Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1002; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE,RATWARE_GECKO_BUILD,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id u469CQPZ028476 for ; Fri, 6 May 2016 11:12:27 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1aybhy-00029K-AN for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 06 May 2016 10:06:02 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1aybhx-00029B-Qo for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 06 May 2016 10:06:01 +0100 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1aybhw-0008IJ-72 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 06 May 2016 10:06:00 +0100 Received: from dovecot03.posteo.de (dovecot03.posteo.de [172.16.0.13]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72654209D7 for ; Fri, 6 May 2016 11:05:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.posteo.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dovecot03.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3r1QqR1TwFz5vN7 for ; Fri, 6 May 2016 11:05:55 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <572C5E72.7010404@posteo.de> Date: Fri, 06 May 2016 11:05:54 +0200 From: DK7FC 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: <40b8e5c6692149a7911fe77631ebb33b@kabelmail.de> <572BB679.2040107@posteo.de> <572BE449.5010806@abelian.org> <279E0DEFDAFA4C849152DBBA3BFEDE8C@White> In-Reply-To: <279E0DEFDAFA4C849152DBBA3BFEDE8C@White> X-Scan-Signature: 64a43ebf6189d3fbac7adf77f3718769 Subject: Re: VLF: EbNaut transmissions on lower frequencies?, pre-tests: 6.47kHz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010807070402030407000305" 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.11 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 8008 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010807070402030407000305 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Markus, VLF, OK so i will run the next carrier on 6480 Hz for some hours this evening for you and Uwe. Prepare your receivers to 47 uHz (or 63 uHz maybe). 73, Stefan Am 06.05.2016 09:24, schrieb Markus Vester: > No chance to see anything on 6470 Hz here due to heavy railway QRM. I > noticed that the unstable lines seem to be concentrated on odd > multiples of 16.70 Hz. Going 8 to 10 Hz up (e.g. to *6480 Hz*) would > place the signal in a QRM minimum, gaining at least 5 dB on average. > All the best, > Markus (DF6NM) > --------------010807070402030407000305 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello Markus, VLF,

OK so i will run the next carrier on 6480 Hz for some hours this evening for you and Uwe. Prepare your receivers to 47 uHz (or 63 uHz maybe).

73, Stefan

Am 06.05.2016 09:24, schrieb Markus Vester:

No chance to see anything on 6470 Hz here due to heavy railway QRM. I noticed that the unstable lines seem to be concentrated on odd multiples of 16.70 Hz. Going 8 to 10 Hz up (e.g. to 6480 Hz) would place the signal in a QRM minimum, gaining at least 5 dB on average.

All the best,

Markus (DF6NM)

--------------010807070402030407000305--