Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mh06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 4F247380000A5; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:05:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TSSXg-0001Pe-Ll for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:04:40 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TSSXg-0001PV-5J for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:04:40 +0000 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 1TSSXe-0000EV-GU for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:04:39 +0000 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 q9SD4aUd015752 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:04:36 +0100 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 q9SD4Zp5001828 for ; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:04:35 +0100 Message-ID: <508D2D5E.8090609@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:04:30 +0100 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: <508C4F78.2020209@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) 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: Hello George, If you like you can send me the DCF39 USR and i can take a look at it. It would also be interesting to see the DCF-plot. I know about the problem with the SSB filter limitation but we could check the DCF strength anyway, one day DCF the next day me. At least to get a first impression what the levels are and what the best time may be in the evening... [...] Content analysis details: (-1.3 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] -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: ce0e5a4ae990e5a63db3ab7aea21191b Subject: Re: LF: DL-DU, EW6GB, SL NB 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-sid: 3039ac1d60da508d2d9c419c X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hello George, If you like you can send me the DCF39 USR and i can take a look at it. It would also be interesting to see the DCF-plot. I know about the problem with the SSB filter limitation but we could check the DCF strength anyway, one day DCF the next day me. At least to get a first impression what the levels are and what the best time may be in the evening... 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 28.10.2012 06:12, schrieb George Szymanski: > Hi Stefan and thanks for the info. > I found how to set the NB on SL! > I'm certainly a newbie, just a few days into the 6 month training > course!! > I get a lot of strong lightning crashes here on 137. > > DCF39 was very strong on Friday night and loud in the speaker. Last > night not so strong however but still a very good trace. > Hopefully a good sign of conditions improving at last. > > 73 de George, DU1GM > > > On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 23:17:44 +0200, you wrote: > > >> George, Andrej, LF, >> >> I've run a splitted EU-60 grabber window now for some time, waiting >> until a relatively weak signal appears to times of high QRN. >> >> Attached is that splitted spectrogram of the grabber, showing "GB" in >> QRSS-60 on 136.1698 kHz, by Andrej/EW6GB. >> >> As visible, the spectrograms are taken in Spectrum Lab. The upper half >> shows the LF signal without band limiting and noise blanking, as done in >> many other programs. The lower half shows the same signal from the same >> instance but taken from behind a 2.5 kHz wide band filter and a >> noiseblanker. >> >> Without the NB, GB is invisible or not readable. When using the NB, GB >> is clearly visible! The effect is impressive when QRN crashes are >> strong, nearby thunderstorms and that stuff. In the typical daylight LF >> background noise the effect is less expressed. >> >> Yes yes, all this is not new but we have some newcomers on LF and so it >> may be useful to demonstrate the effect of the SpecLab noiseblanker. >> >> 73, GL, Stefan/DK7FC >> >