Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
DomainKey-Status: bad (test mode)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com;
  h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:In-Reply-To:Importance;
  b=aUFjM+TQ28wcoPh7bc+Y8eDx67GEjOn9oWIgHtJ2TPYR482BfL7dqyIFZ/8nNVEIuMmsHpP+RF+14H9PqJRfCHIEkpXahIQZKU4ui07ls9G9MMLbHYXxKKx3nfRhovNXVe5lMu8+1oigVLP2UuW+RTjIfx8j6hI6ZH4rsqGdR4A=  ;
From: "Dave G3WCB" <ganymede444@btopenworld.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 20:09:51 +0100
Message-ID: <PAEFLMFGBDKKCONLMLBIIEIICKAA.ganymede444@btopenworld.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <002001c7967b$bf365020$0300a8c0@lark>
Importance: Normal
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: LF: RE: Re: [500] Dead Band?
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

Hi Alan, LF,

Don't think my set-up is capable of putting that sort of signal your way. I
was running an estimated 50 mW erp or less, but I'm happy to repeat the
experiment!

Last night I was listening to GW3UEP beacon transmission, and he was barely
visible on Spectran at about 1930 utc, becoming clearly visible/audible by
about 2200 utc, but with deep QSB. I get the same effect with GI4DPE. What
sort of propagation are we seeing here...ground wave giving way to sky wave?
At these sort of frequencies, do we get E-layer reflection, or is the
propagation mode more similar to what happens on 137 kHz?

73, Dave G3WCB IO91RM

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
[mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]On Behalf Of Alan Melia
Sent: 14 May 2007 23:28
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: LF: Re: [500] Dead Band?


Hi Dave
It that was you, you were obscenely strong here :-)) no-one should be
allowed to be that strong with 100mW !! it was 40dB above the nose
here.....not many get that high on 500k.

Yes I dont think the "static" travels quite so far or so well as on 136, the
nearest was south-western France of the eastern German boarder....more
attenuation in daylight as well.

Cheers de Alan G3NYK


----- Original Message -----
From: Dave G3WCB <ganymede444@btopenworld.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: 14 May 2007 21:01
Subject: LF: [500] Dead Band?


> Ah, sorry.. That was probably me!
>
> I spent the week-end listening on 137 kHz, and have just re-set my antenna
> for this band. 137 kHz was pretty much wiped out because of high static
> levels. Strangely, 500 kHz seems to be affected less by T-storm static
than
> 137 kHz.
>
> 73, Dave G3WCB IO91RM
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]On Behalf Of Alan Melia
> Sent: 14 May 2007 19:53
> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> Subject: LF: Re: Dead Band?
>
>
> There is a strong carrier on 503.33 I think it must be G3UNT from the
> strength.
>
> Alan G3NYK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <G3vtt@aol.com>
> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Sent: 14 May 2007 19:36
> Subject: LF: Dead Band?
>
>
> >
> > I am calling CQ just below 502. Not a sausage around tonight apart from
> > G3YVF testing his loft antenna for 502!
> >
> > Anybody around tonight?
> >
> >
> >
> > G3VTT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>