Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mk03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 71FDA380000A5; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 02:35:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tigpd-00051r-L9 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:34:17 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tigpc-00051i-W0 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:34:16 +0000 Received: from mail.senselan.ch ([194.153.189.2]) by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tigpb-000585-7s for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:34:15 +0000 Received: (qmail 18778 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2012 07:33:54 -0000 Received: from webmail.senselan.ch (traumwandler@sensemail.ch@194.153.189.10) by mail.senselan.ch with ESMTPA; 12 Dec 2012 07:33:54 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 09:23:53 +0100 From: traumwandler@sensemail.ch To: In-Reply-To: <50C78875.5050005@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> References: <50C78875.5050005@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Message-ID: X-Sender: traumwandler@sensemail.ch User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.8.1 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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 Stefan Yes, it was me. Your signal was 599 here = 50uV and more than 40 dB above Noise in 100 Hz BW. That's why I called you in CW. You should really improve your RX situation. I'm sorry to say, but right now you are a big crocodile on the band ;-) 73 de Toni [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [194.153.189.2 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Scan-Signature: 2e2f7cbbe9f38dd7bf3fac4fc012e6fc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: HB9ASB 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: 3039ac1d618750c833c53fc8 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Stefan Yes, it was me. Your signal was 599 here = 50uV and more than 40 dB above Noise in 100 Hz BW. That's why I called you in CW. You should really improve your RX situation. I'm sorry to say, but right now you are a big crocodile on the band ;-) 73 de Toni >Preferred mode CW and SSB, no digital mode or similar computergames! > No fake QSO’s!< Am 11.12.2012 20:24, schrieb Stefan Schäfer: > Toni, > > I guess that was you, answering to my call in CW? Sorry, i didn't > listen to the band in that moment. The peak hold graph also indicates > that the S/N was to low for CW reception. This must have to do with > some new QRM in the background. The QRM interacts with the strength > of > HGA22. That's why expect that i will have much better LF reception > with my new RX concept which is on the plan since a longer time. > However i'm waiting for the mixer (SBL-3) from the US since several > weeks. Hopefully soon... > > 73, Stefan/DK7FC