Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dk04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A2BB53800078B; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:29:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1RJSoY-0000a3-TQ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:28:22 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1RJSoY-0000Zu-E9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:28:22 +0100 Received: from out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.243]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1RJSoV-0004Kh-RJ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:28:22 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnABAPaFqU5cHYWR/2dsb2JhbABDmg1Djw2BBoFtBQEBBQgBAQNJAiwBAQMFAgEDEQQBAQolFAEEGgYWCAYTCgECAgEBBIdvBrUZiH4EgliEfp4W X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,413,1315177200"; d="scan'208,217";a="13647715" Received: from host-92-29-133-145.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.29.133.145]) by out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 27 Oct 2011 17:28:13 +0100 Message-ID: <003301cc94c5$6a6083c0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <4EA925BE.4030306@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:28:09 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: vo1na 27-10.jpg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0030_01CC94C5.6A29BC50" 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 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-SCORE: 0:2:507229504:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1db4084ea986f84b23 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01CC94C5.6A29BC50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stefan The majority of signals on LF es MF are suitable for a QSO but the = present culture seems to favour BEACONS, QRS MODE when it is not = necessary and QSL via Internet.=20 In the beginning it was all CW QSO mode and it worked FB.=20 I do not bother any more because it is a waste of time = listening/watching useless repeative part callsigns. It has all been done before and better so what are current operators = trying to achieve.=20 My suggestion is to get back to CW QSO mode, use QRS only under vy poor = propagation condx if you think it helps. Use LF es MF like all the other bands, HF es VHF where CW is the norm, = SSB as appropriate and likewise data modes. 73 de mal/g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Stefan Sch=E4fer=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 9:34 AM Subject: Re: LF: vo1na 27-10.jpg Hi Joe, LF,=20 Your signal in a QRSS-10 window. Would be suitable for a QSO :-)=20 http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/LF/10_402283.jpg 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 27.10.2011 10:35, schrieb henny van elst:=20 Gm LF, Capture vo1na, henny pa3cpm 73's Het bericht kan nu met het volgende bijlagen of koppelingen worden = verzonden: vo1na 27-10.jpg Opmerking: Sommige e-mailprogramma's staan ter beveiliging tegen = virussen het verzenden of ontvangen van bepaalde bestandsbijlagen niet = toe. Controleer de beveiligingsinstellingen voor uw e-mail als u wilt = weten hoe bijlagen worden afgehandeld. ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01CC94C5.6A29BC50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Stefan
The majority of signals on LF es MF are suitable = for a QSO=20 but the present culture seems to favour BEACONS, QRS MODE when it is not = necessary and QSL via Internet.
In the beginning it was all CW QSO mode and it = worked FB.=20
I do not bother any more because it is a waste = of time=20 listening/watching useless repeative part callsigns.
It has all been done before and better so what = are current=20 operators trying to achieve.
My suggestion is to get back to CW QSO mode, use = QRS only=20 under vy poor propagation condx if you think it helps.
Use LF es MF like all the other bands, HF es VHF = where CW=20 is the norm, SSB as appropriate and likewise data modes.
73 de mal/g3kev
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Stefan = Sch=E4fer
Sent: Thursday, October 27, = 2011 9:34=20 AM
Subject: Re: LF: vo1na = 27-10.jpg

Hi Joe, LF,

Your signal in a QRSS-10 window. = Would be=20 suitable for a QSO :-)
http://dl.drop= box.com/u/19882028/LF/10_402283.jpg

73,=20 Stefan/DK7FC

Am 27.10.2011 10:35, schrieb henny van elst:=20
Gm LF,
Capture vo1na,
henny pa3cpm
73's
Het bericht kan nu = met het=20 volgende bijlagen of koppelingen worden verzonden:
vo1na=20 27-10.jpg

Opmerking: Sommige e-mailprogramma's staan ter = beveiliging=20 tegen virussen het verzenden of ontvangen van bepaalde = bestandsbijlagen niet=20 toe. Controleer de beveiligingsinstellingen voor uw e-mail als u = wilt weten=20 hoe bijlagen worden = afgehandeld.
------=_NextPart_000_0030_01CC94C5.6A29BC50--