Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dh01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id BB21038000085; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 13:45:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1ScglX-0003i8-4R for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:44:59 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1ScglW-0003hz-Gr for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:44:58 +0100 Received: from out1.ip05ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.241]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1ScglU-0003MK-7S for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:44:57 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnsFABLo0E9cHYyS/2dsb2JhbAArGoVOmHIDkRiERYEIghMFAQEEAQgBAQMWMwImBgEBAwUCAQMRBAEBCiECAhQBBBoGFggGEwoBAgIBAQqFdoFsAwYJBymmAIkLE4lIix0IE4RfgRIDjT2IcolnhQGCYIFWBQQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,732,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217";a="383587109" Received: from host-92-29-140-146.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.29.140.146]) by out1.ip05ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 07 Jun 2012 18:44:54 +0100 Message-ID: <003901cd44d5$3f63a470$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <00ad01cd424c$0138a690$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <00d301cd4255$b6428ac0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <636F5742-6949-4616-9CFD-3FCF99B4506A@gmail.com> <00f301cd4263$4ce62880$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <4FCCD78A.6030302@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <4FD08634.8010402@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <000b01cd449e$8ed026a0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <989268713.594928.1339069782716.JavaMail.www@wwinf8316> <4FD0999E.3080206@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <1608727203.579919.1339071424127.JavaMail.www@wwinf8307> <4FD09E40.2050308@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <1681559339.753475.1339087873235.JavaMail.www@wwinf8219> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 17:44:54 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: He has a good TX signal but cannot Receive. It is no problem for normal CW to work on 137. I have worked over 30 countries in the past. QRSS is not necessary for those that make an effort especially around EU and as far as Moscow de g3kev [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [62.24.128.241 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FSL_XM_419 Old OE version in X-Mailer only seen in 419 spam -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 FSL_UA FSL_UA 0.0 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 X-Scan-Signature: 94a3ffcd3903efbf0b2b811b1b1cc0bf Subject: Re: LF: MF Allocation (was:VX9MRC 504.1 kHz) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0036_01CD44D5.3F2CDD00" 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 x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:488286944:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d41154fd0e8c5626c X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01CD44D5.3F2CDD00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable He has a good TX signal but cannot Receive. It is no problem for normal CW to work on 137. I have worked over 30 = countries in the past. QRSS is not necessary for those that make an effort especially around EU = and as far as Moscow de g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: manginbenoit.pro=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 4:51 PM Subject: Re: LF: MF Allocation (was:VX9MRC 504.1 kHz) This is the eternal question... QRSS is quite easier and most probably the only solution for most of = us BUT: We are a quite a large lot to look forward = "operator-hands-and-ears" CW activity. If 137 was more populated, maybe wouldn't it be so hard to QSO in = regular CW, even with veeeeeeeery low ERPs.=20 That should be peanuts for you Stefan, once you get on the air another = monstrous signal. On MF, the problem is similar, although antenna efficiency is greater, = and CW should be easier.=20 Passionned with 160 meters, I would also focus on CW for MF 630 = meters, with probably a bit of slow CW beaconing or QSO, but just for = fun. The no-computer approach is something of a challenge. Remember, CW is "Man versus Machine !!!". 73 Ben > Message du 07/06/12 14:32 > De : "Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer"=20 > A : rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Copie =C3=A0 :=20 > Objet : Re: LF: VX9MRC 504.1 kHz > > Hi Ben, >=20 > I do not intend to run so much power. I will rather build a small = PA and a lossy coil. A lossy coil has a lower Q and a braoder bandwidth = and so i will not need to adjust the resonance when making QSY within = the band, hopefully. That makes things easier. > On MF i plan to focus on plain handgiven CW. No QRSS, no grabber, = maybe even no computer. However Speclab would be fine to get an overview = of the band activity and offers nice filter and noise reduction tools... > I'm really excited how the band will be populated. It's not so far = away from 1800 kHz and an ordinary amateur radio antenna, e.g. a dipole = for 80m, configured as a T antenna will work reasonable if a suitable = earth is available. >=20 > But what's the problem in France? You have so much space for large = antennas, don't you? Or do you live in Paris City? :-) >=20 > 73, Stefan/DK7FC >=20 > Am 07.06.2012 14:17, schrieb manginbenoit.pro:=20 Lucky you Stefan, lucky you ! Probably the reason for your KW ERP. >=20 > My "reasonable" setup indicates me that triple that value could = be necessary... >=20 > CU there >=20 > Ben >=20 >=20 >=20 > Message du 07/06/12 14:12 > > De : "Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer"=20 > > A : rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > > Copie =C3=A0 :=20 > > Objet : Re: LF: VX9MRC 504.1 kHz > > > > I only heared some rumours about the permission starting = January, 1st,=20 > > 2013, here in DL. Also i heard rumours that a permit is = given out on the=20 > > Ham Radio 2012 = (http://www.hamradio-friedrichshafen.de/ham-en/index.php)=20 > > , which would be in 3 weeks! But i guess 2013 is more = realistic. > >=20 > > Time to build a suitable loading coil for MF. I will need = about 240 uH=20 > > only... > >=20 > > 73, Stefan/DK7FC > >=20 > > Am 07.06.2012 13:49, schrieb manginbenoit.pro: > > > Are there other EU countries (apart from the British = Isles)=20 > > > granting MF access to the amateur service so fast ? > > > > > > We in France still did not hear even the smallest whisper = from our=20 > > > tutelage administration. Or maybe am I not well informed. > > > > > > 73 > > > > > > Ben > >=20 > >=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01CD44D5.3F2CDD00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
He has a good TX signal but cannot = Receive.
It is no problem for normal CW to work on 137. I = have=20 worked over 30 countries in the past.
QRSS is not necessary for those that make an = effort=20 especially around EU and as far as Moscow
de g3kev
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 manginbenoit.pro =
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 = 4:51=20 PM
Subject: Re: LF: MF Allocation=20 (was:VX9MRC 504.1 kHz)

This is the eternal question...

QRSS is quite = easier and=20 most probably the only solution for most of us BUT: We are a quite a = large lot=20 to look forward "operator-hands-and-ears" CW=20 activity.

If 137 was more populated, maybe wouldn't it be so = hard to=20 QSO in regular CW, even with veeeeeeeery low ERPs.

That should = be=20 peanuts for you Stefan, once you get on the air another monstrous=20 signal.

On MF, the problem is similar, although antenna = efficiency is=20 greater, and CW should be easier.
Passionned with 160 meters, I = would also=20 focus on CW for MF 630 meters, with probably a bit of slow CW = beaconing or=20 QSO, but just for fun. The no-computer approach is something of a=20 challenge.

Remember, CW is "Man versus Machine=20 !!!".

73

Ben




>=20 Message du 07/06/12 14:32
> De : "Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer" =
> A :=20 rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> Copie =C3=A0 :
> Objet : = Re: LF:=20 VX9MRC 504.1 kHz
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> I do not = intend to=20 run so much power. I will rather build a small PA and a lossy coil. = A lossy=20 coil has a lower Q and a braoder bandwidth and so i will not need to = adjust=20 the resonance when making QSY within the band, hopefully. That makes = things=20 easier.
> On MF i plan to focus on plain handgiven CW. No = QRSS, no=20 grabber, maybe even no computer. However Speclab would be fine to = get an=20 overview of the band activity and offers nice filter and noise = reduction=20 tools...
> I'm really excited how the band will be populated. = It's not=20 so far away from 1800 kHz and an ordinary amateur radio antenna, = e.g. a=20 dipole for 80m, configured as a T antenna will work reasonable if a = suitable=20 earth is available.
>
> But what's the problem in = France? You=20 have so much space for large antennas, don't you? Or do you live in = Paris=20 City? :-)
>
> 73, Stefan/DK7FC
>
> Am = 07.06.2012=20 14:17, schrieb manginbenoit.pro:=20
Lucky you Stefan, lucky you ! Probably the reason for = your KW=20 ERP.
>
> My "reasonable" setup indicates me that=20  triple that value could be necessary...
> =
> CU=20 there
>
> Ben
>
>
>=20 >=20 Message du 07/06/12 14:12
> > De : "Stefan = Sch=C3=A4fer"
>=20 > A : rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
>=20 > Copie =C3=A0 :
> > Objet : Re: LF: VX9MRC 504.1 = kHz
>=20 >
> > I only heared some rumours about the = permission=20 starting January, 1st,
> > 2013, here in DL. Also i = heard=20 rumours that a permit is given out on the
> > Ham = Radio 2012=20 (http://w= ww.hamradio-friedrichshafen.de/ham-en/index.php)=20
> > , which would be in 3 weeks! But i guess 2013 is = more=20 realistic.
> >
> > Time to build a suitable = loading=20 coil for MF. I will need about 240 uH
> > = only...
> >=20
> > 73, Stefan/DK7FC
> >
> > Am = 07.06.2012=20 13:49, schrieb manginbenoit.pro:
> > > Are there = other EU=20 countries (apart from the British Isles)
> > > = granting MF=20 access to the amateur service so fast ?
> > = >
> >=20 > We in France still did not hear even the smallest whisper = from our=20
> > > tutelage administration. Or maybe am I not = well=20 informed.
> > >
> > > 73
> >=20 >
> > > Ben
> >
> >=20
------=_NextPart_000_0036_01CD44D5.3F2CDD00--