Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 158B2380000FC; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 09:58:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TrVBF-0004z5-8E for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:57:01 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TrVBE-0004yw-Ot for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:57:00 +0000 Received: from smtpout3.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.59] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TrVB5-0004mf-6Z for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:56:59 +0000 Received: from AGB ([2.26.46.0]) by mwinf5d35 with ME id kEwW1k00800DzFE03EwWk7; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 15:56:30 +0100 Message-ID: <01EEFB8EEDB04C2D949BAB64572709FC@AGB> From: "Graham" To: References: <28CB8EF648E7418BB5C2D4802F72C23C@IBM7FFA209F07C> In-Reply-To: <28CB8EF648E7418BB5C2D4802F72C23C@IBM7FFA209F07C> Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:56:29 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 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: Chris There was a initial setting at the top of the band for wspr , along with other beacon and data modes , leaving the rest of the band clear and maximise the distance from live cw working etc however as you point out, qrss now also sits mid band as well , I don't think we need to look too far to spot the origins of the problem though , as you note , Tweedledum and Tweedledee have been running a Iceland dog-bone competition over the last days [...] 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 [80.12.242.59 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: da9a90c67b7e22f6718c156d8d99c1a4 Subject: Re: LF: 472kHz Band QRSS Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0064_01CDEB54.D8278020" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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: 3039ac1d600c50e83f7a4d3d 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_0064_01CDEB54.D8278020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chris=20 There was a initial setting at the top of the band for wspr , = along with other beacon and data modes , leaving the rest of the = band clear and maximise the distance from live cw working etc = however as you point out, qrss now also sits mid band as well = , I don't think we need to look too far to spot the origins of = the problem though , as you note , Tweedledum and Tweedledee have = been running a Iceland dog-bone competition over the last days=20 As for a few 'Hot Dog' TA activity's , it can bee see that = wspr provides sufficient gain for TA and other dumb beacon dx'ing = on 500 , qsb patterns preventing ultra long qrss decodes as = noted years ago... Food ? anyone for a Hot-Dog ? 73 G .. =20 From: Chris=20 Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 2:04 PM To: RSGB LF Group=20 Subject: LF: 472kHz Band QRSS Who started the trend to have QRSS in the middle of the 'new' band? = There are two extremely strong signals there now as I write this. I = would have thought any mode that requires long plain carriers would be = better suited to near the band edges. Three German operators suggested a band plan during late September, in = which QRSS was near the bottom of the band. As far as I remember this = plan was met with some hostility. It has been suggested that people will not stick to a band plan. I find = this hard to believe, particularly in respect of QRSS, if they want = their signals to be found. Another problem I would suggest, is just how many know how to = measure/calculate their EIRP? I have noticed several contributors to = this reflector refer to ERP. Food for thought? Vy 73, Chris, G4AYT. ------=_NextPart_000_0064_01CDEB54.D8278020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Chris
 
There was a initial  setting  at the  top  of = the =20 band  for  wspr  , along  with  other  = beacon=20 and  data  modes  , leaving the  rest of the =20 band  clear  and    maximise the  = distance =20 from  live cw  working  etc 
 
however  as  you  point  out,  qrss =20 now  also  sits  mid band as well  , I don't =20 think  we  need  to  look  too  far = to  spot=20 the  origins  of the  problem  though , as you  = note  ,  Tweedledum and = Tweedledee =20 have  been  running  a  Iceland dog-bone = competition =20 over the  last  days
 
As for  a  few   'Hot Dog'  TA =20 activity's  , it can bee  see  that  wspr  = provides=20 sufficient  gain for  TA and other   dumb beacon=20 dx'ing  on 500  ,  qsb  patterns =20 preventing   ultra long  qrss  = decodes  as =20 noted   years  ago...
 
Food ? anyone for a  Hot-Dog ?
 
73 G .. 

From: Chris
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 2:04 PM
To: RSGB LF Group
Subject: LF: 472kHz Band QRSS

Who started the trend to have QRSS in = the middle of=20 the 'new' band? There are two extremely strong signals there now as I = write=20 this. I would have thought any mode that requires long plain carriers = would be=20 better suited to near the band edges.
Three German operators suggested a band = plan during=20 late September, in which QRSS was near the bottom of the band. As far as = I=20 remember this plan was met with some hostility.
It has been suggested that people will = not stick to=20 a band plan. I find this hard to believe, particularly in respect of = QRSS, if=20 they want their signals to be found.
Another problem I would suggest, is = just how many=20 know how to measure/calculate their EIRP? I have noticed several = contributors to=20 this reflector refer to ERP.
Food for thought?
Vy 73,
Chris, = G4AYT.
------=_NextPart_000_0064_01CDEB54.D8278020--