Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id v8NDM7pq001522 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 15:22:10 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1dvkJy-0005Pa-NN for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 14:18:14 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1dvkJy-0005PP-Ej for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 14:18:14 +0100 Received: from lb3-smtp-cloud7.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.31]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1dvkJv-0002Hv-Pk for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 14:18:13 +0100 Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([83.162.220.82]) by smtp-cloud7.xs4all.net with ESMTP id vkJsdmYgfG5oqvkJtdMzEB; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 15:18:10 +0200 From: "Roelof Bakker" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 15:18:08 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <59C65F10.6275.470B03@roelof.ndb.demon.nl> In-reply-to: <15eaea599c9-c0a-56a@webjas-vac019.srv.aolmail.net> References: <59C63EC4.12309.B636CA@roelof.ndb.demon.nl>, <15eaea599c9-c0a-56a@webjas-vac019.srv.aolmail.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.72.572) Content-description: Mail message body X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfOtcBk/VF+n6Sw5eS58v9q5O2bhbO2hxcZUS1C7yJAZKczxqEzKeQvKFv6ObOrEBd/StWfSHz1pJM2wJRVHvgXdlqxlSMY60CgKlAW8jPxntLP04G22p Cla3BZErhTt6jhlrz0QErEA2p0X1J+IyApVGcteiHaH4EyHH7TTo3+MN4cP+2Syo75Ui/6lZGjBFYQ== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello Markus, Thanks for the explanation. I was mereley looking at signal to noise ratio, but decoding sensitivity is a different thing! 73, Roelof [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Scan-Signature: ddae800c6581715278ab3184b42d46db Subject: Re: LF: CW 477.7 kHz Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII 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 Hello Markus, Thanks for the explanation. I was mereley looking at signal to noise ratio, but decoding sensitivity is a different thing! 73, Roelof