Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9386 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2003 09:13:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO netmail00.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.218) by mailstore with SMTP; 27 Sep 2003 09:13:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 16863 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2003 09:13:53 -0000 X-Filtered-by: Plusnet (hmail v1.01) X-Spam-detection-level: 11 Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by netmail00.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 27 Sep 2003 09:13:49 -0000 X-Fake-Domain: majordom Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1A3B6y-0000ia-6o for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:11:32 +0100 Received: from [212.135.6.14] (helo=smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1A3B6t-0000iR-Tj for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:11:27 +0100 Received: from tnt-1-51.easynet.co.uk ([195.40.206.51] helo=bryan2) by smarthost4.mail.uk.easynet.net with smtp (Exim 4.10) id 1A3B6s-00099I-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:11:27 +0100 X-Bad-Message-ID: no DNS (bryan2) Message-ID: <002101c384d7$5025de80$33ce28c3@bryan2> From: "captbrian" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:10:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re. WD2XDW Beacon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 required=5.0tests=ORIGINAL_MESSAGE,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 X-Spam-Rating: 2 Agreed absolutely. I use the HF beacon chain for just that purpose and I thank all beacon providers. Bryan -----Original Message----- From: Dave Pick To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: 27 September 2003 08:10 Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re. WD2XDW Beacon >True indeed. > >But without the beacon tests we wouldn't know whether a QSO was possible or >when was the best time to try for one. >When I first started on LF G3XTZ had a QRP beacon on 24/7 which I could >barely detect. After a series of incremental improvements I had it solid 57. >It gives people a signal to listen for and therefore encourages activity >(receive activity, maybe, but activity of some kind!). > >73 >Dave G3YXM > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "captbrian" >To: >Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 6:23 AM >Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re. WD2XDW Beacon > > >> Hearing a beacon is nice but it is not communication. Communication >requires >> that a message be sent and a reply received. Just my view of course. >> >> Bryan - G3GVB >> -----Original Message----- >> From: hamilton mal >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Date: 26 September 2003 21:10 >> Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re. WD2XDW Beacon >> >> >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: "John Andrews" >> >To: >> >Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 11:11 AM >> >Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re. WD2XDW Beacon >> > >> > >> >> I in no way associate myself with G3KEV's response to my message. >> >> >> >> John Andrews, W1TAG >> >> >> >> >> >We both reached the same conclusion. I agree no association please. >> >de G3KEV >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> > > > >