Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp20193igc; Sat, 4 Jan 2014 04:08:57 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.189.106 with SMTP id gh10mr5485425wic.18.1388837336909; Sat, 04 Jan 2014 04:08:56 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q13si19868534wjr.20.2014.01.04.04.08.56 for ; Sat, 04 Jan 2014 04:08:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1VzPM7-0000h5-VG for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2014 11:25:27 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VzPM7-0000gw-Ag for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2014 11:25:27 +0000 Received: from cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.9]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VzPM5-0008PZ-Bg for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2014 11:25:26 +0000 Received: from cpsps-ews10.kpnxchange.com ([10.94.84.177]) by cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.17514); Sat, 4 Jan 2014 12:25:24 +0100 Received: from CPSMTPM-TLF104.kpnxchange.com ([195.121.3.7]) by cpsps-ews10.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.17514); Sat, 4 Jan 2014 12:25:24 +0100 Received: from Extensa ([195.241.183.120]) by CPSMTPM-TLF104.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.17514); Sat, 4 Jan 2014 12:25:24 +0100 Message-ID: <2E541D0E5D0C4611A09455B06D88441D@Extensa> From: "PA1SDB, Peter" To: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2014 11:25:23 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18645 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jan 2014 11:25:24.0201 (UTC) FILETIME=[A91F1590:01CF093F] X-RcptDomain: blacksheep.org X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) 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: I will switch off local experiments :-) 8269.93 is al local tx test from a notebook on a pice of wire. 73's Peter. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lubos To: _RSGB_LF Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2014 9:11 AM Subject: RE: LF: 8270Hz [...] Content analysis details: (1.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [213.75.39.9 listed in list.dnswl.org] 1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 004f7f7656eeac34aa35b19f1e48f84d Subject: Re: LF: 8270Hz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1A01_01CF093F.A89F3730" 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 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1A01_01CF093F.A89F3730 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I will switch off local experiments :-) 8269.93 is al local tx test from a notebook on a pice of wire. 73's Peter. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lubos To: _RSGB_LF Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2014 9:11 AM Subject: RE: LF: 8270Hz Hello Uwe! I saw your signal on 8270Hz yesterday afternoon. Are you transmitting now, please? There is a visible signal on 8269.93 on PA1SDB´s grabber, but it is out of my grabber window (8270 +/- 50mH). Is it your signal or some QRM? 73! Lubos, OK2BVG ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 14:30:43 +0100 From: uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: 8270Hz OK. OK. dreamers, the TX is on the air since 1309UTC. QRG: 8270.000Hz. WX: continuous rain but not so strong. when ever the order comes, I can switch to Op-4H. GL Uwe/dj8wx ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Gesendet: 03.01.2014 13:21 An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Kopie: paul@abelian.netcom.co.uk Betreff: Fw: VLF: 8.275 kHz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Paul Nicholson put forth the important argument that we'd better stay away from 8280 because it's a multiple of 60 Hz. Mains harmonics tend to drift a bit with the line frequeny so further away is better. Thus I retract my preposition, and suggest instead to stay with the original 8270 Hz. Uwe, go ahead! Best 73, Markus PS Direct harmonics from 16.67 Hz are relatively weak here, even though the railway is only 400 m away. It looks more like carriers from switchmode power conversion units (eg near 8 kHz), accompanied by the telltale 33 Hz spaced sidebands. Unfortunately these frequencies are not easily predictable. From: Paul Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 12:56 PM To: Markus Vester Subject: Re: VLF: 8.275 kHz 8970 is well placed with respect to harmonics of both 50 and 60Hz. 8270/8275 not so good in a 60Hz region. 8124 to 8126 would be a good range, considering harmonics of 16.67Hz, 50Hz, and 60Hz. Let me know what is decided, I will switch my spectrogram over to the new band. -- Paul Nicholson -- ------=_NextPart_000_1A01_01CF093F.A89F3730 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I will switch off local experiments = :-)
8269.93 is al local tx test from a notebook on = a pice of=20 wire.
 
73's Peter.
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Lubos
Sent: Saturday, January 04, = 2014 9:11=20 AM
Subject: RE: LF: 8270Hz

Hello Uwe!
I saw your signal on 8270Hz yesterday afternoon. Are you = transmitting=20 now, please? There is a visible signal on 8269.93 on PA1SDB=B4s = grabber, but it=20 is out of my grabber window (8270 +/- 50mH). Is it your signal or some = QRM?

73!

Lubos, OK2BVG

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 14:30:43 +0100
From: uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de
= To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Subject:=20 LF: 8270Hz

OK.=20 OK. dreamers, the TX is on the air since 1309UTC.
QRG: = 8270.000Hz.
WX:=20 continuous rain but not so strong.
when ever the order comes, I can = switch=20 to Op-4H.
GL
Uwe/dj8wx
Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Gesendet: 03.01.2014 13:21
An: = rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Kopie: = paul@abelian.netcom.co.uk
Betreff:=20 Fw: VLF: 8.275 kHz

Paul = Nicholson put=20 forth the important argument that we'd better stay away from 8280 = because it's=20 a multiple of 60 Hz. Mains harmonics tend to drift a bit with the = line=20 frequeny so further away is better.
 
Thus I = retract my=20 preposition, and suggest instead to stay with the original = 8270=20 Hz.
 
Uwe, go=20 ahead!
 
Best = 73,
Markus
 
PS Direct = harmonics=20 from 16.67 Hz are relatively weak here, even though the railway is = only 400 m=20 away. It looks more like carriers from switchmode power = conversion units (eg near 8 kHz), accompanied by the = telltale=20 33 Hz spaced sidebands. Unfortunately these frequencies are not easily = predictable.=20
 

From: Paul
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: VLF: 8.275 kHz


8970 is well placed with respect to harmonics = of
both 50=20 and 60Hz.

8270/8275 not so good in a 60Hz region.

8124 = to 8126=20 would be a good range, considering
harmonics of 16.67Hz, 50Hz, and=20 60Hz.

Let me know what is decided, I will switch my = spectrogram
over=20 to the new band.

--
Paul=20 Nicholson
--
------=_NextPart_000_1A01_01CF093F.A89F3730--