Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dg05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 6438E3804B058; Wed, 2 May 2012 14:34:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SPdwD-0008Tb-LH for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 02 May 2012 19:06:05 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SPdwD-0008TS-7i for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 02 May 2012 19:06:05 +0100 Received: from out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.237]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SPdwB-0003y0-HW for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 02 May 2012 19:06:04 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqgBAC4Tn09OlmIS/2dsb2JhbAANN4VpqRVlhhABAQEBAyNEERELBAEEDwkWCwICCQMCAQIBOgsTCAEBr0ySbo1qgg2BGASOEZsY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,507,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217";a="389530032" Received: from host-78-150-98-18.as13285.net (HELO [192.168.2.7]) ([78.150.98.18]) by out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 30 Apr 2012 23:37:43 +0100 Message-ID: <4F9F1437.6060401@talktalk.net> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 23:37:43 +0100 From: qrss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120420 Thunderbird/12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <6AF9FA27D80A49C4BC95967CB103D19D@AGB> <4F9EDBDF.3030604@talktalk.net> <4CCEC10479A04AFF91E1823373CA6C00@AGB> In-Reply-To: <4CCEC10479A04AFF91E1823373CA6C00@AGB> X-Spam-Score: 2.7 (++) 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: OK Graham Well you wouldn't want to radiate an untidy signal. Second decode was -44dB, about 10dB / Noise in 46mHz. Signal level varied and about 20% data lost in a block, XYL re arranged the configuration of the dining table antenna, they just don't understand! [...] Content analysis details: (2.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [62.24.128.237 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.2 TVD_SUBJ_ACC_NUM Subject has spammy looking monetary reference -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.5 DATE_IN_PAST_24_48 Date: is 24 to 48 hours before Received: date 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 896f9ee4f10c5db37812c155e804756d Subject: Re: LF: WANTED 8KHz OP4H OPERA =?UTF-8?B?VEVTVEVS4oCZUw==?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080209020004070300090707" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE 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-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:428597888:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d410d4fa17e524dc1 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080209020004070300090707 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit OK Graham Well you wouldn't want to radiate an untidy signal. Second decode was -44dB, about 10dB / Noise in 46mHz. Signal level varied and about 20% data lost in a block, XYL re arranged the configuration of the dining table antenna, they just don't understand! 73 Eddie G3ZJO On 30/04/2012 22:23, Graham wrote: > Tnx Ed, > Steady carrier, that should be one of the advantages of Op on 8Khz > , no real problems with sound card 's and frequency stability ! > Look's like you may have some signals from PA soon , not sure > what's happened to all the UK Tx stations , I know there was a > problem with having to inform the met-office .. > --------------080209020004070300090707 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit OK Graham

Well you wouldn't want to radiate an untidy signal.

Second decode was -44dB, about 10dB / Noise in 46mHz. Signal level varied and about 20% data lost in a block, XYL re arranged the configuration of the dining table antenna, they just don't understand!

73 Eddie G3ZJO

On 30/04/2012 22:23, Graham wrote:
Tnx Ed,
 
Steady carrier, that should be  one of the  advantages of Op  on  8Khz , no  real  problems with  sound card 's  and  frequency  stability !
Look's  like  you  may have  some  signals  from PA soon , not  sure  what's happened  to  all the  UK  Tx  stations , I know  there was a  problem  with  having to  inform  the  met-office  ..


--------------080209020004070300090707--