Message-ID: <4FA31F84.1090005@internode.on.net>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 00:15:00 +0000
From: Bob <vk7zl@internode.on.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <4FA22F76.5050601@internode.on.net> <003d01cd2925$bc552d80$4001a8c0@lark>
In-Reply-To: <003d01cd2925$bc552d80$4001a8c0@lark>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: DCF39 from Tasmania
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------030702050100080009060200"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d60594fa31fd418fe
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030702050100080009060200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alan and Stefan

I have made some changes to the web page which will hopefully give some 
more information.

I was trying to combine five or maybe seven days of signal data and I 
thought the inclusion of the noise data as well would make too congested 
so I have added separate graphs.
The station parameters have not changed for a considerable period of 
time, as far as I know, and the noise level is generally constant at 
that time of the morning although it did show it to be quieter yesterday.

I have increased the peak hold time to ten hours. I am not currently 
using the noise blanker as it doesn't appear to make any difference - 
are you suggesting that I should?

Bob  VK7ZL



On 3/05/2012 11:34, Alan Melia wrote:
> Hi Bob great stuff!! that is a very interesting and useful plot you have.
> Well Done. One addition that is often added is a narrow band plot of the
> noise, just clear of the main signal. You do seem to have a very quiet
> location, so this may not be needed to identify local "miscreants"
> :-))...... see Scott Tilley's VE7TIL plots of DCF39.
>
> However in the long term it acts as a very usefull "calibration and
> confidence" facility confirming that your aerial sensitivity is still in the
> right area. One difficulty with long term propagation monitoring is ensuring
> that the receiving station's parameters have not changed. If you can do
> that, you are sensibly able to determine when the best strengths are
> achieved during the year, and the effects of both small and major
> geomagnetic distrubances. Without it you are always wondering whether the
> signal has been affected by local weather or an increase in the band noise,
> or even a coroded connection (been there, done that :-)) )  etc.
>
> The levels you are seeing suggest that western Europe to VK7 is well within
> possibility. It just needs the right conditions for long enough and maybe
> the right transmission mode.
>
> Best Wishes
> Alan
> G3NYK
>
>

--------------030702050100080009060200
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <font face="Times New Roman">Alan and Stefan<br>
      <br>
      I have made some changes to the web page which will hopefully give
      some more information.<br>
      <br>
      I was trying to combine five or maybe seven days of signal data
      and I thought the inclusion of the noise data as well would make
      too congested so I have added separate graphs.<br>
      The station parameters have not changed for a considerable period
      of time, as far as I know, and the noise level is generally
      constant at that time of the morning although it did show it to be
      quieter yesterday.<br>
      <br>
      I have increased the peak hold time to ten hours. I am not
      currently using the noise blanker as it doesn't appear to make any
      difference - are you suggesting that I should?<br>
      <br>
      Bob&nbsp; VK7ZL<br>
      <br>
      <br>
    </font><br>
    On 3/05/2012 11:34, Alan Melia wrote:
    <blockquote cite="mid:003d01cd2925$bc552d80$4001a8c0@lark"
      type="cite">
      <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Hi Bob great stuff!! that is a very interesting and useful plot you have.
Well Done. One addition that is often added is a narrow band plot of the
noise, just clear of the main signal. You do seem to have a very quiet
location, so this may not be needed to identify local "miscreants"
:-))...... see Scott Tilley's VE7TIL plots of DCF39.

However in the long term it acts as a very usefull "calibration and
confidence" facility confirming that your aerial sensitivity is still in the
right area. One difficulty with long term propagation monitoring is ensuring
that the receiving station's parameters have not changed. If you can do
that, you are sensibly able to determine when the best strengths are
achieved during the year, and the effects of both small and major
geomagnetic distrubances. Without it you are always wondering whether the
signal has been affected by local weather or an increase in the band noise,
or even a coroded connection (been there, done that :-)) )  etc.

The levels you are seeing suggest that western Europe to VK7 is well within
possibility. It just needs the right conditions for long enough and maybe
the right transmission mode.

Best Wishes
Alan
G3NYK


</pre>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>

--------------030702050100080009060200--