Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.96.198 with SMTP id du6csp189031igb; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 15:47:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.75.165 with SMTP id d5mr15550308wjw.18.1382395641572; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 15:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k9si71749wiy.18.2013.10.21.15.47.21 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 15:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=fail (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1VYMQu-0001w0-B8 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:50:36 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VYMQt-0001vr-JH for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:50:35 +0100 Received: from mail-gg0-f172.google.com ([209.85.161.172]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VYMQr-0006yj-Le for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:50:34 +0100 Received: by mail-gg0-f172.google.com with SMTP id k3so411421ggn.31 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 13:50:31 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9E2QPDmUT80fOCJWk+uVczDvOO85IgAKLPI33oIjOr8=; b=mlY79kZPpPxOq3ZUBM+DYNsbHzBZpWH4NX/ZzOvj/g8qq0E5yVYpvAUrmBOlfHuJ+4 lT9j0ifRQ58W/pZriaJvsYJu33vyfAuRf9zrwrQx+TB/+WxuArDqqNyFQYfsqudLFiyp bUUBhG1raIW7R43fmgse6m/uJFjM7qwo1S0aQcPnO1cxoxmwbMfZhIrq46Se962iGPOL /S1rgjQ1ldeBqWshbY4uS+D2enGB/wAoiLDu5SskdWN0PVmtPiPItb7t/FceuRgVbPXN nv9WlpXzSWcdUC1BMr9z42oNVcDPWhszbut0J2K8Ejq4n8CwrG9A7RwQt8cF7AqIdrNi +img== X-Received: by 10.236.32.242 with SMTP id o78mr13068000yha.41.1382388631168; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 13:50:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (h111.158.82.166.dynamic.ip.windstream.net. [166.82.158.111]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id d40sm29843608yhi.10.2013.10.21.13.50.30 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Oct 2013 13:50:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <52659361.6010007@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 16:49:37 -0400 From: Dexter McIntyre W4DEX User-Agent: Messenger 9.0a1 (Windows/20071115) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: ,<52656645.20564.A01B5D@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: 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: I've been running /5 from sundown to sunup. 200 watts leaving the shack. Perhaps the signal will improve when the oak trees under the top hat wires are bare. The leaves are just now beginning to fall. Most of the several hundred feet of top hat wires run over a combination of oak and pine trees. I've often wondered if my antenna would be more efficient with more loading instead of having the top hat. I'll probably never know because it would be way to much work to find out. The antenna has been in use for 8 years. I may find out when the top hat wire fails because I doubt I'm now able to replace them. [...] 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 [209.85.161.172 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (dexter.mc[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 4e3b1488273adbbe9757d6bdd5adf219 Subject: Re: LF: 74.5493 instead...(1of2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1979 I've been running /5 from sundown to sunup. 200 watts leaving the shack. Perhaps the signal will improve when the oak trees under the top hat wires are bare. The leaves are just now beginning to fall. Most of the several hundred feet of top hat wires run over a combination of oak and pine trees. I've often wondered if my antenna would be more efficient with more loading instead of having the top hat. I'll probably never know because it would be way to much work to find out. The antenna has been in use for 8 years. I may find out when the top hat wire fails because I doubt I'm now able to replace them. Nice to at least see those traces Mike. Dex Bob Raide wrote: > Mike; > I can see that I have to stay on longer at least to 0600. You haven't > missed a night of good captures-QRN, poor conditions doesn't stop > you! Very consistent captures-good to see Dex "almost" there-just > gonna need a decent night with lower noise that should be coming with > the colder WX-Bob > > > From: mike.dennison@ntlworld.com > > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > > Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:37:09 +0100 > > Subject: Re: LF: 74.5493 instead...(1of2) > > > > More good pictures attached from last night despite some heavy > > static. Still no complete call from Dex on 74.5485kHz, but plenty of > > traces again. > > > > Mike, G3XDV