Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mh05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id B68D23800009E; Thu, 3 May 2012 08:40:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SPvJg-00063C-Fa for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 03 May 2012 13:39:28 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SPvJf-000633-UP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 03 May 2012 13:39:27 +0100 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SPvJe-0007jc-2p for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 03 May 2012 13:39:26 +0100 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q43CdP7l000387 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 14:39:25 +0200 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id q43CdNMa030380 for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 14:39:23 +0200 Message-ID: <4FA27C43.4010602@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 14:38:27 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <4FA22F76.5050601@internode.on.net> In-Reply-To: <4FA22F76.5050601@internode.on.net> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) 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: Hi Bob, Nice! Do you use noise blanking to optimise the S/N? Maybe you can add a peak hold grapg in the spectrum of the lower image. A peak hold time of 12 hours or so would allow us to see the highest peak of the last night... [...] Content analysis details: (-2.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [129.206.210.211 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: f62c7cf8eeb8e5a327b71719e9bffff1 Subject: Re: LF: DCF39 from Tasmania Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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=0.0 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: 0:2:455689600:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d60d94fa27cb54b34 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Bob, Nice! Do you use noise blanking to optimise the S/N? Maybe you can add a peak hold grapg in the spectrum of the lower image. A peak hold time of 12 hours or so would allow us to see the highest peak of the last night... Looks like you're getting up to 20 dB S/N. That's more than i thought. Tnx for the service. Give us a heads up if there are exceptional (=realistic for EU/VK) condx :-) 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 03.05.2012 09:10, schrieb Bob: > I am continuing to monitor DCF39 every day. > A graph of the received signal strength and a screen capture are > available on my web page at: > > http://www.users.on.net/~bobw/dcf39/ > > > Bob VK7ZL > > > > >