Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.208.67 with SMTP id mc3csp75693igc; Wed, 21 May 2014 06:28:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.84.208 with SMTP id b16mr26558116wjz.55.1400678919771; Wed, 21 May 2014 06:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id kt2si16215465wjb.92.2014.05.21.06.28.39 for ; Wed, 21 May 2014 06:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: none (google.com: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; dkim=pass header.i=@googlemail.com Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Wn62a-00013N-2e for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 May 2014 13:54:40 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Wn62U-00013E-IK for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 May 2014 13:54:34 +0100 Received: from mail-ee0-f51.google.com ([74.125.83.51]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <73dk7fc@googlemail.com>) id 1Wn62R-0001AY-Un for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 May 2014 13:54:33 +0100 Received: by mail-ee0-f51.google.com with SMTP id e51so1570619eek.38 for ; Wed, 21 May 2014 05:54:31 -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:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; bh=ov1DVF/5A92ZPB9MWjy1VhXEXRmXV9VllXKOZjuWWQs=; b=ahHyWh6nHFSZUidfdq9Y0Kq2mmxk+xhS+eeLwr9srhxvTQwSeEyV371gfkIk804GHZ vXS8J8eC9TfTjpQrhbwia9KxOJvCScxufZys8nexq+YebkV81prznAuCFxo+kugzflD2 5JTV1Y124RrPdAKmxD9PkQxe3zEYbWcsWDapBEmwStxL9DppHSs7S9D681A/jP68IvaG SjXBAFjcTvel7Sr6cn4Cit0wTVvP7M5CmWXz/ayIJpHEz1OwcmrD4pEnUbVqh2BXyo6U JzIS5kxd3a+T+PkXakAHyBhMKXc+xX/vAzEErQRQlZoe9H33lTunvUM4/dAwnFmV15/W 3/mA== X-Received: by 10.14.209.130 with SMTP id s2mr6963329eeo.15.1400676870976; Wed, 21 May 2014 05:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de. [129.206.22.206]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id z44sm11727687eep.39.2014.05.21.05.54.29 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 21 May 2014 05:54:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-From: DK7FC <73dk7fc@gmail.com> Message-ID: <537CA204.8070505@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:54:28 +0200 From: DK7FC <73dk7fc@googlemail.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <537B3F53.1000301@gmail.com> <537BF4D3.6050903@gmail.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: Hi Alan, Am 21.05.2014 13:41, schrieb Alan Melia: > A few more simultaneous reports would be very interesting. :-)) That would be no problem if there were enough WSPR stations monitoring day and night, and transmit day and night. I am one of them but that's not enough i think :-) [...] 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 [74.125.83.51 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (73dk7fc[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: d315c81827f71be07030d900195100c1 Subject: Re: LF: Re: MF propagation Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010004000005010808040606" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_HAS_MIXED_NUMS,HTML_40_50, HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY 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. --------------010004000005010808040606 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alan, Am 21.05.2014 13:41, schrieb Alan Melia: > A few more simultaneous reports would be very interesting. :-)) That would be no problem if there were enough WSPR stations monitoring day and night, and transmit day and night. I am one of them but that's not enough i think :-) 73, Stefan Am 21.05.2014 13:41, schrieb Alan Melia: > Hi Stefan, The way I try to separate ground and skywave is to look at > a beacon transmission during daylight hours. the groundwave strength > seems to correlate quite well with the minimum in the morning and > evening dips. I find tis gives similar values to those calculated by > the late G3FGQ's GRNDWAV3. > The skywave inceases in strength to mid-day at mid path, and no there > is not much if any QSB because I think the skywave is quite stable > most of the day. > Yes water does help at all frequencies in a number of ways. There is a > coast effect for station near the sea a bit like focussing. The sea is > generall less "rough" than land in terms of scattering the earth > clinging wave,and of course the loss is less > I do think the daytime skywave attenuation is greater than at say 136 > but I have no sensible measrements at 470kHz .....hence the "query" > rather than "statement" :-)) I guess about half the path to Mike is > over water as he is a lot further inland than me..A few more > simultaneous reports would be very interesting. :-)) > Alan > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* DK7FC > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 21, 2014 1:35 AM > *Subject:* Re: LF: Re: MF propagation > > Hi Alan, > > My observation is that the sky wave attenuation at daytime in > summer is in the order of 40 dB over that distance. So i think it > is groundwave exclusively. Also i can't see QSB over that > distances at daytime (maybe 1 dB). > > Water nearly seems to act as an amplifier at 630m :-) Could that > be a reason for the choice of the ex marine frequency? ;-) > > 73, Stefan > > Am 20.05.2014 21:02, schrieb Alan Melia: >> Hi Stefan interesting...... at that distance could it just be >> different goundwave v skywave phase at the different receivers. >> You really need more thn two paths to pin that one :-)) >> Alan >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* DK7FC >> *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:41 PM >> *Subject:* LF: MF propagation >> >> Hi MF, >> >> Timestamp Call MHz SNR Drift Grid Pwr Reporter >> RGrid km az >> 2014-05-20 10:10 PA0A 0.475698 +4 0 JO33de 1 >> G3XDV IO91vt 466 253 >> 2014-05-20 10:10 PA0A 0.475702 -25 0 JO33de 1 >> DK7FC JN49ik 449 157 >> >> >> >> That shows the difference of MF propagation over sea water >> and over land at daytime! (maybe 3 to 6 dB more background >> noise here?). >> >> 73, Stefan >> --------------010004000005010808040606 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alan,

Am 21.05.2014 13:41, schrieb Alan Melia:
A few more simultaneous reports would be very interesting. :-))

That would be no problem if there were enough WSPR stations monitoring day and night, and transmit day and night. I am one of them but that's not enough i think :-)

73, Stefan


Am 21.05.2014 13:41, schrieb Alan Melia:
Hi Stefan, The way I try to separate ground and skywave is to look at a beacon transmission during daylight hours. the groundwave strength seems to correlate quite well with the minimum in the morning and evening dips. I find tis gives similar values to those calculated by the late G3FGQ's GRNDWAV3.
 
The skywave inceases in strength to mid-day at mid path, and no there is not much if any QSB because I think the skywave is quite stable most of the day.
 
Yes water does help at all frequencies in a number of ways. There is a coast effect for station near the sea a bit like focussing. The sea is generall less "rough" than land in terms of scattering the earth clinging wave,and of course the loss is less
 
I do think the daytime skywave attenuation is greater than at say 136 but I have no sensible measrements at 470kHz .....hence the "query" rather than "statement"  :-))  I guess about half the path to Mike is over water as he is a lot further inland than me..A few more simultaneous reports would be very interesting. :-))
 
Alan
----- Original Message -----
From: DK7FC
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 1:35 AM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: MF propagation

Hi Alan,

My observation is that the sky wave attenuation at daytime in summer is in the order of 40 dB over that distance. So i think it is groundwave exclusively. Also i can't see QSB over that distances at daytime (maybe 1 dB).

Water nearly seems to act as an amplifier at 630m :-) Could that be a reason for the choice of the ex marine frequency? ;-)

73, Stefan

Am 20.05.2014 21:02, schrieb Alan Melia:
Hi Stefan interesting...... at that distance could it just be different goundwave v skywave phase at the different receivers. You really need more thn two paths to pin that one :-))
 
Alan
----- Original Message -----
From: DK7FC
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:41 PM
Subject: LF: MF propagation

Hi MF,

Timestamp Call MHz SNR Drift Grid Pwr Reporter RGrid km az
 2014-05-20 10:10   PA0A   0.475698   +4   0   JO33de   1   G3XDV   IO91vt   466   253 
 2014-05-20 10:10   PA0A   0.475702   -25   0   JO33de   1   DK7FC   JN49ik   449   157 


That shows the difference of MF propagation over sea water and over land at daytime! (maybe 3 to 6 dB more background noise here?).

73, Stefan
--------------010004000005010808040606--