Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mp05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 81CF438000090; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:00:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TBoPh-0006zW-At for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:59:37 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TBoPg-0006zN-Ro for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:59:36 +0100 Received: from out1.ip06ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.242]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TBoPf-00027S-3p for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:59:35 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkgLABqjUFBcHn5K/2dsb2JhbABFpQYDlTYCfoEIghsFAQENAQEDSQIsAQEIAgEDBA0EAQEKOQEEGgYUAg4TCgECAgEBiACafKFjixCBUoRwA4gghUOYG4Jm X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,410,1344207600"; d="scan'208,217";a="550483564" Received: from host-92-30-126-74.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.30.126.74]) by out1.ip06ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 12 Sep 2012 15:59:33 +0100 Message-ID: <007901cd90f7$34e24ba0$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: "rsgb" Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:59:27 -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: 3.8 (+++) 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: ----- Original Message ----- From: mal hamilton To: rsgb Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:57 PM Subject: LOST TRACK LF/MF I think most have now lost track of who is actually available to work or listen at any one time on LF or MF with such a variety of modes talked about and in use. A new comer has no chance, would not know where to start or what to listen for or what frequency. In the days of CW or QRSS DXing, the procedure seemed orderly then the scene became fragmented with the different DATA modes being introduced and just as easly ended. For simplicity and efficiency sake I would suggest sticking to CW, QRSS and OPERA using class D or E type amplifiers at 90% efficiency. and avoid modes that might appear efficient but are not when you consider they need Linear amps that are only 40% efficient. Slow slow modes are not the best when hit by QRN or QSB that removes large chunks of the data stream. in fact Short Burst transmissions would probably had an advantage, anyone thought of that approach ie several repeative short bursts of information sent periodically, of course more bandwidth is required. de mal/g3kev [...] Content analysis details: (3.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [62.24.128.242 listed in list.dnswl.org] 1.0 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 0.8 FSL_UA FSL_UA 1.9 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 X-Scan-Signature: ad8e5dd63f7497fd9d71d15044db2e2b Subject: LF: Fw: LOST TRACK Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0076_01CD90F7.34B01810" 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-sid: 3039ac1dc1495050a3974e45 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_0076_01CD90F7.34B01810 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: mal hamilton=20 To: rsgb=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:57 PM Subject: LOST TRACK LF/MF I think most have now lost track of who is actually available to work or = listen at any one time on LF or MF with such a variety of modes talked = about and in use.=20 A new comer has no chance, would not know where to start or what to = listen for or what frequency.=20 In the days of CW or QRSS DXing, the procedure seemed orderly then the = scene became fragmented with the different DATA modes being introduced = and just as easly ended.=20 For simplicity and efficiency sake I would suggest sticking to CW, QRSS = and OPERA using class D or E type amplifiers at 90% efficiency.=20 and avoid modes that might appear efficient but are not when you = consider they need Linear amps that are only 40% efficient. Slow slow modes are not the best when hit by QRN or QSB that removes = large chunks of the data stream. in fact Short Burst transmissions would probably had an advantage, = anyone thought of that approach ie several repeative short bursts of = information sent periodically, of course more bandwidth is required. de mal/g3kev ------=_NextPart_000_0076_01CD90F7.34B01810 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: mal = hamilton=20
To: rsgb
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:57 PM
Subject: LOST TRACK

LF/MF
I think most have now lost track of who is = actually=20 available to work or listen at any one time on LF or MF with such a = variety of=20 modes talked about and in use.
A new comer has no chance, would not know where = to start=20 or what to listen for or what frequency.
In the days of CW or QRSS DXing,   the = procedure=20 seemed orderly then the scene became fragmented with the different DATA = modes=20 being introduced and just as easly ended.
For simplicity and efficiency sake I = would=20 suggest sticking to CW, QRSS and OPERA using class D or E type = amplifiers at 90%=20 efficiency.
and avoid modes that might appear efficient but = are not=20 when you consider they need Linear amps that are only 40%=20 efficient.
Slow slow modes are not the best when hit by QRN = or QSB=20 that removes large chunks of the data stream.
in fact Short Burst transmissions would probably = had an=20 advantage, anyone thought of that approach ie several repeative short = bursts of=20 information sent periodically, of course more bandwidth is=20 required.
de mal/g3kev
 
------=_NextPart_000_0076_01CD90F7.34B01810--