Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dg02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 5C57F380000B4; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 19:32:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Sh7tO-0007MH-U6 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:31:26 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Sh7tO-0007M8-6g for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:31:26 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.100.212]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Sh7tM-000795-7h for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:31:25 +0100 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q5JNVMZN027983 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:31:23 +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 q5JNVMxP031087 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:31:22 +0200 Message-ID: <4FE10B61.7060202@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:29:37 +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: <4FE0ED02.4080903@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>,<4FE0EF87.8060905@kpnmail.nl> <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A0FAB195C@ICTS-S-MBX5.luna.kuleuven.be> <4FE100DB.60809@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: <4FE100DB.60809@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by relay.uni-heidelberg.de id q5JNVMZN027983 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: MF, I took the QRSS/CW beacon signal from IQ2MI as the test signal. It was very well audible here, R5. It was interesting to see the deep QSB. Both, my small active antenna and the transmit antenna show the same S/N but maybe it would be useful to use a antenna switch to compare the S/N without having a time delay (changing the antenna cables), due to the QSB... [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [129.206.100.212 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: c1f72e5acb1277e013f90c915ad7ad68 Subject: Re: LF: Test signal needed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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: 0:2:398658624:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d410a4fe10c1435a2 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none MF, I took the QRSS/CW beacon signal from IQ2MI as the test signal. It was=20 very well audible here, R5. It was interesting to see the deep QSB.=20 Both, my small active antenna and the transmit antenna show the same S/N=20 but maybe it would be useful to use a antenna switch to compare the S/N=20 without having a time delay (changing the antenna cables), due to the QSB= ... 73s.. Am 20.06.2012 00:44, schrieb Stefan Sch=E4fer: > Rik, MF, > > Right now i'm testing the TX antenna as a RX antenna. This works much=20 > better than expected. A 10 dB attenuator is needed but no problem.=20 > Maybe you can give me a test signal again on 502 kHz, or someone else? > > It looks like the QRN is much lower on that antenna. That means that=20 > many of the crashes during my CQ calls have been charged rain drops=20 > that were falling on the E field probe, just my guess. > > I will listen another 20 min. on 502 kHz and apprechiate any test=20 > signals from amateurs. > > 73, Stefan > >