X-GM-THRID: 1240120713340264904 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.78.172.10 with SMTP id u10cs613356hue; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.82.136.4 with SMTP id j4mr11877403bud.1182754196313; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h6si13241221nfh.2007.06.24.23.49.50; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:49:56 -0700 (PDT) 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) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1I2iLH-00030E-3x for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 07:46:31 +0100 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1I2iLG-000305-DE for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 07:46:30 +0100 Received: from mk-filter-2-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.100.53]) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <500kcs@uku.co.uk>) id 1I2iLF-0007Tn-1P for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 07:46:30 +0100 X-SBRS: -2.9 X-RemoteIP: 80.225.181.84 X-Cloudmark-SP-Filtered: true X-Cloudmark-SP-Result: v=1.0 c=0 a=lCbXUKvpAAAA:8 a=M87nDvfDojGf0FxxLD8A:9 a=E3ex7u-GRqWrWfQbeY8A:7 a=5ja_kGqpb3yWuMBM38jGZ9bXa48A:4 a=5BfkrsLm-ifVaGy8V7IA:9 a=l3cP8-tEW0KsHtpySnEA:7 a=xBcHAaWInbErSXifYMpvJDCCbUgA:4 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8/AIYBf0ZQ4bVUR2dsb2JhbACCLDWGHA6BPoRJAQE/AQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.16,458,1175468400"; d="scan'208,217";a="3838796" Received: from ppp-3-84.leed-b-1.access.uk.tiscali.com (HELO o) ([80.225.181.84]) by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with SMTP; 25 Jun 2007 07:45:30 +0100 Message-ID: <002201c7b6f4$944bcea0$54b5e150@o> From: "Gw3UEP" <500kcs@uku.co.uk> To: References: <001101c7b632$d5a7ea40$5cd9e150@o> <467E3B0D.40309@ukonline.co.uk> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 07:45:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: 500; RFI source captured... Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001B_01C7B6FC.D2A63430" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1261 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C7B6FC.D2A63430 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok Peter - Thanks for info. Heard this one at ~ 1mile, at its worst. Rog. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Peter Dodd=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 10:36 AM Subject: Re: LF: 500; RFI source captured... Interesting! I have been plagued by a similar QRM for over three years, which seems=20 to be centred on the 14MHz band. It is distributed over an area of a couple of miles mainly by the=20 telephone lines. I have had a description of this QRM on my website for=20 some time now but no one has been able to identify it as yet. It has=20 even been described in the the EMC column in RadCom and has still not=20 been identified. I would appreciate any help on this matter. All details can be found on=20 my website (including wav files) - click on QRM REPORT on the index page = to be found at http://web.ukonline.co.uk/g3ldo or from Google enter g3ldo, click G3LDO Index. In the meantime I will check all wall warts Regards Peter G3LDO Gw3UEP wrote: > Failed Wart: Post Mortem... > Its dc-o/p is modulated with 100pps pulses. These contain an RF-burst=20 > envelope, chirping from MF to HF. > System had been working fine for 3yrs - then owner lost sync & B/B=20 > connection; village became qrm hot-spot via BT-lines. > The routers appeared to be powered-up as normal - hours had been spent = > arguing with BT who were oblivious to the problem. > Confusingly, the routers had been tested elsewhere & were ok. It=20 > finally emerged that a spare/second wart had been used for these = tests. > Rog. > =20 ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C7B6FC.D2A63430 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok Peter - Thanks for info.  Heard = this one at=20 ~ 1mile, at its worst.
Rog.
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Peter = Dodd=20
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: LF: 500; RFI source captured...

Interesting!
I have been plagued by a similar QRM for = over=20 three years, which seems
to be centred on the 14MHz band.
It is=20 distributed over an area of a couple of miles mainly by the =
telephone lines.=20 I have had a description of this QRM on my website for
some time now = but no=20 one has been able to identify it as yet. It has
even been described = in the=20 the EMC column in RadCom and has still not
been identified.
I = would=20 appreciate any help on this matter. All details can be found on
my = website=20 (including wav files) - click on QRM REPORT on the index page
to be = found=20 at
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/g3ldo<= /A>

or=20 from Google enter g3ldo,  click G3LDO Index.

In the meantime = I will=20 check all wall warts

Regards

Peter G3LDO


Gw3UEP = wrote:
> Failed Wart: Post Mortem...
> Its dc-o/p is = modulated with=20 100pps pulses. These contain an RF-burst
> envelope, chirping = from MF to=20 HF.
> System had been working fine for 3yrs - then owner lost sync = &=20 B/B
> connection; village became qrm hot-spot via = BT-lines.
> The=20 routers appeared to be powered-up as normal - hours had been spent =
>=20 arguing with BT who were oblivious to the problem.
> Confusingly, = the=20 routers had been tested elsewhere & were ok.  It
> = finally=20 emerged that a spare/second wart had been used for these tests.
>=20 Rog.


------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C7B6FC.D2A63430--