Message-ID: <4CF6C1E0.3000809@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 22:45:04 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?U3RlZmFuIFNjaMOkZmVy?= <schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <4CF65D62.21930.96EDB2@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> <4CF672A2.6040506@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <005001cb917a$15cb1720$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <63F0E942-FAC1-4DAF-911A-2BEEDD7995F1@gmail.com> <008c01cb918c$3a1f4d50$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
In-Reply-To: <008c01cb918c$3a1f4d50$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
Subject: Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


If someone starts to become on LF (or on any band) he cannot move=20
backwards! Each litte experiment (like resonating an antenna) is a=20
success! Reaching the neighbour in 3 km distance is a great success! No=20
need to compete with others! The personal success counts and everyone=20
can define for him selfe what a personal success means!

In 2002 i run a marathon (42.195 km) in 4:13 h:mm. How stupid would i am=
=20
if i would say "Even before 10s of years others run it 2 hours faster so=
=20
its no success"??????

Stefan/DK7FC



Am 01.12.2010 20:16, schrieb mal hamilton:
> Listen to experience and avoid moving backwards. Historically lots of
> records have been achieved this past several years on LF. I would encour=
age
> you and others to build on this experience and do something outstanding.
> You ought to be congratulated with your advancement on the Touch 4g
> technology.
> de mal/g3kev
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roger Lapthorn"<rogerlapthorn@gmail.com>
> To:<rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 6:09 PM
> Subject: Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers
>
>
> So why not QSY somewhere else in the spectrum Mal and teach yourself
> something new? Some of us here are still learning on LF for the first ti=
me,
> and can do without your "help".
>
> Roger G3XBM
>
> Sent from my iPod Touch 4g
>
> On 1 Dec 2010, at 17:06, "mal hamilton"<g3kevmal@talktalk.net>  wrote:
>
>   =20
>> I have some nice pics of my signal a few years back being received TA=
 at
>> QRS 3 on 137 Kcs also 500 Kcs last year.
>> also NC1K was able to copy G3KEV and MM0ALM on normal CW in the past.
>> When there was an abundance of acty on 137 a few years ago I could copy
>>     =20
> the
>   =20
>> USA stations on QRS1 and normal CW.
>> For those serious about TA qso's a well engineered station and elevated
>> antenna will do the trick without a struggle. There is no need for QRS
>> slower than 30 sec dot.
>> VE1JG was a big player in the past along with VE1ZZ and both  able to=
 copy
>> my CW
>> Many TA QSO'S have taken place in the past when there was lots of acty
>>     =20
> from
>   =20
>> the UK in particular. and I have made dozens of contacts especially aro=
und
>> this time of year. In the early days the USA had to reply xband usually
>>     =20
> for
>   =20
>> me on 7 Mcs because they did not have a permit for 137
>> At the present time some seem to be RE-INVENTING the wheel, obviously=
 not
>> reading past history about LF.
>> de Mal/G3KEV
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer"<Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
>> To:<rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:06 PM
>> Subject: Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers
>>
>>
>>     =20
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> Yes, some thoughts:
>>>
>>> Am 01.12.2010 15:36, schrieb Mike Dennison
>>>       =20
>>>> I believe the danger is to regard this as the 'optimum' speed for DX
>>>> working, simply because the S/N ratio is good.
>>>>         =20
>>> Is that really a danger?
>>>       =20
>>>>   In practice, there is
>>>> another factor in play. There is often rapid and deep fading on a DX
>>>> path, often resulting in only parts of letters being received at this
>>>> speed, even though the peak signal is quite strong (see many of the
>>>> pictures of transatlantic reception regularly posted on this group).
>>>>
>>>> The situation becomes worse if the final aim of experimenting with a
>>>> path is to have a two-way DX QSO. Even exchanging minimal
>>>> information, a QSO will take several hours, during which time the
>>>> conditions must hold up.
>>>>         =20
>>> When was the last real QSO done in QRSS>=3D 30? I rember the contact
>>> between VE7TIL and JA7NI but most of the active people are just
>>> transmitting a character (representing their callsign) in beacon mode.=
 I
>>> have never seen a "CQ ... K" in 60 or 120.
>>> So if one just wants to transmit a beacon signal it doesn't matter if
>>> there is some QSB. As an example, XGJ is monitored very often most of
>>> the nights. If the G would be lost (X_J)and in the next turn the J wou=
ld
>>> be lost (XG_), anyway everbody would know it't (XGJ). Furthermore the=
 DX
>>> interested OMs gets the confirmation on the other grabbers.
>>> If a QSO is wanted, i fully agree with your opinion. But a QSO means
>>> that both stations are sitting in front of the PC, so they can change
>>> the RX to the wanted QRSS/DFCW mode.
>>> Anyway, i am providing both QRSS-60 and QRSS-120 for TA and EU, so
>>> people may chosse what they like :-)
>>>       =20
>>>> Take a look at VE7TIL's excellent DCF39
>>>> graph to see how short a good DX opening usually is - perhaps an hour
>>>> if you are lucky.
>>>>         =20
>>> ...which wouldn't be enough for a (real) QSO in QRSS-60 but enough for
>>> "FC" or "NM" or "NI" in QRSS-120.
>>>       =20
>>>>
>>>> The very few who have had transatlantic QSOs have used QRSS30 or at
>>>> most QRSS60. I am not aware of a successful two-way involving a
>>>> longer dot length.
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest that DX beacons and grabbers use a =3Dmaximum=3D of=
 60s
>>>> dot length (though a second grabber screen could be provided for 120
>>>> etc if desired). In my opinion this would be more likely to result in
>>>> useful propagation data.
>>>>
>>>>         =20
>>> Done.
>>>       =20
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Mike, G3XDV
>>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>>>
>>>>         =20
>>> 73, Stefan
>>>
>>>       =20
>>
>>     =20
>
>   =20