Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mh01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 6F780380000B4; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 18:47:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TATnB-0001wx-9D for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 08 Sep 2012 23:46:21 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TATnA-0001wo-EI for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 08 Sep 2012 23:46:20 +0100 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TATn8-0006mb-K7 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 08 Sep 2012 23:46:19 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.197] (77-20-201-99-dynip.superkabel.de [77.20.201.99]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LfYxF-1TuJ7I0es5-00p4aA; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 00:46:17 +0200 References: <12fe8.4c562f1.3d7d1434@aol.com> <504BC546.2000105@gmail.com> From: Holger 'Geri' DK8KW DI2BO W1KW X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9A405) In-Reply-To: <504BC546.2000105@gmail.com> Message-Id: <4C2DCE93-0E21-440E-80E9-7E10DBA97FEB@dk8kw.de> Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 00:47:18 +0200 To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:VHf1jxoGxVM0nvAjmfq8H3gnBVsV5WHOMuqCJ7SWMwC cTVtmgjeQmmMT7G7zfSVLbNv6eDSS0egt3w7JBAb6louOjuojA p+BhxwMMqimjd0KxHu9Umoa9UxVEKtwjms3zqbXUwjARlHu6ST TyfkknuVj72ddoE+zn1toBUqVa8rJyDtB1k1wED2CerU737kKv S/C9FX3eJvR4iW4a74XwLVv5VBhiuvkl70c94ck+uQc7nfNvNa d2xk14D99wQpjH1GIvh1PAshgc84h/12Ki4XMdFMiPxp9veDYl zDrc5EEDvKrg7gV1XFsAdMtLXgP7y2AtopykcUVXJlUHWgoVvD FNx6ZzWE6wMvlNqI0eZXGxek/V8UB43YR76rZz2xz 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: John, > A WSPR transmission for the same length of time would gather much more usefuly information than calling CQ with no hope of hearing any replies? I think it all depends on what we expect to get out of our amateur radio activity. What would a WSPR signal reveal other than that what everybody who ever had talked to the marine guys already knew: that a MF signal can be heard a few thousand miles away. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.126.187 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 24b65a258fa7a3a87cfdaa03bb2f3176 Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-F49D042C-887F-43F4-BC5F-349361841034 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=1.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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-sid: 3039ac1d60d5504bcb046eca X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --Apple-Mail-F49D042C-887F-43F4-BC5F-349361841034 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii John, > A WSPR transmission for the same length of time would gather much more us= efuly information than calling CQ with no hope of hearing any replies? I think it all depends on what we expect to get out of our amateur radio act= ivity. What would a WSPR signal reveal other than that what everybody who ev= er had talked to the marine guys already knew: that a MF signal can be heard= a few thousand miles away.=20 Here we have a group of people setting up a fieldday station under less than= optimal conditions, not experienced with MF operation at all yet - and had t= rouble to receive - so what? How long did it take us "experienced" guys to b= e where we are today? Did it really kill some 'valuable' QSOs tonight that w= e will never have another chance to have again? Just relax, the band is stil= l there tomorrow, sooner or later we will all have contacted each other nume= rous times, in CW, WSPR, QRSS or whatever mode.=20 By the way: I had a QSO with Bert, DF2PI who was operating DK0SWF this eveni= ng, and I was able to hear and feel his excitement to explore a new band. Did we all forget on how we started, on how we had to make our own experienc= es when we began and what fun we had? 73 Geri, DK8KW & DI2BO On 09.09.2012, at 00:23, JohnPumford-Green wrote: > On 08/09/2012 22:35, KKorn42@aol.com wrote: >> Mal, don't be so harsh with them. These guys are obviously new to MF and >> they have a real problem handling a big vertical (ex BC stn "SWF"). I had= a >> qso with the guy on 80m and he told me they have QRM > S9. >=20 >=20 > Klaus, Mal et al, >=20 > Strong signals here from DK0SWF on 472.4kHz in Shetland, IP90gg >=20 > Calling CQ ad infinitum, while also 60Hz higher I also copy DF0WD calling C= Q too. I assume neither station can hear each other? >=20 > While I applaud any new MF activity, I wonder why, if DK0SWF are unable to= receive efficiently on their antenna, they call CQ? >=20 > Surely if this is a "one time" opportunity to transmit from "SWF" and rece= ption is impossible they could do something else with the time on the air. A= WSPR transmission for the same length of time would gather much more useful= y information than calling CQ with no hope of hearing any replies? >=20 > John > GM4SLV > IP90gg > Shetland Isles >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-F49D042C-887F-43F4-BC5F-349361841034 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
John,

=  A WSPR transmission for the same length of time would gather much more= usefuly information than calling CQ with no hope of hearing any replies?

I think it all depends on what we expe= ct to get out of our amateur radio activity. What would a WSPR signal reveal= other than that what everybody who ever had talked to the marine guys alrea= dy knew: that a MF signal can be heard a few thousand miles away. 

Here we have a group of people setting up a fieldday st= ation under less than optimal conditions, not experienced with MF operation a= t all yet - and had trouble to receive - so what? How long did it take us "e= xperienced" guys to be where we are today? Did it really kill some 'valuable= ' QSOs tonight that we will never have another chance to have again? Just re= lax, the band is still there tomorrow, sooner or later we will all have cont= acted each other numerous times, in CW, WSPR, QRSS or whatever mode. 

By the way: I had a QSO with Bert, DF2PI who was ope= rating DK0SWF this evening, and I was able to hear and feel his excitement t= o explore a new band.

Did we all forget on how we s= tarted, on how we had to make our own experiences when we began and what fun= we had?

73

Geri, DK8KW &a= mp; DI2BO


On 09.0= 9.2012, at 00:23, JohnPumford-Green <= gm4slv@gmail.com> wrote:

On 08/09/2012 22:35, KKo= rn42@aol.com wrote:
Mal, don't= be so harsh with them. These guys are obviously new to MF and
they have a real problem handling a= big vertical (ex BC stn "SWF"). I had a
qso  with the guy on 80m and he told me they have QR= M > S9.


Kl= aus, Mal et al,

Strong signals here from DK= 0SWF on 472.4kHz in Shetland, IP90gg

Callin= g CQ ad infinitum, while also 60Hz higher I also copy DF0WD calling CQ too. I= assume neither station can hear each other?

While I applaud any new MF activity, I wonder why, if DK0SWF are unable to= receive efficiently on their antenna, they call CQ?
=
Surely if this is a "one time" opportunity to transmit from "SWF" a= nd reception is impossible they could do something else with the time on the= air. A WSPR transmission for the same length of time would gather much more= usefuly information than calling CQ with no hope of hearing any replies?

John
GM4SLV
I= P90gg
Shetland Isles


= --Apple-Mail-F49D042C-887F-43F4-BC5F-349361841034--