Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mk12.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mk12.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.97.144]) by air-db04.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDB042-861e4d39ffad196; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 16:50:37 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mk12.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 9FEB3380026C6; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 16:50:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1PgOrR-0007nD-Mn for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:49:37 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1PgOrR-0007n4-5I for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:49:37 +0000 Received: from blu0-omc1-s15.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.26]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PgOrP-0000s5-Aw for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:49:36 +0000 Received: from BLU146-W24 ([65.55.116.8]) by blu0-omc1-s15.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:49:28 -0800 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [138.32.32.166] From: Laurence KL7UK To: Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 12:49:27 -0900 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <004a01cbb99f$182a38f0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> References: <004a01cbb99f$182a38f0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jan 2011 21:49:28.0408 (UTC) FILETIME=[13E36580:01CBB9B5] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_554be2fa-3397-40d8-aeb4-94b2affebe62_" Subject: RE: LF: Alpha benchmark 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=FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD,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 x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d61904d39ffa56dd2 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) --_554be2fa-3397-40d8-aeb4-94b2affebe62_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Can we get a say 24 hour plot of Alphas/ signal to noise for your locatio= n Mal please? Id be very interested to see how quiet your location is. =20 Cheers =20 From: g3kevmal@talktalk.net To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:12:05 +0000 Subject: LF: Alpha benchmark vlf As a guide for those interested in VLF 9 Khz it would be useful if each st= ation could use the Alpha station on 11905 Khz as a benchmark for quality= of reception. and let us all know hown efficient their RX system is. In my case using an inv L 150 metres total length not resonated the report= is minus 60 dB with a sig over noise of 25 dB. This seems an acceptable= system for 9 Khz reception. I can do better by resonating the antenna, or using my 136 antenna system= re-resonated for 9 Khz=20 I get the impression that at some locations receiving is a problem, for va= rious reasons including noise from being in the middle of a Urban environm= ent. Can we have some data. de mal/g3kev =20 =3D --_554be2fa-3397-40d8-aeb4-94b2affebe62_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Can we get a say 24 hour plot of Alphas/ signal to noise for yo= ur location Mal please? Id be very interested to see how quiet your locati= on is.

Cheers

From: g3kevmal@talktalk.net
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date:= Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:12:05 +0000
Subject: LF: Alpha benchmark

vlf

As a guide for those interested in VLF 9= Khz it would be useful if each station could use the Alpha station on 119= 05 Khz as a benchmark for quality of reception.

and let us all know hown efficient their= RX system is.

In my case using an inv L 150 metres tota= l length not resonated the report is minus 60 dB with a sig over= noise of 25 dB. This seems an acceptable system for 9 Khz reception.

I can do better by resonating the antenna= , or using my 136 antenna system re-resonated for 9 Khz

I get the impression that at some locatio= ns receiving is a problem, for various reasons including noise from being= in the middle of a Urban environment.

Can we have some data.

de mal/g3kev

= =3D --_554be2fa-3397-40d8-aeb4-94b2affebe62_--