Return-Path: Received: from mtain-ma12.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-ma12.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.96.20]) by air-mc04.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMC041-a92e4cdfbd22c4; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 05:42:42 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma12.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 3635B38000052; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 05:42:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1PHa1L-0002LG-K0 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:41:15 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1PHa1L-0002L7-7G for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:41:15 +0000 Received: from mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.47]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PHa1K-0003GS-1w for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:41:15 +0000 Received: from aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20101114104107.PJIA26766.mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:41:07 +0000 Received: from [192.168.2.33] (really [82.5.252.15]) by aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.3.00.04.00 201-2196-133-20080908) with ESMTP id <20101114104107.UZZX25842.aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@[192.168.2.33]> for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:41:07 +0000 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:41:02 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4CDFBCBE.5787.60D7DE@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> In-reply-to: <4CDF089E.4090604@gmx.de> References: <4CDEC5B8.17075.79A05A@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com>, <4CDF089E.4090604@gmx.de> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41) Content-description: Mail message body X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=JvdXmxIgLJv2/GthKqHpGJEEHukvLcvELVXUanXFreg= c=1 sm=0 a=rZbJn9Vgt5UA:10 a=9YlaCzn6_68A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=I_2eLozmAAAA:8 a=f30uZTO_o-_Lz1-BLzoA:9 a=7N2FYiMPw-trClJ2Tx8xyqjEspYA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: LF: Eu QRSS freq. Was 'XDV QRSS60 137k' Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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: 3039ac1d60144cdfbd1f6321 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 > In the past EU QRSS beacons were transmitting in the 137.32 range. > Did this changed? I think I missed something.- > 73 > Hartmut > www.h-wolff.de Hartmut, You are right. In the past I have strongly argued that Eu beacons should be in that part of the band. However, the reality is that no- one is listening there (apart from a couple of Eu grabbers). There are grabbers in Alaska, Western Canada, Japan and Eastern Russia but not one covers the 136.320kHz sub-band. That sub-band was originally created when there were many Eu (mostly UK) stations chasing QSOs and reports from the east coast of America - there were even several Canadians capable of two-way QSOs. The idea of the split frequency was that these QSOs should not cause QRM to each other. Now there are very few Eu stations interested in DX working, and seemingly no east coast American stations routinely monitoring. I try not to QRM those Eu stations who are monitoring for US and Russian beacons. This is achieved by not beaconing every day, and by not beaconing continuously (which is why I synchronise each transmission with the start of each hour). My frequency is much lower than most US and Russian beacons. I have also announced that if my transmissions cause anyone any problems, I will close down. In practice, unless the receiving station is within about 150km of me there is little chance of real QRM - last night EW6GB was fully readable just 0.2Hz HF of me on the grabbers of DF6NM and OE3GHB. There is still a use for the Eu DX sub-band during two-way DX QSOs, or tests involving lots of activity. I will be the first to use it again if any DX stations are prepared to monitor it. Does anyone else have a view on this? Mike, G3XDV ==========