Message-ID: <504BD4A5.5010203@freenet.de>
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 01:28:37 +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> <504BCD96.2010901@freenet.de> <003a01cd8e17$f3e02f00$6401a8c0@JAYDELL>
In-Reply-To: <003a01cd8e17$f3e02f00$6401a8c0@JAYDELL>
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


Hello Jay,

Possibly yes, at least at the moment I can still hear them calling on 
472.5 kHz with a piece of wire on my TS-850.
But the calling intervals are more 'widely spaced' now, hi. But the 
signal from DK0SWF has dropped a lot; at the moment DK7FC (in Opera on 
478.7x kHz) is stronger. Maybe they are back to the legal limit in DL, 
which I think is still
1 watt ERP.

73 and gn,
    Wolf

Am 09.09.2012 01:16, schrieb jrusgrove@comcast.net:
> Does anyone know if they will be operating during the overnight period?
>
> Jay W1VD  WD2XNS  WE2XGR/2
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "wolf_dl4yhf" <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2012 6:58 PM
> Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna
>
>
>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>