Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp76032igc; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 05:49:48 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.181.13.11 with SMTP id eu11mr6034329wid.30.1390139387541; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 05:49:47 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id fx17si5672903wic.45.2014.01.19.05.49.47 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 05:49:47 -0800 (PST) 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 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1W4sR4-0003TA-8l for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 13:29:10 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1W4sR3-0003T1-FQ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 13:29:09 +0000 Received: from mout2.freenet.de ([195.4.92.92]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (UNKNOWN:AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1W4sR0-0007Re-DJ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 13:29:08 +0000 Received: from [195.4.92.140] (helo=mjail0.freenet.de) by mout2.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.80.1 #4) id 1W4sQz-0004QQ-Nh for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 14:29:05 +0100 Received: from localhost ([::1]:51595 helo=mjail0.freenet.de) by mjail0.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (Exim 4.80.1 #4) id 1W4sQz-0004wc-II for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 14:29:05 +0100 Received: from mx3.freenet.de ([195.4.92.13]:58972) by mjail0.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (Exim 4.80.1 #4) id 1W4sOJ-0003z3-R1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 14:26:19 +0100 Received: from blfd-4db03b5c.pool.mediaways.net ([77.176.59.92]:3482 helo=[192.168.178.21]) by mx3.freenet.de with esmtpsa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (port 465) (Exim 4.80.1 #4) id 1W4sOJ-0003jH-8c for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 14:26:19 +0100 Message-ID: <52DBD279.3090102@freenet.de> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 14:26:17 +0100 From: wolf_dl4yhf User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: In-Reply-To: X-Originated-At: 77.176.59.92!3482 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 Uwe, umm.. "PPS zero-crossing too flat" was mumbo-jumbo from the software debugging phase. The reason may just be as simple as "there was no pulse-per-second sync signal from the GPS" at all. I have similar trouble here every now and then, because the GPS receiver ('mouse' by Garmin) is sitting on a window ledge; and even though I don't have a cat, I can imagine what has happened in your case ;-) [...] Content analysis details: (-0.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [195.4.92.92 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (dl4yhf[at]freenet.de) -0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 0ec4100a7eb09b79f89f9c2085e5ddc1 Subject: Re: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050904070603040304080809" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=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 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050904070603040304080809 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Uwe, umm.. "PPS zero-crossing too flat" was mumbo-jumbo from the software debugging phase. The reason may just be as simple as "there was no pulse-per-second sync signal from the GPS" at all. I have similar trouble here every now and then, because the GPS receiver ('mouse' by Garmin) is sitting on a window ledge; and even though I don't have a cat, I can imagine what has happened in your case ;-) Cheers, Wolf . Am 19.01.2014 12:49, schrieb uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de: > > Hi Peter, > > There has been chaos around 0200utc: > > 2014-01-19 02:00:12PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:12Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:13Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:22 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:22Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:23 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:23Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:24 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:24 Last sync too old (delta=3.08 s) ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:24 Last sync too old (delta=3.42 s) ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:25 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:26Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:29 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:29Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:30 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:31 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:31Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:31 Last sync too old (delta=3.25 s) ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:32 PPS zero-crossing too flat > > 2014-01-19 02:00:32 Last sync too old (delta=4.27 s) ! > > 2014-01-19 02:00:33Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check ! > > I don’t know why. seems most of the satellites where asleep. > > until coming night > > Uwe/dj8wx > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Gesendet: 19.01.2014 11:01 > An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Betreff: Re: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Hello Uwe, Markus, VLF ! > I just took a "look back in time" in my 2012 and 2013 log's > (www.qsl.net/pa1sdb ) and I think over the > last two years there is a large > rise in signal level when I take a look at DJ8WX his signal. The trace > in some saved Spectograms in 2012 and 2013 are not that > impressive as they are right now. > Look at the trace in the spectogram above. Impressive !!! > > I have to do research if those "glitches" are at the TX or RX side... > Do you recognise that glitch at about 2 h Uwe ? (in your debug log ?) > I'm not at home this weekend, so I can't tel you the exact time right now. > 73's Peter - PA1SDB > www.qsl.net/pa1sdb > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Markus Vester > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > > *Cc:* Paul > *Sent:* Sunday, January 19, 2014 10:01 AM > *Subject:* Re: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz > > Hi Uwe, > great signal here, better than ever! On my grabber > http://www.df6nm.de/vlf/vlfgrabber.htm it's well visible in 478 > uHz, and even traces in the 3.8 mHz "600" window during the early > morning hours. The SNR would probably have been sufficient for an > Opds-4H detection, but I'm glad you just left the carrier on. > I had fixed my frequency offset and you were spot on 8270.004, > albeit with occasional transmit phase glitches widening the 42 uHz > trace a bit. Sorry about the apparent 0.8 mHz up shift after > around 3 UT, it is an artefact caused by a too narrow setting of > samplerate tracking tolerance (0.2 ppm). > Thanks very much for this test! It's a pity that Mal hadn't left > his RX on overnight. > Best 73, > Markus (DF6NM) > > *From:* uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de > *Sent:* Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:56 PM > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > > *Subject:* Re: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz > > Hi Markus, > just now reading your mail. the switch off time was some min after > you sent it.. > sri for that. > now the TX will stay on the air until tomorrow abt 0900utc. > > Hopefully Mal reads this. > > GL > > Uwe > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > > Gesendet: 17.01.2014 22:36 > An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Betreff: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Uwe is again producing very good traces on the European > grabbers. Even in my noisy location I am now getting a nice peak > in the 42 uHz FFT (slightly higher due to an uncorrected 0.25 mHz > error in my frequency readout). > Uwe, do you intend to stay on longer tonight? > Best 73, > Markus (DF6NM) > --------------050904070603040304080809 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Uwe,

umm..  "PPS zero-crossing too flat" was mumbo-jumbo from the software debugging phase.
The reason may just be as simple as "there was no pulse-per-second sync signal from the GPS" at all.

I have similar trouble here every now and then, because the GPS receiver ('mouse' by Garmin) is sitting on a window ledge;
and even though I don't have a cat, I can imagine what has happened in your case ;-)

Cheers,
  Wolf .


Am 19.01.2014 12:49, schrieb uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de:

Hi Peter,

There has been chaos around 0200utc:

2014-01-19 02:00:12  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:12  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

2014-01-19 02:00:13  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

2014-01-19 02:00:22  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:22  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

2014-01-19 02:00:23  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:23  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

2014-01-19 02:00:24  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:24  Last sync too old (delta=3.08 s) !

2014-01-19 02:00:24  Last sync too old (delta=3.42 s) !

2014-01-19 02:00:25  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:26  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

2014-01-19 02:00:29  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:29  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

2014-01-19 02:00:30  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:31  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:31  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

2014-01-19 02:00:31  Last sync too old (delta=3.25 s) !

2014-01-19 02:00:32  PPS zero-crossing too flat

2014-01-19 02:00:32  Last sync too old (delta=4.27 s) !

2014-01-19 02:00:33  Timestamp didn't pass plausibility check !

 

I don’t know why. seems most of the satellites where asleep.

 

until coming night

Uwe/dj8wx

 


Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Gesendet: 19.01.2014 11:01
An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Betreff: Re: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz

Hello Uwe, Markus, VLF !
 
 
I just took a "look back in time" in my 2012 and 2013 log's (www.qsl.net/pa1sdb) and I think over the last two years there is a large
rise in signal level when I take a look at DJ8WX his signal. The trace in some saved Spectograms in 2012 and 2013 are not that
impressive as they are right now. 
 
Look at the trace in the spectogram above. Impressive !!!

I have to do research if those "glitches" are at the TX or RX side...
Do you recognise that glitch at about 2 h Uwe ? (in your debug log ?)
I'm not at home this weekend, so I can't tel you the exact time right now.
 
 73's Peter - PA1SDB
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Cc: Paul
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz

Hi Uwe,
 
great signal here, better than ever! On my grabber http://www.df6nm.de/vlf/vlfgrabber.htm it's well visible in 478 uHz, and even traces in the 3.8 mHz "600" window during the early morning hours. The SNR would probably have been sufficient for an Opds-4H detection, but I'm glad you just left the carrier on.
 
I had fixed my frequency offset and you were spot on 8270.004, albeit with occasional transmit phase glitches widening the 42 uHz trace a bit. Sorry about the apparent 0.8 mHz up shift after around 3 UT, it is an artefact caused by a too narrow setting of samplerate tracking tolerance (0.2 ppm).
 
Thanks very much for this test! It's a pity that Mal hadn't left his RX on overnight.
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF6NM)
 

 
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz

Hi Markus,
just now reading your mail. the switch off time was some min after you sent it..
sri for that.
now the TX will stay on the air until tomorrow abt 0900utc.

Hopefully Mal reads this.

GL

Uwe



Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Gesendet: 17.01.2014 22:36
An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Betreff: VLF: DJ8WX 8270.004 Hz

Uwe is again producing very good traces on the European grabbers. Even in my noisy location I am now getting a nice peak in the 42 uHz FFT (slightly higher due to an uncorrected 0.25 mHz error in my frequency readout).
 
Uwe, do you intend to stay on longer tonight?
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF6NM)
 
 

--------------050904070603040304080809--