Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2727 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2000 19:22:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jan 2000 19:22:44 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 128T9u-0006yJ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2000 19:10:18 +0000 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 128T9r-0006yE-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2000 19:10:15 +0000 Received: from as32-s15-148-22.cwci.net ([195.44.148.22] helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 128T9n-0002o3-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2000 19:10:12 +0000 Message-ID: <387D4110.D8B52A65@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 19:05:52 -0800 From: "g3kev" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: CFH (again!) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: No Windup. Its a reality if you need to use LMCW and Small Loop Antennas and Lemonade bottles for coil formers for local qso's its SYMPATHY you need. Mike Dennison wrote: > G3YMC wrote: > > Mal mentions the problem of QRM from CFH - in case we hadn't noticed! I > > suggest that the Rugby transmitter on 73.4, which has more or less put an > > end to realistic QSOs on that band, is similar both in function, purpose > > and power to CFH. The noise sidebands we get from GBR are probably what a > > listener in VE1 would hear on 136! If QSOs on 73 are limited to 11km on > > 73kHz when Rugby is on (congratulations Jim!) we are going to find it a > > bit hard going to work VE on 136!! > > I strongly believe that the noise on the Rugby 73.4kHz transmssion > is not merely a function of its strength. Most of us (outside the > Midlands) had no trouble having QSOs on most of the band until > about Spring 99. I could get 9+50dB on the Rugby signal and S3 > noise floor only a couple of hundred of Hertz away, but now the > noise is over S9. > > This is either accidental - noisy oscillator, or (most likely) deliberate - > spread spectrum or clever data mode. > > The effect was first noticed by Roger, G2AJV, who spent hours > trying to fix what he thought was a fault on his antenna when he > could neither hear nor work people who used to be good signals. > Dave, G3YMC, himself reported being puzzled not to hear signals > that were prevously good. Later, I tried to work G3YXM for a second > time and we were both surprised not to hear each other. The noise > crept up on us as the band was used for amateur contacts only > once every few months. > > It is possible that CFH has some noise sidebands, but please don't > assume that the present Rugby signal is typical of LF commercials. > > At the risk of winding Mal up, the only really useful way to make > QSOs on 73 these days is QRSs. This was used by myself and > G3LDO to work GD0MRF at 400km+. > > Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm