Message-ID: <4828C66B.1040909@online.fr>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 00:36:27 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jean-Pierre_M=E9r=E9?= <jpm.f1afj@online.fr>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.14 (Windows/20071210)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:  rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <002101c8b40f$0fe78780$0201a8c0@home>	<029c01c8b447$3f08d400$0301a8c0@g3kev> <20080512184529.52242e0e@lurcher.twatt.local>
In-Reply-To: <20080512184529.52242e0e@lurcher.twatt.local>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: Becons etc.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Hello John and all,

I am in perfect agreement with your remarks , the scientific step is=20
more rigorous with a beacon/grabber H24 than  the simple CW qso ! If you=20
ask me which is the propagation on 137kHz the 3 january 2008 with the=20
top of the Atlantic , it is just go to :       =20
http://jpmere.online.fr/LF/2008/January/
John , PLEASE do not leave the 600m , it does not have there already=20
nobody any more on the 2200m because of all these quarrels of vicinity !!!!

73 qro Jean-Pierre f1afj  (faithful to the 2200m, which is not against=20
the 600m , quite to the contrary ! )

John Pumford-Green GM4SLV a =E9crit :
>
> A 250Hz IF filter and a 10Hz AF filter.... what QRM?=20
>
>
>
> The EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH band is not for "rubberstamp DX QSOs" ("ur RST
> 599 =3D pse QSL =3D QRU 73") or a "ragchewers paradise" ("ere
> WX sunny =3D been to docs for lumbago =3D xyl say hows Marge and the dogs?=
")
>
> It's for self-determined study into a hitherto unexplored area (to
> amateurs and on the whole also to professionals) of the MF spectrum.=20
>
> Before you say "the old marine CW users know all there is to know" think
> again - the professional users were generally only interested in
> reasonably short range, reasonably strong signals, from reasonably
> efficient antennas and using reasonably powerful transmitters, over
> reasonably favourable groundplane conductivity.=20
>
> Very little could be done during the heyday of MF CW to
> seriously investigate this region of spectrum, in terms of compromise
> short antenna systems, weak signals and anomalous propagation -  due to
> the high levels of occupancy and large signal levels.=20
>
> Certainly nothing was known at that time about DSP and clever digital
> modulation/coding systems to achieve robust, low power, information
> exchange.=20
>
> YES.... I know... "CW IS BEST".... but think... some of the new schemes
> may actually be BETTER.... but until someone tests them we'll never
> know..... CW might indeed be the one true mode, let others do their
> datamode tests, and let's see.
>
>
> Randomly convened 2-way CW QSOs may provide an insight into the
> band, for the 2-stations concerned. It's a bit hit and miss though.
>
>
> However others may want a more in depth, scientific view of things.
>
> Long periods of transmission (I'm not going to call them beacons) allow
> the collection of much more data, by many more people, than the odd
> "I've got half an hour to spare, let's see what's on 500" way of
> operating=20
>
> I have had many CW QSOs on 500 where some actual experimentation was
> done in the course of the QSO but in generalI think most QSOs are
> either local groundwave rag-chews or short (what's to be learned by
> this?), or short rubber stamp "DX" QSOs - to get a new
> call/country/distance in the log.=20
>
> Are you telling me that this style of operating is what was intended by
> the issuing of Special Research Permits?=20
>
> Admittedly the research concerened may be to build/modify/adjust the
> equipment, and the QSO is a means of proving a concept or validating a
> modification etc...
>
>
> The "beacon hell" period you refer to, where several stations had
> continuous CW idents running, was for a specific and I think valid,
> cause - to enlist the community of NDB listeners (experts in narrow
> band, weak signal in high QRM, MF CW reception) over the Easter weekend
> in attempting to receive amateur signals on 500kHz.
>
> We all got very many reports - many more than could have been gathered
> relying only on direct, in-band or cross-band QSOs.
>
>
> The stations sending the transmissions learned much about the
> performance of their equipment, and the band itself, and the listeners
> probably gained new knowledge too.
>
>
> I'm heartily tired of all this whinging about "beacons are spoiling
> it".
>
> Do you want to turn the radio on, call "CQ", have a QSO with a random
> stranger?
>
> Use 80/40/30/20m.
>
>
>
> Do you want to study something specific, in depth?=20
>
> Then do some more structured operating. If this is pre-arranged regular
> skeds with specific stations (the dreaded email...to arrange them,
> to report on them beyond what is passed in the QSO... to discuss things
> - eg  if it failed due to unsuitable conditions.....)
>
>
> Or even generate a more general "beacon" (attended operation only of
> course!!!) for a wider audience to study. Perhaps operate a grabber
> for others use as a research tool...
>
>
> These are more in line with the spirit and intention of the Special=20
> Research Permit than random QSOs.
>
>
>
> Your narrow view of how others should operate on 500, repeated ad
> nauseum on this list every time you get out of bed the wrong side, has
> driven several experimenally minded people away already.... and now
> it's done the same for me too.
>
>
> I'm now QRT on 500 and I know you'll be happy at that. More proof that
> the modern radio amateur is a technically challenged appliance
> operator. You're wrong in that assumption - my operation on 500 has
> been with homebrew gear and manual telegraphy only - but you're
> welcome to your opinions (you certainly have plenty of them).=20
>
>
> For those that used my grabber for their investigations, or were happy
> to study my "beacon" signals from this far flung corner of the UK - I
> wish you every success on 500.=20
>
> Just make sure you play by Mal's rules.
>
> Regards,
>
> John Pumford-Green
> GM4SLV
>
>
>
>
>  =20

--=20
Website : http://jpmere.online.fr/