Return-Path: Received: (qmail 87568 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2005 23:01:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore02.plus.net) (192.168.71.3) by ptb-mailstore01.plus.net with SMTP; 2 Apr 2005 23:01:18 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore02.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1DHrcs-0005lR-Tl for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:01:58 +0100 Received: from [192.168.67.2] (helo=ptb-mxcore02.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1DHrcs-0005lJ-LM for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:01:58 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1DHrcD-000D3y-Ij for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Sat, 02 Apr 2005 23:01:17 +0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1DHrbm-0007wT-0Z for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:00:50 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1DHrbl-0007wK-Jq for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:00:49 +0100 Received: from imo-m19.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.11]) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DHrbj-0006Si-3J for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:00:49 +0100 Received: from MarkusVester@aol.com by imo-m19.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r5.33.) id l.80.24dbe7d4 (1320) for ; Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:00:37 -0500 (EST) From: MarkusVester@aol.com Message-ID: <80.24dbe7d4.2f807e15@aol.com> Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:00:37 EST To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6104 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: domain of aol.com designates 64.12.137.11 as permitted sender X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no,HTML_20_30=0.504,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,NO_REAL_NAME=0.178 Subject: Re: LF: Weak signals Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TAG_BALANCE_HTML,NO_REAL_NAME 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 X-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet SpamCORE (v3.00) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Dear Bob, Teo and LF,

tonight's signals sorted by frequency were

18:00...19:52 923.19...922.98 qrss120 "S52AB"
18:02...18:24 922.06/21.96; 18:27...19:15 921.99/.89 dfcw100 DF6"NM" (0.3W EMRP)
17:02...19:21 921.73...921.71 qrss60 YU7"AR"
18:00...20:44 921.58/.51...921.39/.31 dfcw180 G3"AQC"
http://members.aol.com/df6nm2/testEu0504022100.gif (142kB)

Unfortunately the detective's vision on signal timing was somewhat impaired, due to the fragmentation by his own transmitted dashes. But time and frequency of your trace clearly indicate that you have caught Teo's fifth "AR", which he sent from 18:27 to 18:42.

The signal was visible on both Argo30s (21mHz, 12s) and Argo120s (5mHz, 3s) settings. BTW my own preferred setting usually is "90s slow", as it provides a reasonably long screenfill duration with less "pixel-stretching" at 10 milliHz resolution.

73 and all the best

Markus, DF6NM

In einer eMail vom 02.04.2005 23:12:28 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit schreibt vernall@xtra.co.nz:

Hi all,

It looks like more weak signals in captures viewed this morning. I've sent
30 and 120 second dot length Argo files to Detective Vester for analysis.

73, Bob ZL2CA