Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
Message-ID: <4407287F.8000306@freenet.de>
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 17:16:47 +0000
From: Wolf DL4YHF <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:  rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <PAEFLMFGBDKKCONLMLBIKEOMCFAA.ganymede444@btopenworld.com> <01cd01c63d73$69bc4f80$0300a8c0@LAPTOP>
In-Reply-To: <01cd01c63d73$69bc4f80$0300a8c0@LAPTOP>
Subject: Re: LF: LORAN spurious emission levels
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

Hello Peter,

Would a "relative" level indication be helpful too ? I have no 
calibrated measuring equipment, all I can measure is how many dB's 
weaker a particular Loran line is compared to the DCF39 . But I think 
others will be able to provide more meaningful measurements, but if 
anything else fails I can make such measurements next weekend. Besides 
this, in the local QRM I cannot hear Loran; I can only see it in the 
spectrum.

Cheers,
   Wolf  DL4YHF.


Peter Martinez schrieb:

>> From Peter G3PLX:
>
>
> Does anyone have any information about the actual level of spurious 
> emission from the LORAN transmitters in the 136kHz band?  The only 
> specification I know of says something like the out-of-band power 
> shall be less that 1% of the total, but what I would love to know is 
> if anyone has actually put numbers on the levels of the individual 
> spectral lines we can hear. What is their e.m.r.p?  This would be a 
> useful receiver sensitivity calibration feature.
>
> 73
> Peter
>
>
>