Message-ID: <504BCD96.2010901@freenet.de>
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 00:58:30 +0200
From: wolf_dl4yhf <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <12fe8.4c562f1.3d7d1434@aol.com> <504BC546.2000105@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <504BC546.2000105@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


John,

you wrote:

 >
Calling CQ ad infinitum, while also 60Hz higher I also copy DF0WD 
calling CQ too. I assume neither station can hear each other?
<

Of course I could hear DK0SWF calling CQ about 100 Hz away. But I had 
given up, finally, after trying for the umpteenth time to get a response 
from them. As Mal and others already noted, their signal was incredibly 
strong, but they must have had a very, very serious problem with their 
receiver. Maybe they should have asked the SWF (Südwestfunk) to close 
down some of the transmitters in their vincinity ? Oh well. Hope the 
pilots in Poland were not too irritated by the powerful signal, which 
even beat DK7FC's signal by far !

Despite all the trouble, I was positively surprised to make a QSO with 
OM1II, whom I heard earlier on, but didn't want to add to the confusion 
on the semi-official "calling frequency" (472.5 kHz). Also thanks to 
G3KEV, DK8KW, DJ2LF, and DF5QF for the nice QSOs. OZ7FOC was partly 
audible, but difficult tonight.

73,
   Wolf  DL4YHF / DF0WD


>
> While I applaud any new MF activity, I wonder why, if DK0SWF are 
> unable to receive efficiently on their antenna, they call CQ?
>
> Surely if this is a "one time" opportunity to transmit from "SWF" and 
> reception is impossible they could do something else with the time on 
> the air. A WSPR transmission for the same length of time would gather 
> much more usefuly information than calling CQ with no hope of hearing 
> any replies?
>
> John
> GM4SLV
> IP90gg
> Shetland Isles
>
>
>
>