Return-Path: Received: (qmail 328 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2003 20:43:03 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from marstons.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.223) by netmail00.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 12 Aug 2003 20:43:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 24442 invoked by uid 10001); 12 Aug 2003 20:43:02 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by marstons.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 12 Aug 2003 20:43:02 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-SQ: A Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 19mfyM-0000cw-Kc for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 21:42:26 +0100 Received: from [64.4.23.3] (helo=hotmail.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 19mfyI-0000cm-9R for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 21:42:22 +0100 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 13:41:50 -0700 Received: from 136.226.254.148 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:41:50 GMT X-Originating-IP: [136.226.254.148] X-Originating-Email: [hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com] From: "flo flo" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:41:50 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2003 20:41:50.0963 (UTC) FILETIME=[28482C30:01C36112] Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: BBC R4 LW "Frequency Standard" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.5 required=5.0tests=QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXTversion=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false ...and R4 is pretty weak here in Alaska too compared with its Eureopean counterparts across the Marche/channel (often some 20-30 dBs stronger) - Ive only managed to listen to cricket test match special on a few occasions - and the freq is shared in an NDB Canadian Beacon some 600 miles south too which doesnt help. R4 LW 198Khz in Aberdeen Scotland was appauling - and that why they had a MW relay...AM phase and all that... Given the Power differences in some of the European LW stations R4 is very much weaker than I would have imagined here, but, there are more than one variables that influence signals quality and strength. I presume the R4 LW station doesnt "beam" or does it? Given the "speed"/sheer of the particles in the ionosphere - and they would have to be moving quite fast; might we not see some blurring of phase from the two locked sources? Beacon ...and the WD2XDW beacon will be on from 0001Z on around 137.773Khzish until advised. I might get the locked freq source sorted tonight. The matching system is now under cover and no deterioation of aerial current has been seen. Around 2.3 amps. Laurence - rainy Anchorage >From: "Alan Melia" >Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >To: >Subject: LF: Re: Re: BBC R4 LW "Frequency Standard" >Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:30:48 +0100 > >Hi Hugh, yes I supose it would have some effect. The advantage is that all >the transmitters are under "atomic" control so there is almost a continuous >phase difference between their carriers. The "mush" area, I think, refers >mainly to the reception and demodulation of the AM program material. I >suppose within ground-wave range there is "beat" when the strengths from >Droitwich and say Westerglen are approximately the same ....the beat >frequency would not more than 0.00001Hz or about 1 cycle in 30 hours (I >hope >my thumbnail calcuation is right....but I sure someone will tell me if it >isn't). I dont expect that would give much problem but the path differences >from the different tranmitters might give some interesting effects at >distance. The only person I know who does monitor R4 is Laurence in >Anchorage. > >Cheers de Alan G3NYK >alan.melia@btinternet.com > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Hugh M0WYE" >To: >Sent: 12 August 2003 16:21 >Subject: LF: Re: BBC R4 LW "Frequency Standard" > > > > Hi Alan, Group, > > Interesting article about BBC R4 LW. > > > > Does the fact that there are multiple transmitters on this frequency >have > > any bearing on those who might use the 198kHz signal as a propagation > > indicator outside of the UK ? > > > > Presumably the interference pattern ("mush area") extends way beyond our > > shores, and someone monitoring, say in the 'States might receive a weak > > signal, not because there was no propagation, but because the two > > transmitters happened to be in cancellation. > > > > I assume the signals that we might use for reference, such as DCF39, >have > > only one source. > > > > 73 > > Hugh M0WYE > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Alan Melia" > > To: "LF-Group" > > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 3:57 PM > > Subject: LF: BBC R4 LW "Frequency Standard" > > > > > > > Hi All, I have posted the latest DTI Time & Frequency Club Newsletter >to > > my > > > web site. It contains a short description of the frequency control of >the > > > BBC Radio 4 Longwave transmitters on 198kHz, together with details of >the > > > phase modulation data service it also carries on the carrier. This >will >be > > > interesting information for those of you who, like me, may have a >198kHz > > > off-air standard in your workshop. > > > > > > Download of the 68kB pdf file is available from the link in the >contents > > > section on the index page. > > > http://www.alan.melia.btinternet.co.uk/ > > > > > > Cheers de Alan G3NYK > > > alan.melia@btinternet.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail