Message-ID: <002d01cbcb72$87e2f760$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
From: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <00c301cbcb04$b57989a0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf><AANLkTim2VEtkiobqX=dgj_y8bkLG=MV4hg9u0+p7j21d@mail.gmail.com><00dd01cbcb0a$b7f1f4f0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf><AANLkTimQd7=M6O-uLrTP+ECOxXiitE4DKCYmEn5a7vxJ@mail.gmail.com><00eb01cbcb0d$6a82ee10$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <AANLkTim+Zz_0xum_b=rnBhcfuOKDSt-AQ7k8Q1Sor5h8@mail.gmail.com> <012001cbcb15$e63c14c0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <433CFC410770450186BB307A8AD28484@JimPC>
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 11:38:27 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: LF: Re: Re:  CQ WW
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Jim
Are u still active on 137.
The freq area 136.177 seems to be a problem in the USA from QRM, maybe the
old freq of 136.318 would be better and why was it changed?
I said at the time keep it as it is.
de mal/g3kev

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 2:46 AM
Subject: LF: Re: CQ WW


> Dear Warren, Mal, LF Group,
>
> I took the opportunity of your sked to try simultaneous reception of the
Eu
> / NA QRSS windows - really, I was hoping G3XDV would be transmitting as
> well, since he is only about 11km from me and would be a good challenge
for
> the receiver. I think it is possible by carefully adjusting the various
> gains to reduce the "splatter" caused by such a local signal to allow the
> copy of relatively DX signals within a few hertz. This didn't happen, but
I
> was able to simultaneously receive WD2XGJ, G3KEV, PA0A, RA3AGC and DF6NM.
> The attachment shows signals from about 2245 - 0112utc; it is screen shots
> from two instances of SpecLab edited together, and the scroll rate was
> increased at about 0000, which is why the time markers don't match up
> perfectly.
>
> Concerning QSOs in QRSS with very long dot periods, I think this shows how
> it is most important to agree the format and the protocol for the QSO
before
> starting. I think the generally accepted format goes something like:
>
> XGJ KEV K (for a sked, or CQ KEV K for a random QSO, repeat as necessary)
> ...then...
> KEV XGJ O K
> XGJ KEV R O K
> KEV XGJ R TU SK ...(end of QSO)
>
> It is probably best to decide from experience who is likely to be the
weaker
> received signal, and for that station to make the initial calls, since
then
> subsequent overs are most likely to succeed. If one station fails to
> completely receive an over, they should repeat their previous over so that
> the other station can repeat also. Some will insist that complete
callsigns
> should be used for the initial overs, but I think most agree on the
> abbreviated calls, especially for a sked. Some people omit the "K" at the
> end of an over, or substitute an "E", but I think this is a bad idea
because
> under marginal conditions it is harder to tell when the other station has
> stopped transmitting.
>
> Hope this is helpful - better luck next time!
>
> Cheers, Jim Moritz
> 73 de M0BMU
>