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;
Message-ID: <52FFCF60.50609@freenet.de>
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 21:34:40 +0100
From: wolf_dl4yhf <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
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: <1392470753.4354.YahooMailNeo@web133005.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>,<52FF91E7.7030406@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <BLU180-W7288D17496E83683CA9275AC9F0@phx.gbl> <52FFC3FD.2040601@freenet.de> <52FFCBAF.6080408@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
In-Reply-To: <52FFCBAF.6080408@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
Subject: Re: LF: LF Activity - G3XIZ
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------070400050009020308080801"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070400050009020308080801
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Am 15.02.2014 21:18, schrieb schaefer:
> Hi Bob, Wolf, LF,
>
> Am 15.02.2014 20:46, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf:
>> Hello Bob and all,
>>>
>>> It's much easier to put a good sigs out on 472 than 137 or 
>>> 73.  Countless new modes to use and band conditions much more 
>>> predictable on 600 meters.
>>
>> I agree as far as PEP-versus-ERP is concerned.
>
> Hah! Was that a joke?

That wasn't a joke.
That was a comparison of the efficiency of a LF antenna with an MF antenna.

Please explain why you think this is a joke.

Are you seriously saying that generating the same ERP on MF (now 
listen..) is EASIER THAN ON LF ?

73,
   Wolf .


--------------070400050009020308080801
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 15.02.2014 21:18, schrieb schaefer:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote cite="mid:52FFCBAF.6080408@iup.uni-heidelberg.de"
      type="cite">
      <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
        http-equiv="Content-Type">
      Hi Bob, Wolf, LF,<br>
      <br>
      Am 15.02.2014 20:46, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf:
      <blockquote cite="mid:52FFC3FD.2040601@freenet.de" type="cite">
        <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
          http-equiv="Content-Type">
        <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hello Bob and all,<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote
          cite="mid:BLU180-W7288D17496E83683CA9275AC9F0@phx.gbl"
          type="cite">
          <style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style>
          <div dir="ltr"><br>
            It's much easier to put a&nbsp;good sigs out on&nbsp;472 than 137 or
            73.&nbsp;&nbsp;Countless new modes to use and band conditions much
            more
            predictable on 600 meters. <br>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
        <br>
        I agree as far as PEP-versus-ERP is concerned.<br>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      Hah! Was that a joke? <br>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    That wasn't a joke. <br>
    That was a comparison of the efficiency of a LF antenna with an MF
    antenna.<br>
    <br>
    Please explain why you think this is a joke.<br>
    <br>
    Are you seriously saying that generating the same ERP on MF (now
    listen..) is EASIER THAN ON LF ? <br>
    <br>
    73,<br>
    &nbsp; Wolf .<br>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------070400050009020308080801--