Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mp06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 1E460380000A8; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:26:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U5ZXC-00039R-0M for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:25:50 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U5ZXB-00039I-0D for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:25:49 +0000 Received: from smtp-out1-02.simnet.is ([194.105.232.27] helo=smtp-out-02.simnet.is) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U5ZX7-0002Yz-KS for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:25:47 +0000 Authentication-Results: smtp-out-02.simnetpro.is; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-SBRS: 2.9 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApgCAJVmG1HCaehFgWdsb2JhbABEgkmrMpMKDgEBFiYngh8BAQUIAiM5HwEDAgkRAwEBASgHGS0JCAIEEwsFh3ADE78fjDWFTgOIMIVxhisDgVWFXoViiBk X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,655,1355097600"; d="scan'208,217";a="30984415" Received: from z-proxy-03.simnet.is (HELO mail.simnet.is) ([194.105.232.69]) by smtp-out-02.simnetpro.is with ESMTP; 13 Feb 2013 10:25:24 +0000 Received: from MT297 (unknown [213.167.153.184]) by mail.simnet.is (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E95F900F6 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:25:24 +0000 (GMT) From: "Halldor" To: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:23:57 -0000 Message-ID: <01d801ce09d4$3b527720$b1f76560$@simnet.is> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQJPGwY4pOldlM5vhT7pNURYTKSuzJd1caZA Content-Language: is X-HELO-Warning: Remote host 194.105.232.27 (smtp-out1-02.simnet.is) used invalid HELO/EHLO smtp-out-02.simnet.is - verification failed X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: Uwe, I had to remove the receiver from the previous location. I haven´t found a new noise free location yet. There is still hope so it might be operational again soon. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [194.105.232.27 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 254fb1f92e9e6a3597761e1cd9a3a730 Subject: RE: LF: TF grabber Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01D9_01CE09D4.3B55D280" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE, NO_EXPERIENCE 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: 3039ac1dc14a511b6a6d45e1 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01D9_01CE09D4.3B55D280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Uwe, =20 I had to remove the receiver from the previous location. I haven=B4t = found a new noise free location yet. There is still hope so it might be operational again soon. =20 73 Halld=F3r =20 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de Sent: 13. febr=FAar 2013 10:17 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: TF grabber =20 Hi Halldor, what abt your VLF grabber? can you switch it on too? GL Uwe/dj8wx txing on 8970.0225Hz _____ =20 Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Gesendet: 12.02.2013 21:39 An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Betreff: LF: TF grabber _____ =20 The TF-grabber is most of the time active on LF. In the coming days I will do some changes to my RX-setup so there might = be some days when it will be offline. I am always willing to switch between LF and MF on demand and if I spot = some interesting activity. 73 Halld=F3r TF3HZ -----Original Message----- From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Alan Melia Sent: 12. febr=FAar 2013 16:57 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: Re: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX experiments - how = slow should we go? Hi Marco I guess you have a long land path to TF and some big mountains = in the way :-)) I suppose there could be weather probs in TF at this time = of year. I'm not really sure what the status of these sites is at present. = Keep trying ! Alan ----- Original Message ----- From:=20 To:=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 4:13 PM Subject: R: Re: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX experiments - how = slow should we go? Hi Alan, of course we are all joking and support Stefan hoping that new positive datas can give more thoughts! By the way I'm still struggling sometime because I'm not able to leave a trace on the TF grabber although at the same distance was able to leave = nice signals on the Haifa grabber... (no chance to have again active it?) so...go Stefan go! GL 73, Marco IK1HSS ----Messaggio originale---- Da: alan.melia@btinternet.com Data: 12-feb-2013 15.42 A:=20 Ogg: Re: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX experiments - how slow = should we go? Hi Marco a case of "never mind the theory, show me the data " :-)) Jay's plot shows what I was thinking about quite well. Markus's signal is = weaker and suffers fade decode problems, but Stefan's signal is stronger and = shows no fading. I think this is due to the "non-linearity" of the waterfall display. From experience of my use it only takes a change in strength of about 3dB to go from "M" to "dogbones". Thus my idea that the fading at distance is much shallower.....it doesnt make it any less difficult to decypher, but you may only need another dB or so for fully readable once = you display on the trace. You can lay off time against improved readability by as somone asked "stacking" modes, like Wolf used to do. This it does need accurate = timing, and is akin to how amateur astronomers produce such spectacular pictures with backyard telescopes. CW ops do it as well(!!) ....you know "ur 599 = pse rpt all" :-)) Alan G3NYK ----- Original Message ----- From:=20 To:=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 1:30 PM Subject: R: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX experiments - how slow should we go? On the theory hornets cannot fly.. Let's dream again Stefan! 73, Marco IK1HSS ----Messaggio originale---- Da: hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com Data: 12-feb-2013 4.27 A: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Ogg: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX experiments - how slow should we go? I would agree Alan that on the longer hauls I still see a more rapid fade pattern but not the couple of mins typical of the shorter hop stuff - - I sort of got used to "20 mins" for 137Khz on the Transpolar and Trans Siberian paths into China from Eu, but it was a little more than "5 mins" at 500Khz - that sort of aligns on what I saw at sea on the Antarctic/South Atlantic paths on 500 back to Portishead path back long long ago, and what I have heard from here and Fiji into Oz and NZ - but I also recall the fades became more vertical and shorter during the more disturbed periods - again this way very dependant on the path profile and where it and what it crossed on the Rhum line geomag and whether it was North/South East West - again cutting across the "lines" was far more problematic. I still scratch my head to see the MUF map of the world and how it looks more like a complicated barometric pressure map with depressions and High pressure areas :-) What I would do is not to discount the long periods out of hand at 500 - I have a tingly feeling that dot 30 is as slow as I would go but Ive been proved wrong countless times :-) What I do know is to date that bar Japan to Alaska (apart from Canada/USA) no signals have reached the levels that my old CW ears could decode, and truthfully I dont think they would ever get to that level at our ERP levels and lack of the salty stuff. Mind you I would love to set up an MF station here on Maui - Ive already picked my spot and the tower I would steal (Junction of Lahaina/Kihei road at South Kihei). Im trying to twist a certain arm to install MF on our expedition ship, but we dont have a lot of space for the normal type of array Im used to. We will see Laurence KL 1X/KH62AZT > From: alan.melia@btinternet.com > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 01:09:31 +0000 > Subject: LF: Re: Considerations about wide DX experiments on 630m and tonites QRSS-60 > > Hi Stefan I think that maybe the right approach. I think you may find that > the "perceived wisdom" on fading rate v QRSS speed is based on relatively > short paths. I suspect it may well be very different at real DX range, that > is several hops.......>6000km. There obviously is some sort of a problem > because the wavelength is much shorter than 136kHz so the phase changes more > rapidly with ionisation and "apparent refection height" but you need two > "modes" of nearly equal strength to get extinction. This may not be so > prevalent at long ranges on 470kHz. The experiment will be very interesting > if you can start to leave traces on distant grabbers. > > Alan > G3NYK > ----- Original Message -----=20 > From: "Stefan Sch=E4fer"=20 > To: ; "Vasily Savchenko" =20 com>; > "Garry and Linda Hess" ; "Douglas D. Williams" > ; "Andy - KU4XR" ; "Edgar J Twining" >=20 > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 10:57 PM > Subject: LF: Considerations about wide DX experiments on 630m and tonites > QRSS-60 > > > > MF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-) > > > > Edgar in Tasmania was recently asking if i have some plans about DX > > experiments on 630m. Well that is a path of > 16000 km. However we do not > > have real experience if that is easier than 2200m or rather impossible. > > > > At least i know that there was not even a single decode by UA0SNV in my MF > > WSPR and QRSS tests so far, while it is no problem on LF (OK my MF signal > > is weaker than my LF signal). Thus i would guess that it is much harder to > > get some traces of a signal on 630m. We will try anyway! > > > > I'm starting to run a QRSS-60 transmission on 476.172 kHz (+- a few Hz) > > for the night. Maybe someone across the pond will catch something. We, or > > at least i still have no experience about the QSB problem on very slow > > QRSS transmissions on MF. It would be interesting to see a spectrogram. > > > > On air in a few minutes. > > > > 73, Stefan/DK7FC > > > > PS: No, not only beacon transmissions, i've just had a > 1 hour long CW > > QSO with PA0LCE and DK6SX/p! Also contacts to OK2BVG and S57A. > > > >

Uwe,

 

I had to remove the receiver from the previous location. I haven=B4t = found a new noise free location yet.

There is still hope so it might be operational again = soon.

 

73

Halld=F3r

 

From:= = owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of = uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de
Sent: 13. febr=FAar 2013 = 10:17
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: = LF: TF grabber

 

Hi = Halldor,

what abt your VLF grabber? can you switch it on = too?

GL
Uwe/dj8wx txing on = 8970.0225Hz

Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Gesendet: 12.02.2013 21:39
An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Betreff: LF: TF grabber


The = TF-grabber is most of the time active on LF.
In the coming days I = will do some changes to my RX-setup so there might be some days when it = will be offline.
I am always willing to switch between LF and MF on = demand and if I spot some interesting = activity.

73
Halld=F3r
TF3HZ

-----Original = Message-----
From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@bl= acksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_g= roup@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Alan Melia
Sent: 12. febr=FAar = 2013 16:57
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Subject: Re: Re: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX = experiments - how slow should we go?

Hi Marco I guess you have a = long land path to TF and some big mountains in the way :-)) I suppose = there could be weather probs in TF at this time of year. I'm not really = sure what the status of these sites is at present. Keep trying = !
Alan
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: = Tuesday, February 12, 2013 4:13 PM
Subject: R: Re: LF: Was = Considerations about wide DX experiments - how slow should we = go?


Hi Alan,
of course we are all joking and support = Stefan hoping that new positive datas can give more thoughts!
By the = way I'm still struggling sometime because I'm not able to leave a trace = on the TF grabber although at the same distance was able to leave nice = signals on the Haifa grabber... (no chance to have again active = it?)

so...go Stefan go! GL

73, Marco = IK1HSS
----Messaggio originale----
Da: alan.melia@btinternet.comData: 12-feb-2013 15.42
A:
Ogg: Re: LF: Was Considerations = about wide DX experiments - how slow should we go?

Hi Marco a = case of "never mind the theory, show me the data " :-)) Jay's = plot shows what I was thinking about quite well. Markus's signal is = weaker and suffers fade decode problems, but Stefan's signal is stronger = and shows no fading. I think this is due to the = "non-linearity" of the waterfall display. From experience of = my use it only takes a change in strength of about 3dB to go from = "M" to "dogbones". Thus my idea that the fading at = distance is much shallower.....it doesnt make it any less difficult to = decypher, but you may only need another dB or so for fully readable once = you display on the trace.
You can lay off time against improved = readability by as somone asked "stacking" modes, like Wolf = used to do. This it does need accurate timing, and is akin to how = amateur astronomers produce such spectacular pictures with backyard = telescopes. CW ops do it as well(!!) ....you know "ur 599 pse rpt = all" :-))

Alan
G3NYK

----- Original Message = -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 1:30 = PM
Subject: R: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX experiments - how = slow should we go?


On the theory hornets cannot = fly..
Let's dream again Stefan!
73, Marco = IK1HSS

----Messaggio originale----
Da: hellozerohellozero@hotmail= .com
Data: 12-feb-2013 4.27
A: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= "
Ogg: LF: Was Considerations about wide DX experiments - = how slow
should we go?


I would agree Alan that on the = longer hauls I still see a more rapid
fade pattern but not the couple = of mins typical of the shorter hop
stuff - - I sort of got used to = "20 mins" for 137Khz on the Transpolar
and Trans Siberian = paths into China from Eu, but it was a little more
than "5 = mins" at 500Khz - that sort of aligns on what I saw at sea = on
the Antarctic/South Atlantic paths on 500 back to Portishead path = back
long long ago, and what I have heard from here and Fiji into Oz = and NZ
- but I also recall the fades became more vertical and shorter = during
the more disturbed periods - again this way very dependant on = the path
profile and where it and what it crossed on the Rhum line = geomag and
whether it was North/South East West - again cutting = across the "lines"
was far more problematic. I still = scratch my head to see the MUF map
of the world and how it looks more = like a complicated barometric
pressure map with depressions and High = pressure areas :-) What I would
do is not to discount the long = periods out of hand at 500 - I have a
tingly feeling that dot 30 is = as slow as I would go but Ive been proved
wrong countless times :-) = What I do know is to date that bar Japan to
Alaska (apart from = Canada/USA) no signals have reached the levels that
my old CW ears = could decode, and truthfully I dont think they would
ever get to that = level at our ERP levels and lack of the salty stuff.
Mind you I would = love to set up an MF station here on Maui - Ive
already picked my = spot and the tower I would steal (Junction of
Lahaina/Kihei road at = South Kihei). Im trying to twist a certain arm
to install MF on our = expedition ship, but we dont have a lot of space
for the normal type = of array Im used to. We will see Laurence KL
1X/KH62AZT
> From: = alan.melia@btinternet.com> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 01:09:31 +0000
> Subject: LF: = Re: Considerations about wide DX experiments on 630m and
tonites = QRSS-60
>
> Hi Stefan I think that maybe the right approach. = I think you may find
that
> the "perceived wisdom" on = fading rate v QRSS speed is based on
relatively
> short paths. = I suspect it may well be very different at real DX
range, = that
> is several hops.......>6000km. There obviously is some = sort of a
problem
> because the wavelength is much shorter than = 136kHz so the phase
changes more
> rapidly with ionisation and = "apparent refection height" but you need
two
> = "modes" of nearly equal strength to get extinction. This may = not be
so
> prevalent at long ranges on 470kHz. The experiment = will be very
interesting
> if you can start to leave traces on = distant grabbers.
>
> Alan
> G3NYK
> ----- = Original Message -----
> From: "Stefan Sch=E4fer" =
> To: ; "Vasily Savchenko" <ua0snv@yahoo.
com>;
>= "Garry and Linda Hess" ; "Douglas D. = Williams"
> ; "Andy - KU4XR" ; "Edgar = J
Twining"
>
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 = 10:57 PM
> Subject: LF: Considerations about wide DX experiments = on 630m and
tonites
> QRSS-60
>
>
> > MF = !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)
> >
> > Edgar in Tasmania = was recently asking if i have some plans about
DX
> > = experiments on 630m. Well that is a path of > 16000 km. However = we
do not
> > have real experience if that is easier than = 2200m or rather
impossible.
> >
> > At least i know = that there was not even a single decode by UA0SNV
in my MF
> = > WSPR and QRSS tests so far, while it is no problem on LF (OK my = MF
signal
> > is weaker than my LF signal). Thus i would = guess that it is much
harder to
> > get some traces of a = signal on 630m. We will try anyway!
> >
> > I'm = starting to run a QRSS-60 transmission on 476.172 kHz (+- a = few
Hz)
> > for the night. Maybe someone across the pond = will catch something.
We, or
> > at least i still have no = experience about the QSB problem on very
slow
> > QRSS = transmissions on MF. It would be interesting to see = a
spectrogram.
> >
> > On air in a few = minutes.
> >
> > 73, Stefan/DK7FC
> >
> = > PS: No, not only beacon transmissions, i've just had a > 1 = hour
long CW
> > QSO with PA0LCE and DK6SX/p! Also contacts = to OK2BVG and S57A.
> = >
>
>












&= lt;/ua0snv@yahoo.

------=_NextPart_000_01D9_01CE09D4.3B55D280--