Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mb04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id BE871380000AE; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 03:52:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1T1Bsx-0008Um-LZ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:49:55 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1T1Bsw-0008Ud-VK for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:49:54 +0100 Received: from mail-bk0-f43.google.com ([209.85.214.43]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1T1Bsu-0006j5-SM for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:49:53 +0100 Received: by bkty15 with SMTP id y15so47248bkt.16 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:49:51 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=googlemail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:from:to:references:subject:date:mime-version :content-type:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole; bh=q5Fb5IiLegc5Oav8hGHY+I4F0y1TM2+7IqEvBiJsCJE=; b=p68S0f8bMaZ1cMxP/mIaChyONtyzupurigeKr/ajsu1YubSzPgWn2BzJ3FQ+rf0HOF PVTe28+Jyvlda3wPr2WoNwaMYXYV/6lXeQeItZono93WZVEm6TDXDyBMxuE+VV2WsSvZ w0DiLmP5SqmjguLtp7wdZZ0WMJCiU/rlfW4RrNQqGjdvL1piMccIgCq0fMslALERjN/V b0Xa5bBfPXoNyVWPs+OONZm0qBySY+Ge+vn/WU+VYRQdvfenfcZPKhrHi08ofE1rRWIU 94hofOH9np0JmeUNi40GIekZNKwmAhaD8O05hbfIij+MLTydyYndpP9dbbigdsS/aMKh NpEA== Received: by 10.205.127.72 with SMTP id gz8mr3981258bkc.121.1344930591606; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from W1KW (77-21-14-75-dynip.superkabel.de. [77.21.14.75]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 25sm769639bkx.9.2012.08.14.00.49.50 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <522B224E78944CBDBE55D28A48360340@W1KW> From: "DK8KW & DI2BO" To: References: <569fd19f03994b069634810b4361b931@kabelmail.de> <5027D928.7080205@freenet.de> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 09:49:50 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: Hi, >IMVHO, beaconing test in this precious (because otherwise un-QRMed) >frequency range (472.3 to 472.7 kHz) should be kept as short as possible. >Which doesn't mean I propose a bandplan. I sent an email to DL5DBT the day before yesterday, explaining the situation to him and proposing to use a frequency in the middle of the band for test transmissions. Didn't get any reply so far, but yesterday night the frequency was clear again and I had a nice QSO with PA3ABK (Jan transmitting on 501,6 kHz). [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.214.43 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (dk8kw.di2bo[at]googlemail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 6bb858db23df2b82c4f5a8cb512b45b1 Subject: Re: LF: 472.5 kHz acty and QRSS Beacon Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01CD7A02.256D5D60" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.4 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,HTML_30_40, 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-sid: 3039ac1d6018502a03a35bd9 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01CD7A02.256D5D60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, >IMVHO, beaconing test in this precious (because otherwise un-QRMed)=20 >frequency range (472.3 to 472.7 kHz) should be kept as short as = possible.=20 >Which doesn't mean I propose a bandplan. I sent an email to DL5DBT the day before yesterday, explaining the = situation to him and proposing to use a frequency in the middle of the = band for test transmissions. Didn't get any reply so far, but yesterday = night the frequency was clear again and I had a nice QSO with PA3ABK = (Jan transmitting on 501,6 kHz). Vy 73 Geri, DK8KW & DI2BO ----- Original Message -----=20 From: wolf_dl4yhf=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 6:26 PM Subject: Re: LF: 472.5 kHz acty Hello Uwe, Aaah yes, that explains all. I was a bit irritated by that = transmission because stations from southern germany were calling CQ in = normal CW about 100 Hz up in frequency. The signal was completely = overloading my receiver's frontend.=20 I didn't consider reading the signal as "inverse QRSS keying". IMVHO, beaconing test in this precious (because otherwise un-QRMed) = frequency range (472.3 to 472.7 kHz) should be kept as short as = possible. Which doesn't mean I propose a bandplan. All the best, Wolf . Am 12.08.2012 17:46, schrieb uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de: Hello Wolf, I received DL5DBT on 472.43kHz extremly strong in QRS3 beacon mode = but - but negativ (!) keying at the time you mentioned. read the gaps as key down and you will find that callsign.=20 GL Uwe/dj8wx ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01CD7A02.256D5D60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
 
>IMVHO,=20 beaconing test in this precious (because otherwise un-QRMed)=20
>frequency=20 range (472.3 to 472.7 kHz) should be kept as short as possible.=20
>Which=20 doesn't mean I propose a bandplan.
I sent an email to DL5DBT the day = before yesterday,=20 explaining the situation to him and proposing to use a frequency in the = middle=20 of the band for test transmissions. Didn't get any reply so far, = but=20 yesterday night the frequency was clear again and I had a nice QSO with = PA3ABK=20 (Jan transmitting on 501,6 kHz).
 
Vy 73
 
Geri, DK8KW & = DI2BO
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 wolf_dl4yhf=20
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 = 6:26=20 PM
Subject: Re: LF: 472.5 kHz = acty

Hello Uwe,

Aaah yes, that explains = all. I=20 was a bit irritated by that transmission because stations from = southern=20 germany were calling CQ in normal CW about 100 Hz up in frequency. The = signal=20 was completely overloading my receiver's frontend.
I didn't = consider=20 reading the signal as "inverse QRSS keying".

IMVHO, beaconing = test in=20 this precious (because otherwise un-QRMed) frequency range (472.3 to = 472.7=20 kHz) should be kept as short as possible. Which doesn't mean I propose = a=20 bandplan.

All the best,
  Wolf .


Am = 12.08.2012=20 17:46, schrieb uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de:
Hello=20 Wolf,

I received DL5DBT on 472.43kHz extremly strong in QRS3 = beacon=20 mode but - but negativ (!)  keying at the time you = mentioned.
read=20 the gaps as key down and you will find that callsign.=20 =

GL
Uwe/dj8wx


------=_NextPart_000_001D_01CD7A02.256D5D60--