Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-md06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 326813800008B; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 05:38:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SJLu7-0003Sx-Pm for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 10:37:55 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SJLu7-0003So-CD for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 10:37:55 +0100 Received: from filter02.i-online.fr ([195.200.78.9]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SJLu5-0005bM-M4 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 10:37:54 +0100 Received: from smtp.qtxt.dns-iol.com ([195.200.78.13]) by filter02.i-online.fr (IceWarp 10.2.2) with ESMTP (SSL) id ZNA46751 for ; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:37:51 +0200 Received: (qmail 27875 invoked by uid 507); 15 Apr 2012 11:29:36 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (john.rabson@numeo.fr@217.67.155.178) by smtp.qtxt.dns-iol.com with SMTP; 15 Apr 2012 11:29:36 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) From: John Rabson In-Reply-To: <20120415104118.xw4cii7ibk00ow0o@webmail.senselan.ch> Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:29:39 +0200 Message-Id: <8B11B4CF-2A1A-4032-8A73-DFF330D6DF1D@numeo.fr> References: <20120415104118.xw4cii7ibk00ow0o@webmail.senselan.ch> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: No, but it is good to know the reflector is working a bit quicker. G4WGT's message of Friday 13th took 20 hours to get to me. 73, John F5VLF (sent 15 Apr 2012 1129CEST) On 15 Apr 2012, at 10:41CEST, traumwandler@sensemail.ch wrote: [...] Content analysis details: (-0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Scan-Signature: 59677119386dcf9f1872cb454dc1331d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Subject: Re: LF: Titanic Frequency Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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: 0:2:470343744:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d605a4f8a972a426a X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none No, but it is good to know the reflector is working a bit quicker. = G4WGT's message of Friday 13th took 20 hours to get to me. 73, John F5VLF (sent 15 Apr 2012 1129CEST) On 15 Apr 2012, at 10:41CEST, traumwandler@sensemail.ch wrote: > Does anybody know, on which frequency the titanic sent the SOS? Was it = really > 500kc/s? > 73 de Toni, HB9ASB >=20 >=20 >=20