Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dg05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A7EB8380000EC; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:25:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tuk1I-00056U-O8 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:24:08 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tuk1I-00056L-AN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:24:08 +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 1Tuk1G-0005Yx-8B for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:24:07 +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 r0EDO56i022239 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:24:05 +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 r0EDO3Cl025098 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:24:03 +0100 Message-ID: <50F406F0.2070400@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:24:00 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?U3RlZmFuIFNjaMOkZmVy?= 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: <1528720709.20130114092604@tut.by> <9F8CB1AEE09F4B658239326D0F662F09@gmc.net> In-Reply-To: <9F8CB1AEE09F4B658239326D0F662F09@gmc.net> 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: Hi Petr, Am 14.01.2013 09:28, schrieb Petr Maly: > Hello all, > > I can reasonably listen to LF/MF only in my /P QTH. After long long > time I could spend almost the whole Saturday by listening on 472 kHz. > The only station heard was DL2HRE, see the screenshot. I haven't heard > any one else, and no QSO. I believe the conditions would allow the > standard two-way CW QSOs easily. > Is the current traffic on 472 kHz really that low? This weekend i was not QRV on MF because i worked on the MF variometer so i was active on LF. However i saw several CW signals with good strength on my grabber http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/DK7FC_MF_Grabber.html Certainly there were many QSOs. But if DL2HRE is received at this strength in DFCW-10 (?) maybe it was not the best time or the local QRM is high? He should be much stronger, i.e. higher SNR in that mode and distance. [...] 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 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 046f068074e745d5c60ca47deee9b503 Subject: Re: LF: Listened on 472 kHz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; 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: 3039ac1d410d50f40749128e X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Petr, Am 14.01.2013 09:28, schrieb Petr Maly: > Hello all, > > I can reasonably listen to LF/MF only in my /P QTH. After long long > time I could spend almost the whole Saturday by listening on 472 kHz. > The only station heard was DL2HRE, see the screenshot. I haven't heard > any one else, and no QSO. I believe the conditions would allow the > standard two-way CW QSOs easily. > Is the current traffic on 472 kHz really that low? This weekend i was not QRV on MF because i worked on the MF variometer so i was active on LF. However i saw several CW signals with good strength on my grabber http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/DK7FC_MF_Grabber.html Certainly there were many QSOs. But if DL2HRE is received at this strength in DFCW-10 (?) maybe it was not the best time or the local QRM is high? He should be much stronger, i.e. higher SNR in that mode and distance. > Are you all on WSPR? More than 60 stations were active in WSPR last evening. Be happy that they were not calling CQ in CW to the same time ;-) Most stations can run the PC 24/7 in WSPR but do not find the time for CW. I think WSPR is a good alternative for MF activity when you have other things to do. > Is the activity now splitted amongst 136, 472 and 505 kHz? 136.172 ;-) > Should I listen after sunset instead? At least it is more promising! 73, Stefan/DK7FC > Is the number of countries with 472 kHz permitted for all still low? > > 73, Petr, OK1FIG > > >