Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: "Laurence KL1X" <hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 11:19:26 -0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <Law15-F43lcYwYnSwX00001b93c@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: LF: Activity.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Sender: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Being an avid cw'er this would be my preference too, after all it was my job 
to send and receive the stuff for a number of years and it put bread on the 
table - but being in the boonies QRSS is really the only mode that is 
probable in being received here.

Saying that given another 30 dBs in signal improvement I might have been 
able to read Lauries CW signal last year. Never say never.

Beaconing may seem a waste for some but for propagation testing/research its 
a big plus for me. 2 Way of course is preferable, but Ill take any signal...

Its coming to that time of year when I welcome any CW or QRSS signal test 
from Europe/East Coast - link this with Geo/solar and weather activity it 
all adds up to another dot on the graph.

If theres one thing Ive learnt since being here its that LF propagation is 
far from boring -

So Ive opened up a few more receive windows and would welcome any activity 
before I have to pull down the tower.

Laurence KL1X - Anchorage


>From: "James Moritz" <J.R.Moritz@herts.ac.uk>
>Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
>Subject: RE: LF: Activity.
>Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:25:53 -0000
>
>Dear LF Group,
>
>One of the problems of CW operation on 136k is that there are not so
>many stations you can work, and after you have worked each of them
>several times, you run out of things to say to each other. So to get a
>high level of activity really needs new stations taking the plunge to
>get QRV on the band. But a sort of intermediate step is to have
>cross-band QSOs - between 136k and 80m or 40m (or 20m if you are getting
>really ambitious...). So if anyone who currently only has receive
>capability on LF would like to try a cross-band sked, please let me
>know.
>
>QRSS is not a huge technical leap for those who have never tried
>"digital modes" (it isn't really very digital of course) - the computer
>you are reading this e-mail on is probably perfectly capable of
>receiving QRSS, with the addition of an audio lead and some free
>software. Most people would prefer an aural CW signal, but many times
>this just isn't possible. QRSS certainly expands your horizons under
>these conditions. Having a rather nice audio spectrum analyser attached
>to your receiver is quite interesting too!
>
>Cheers, Jim Moritz
>73 de M0BMU
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Winterize your home with tips from MSN House & Home. 
http://special.msn.com/home/warmhome.armx