Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mg02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id DE257380000A8; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 07:24:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TqjJr-0008Sp-L3 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 11:50:43 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TqjJq-0008Sg-M9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 11:50:42 +0000 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 1TqjJn-0002qF-FW for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 11:50:41 +0000 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 r03BocDb023278 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 12:50:38 +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 r03Bob5p013526 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 12:50:38 +0100 Message-ID: <50E57089.1040109@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 12:50:33 +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: <0A4D88A68FCB4F22A2BC40825788A6AA@AGB> <1357150913.48886.YahooMailNeo@web133204.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <63C5AFAA6F8C41A7936F2069D38FAC01@AGB> <81FED2F455C94E45B3BE41353A6D53BC@W1KW> <52B2628757094925BA8206A2C0D9640B@AGB> <1357173044.69099.YahooMailNeo@web133203.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <48BBF8CC892E4164B0E96E856BB44972@gnat> In-Reply-To: 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: How many OMs are able to radiate a CW signal on 630m that is audible in a reasonable distance? Here in a radius of 1000km from central EU, maybe 50? How many of them would be even able to radiate a SSB signal that is comfortable readable in some distance, so that at least a few SSB QSO partners can be found? 10? How many of them would be willing to populate the band for a _longer_ time (i.e. so that it it worth to discuss about SSB on MF), "job-, XYL-, grandchildren-, neighbour-, motivation-, other projects-, QRM/QRN-, WX-permitting"? X! I guess that the number X is very close to 0! [...] 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 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 7a2474f8514b50a7ab468c8b7bdbd65d Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040707030802010307050907" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE 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: 3039ac1d60ca50e5787a7942 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040707030802010307050907 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit How many OMs are able to radiate a CW signal on 630m that is audible in a reasonable distance? Here in a radius of 1000km from central EU, maybe 50? How many of them would be even able to radiate a SSB signal that is comfortable readable in some distance, so that at least a few SSB QSO partners can be found? 10? How many of them would be willing to populate the band for a _longer_ time (i.e. so that it it worth to discuss about SSB on MF), "job-, XYL-, grandchildren-, neighbour-, motivation-, other projects-, QRM/QRN-, WX-permitting"? X! I guess that the number X is very close to 0! There are a number of ideas for short experiments, now that the band is new. Some of these experiments will be done. But the time that is spent to discuss about these modes (and all the problems) will be longer than the time the mode will be done. I do not really expect problems from stations working SSB for a few hours per year whose CW signal would be 10 dB above the noise in a 250 Hz CW bandwidth. Lastly people will concentrate on exciting modes like CW, the rest will come and go. 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 03.01.2013 03:06, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca: > Hi Alan, Group, > > Memories of QRM from SSB are still fresh in my mind. You certainly > don't need any endorsement from me, but I think your views are well > stated and should be heeded. > > 73 > Joe VO1NA > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, Alan Melia wrote: > >> Just a thought.....when it gets totally washed out with SSB all 24 >> hours how are you going to clean it out? People in general dont >> follow gentlemen's agreements they were not party too.....and "it >> doesnt say I cant in the licence". >> >> I fear that, though what you suggest would work, it might encourage >> mayhem. I would prefer to see those who feel uncomfortable using a >> morse key on other bands, improve their skill on 475 by not being >> under HF-band like pressure. I dont listen there now but 10MHz used >> to be a guide for what you can expect wher SSB is not actually banned >> from a narrow band. Dont forget, to SSB-only ops CW is just >> interference. The plus point is they will have to make a transverter >> first, but then a few badly aligned tranverters on SSB could be a >> disaster. I think the Swedish station was was Gus SM?BHZ, and the SSB >> wiped out several DX CW qsos I knew of at the time. It was a >> commercial licence not an amateur one, so voice ID may have been in >> the conditions. >> >> Alan >> G3NYK >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: M0FMT >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 12:30 AM >> Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? >> >> >> Hi Graham Geri and all >> >> Warren has seen SSB first hand on the MF QRG and we have this side >> also.There was an SM station (call sign forgotten?) in the early days >> of 500 that added an SSB anouncement on his beacon and it worked well. >> >> To my spec. :- "One SSB channel at the high edge of the band only >> used during daylight hours no DXing!" add " Use VOX, no monologuing >> allowed" to be a laissez faire operation no band plan, but fair >> play!.73 es GL es HNY Pete M0FMT IO91UX >> >> From: Graham >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Sent: Wednesday, 2 January 2013, 20:48 >> Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? >> >> >> >> Geri >> >> 800 Hz B/W ... May be this is something 'Wolf' can code >> for you ? a b/w compression / expansion module in SL , to >> limit the tx b/w to 800 Hz must be possible to divide by 3 >> and mult by 3 with a linear shift as well ? >> >> G.. >> >> >> From: Holger 'Geri', DK8KW - DI2BO - W1KW >> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 8:36 PM >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? >> >> >> Hi, >> >> I kind of like the idea of an SSB channel. I just pulled out the >> conditions of my first secial license for 160m from 1973 or 1974. >> That said 1815 to 1835 kHz with 10 Watts in CW, additionally one SSB >> channel for 1832 to 1835 kHz, so why not trying this on 630m, too? >> Here in Germany we are currently limited to 800 Hz bandwidt but I am >> sure we can sork towards a special license under certain conditions >> such as daylight operation only .. sounds good to me! >> >> Vy 73 >> >> Geri, DK8KW >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Graham >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 8:58 PM >> Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? >> >> >> Hi Pete >> >> Its quite obvious that the allocation is quite able to >> support normal armature activity , and why not ? its no >> longer a experimental allocation , its just the same as 10 or >> top band , un expected results today though ! ssb sounds odd , >> may be as the path is stable , sstv ? must be a narrow >> mode , and the 'new' digital voice is 2KHz , but that >> requires a linear Tx path >> >> As for the band edge >> >> I'm straining to find a engineering reason , that >> wspr and qrss has decided to run mid band ? Im sure users had >> a reasonable discussion at the introduction of the band , to >> place the modes at the edges , with live cw a the lower >> portion ? its well know that these long carrier modes cause >> disruption to other band users and are well placed at the >> band edges , 'vanity beacons' is a term I have seen noted in >> referral, as occupancy increases , by users not linked or even >> aware of discussions taking place on these groups , i'm sure >> there will be problems leading to the introduction of band >> plan's , for some the plans form part of the licence >> conditions .. >> >> Is Opera a vanity system ? , actually no, it compliments >> ros- data mode in that the ave s/n readings can be used to >> determine if a path will support the data mode , each >> having the same averaging s/n reading taken along the time >> line , >> >> 73 -G.. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: M0FMT >> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 6:21 PM >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? >> >> >> Hi all >> >> One SSB channel at the high edge of the band only used during >> daylight hours no DXing! >> >> >> 73 es GL es HNY Pete M0FMT IO91UX >> >> From: Graham >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Sent: Wednesday, 2 January 2013, 16:13 >> Subject: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? >> >> >> >> Quite intriguing propagation on this 'new' band >> >> From some unexpected early 600 mile + Opera decodes >> last night , to several wspr TA decodes , [G8's again >> ..] to today's test with Gary using USB-SSB voice , >> >> Where as at 1300z we had 5/9 signals each way as >> expected over 25 miles , GI3PDN Ray , called on CW , to >> give a report of 5/9 across the Irish Sea , some 100 miles >> for our two signals , his CW also in the 5/9/9 region, one >> wonders how far inland the signals travelled ? >> >> After a short 3 way qso, we closed the test round 1330z >> , may not of been quite as sociable after dark , but with a >> small Ae , 40 x 70 ft iv L and 35 ft Top load vert , 50 >> watts pep , results defiantly superior to say 160 mtrs >> using the same Ae's >> >> 73 -G >> G0NBD >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > This electronic communication is governed by the terms and conditions at > http://www.mun.ca/cc/policies/electronic_communications_disclaimer_2012.php > --------------040707030802010307050907 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit How many OMs are able to radiate a CW signal on 630m that is audible in a reasonable distance? Here in a radius of 1000km from central EU, maybe 50?
How many of them would be even able to radiate a SSB signal that is comfortable readable in some distance, so that at least a few SSB QSO partners can be found? 10?
How many of them would be willing to populate the band for a longer time (i.e. so that it it worth to discuss about SSB on MF), "job-, XYL-, grandchildren-, neighbour-, motivation-, other projects-, QRM/QRN-, WX-permitting"? X!
I guess that the number X is very close to 0!

There are a number of ideas for short experiments, now that the band is new. Some of these experiments will be done. But the time that is spent to discuss about these modes (and all the problems) will be longer than the time the mode will be done.
I do not really expect problems from stations working SSB for a few hours per year whose CW signal would be 10 dB above the noise in a 250 Hz CW bandwidth.

Lastly people will concentrate on exciting modes like CW, the rest will come and go.

73, Stefan/DK7FC

Am 03.01.2013 03:06, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca:
Hi Alan, Group,

Memories of QRM from SSB are still fresh in my mind. You certainly
don't need any endorsement from me, but I think your views are well
stated and should be heeded.

73
Joe VO1NA

On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, Alan Melia wrote:

Just a thought.....when it gets totally washed out with SSB all 24 hours how are you going to clean it out? People in general dont follow gentlemen's agreements they were not party too.....and "it doesnt say I cant in the licence".

I fear that, though what you suggest would work, it might encourage mayhem. I would prefer to see those who feel uncomfortable using a morse key on other bands, improve their skill on 475 by not being under HF-band like pressure. I dont listen there now but 10MHz used to be a guide for what you can expect wher SSB is not actually banned from a narrow band. Dont forget, to SSB-only ops CW is just interference. The plus point is they will have to make a transverter first, but then a few badly aligned tranverters on SSB could be a disaster. I think the Swedish station was was Gus SM?BHZ, and the SSB wiped out several DX CW qsos I knew of at the time. It was a commercial licence not an amateur one, so voice ID may have been in the conditions.

Alan
G3NYK

 ----- Original Message -----
 From: M0FMT
 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
 Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 12:30 AM
 Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ?


 Hi Graham Geri and all

 Warren has seen SSB first hand on the MF QRG and we have this side also.There was an SM station (call sign forgotten?) in the early days of 500 that added an SSB anouncement on his beacon and it worked well.

 To my spec. :- "One SSB channel at the high edge of the band only used during daylight hours no DXing!" add " Use VOX, no monologuing allowed" to be a laissez faire operation no band plan, but fair play!.73 es GL es HNY Pete M0FMT IO91UX

   From: Graham <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>
   To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
   Sent: Wednesday, 2 January 2013, 20:48
   Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ?



   Geri

   800 Hz  B/W ...  May  be this  is  something  'Wolf' can  code  for  you  ? a  b/w   compression / expansion  module in SL  , to  limit the  tx b/w  to  800  Hz must  be  possible to  divide  by  3  and  mult  by  3  with a  linear shift  as  well ?

   G..


   From: Holger 'Geri', DK8KW - DI2BO - W1KW
   Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 8:36 PM
   To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
   Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ?


   Hi,

   I kind of like the idea of an SSB channel. I just pulled out the conditions of my first secial license for 160m from 1973 or 1974. That said 1815 to 1835 kHz with 10 Watts in CW, additionally one SSB channel for 1832 to 1835 kHz, so why not trying this on 630m, too? Here in Germany we are currently limited to 800 Hz bandwidt but I am sure we can sork towards a special license under certain conditions such as daylight operation only .. sounds good to me!

   Vy 73

   Geri, DK8KW

     ----- Original Message -----
     From: Graham
     To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
     Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 8:58 PM
     Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ?


     Hi Pete

     Its  quite  obvious that  the  allocation  is   quite  able  to  support  normal   armature  activity , and  why  not  ? its no  longer a experimental  allocation , its just the  same  as   10  or top  band , un expected  results  today though !  ssb  sounds  odd  , may  be  as  the  path is  stable ,   sstv ?  must  be a  narrow  mode  , and the  'new'  digital  voice  is 2KHz  , but that  requires  a  linear  Tx  path

     As  for  the  band edge

      I'm  straining  to  find  a  engineering   reason  , that  wspr  and  qrss  has  decided to  run mid band ? Im sure  users had a  reasonable discussion  at the  introduction  of the  band , to  place the  modes  at the  edges , with  live  cw a the  lower  portion ?  its well  know  that  these  long  carrier  modes  cause  disruption  to  other  band  users and  are  well  placed  at the  band  edges  , 'vanity  beacons'  is a term I have  seen  noted  in referral, as occupancy  increases , by users  not  linked or  even  aware  of   discussions   taking place on these  groups , i'm sure there  will  be  problems  leading  to  the  introduction  of  band plan's  , for  some  the  plans  form  part of the  licence  conditions ..

     Is Opera  a vanity  system ? , actually  no, it  compliments   ros-  data  mode in that  the  ave s/n   readings  can be used to  determine  if  a  path  will  support  the  data  mode , each  having  the  same   averaging  s/n  reading  taken along the  time  line  ,

     73 -G..









     From: M0FMT
     Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 6:21 PM
     To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
     Subject: Re: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ?


     Hi all

     One SSB channel at the high edge of the band only used during daylight hours no DXing!


     73 es GL es HNY Pete M0FMT IO91UX

       From: Graham <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>
       To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
       Sent: Wednesday, 2 January 2013, 16:13
       Subject: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ?



       Quite  intriguing  propagation  on this  'new'  band

       From  some  unexpected  early  600 mile  +   Opera  decodes  last  night  , to  several   wspr   TA  decodes ,  [G8's  again ..]     to   today's   test  with  Gary  using   USB-SSB  voice ,

       Where  as at   1300z   we  had  5/9  signals each  way  as  expected   over 25 miles  ,  GI3PDN   Ray  , called  on CW , to   give  a  report of  5/9 across  the  Irish   Sea  , some  100  miles  for  our  two  signals , his  CW also  in the  5/9/9  region, one  wonders  how  far  inland  the signals  travelled  ?

       After a  short 3  way  qso,  we closed the  test  round 1330z  ,  may  not of been  quite  as  sociable  after  dark  , but  with a  small  Ae  , 40 x 70  ft  iv L  and   35  ft  Top load  vert  , 50  watts  pep  , results  defiantly   superior  to  say  160  mtrs  using  the  same  Ae's

       73 -G
       G0NBD










This electronic communication is governed by the terms and conditions at
http://www.mun.ca/cc/policies/electronic_communications_disclaimer_2012.php
--------------040707030802010307050907--