Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.67.23.138 with SMTP id ia10csp399978pad; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 09:43:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.89.98 with SMTP id bn2mr23618934wib.42.1380127436802; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 09:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c5si4233529wiv.7.1969.12.31.16.00.00; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 09:43:56 -0700 (PDT) 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; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@btinternet.com Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1VOri0-0003R3-Lr for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:13:00 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VOri0-0003Qu-2m for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:13:00 +0100 Received: from smtpout05.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk ([65.20.0.125]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VOrhx-0004IZ-HZ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:12:58 +0100 X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A090207.52430B88.0099,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0 X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=39/97,refid=2.7.2:2013.9.25.44515:17:39.532,ip=86.171.166.126,rules=__HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, MSGID_32HEX_LC, INVALID_MSGID_NO_FQDN, __HAS_FROM, __PHISH_FROM2, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL_FROM, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NO_NAME, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __FRAUD_SUBJ_ALLCAPS, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, __CTYPE_MULTIPART_ALT, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY, __CTYPE_MULTIPART, __HAS_X_PRIORITY, __HAS_MSMAIL_PRI, __HAS_X_MAILER, USER_AGENT_OE, __OUTLOOK_MUA_1, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC, __ANY_URI, __URI_NO_WWW, __URI_NO_PATH, __CP_MEDIA_BODY, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE, SUPERLONG_LINE, __HAS_HTML, HTML_NO_HTTP, BODYTEXTH_SIZE_10000_LESS, __MIME_HTML, __TAG_EXISTS_HTML, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, __URI_NS, SXL_IP_DYNAMIC[126.166.171.86.fur], RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, __PHISH_FROM, __OUTLOOK_MUA, RDNS_SUSP, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown Received: from gnat (86.171.166.126) by smtpout05.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk (8.6.100.99.10047) (authenticated as alan.melia@btinternet.com) id 5242B368000458A0 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:12:56 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=btcpcloud; t=1380125577; bh=llosxsAEvv0o1J2r/yge9yYKrC2tXyioy+F9E1AWQxA=; h=Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer; b=c+6GbhcHLYyyl8viWAMlKQ1M79sjWPbKpSurNmx3ufc1iD6IT/duJjvtj5fkWSq2iCeNFgRywHK0jSsNETlOZrP6n9/0GKoV1g3nrqyDDn+GQXucJ/w7lDRYGOBlQdSsjmcxzqjSeY0ymdNjb/1j5djv7uM/1wu5Zwf5HjnppEg= Message-ID: <662F6271FD24456BA298B3FE2680A036@gnat> From: "Alan Melia" To: References: <416ce82c.32a95.14155a63be8.Webtop.44@charter.net> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:53:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130925-0, 25/09/2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) 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 John yes I agree totally with your assessments I had forgotten Peter was active at the same time...knowing the date now I will search back through the archive and look at the Dst as this was before my discovery of that connection. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 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: b16f5c37bc0c21b41453c2ac5e65973c Subject: Re: LF: TA CW? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01CEBA0F.CBC47A10" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,HTML_20_30, 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 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2997 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01CEBA0F.CBC47A10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi John yes I agree totally with your assessments I had forgotten Peter = was active at the same time...knowing the date now I will search back = through the archive and look at the Dst as this was before my discovery = of that connection. This reflector will not carry the images (bmp) from Colorado plots, = which show that the Eq. Ring Current was not too highly topped up. The = Dst was hovering about -30 to -40 nT ....a bit below best conditions. = The 6th is characterised by a suddent fairly rapid rise in Dst to 0nT. = This usually is the precursor to a downward swing to maybe -60nT However = this depends upon the direction of the Cme magnetic field. Without = researching further I suspect that the field did not reconnect because = the Dst droped back to around only -40nT. I suspect that burst from = Laurie was a happy coincidence of the positive swing of Dst and the = phase coincidence of the multi-hop signals......that rare event that all = amateirs pray for, a path opening at the right time. I am not sure the = positive swing is significant in radio terms, because I cant see it = sweeping the D-layer clear of absorption, so I am guessing the in-phase = "sweet spot" is the real reason.=20 Was that the first E-W reception contact of had Laurie made it Caanada = earlier John?? Alan G3NYK ----- Original Message -----=20 From: w1tag@charter.net=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 4:04 PM Subject: Re: LF: TA CW? Further to Alan's posts, some thoughts on the earlier 72 kHz TA = reception from December, 2002. TA signals from G3AQC and G3LDO (among others) on 2200 meters had been = regularly copied in the eastern U.S. This was all done at QRSS60-120 = data rates. The end of the 72 kHz NOV's in the UK was approaching, and = Laurie and Peter began transmitting regularly at 72.4 KHz, with Laurie = using something close to DFCW240. Nothing was reported from over here = until the evening of 6 December 2002, when I put the receiver on after = dinner, and saw a strong signal where none had been in the previous = week. I sent out emails, and over the course of the evening, the only = U.S. copy of Laurie was from Jay, W1VD and myself. Watchers further = south and west reported nothing. We believe that Laurie signed off = around 0130...in any case, the copy ceased. Looking back at solar weather records, nothing unusual seems to have = been going on. Activity was higher than present, no surprise, but there = had just been a regular succession of fairly minor events. This suggests = that Alan's famous "leaky reservoir" was fairly full, but that LF = conditions had not been depressed by a recent CME.=20 Speculation at the time was that we caught a period where the signal = "hop" landed in this part of the U.S. I believe this would have been a = 3-hop path (Alan will correct me), but this might have been a time where = the 2nd and 3rd hops happened to end in phase over here. Jay and I are = 100 km apart, pretty close for this sort of thing, but the unsuccessful = listeners were considerably farther away.=20 This record may fall with the use of higher power, but Alan is = definitely correct about the effectiveness of Laurie's unusual antenna. John, W1TAG ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01CEBA0F.CBC47A10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
Hi John yes I agree totally with your = assessments I=20 had forgotten Peter was active at the same time...knowing the date now I = will=20 search back through the archive and look at the Dst as this was before = my=20 discovery of that connection.
 
This reflector will not carry the = images (bmp) from=20 Colorado plots, which show that the Eq. Ring Current was not too = highly=20 topped up. The Dst was hovering about -30 to -40 nT ....a bit below best = conditions. The 6th is characterised by a suddent fairly rapid rise in = Dst to=20 0nT. This usually is the precursor to a downward swing to maybe -60nT = However=20 this depends upon the direction of the Cme magnetic field. Without = researching=20 further I suspect that the field did not reconnect because the Dst = droped back=20 to around only -40nT.  I suspect = that burst=20 from Laurie was a happy coincidence of the positive swing of Dst and the = phase=20 coincidence of the multi-hop signals......that rare event that all = amateirs pray=20 for, a path opening at the right time. I am not sure the positive swing = is=20 significant in radio terms, because I cant see it sweeping the D-layer = clear of=20 absorption, so I am guessing the in-phase "sweet spot" is the real = reason.=20
 
Was that the first E-W reception = contact of had=20 Laurie made it Caanada earlier John??
Alan
G3NYK
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 w1tag@charter.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, = 2013 4:04=20 PM
Subject: Re: LF: TA CW?

 Further to Alan's posts, some thoughts on = the earlier=20 72 kHz TA reception from December, 2002.
TA signals from G3AQC and G3LDO (among others) on = 2200=20 meters had been regularly copied in the eastern U.S. This was all done = at=20 QRSS60-120 data rates. The end of the 72 kHz NOV's in the UK was = approaching,=20 and Laurie and Peter began transmitting regularly at 72.4 KHz, with = Laurie=20 using something close to DFCW240. Nothing was reported from over here = until=20 the evening of 6 December 2002, when I put the receiver on after = dinner, and=20 saw a strong signal where none had been in the previous week. I sent = out=20 emails, and over the course of the evening, the only U.S. copy of = Laurie was=20 from Jay, W1VD and myself. Watchers further south and west reported = nothing.=20 We believe that Laurie signed off around 0130...in any case, the copy=20 ceased.
Looking back at solar weather records, nothing = unusual seems=20 to have been going on. Activity was higher than present, no surprise, = but=20 there had just been a regular succession of fairly minor events. This = suggests=20 that Alan's famous "leaky reservoir" was fairly full, but that LF = conditions=20 had not been depressed by a recent CME.

Speculation at the time was that we caught a = period where=20 the signal "hop" landed in this part of the U.S. I believe this would = have=20 been a 3-hop path (Alan will correct me), but this might have been a = time=20 where the 2nd and 3rd hops happened to end in phase over here. Jay and = I are=20 100 km apart, pretty close for this sort of thing, but the = unsuccessful=20 listeners were considerably farther away.

This record may fall with the use of higher power, = but Alan=20 is definitely correct about the effectiveness of Laurie's unusual=20 antenna.
John, W1TAG

 ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01CEBA0F.CBC47A10--