Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13132 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 14:21:23 -0000 Received: from marstons.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.223) by mailstore with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 14:21:23 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: (qmail 19799 invoked by uid 10001); 17 Dec 2002 14:21:22 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by marstons.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 14:21:22 -0000 X-SQ: A X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.10) id 18OIaB-0003Vy-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:20:27 +0000 Received: from [147.197.200.9] (helo=hestia.herts.ac.uk) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18OIaB-0003Vp-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:20:27 +0000 Received: from gemini ([147.197.200.44] helo=gemini.herts.ac.uk) by hestia.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 18OIa4-0006QU-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:20:20 +0000 Received: from [147.197.232.252] (helo=rsch-15.herts.ac.uk) by gemini.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18OIZt-00055f-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:20:09 +0000 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20021217140941.029d9210@gemini.herts.ac.uk> X-Sender: mj9ar@gemini.herts.ac.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:20:07 +0000 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "James Moritz" In-reply-to: <004901c2a533$ab9fd8d0$0700000a@parissn2> References: <000b01c2a4ff$bc781fc0$ea00a8c0@f3a3a2> <000601c2a50e$0b89ca60$4d6a0450@oemcomputer> <3DFDE74B.7725145F@diolog.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MailScanner: No Virus detected Subject: Re: LF: Re: QSO format Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.4 required=5.0tests=DEAR_SOMEBODY,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01version=2.42 Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Dear Stewart, LF Group, At 19:48 16/12/2002 +0100, you wrote: >However, I believe that HBG 75 could serve as a "pilot" carrier. In order to serve as a pilot carrier in this way, the signal from HBG would have to be subject to exactly the same propagation effects and noise levels as G3AQC - but since these two stations are operating in different locations, on different frequencies, is it likely that this is actually the case? Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU