Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-di02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 95C1938000093; Sun, 2 Sep 2012 18:13:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1T8IP2-0002Cr-AE for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2012 23:12:24 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1T8IP1-0002Ci-Ug for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2012 23:12:23 +0100 Received: from nina.ucs.mun.ca ([134.153.232.76]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1T8IOz-0003VW-Am for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2012 23:12:22 +0100 Received: from plato.ucs.mun.ca (plato.ucs.mun.ca [134.153.232.153]) by nina.ucs.mun.ca (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q82MCHMq024665 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2012 19:42:17 -0230 Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2012 19:42:17 -0230 (NDT) From: jcraig@mun.ca X-X-Sender: jcraig@plato.ucs.mun.ca To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org In-Reply-To: <2EF53A3E645341B3BD7233250660338E@AGB> Message-ID: References: <000001cd8810$7b23f220$716bd660$@com> <002d01cd8853$3f197af0$bd4c70d0$@com> <68C1B4735C85472DA442B70F4963742A@AGB> <000001cd88d1$4ce8a5b0$e6b9f110$@com> <2EF53A3E645341B3BD7233250660338E@AGB> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MUN-Disclaimer: http://www.mun.ca/cc/policies/elect_communications_disclaimer_2012.php X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) 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: Dear Group, Thank-you to all who provided reports: GW0EZY, F1DTL, W1TAG, G4WGT and DF6NM to whom I apologise for not having phase coherent keying! I will give this some thought, along with Grahams suggestion to try the pencil method of lowering the QRG. Perhaps it might be best to keep searching for a caesium standard to use with a synthesiser. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.2 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.2 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 7aa9ad08848e488e22e0ff1d71f4ef1d Subject: Re: LF: VO1NA Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=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-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1da6065043da0e55db X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Dear Group, Thank-you to all who provided reports: GW0EZY, F1DTL, W1TAG, G4WGT and DF6NM to whom I apologise for not having phase coherent keying! I will give this some thought, along with Grahams suggestion to try the pencil method of lowering the QRG. Perhaps it might be best to keep searching for a caesium standard to use with a synthesiser. The present reference is an OCXO at 13.7770 MHz which was last calibrated against the LORAN sidebands. Some RX antenna work was completed today so the RX will be on for OPERA32 on 136.00 kHz. 73 and thanks again. Joe VO1NA This electronic communication is governed by the terms and conditions at http://www.mun.ca/cc/policies/electronic_communications_disclaimer_2012.php