Return-Path: Received: from mtain-dk03.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-dk03.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.180.7]) by air-mb01.mail.aol.com (v129.10) with ESMTP id MAILINMB013-a1874dbaab8e3d8; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 08:14:06 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dk03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 20BED380000E9; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 08:14:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1QFmZJ-0006K2-Kh for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:13:09 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1QFmZJ-0006Jt-1U for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:13:09 +0100 Received: from mail-wy0-f171.google.com ([74.125.82.171]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1QFmZH-00054P-Fj for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:13:09 +0100 Received: by wyb32 with SMTP id 32so4176865wyb.16 for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 05:13:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer :in-reply-to:message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version; bh=MhAlzEN3ogiA1VnmDyeGoiDVr7tZH4KkU+/PhN3A6LA=; b=VSbdYKyjAVJAaTKPhMg4m6knPNpgf6LrZbIfjDXbSQ5b00gecbYePeE57OEbsBQgaz JBdytJS2/ChtpE7B0t89giOnP3yVI3d0Y+EAJrYLW9qUTpgrAbus0MRi70A+gfwHCW2N sqW4XqKbsB8H0WSlDccdBjoRmu+IGi/zxMalc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; b=vpMlmKNh58lsjWBixXMvDc4d6SIMsoLPNZ1bvwk9JVxQviO9JPCg/4niZ4YdfYgIM2 DUyFVsq4KNgSFV9uahwe4Kfd309AwsFJ57gVlWnNwDryuKFw6FRTJpubWCmnwhcc/mSs 8mLyspAPh7HjVgxH93ObeTg6SZT1ZuYjReZhM= Received: by 10.216.62.74 with SMTP id x52mr7401wec.45.1304079180439; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 05:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (cpc3-cmbg14-0-0-cust445.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com [213.106.93.190]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d6sm1332773wer.26.2011.04.29.05.12.57 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 29 Apr 2011 05:12:59 -0700 (PDT) References: <001001cc05c9$a2882ae0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <002201cc05d6$01561260$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <574249.39593.qm@web28107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> From: Roger Lapthorn X-Mailer: iPod Mail (8F190) In-Reply-To: <574249.39593.qm@web28107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-Id: Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:13:27 +0100 To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPod Mail 8F190) DomainKey-Status: good (testing) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: QRP Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-3--645500395 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=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m283.1 ; domain : gmail.com DKIM : pass x-aol-sid: 3039ac1db4074dbaab8b0788 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --Apple-Mail-3--645500395 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I agree Pete. Mal's signal would be a very welcome one on 8.97kHz and the= thing preventing many of us VLF enthusiasts from TXing (other than by ear= th mode) is lack of space for a credible antenna.=20 Mal, are you game to give it a go? 73s Roger G3XBM Via my 2.4GHz handheld (iPod Touch 4g) On 29 Apr 2011, at 12:55, M0FMT wrote: > Hi Mal and LF > =20 > Too bad Mal you have a good set up to radiate on 9kc/s to help the inter= est in this part of the spectrum. Most can not TX on that band because the= y just do not have the space with an excellent antenna. There are a fair= number of people in UK who have invested in good RX systems that will wor= k in limited space with a small antennas on VLF. IMHO VLF will never be li= ke a highly populated band like the HF bands but it has it's followers lik= e the number of reports SAQ gets every time it transmits. I would like to= try to receive a signal from the Scarborough area approx 190miles North= of here.=20 > =20 > 73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX >=20 >=20 > From: mal hamilton > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: Thu, 28 April, 2011 19:56:38 > Subject: Re: LF: QRP >=20 > Markus > I have made it quite clear that presently I am not interested in Transmi= tting on 9 khz and if I did you would certainly hear me. > I am told that I have the strongest signal on 137 and 500 khz from EU an= d the same would apply if I could be bothered to TX on 9 khz. > Some years ago there was over 30 countries active on 137 CW and now it= is down to just a few, 500 khz is likewise not worth the effort anymore= and 9 khz is not worth the effort as far as I am concerned. > 73 de mal/g3kev > =20 > =20 > =20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Markus Vester > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 7:10 PM > Subject: Re: LF: QRP >=20 > Righto Mal - so when will we finally see a decent 9 kHz signal from that= famous Scarborough antenna? > =20 > 73, Markus (DF6NM) >=20 > From: mal hamilton > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 7:28 PM > To: rsgb > Subject: LF: QRP >=20 > Why do some insist on flogging QRP on the LF bands. The object should be= to generate a signal that all can hear or see. > QRO is more appropriate on the lower frequencies otherwise the RX operat= or has a hard time digging the signal out of the noise. > The TX operator puts no effort into the exercise. QRP and Earth mode equ= ally disaster for those making an effort to detect signals on LF. > I leave gas pipe and electic wire underground propagation to the local= gas/el installer and do not believe all you see on twitter and tweet > by others. > G3KEV > =20 > =20 --Apple-Mail-3--645500395 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
I agree Pete. Mal's signal would be a very welcome one on 8.97kHz and the thing preventing many of us VLF enthusiasts from TXing (other than by earth mode) is lack of space for a credible antenna. 

Mal, are you game to give it a go?

73s
Roger G3XBM

Via my 2.4GHz handheld (iPod Touch 4g)

On 29 Apr 2011, at 12:55, M0FMT <m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Hi Mal and LF
 
Too bad Mal you have a good set up to radiate on 9kc/s to help the interest in this part of the spectrum. Most can not TX on that band because they just do not have the space with an excellent antenna. There are a fair number of people in UK who have invested in good RX systems that will work in limited space with a small antennas on VLF. IMHO VLF will never be like a highly populated band like the HF bands but it has it's followers like the number of reports SAQ gets every time it transmits. I would like to try to receive a signal from the Scarborough area approx 190miles North of here.
 
73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX


From: mal hamilton <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Thu, 28 April, 2011 19:56:38
Subject: Re: LF: QRP

Markus
I have made it quite clear that presently I am not interested in Transmitting on 9 khz and if I did you would certainly hear me.
I am told that I have the strongest signal on 137 and 500 khz from EU and the same would apply if I could be bothered to TX on 9 khz.
Some years ago there was over 30 countries active on 137 CW and now it is down to just a few, 500 khz is likewise not worth the effort anymore and 9 khz is not worth the effort as far as I am concerned.
73 de mal/g3kev
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: LF: QRP

Righto Mal - so when will we finally see a decent 9 kHz signal from that famous Scarborough antenna?
 
73, Markus (DF6NM)

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 7:28 PM
To: rsgb
Subject: LF: QRP

Why do some insist on flogging QRP on the LF bands. The object should be to generate a signal that all can hear or see.
QRO is more appropriate on the lower frequencies otherwise the RX operator has a hard time digging the signal out of the noise.
The TX operator puts no effort into the exercise. QRP and Earth mode equally disaster for those making an effort to detect signals on LF.
I leave gas pipe and electic wire underground propagation to the local gas/el installer and do not believe all you see on twitter and tweet
by others.
G3KEV
 
 
--Apple-Mail-3--645500395--