Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mi09.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mi09.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.21.131.167]) by air-dd02.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDD024-86aa4ca9d86035d; Mon, 04 Oct 2010 09:36:32 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mi09.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id B9C14380000D0; Mon, 4 Oct 2010 09:36:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1P2lBm-0000q4-TV for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2010 14:34:46 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1P2lBm-0000pv-82 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2010 14:34:46 +0100 Received: from thsbbfxrt01p.thalesgroup.com ([192.54.144.131]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1P2lBj-0006hL-Nm for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2010 14:34:46 +0100 Received: from thsbbfxrt01p.thalesgroup.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C03359A31F for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2010 15:34:37 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3558_1286199277_4CA9D7ED_3558_30396_1_92F6B0CB5F307544B1F54305F95265AB5A850B@API.clb.tcfr.thales> From: Jean-Louis.RAULT@fr.thalesgroup.com To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2010 15:34:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,FORGED_MUA_IMS=1.198,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,NO_REAL_NAME=0.55 Subject: RE: VLF: VLF at different locations and QRN as a function of dayt ime Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CB63C8.E0ED5187" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.5 required=5.0 tests=CELL_PHONE_BOOST, FORGED_MUA_IMS,HTML_20_30,HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_MESSAGE, NO_REAL_NAME 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 x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039400cded14ca9d85e33ca X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none ------_=_NextPart_001_01CB63C8.E0ED5187 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Daniele =20 It's not a shame to be "only registered as SWL" ... =20 An efficient SWL is much more valuable than a bunch of idle licenced opera= tors :o) =20 Jean-Louis F6AGR _____ =20 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@black= sheep.org] On Behalf Of Daniele Tincani Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 2:57 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Daniele Tincani Cc: Renato Romero; Paul; rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: VLF: VLF at different locations and QRN as a function of dayt= ime Hello Stefan, VLF, =20 frankly speaking, it is still unbelievable to me that I was able to catch= a faint trace of your signal and see it appearing on my PC. This is becau= se of the intense hum at my location and the unsophisticated reception sys= tem that I use. Anyway, I'm glad to read your opinion that the screenshot= I captured was really showing your tx :-) I'm also interested in supporting your idea of collecting information abou= t local QRN at different locations. I'm aways looking for simple-to-build= solutions for improving my setup. May be some helpful information could= emerge from this data analysis you are proposing. For the time being, these are the information you have requested: the loca= tor is JN53EM. As for the callsign, I'm sorry, I haven't one. I'm only "re= gistered" as a SWL and my identifier is I0169LI (http://www.qrz.com/db/I01= 69LI/ ). =20 Cheers Daniele _____ =20 From: Stefan Sch=E4fer To: Daniele Tincani Cc: Renato Romero ; Paul ; rsgb= _lf_group@blacksheep.org Sent: Mon, October 4, 2010 1:43:28 PM Subject: VLF: VLF at different locations and QRN as a function of daytime Hi Daniele, VLF, Congrats to your successful VLF reception! :-) If you compare your receive= d signal to that of Renato Romero, it is not much weaker. Since Renatos An= tenna is excellent, i assume the low S/N is caused either by local QRN in= Italy or simply by the propagation. If i remember correctly, in my 3rd ex= periment, Renatos reception was one of the best of all! So maybe we should= /could learn something about the VLF propagation between Germany and Italy= , above the alps. I think the lower S/N is not (only) due to the presence= of the alps! All this is very interesting :-) There is still no reception in Italy on 6470 Hz (46 km band), sadly. It is= just because of my mistake with the generator :-( At least 2 hours of TX= time was lost :-( Ok, never mind... Maybe 6470 Hz is much more suitable to cross the alps. We will check this= in the next experiment i would say? :-) 6470 Hz has many advantages i think, at least if the mains hum at a given= RX location is about at equal or less strength than on 8970 Hz. I have ob= served that the (day)time of low QRN is much longer there. Another questio= n is how the S/N as a function of time behaves. Attached you see a capture= of my 'wideband' grabber window of the last sunday (including those nervi= ng horizontal local QRM lines). You can see the frequency region of the ma= ximum sferics level is changing with daytime. On 8970 Hz it is 'dark' from= 7...12 UTC but on 6470 Hz it is 'dark' from 7...17 UTC. Maybe some VLF receiving OMs can record their 'wideband' window on their= own location and we can share the results. This makes it easyer the compa= re the situation of various locations :-) And we could discuss about the= best time for a transmission either on 33 km or on 46 km to reach a given= location. Daniele, can you tell me your call and locator? I want to set up a list of= the successful VLF receptions :-) 73, Stefan/DK7FC ------_=_NextPart_001_01CB63C8.E0ED5187 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Daniele
 
It's not a shame to be "only registered= as=20 SWL" ...
 
An efficient SWL is much more valuable th= an a bunch of idle=20 licenced operators  :o)
 
Jean-Louis F6AGR

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep= .org=20 [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Daniele= =20 Tincani
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 2:57 PM
To:= =20 rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Daniele Tincani
Cc: Renato Romer= o;=20 Paul; rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: VLF: VLF at=20 different locations and QRN as a function of daytime

http://www.qrz.com/db/I0169LI/).
 
Cheers
Daniele
From: Stefan Sch=E4fer= =20 <schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
To: Daniele Tincani=20 <daniele.tincani@alice.it>
Cc: Renato Romero <contact@vlf.it>;=20 Paul <paul@abelian.netcom.co.uk>;=20 rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Mon, October 4, 2010 1:43:28=20 PM
Subject: VLF: VLF= at=20 different locations and QRN as a function of daytime

Hi Da= niele,=20 VLF,

Congrats to your successful VLF reception! :-) If you compar= e your=20 received signal to that of Renato Romero, it is not much weaker. Since= Renatos=20 Antenna is excellent, i assume the low S/N is caused either by local QRN= in=20 Italy or simply by the propagation. If i remember correctly, in my 3rd= =20 experiment, Renatos reception was one of the best of all! So maybe we=20 should/could learn something about the VLF propagation between Germany= and=20 Italy, above the alps. I think the lower S/N is not (only) due to the pr= esence=20 of the alps! All this is very interesting :-)

There is still no= =20 reception in Italy on 6470 Hz (46 km band), sadly. It is just because of= my=20 mistake with the generator :-( At least 2 hours of TX time was lost :-(= Ok,=20 never mind...
Maybe 6470 Hz is much more suitable to cross the alps.= We=20 will check this in the next experiment i would say? :-)

6470 Hz= has=20 many advantages i think, at least if the mains hum at a given RX locatio= n is=20 about at equal or less strength than on 8970 Hz. I have observed that th= e=20 (day)time of low QRN is much longer there. Another question is how the= S/N as=20 a function of time behaves. Attached you see a capture of my 'wideband'= =20 grabber window of the last sunday (including those nerving horizontal lo= cal=20 QRM lines). You can see the frequency region of the maximum sferics leve= l is=20 changing with daytime. On 8970 Hz it is 'dark' from 7...12 UTC but on 64= 70 Hz=20 it is 'dark' from 7...17 UTC.

Maybe some VLF receiving OMs can re= cord=20 their 'wideband' window on their own location and we can share the resul= ts.=20 This makes it easyer the compare the situation of various locations :-)= And we=20 could discuss about the best time for a transmission either on 33 km or= on 46=20 km to reach a given location.

Daniele, can you tell me your call= and=20 locator? I want to set up a list of the successful VLF receptions=20 :-)

73,=20 Stefan/DK7FC



------_=_NextPart_001_01CB63C8.E0ED5187--