Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 14:09:57 +0200
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
From: Dick Rollema <dickrollema@casema.nl>
In-Reply-To: <004f01c783a3$90374e40$8b128351@w4o8m9>
References: <c02.1296bc3d.33463a7a@aol.com>
 <004f01c783a3$90374e40$8b128351@w4o8m9>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20070422120902.C696D588F@mta-fe.casema.nl>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: More QRM from DLF and DCF39
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

Dear LF Group,

I also notice DCF 39 burst sidebands spreading into "our" band.  It 
also seems to me they sound more aggressive than before.

I measure its field strength at 2.4mV/m. It used to be 2 mV/m but the 
difference is too small to draw conclusions as regarding radiated power.

73, Dick PA0SE
JO22GD

At 01:28 21-4-2007, you wrote:
>Dear Markus, LF Group,
>
>I have just liberated my computer from other duties to have a look for
>EW6GB, and I seem to be hearing the DCF 39 extra-wide sidebands at around
>137.7kHz here in the UK. The Hungarian "DCF" station has been putting
>audible sidebands into the lower end of the band for some time, but this is
>the first time I have noticed audible sidebands of the data bursts at the
>upper end of the band as well!
>
>Cheers, Jim Moritz
>73 de M0BMU
>
>
>...My unconfirmed assumption is that the modulation parameters of DCF39 have
>been changed towards even less pulse shaping. But an occupied bandwidth of
>3.8 kHz for a 200 bd FSK signal would seem rather ridiculous! I would be
>keen to know whether others are also seeing the annoying sidebands, and if
>anyone in the group has contact information to the DCF transmitter operators
>on site.
>
>
>73 and Happy Easter,
>Markus, DF6NM