMIC-IP X-SBRS: -3.0 X-RemoteIP: 80.225.141.66 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnpUAEpkskZQ4Y1CRmdsb2JhbAAUgiA1hAeBOwyBEoQ9AQEBNQGLdg Received: from ppp-3-66.edin-a-1.access.uk.tiscali.com (HELO o) ([80.225.141.66]) by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with SMTP; 03 Aug 2007 07:11:11 +0100 Message-ID: <002301c7d595$26d89500$428de150@o> From: "GW3UEP" <500kcs@uku.co.uk> To: References: <001301c7d523$6ade3e70$2201a8c0@PC2> Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 07:10:46 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: LF: Re: 500 Recent daytime test Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001C_01C7D59D.69A9DCB0" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,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: 448 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C7D59D.69A9DCB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jose, Just rcd - thank you for your most informative summary. Excellent work. 73, Rog. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Jose Manuel=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Cc: Finbar=20 Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 5:37 PM Subject: LF: 500 Recent daytime test Hello all, Some days ago I asked for cooperation to make a test of daytime = propagation on this band, and the colleagues Finbar-GI4DPE, Mike-GW4HXO = and Rog-GW3UEP were kindly running their CW beacons for such a test. The purpose of the test was to corroborate, with an ERP as low as 0.1W, = that daytime reception by ear, for a 1000km sea path, could be possible. = According to the family of curves of the ITU Rec.368, the expected field = strength for 0.1W, for this kind of sea path, is roughly -14dB(uV/m). = Unfortunately I couldn=B4t make measurements, with my heavy = "messempf=E4nger", of the incoming signal either the external noise = field strength at the receiving site but, assuming the previously = mentioned signal level for GW4HXO ( only 4 km land mass), an external = noise in the range of -27 to -33 dB(uV/m) for 1 Hz, ( in my noisy urban = QTH it=B4s around 10 dB higher), and considering some 20 Hz for the BW = human ear, can be obtained an audio signal to noise in the order of 5dB. = Regarding to the Rog=B4s path, I think his power is something lower than = the Mike=B4s one, and besides there are 60 km of land mass, so no = possible reception by ear was possible. For the path with Finbar there = are 300km of land mass to be added to 1000km of sea, so the resulting = path loss is enormous. As a personal curiosity, I=B4ll try to calculate, for this last case, = and for other UK mixed paths, the expected FS according to the = Millington method recommended by ITU. On the other hand, I think that QRSS and CW beacons are very useful in = order to study, or simply to monitor, the radio propagation, but I=B4d = like to mention again, for the CW ones, the convenience to transmit a = long dash, equal or longer than 10 sec, to make possible plottings with = weak signals; I think it would be better a speed lower than 10 wpm. 73 de Jos=E9, EA1PX, IN53ti ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C7D59D.69A9DCB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Jose,
Just rcd - thank you for your most = informative=20 summary.
Excellent work.
73, Rog.
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Jose=20 Manuel
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Cc: Finbar
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 5:37 PM
Subject: LF: 500 Recent daytime test

Hello all,
 
Some days ago I asked for cooperation = to make a=20 test of daytime propagation on this band, and the colleagues = Finbar-GI4DPE,=20 Mike-GW4HXO and Rog-GW3UEP were kindly running their CW beacons for such = a=20 test.
The purpose of the test was to = corroborate, with an=20 ERP as low as 0.1W, that daytime reception by ear, for a 1000km sea = path, could=20 be possible. According to the family of curves of the ITU Rec.368, the = expected=20 field strength for 0.1W, for this kind of sea path, is roughly = -14dB(uV/m).=20 Unfortunately I couldn=B4t make measurements, with my heavy = "messempf=E4nger", of=20 the incoming signal either the external noise field strength at the = receiving=20 site but, assuming the previously mentioned signal level for GW4HXO ( = only 4 km=20 land mass), an external noise in the range of -27 to -33 dB(uV/m) for 1 = Hz, ( in=20 my noisy urban QTH it=B4s around 10 dB higher), and considering some 20 = Hz for the=20 BW human ear, can be obtained an audio signal to noise in the order of = 5dB.=20 Regarding to the Rog=B4s path, I think his power is something lower than = the=20 Mike=B4s one, and besides there are 60 km of land mass, so no possible = reception=20 by ear was possible. For the path with Finbar there are 300km of land = mass to be=20 added to 1000km of sea, so the resulting path loss is = enormous.
As a personal curiosity, I=B4ll try to = calculate, for=20 this last case, and for other UK mixed paths, the expected FS according = to the=20 Millington method recommended by ITU.
 
On the other hand, I think that QRSS = and CW beacons=20 are very useful in order to study, or simply to monitor, the radio = propagation,=20 but I=B4d like to mention again, for the CW ones, the convenience = to transmit=20 a long dash, equal or longer than 10 sec, to make possible = plottings with=20 weak signals; I think it would be better a speed lower than 10 = wpm.
 
73 de Jos=E9, EA1PX,=20 IN53ti
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C7D59D.69A9DCB0--