Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-da05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 115CE38000138; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:25:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U7VO4-0006Pr-Kh for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:24:24 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U7VO3-0006Pi-VD for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:24:23 +0000 Received: from out1.ip04ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.240]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U7VO2-0001QQ-10 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:24:22 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiIFAOpwIlFcF/Zj/2dsb2JhbABEqSOXAIEDF3OCGgUBAQUIAQEDSQIPBBkBAQMFAgEDEQQBAQolFAEEGgYWCAYTCgECAgEBh28DE7ciC4lcjlhUGIM6A4gxhVmYeoMH X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,689,1355097600"; d="scan'208,217";a="400447454" Received: from host-92-23-246-99.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.23.246.99]) by out1.ip04ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 18 Feb 2013 18:24:01 +0000 Message-ID: <021701ce0e05$1f0acd30$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <01c201ce0df6$fca68350$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <01d001ce0df7$ec018990$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <3751D15C489E45289657A49A3266CF42@AGB> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:23:59 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 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: Graham It is all inter related. But a few fundamentals are necessary. If it is so bad with for instance a 24 dB disadvantage I would MOVE or pack it in. Too many excuses are used, the amateur has enough space for a reasonable antenna but says he is concerned about what the neighbours might think. I have heard this so many times. How much space does a 60 ft vertical take up, less than half a sq metre. Surely when a radio amateur is looking for a property he has antennas in mind and looks for the largest real estate he can afford. especially if interested in MF or LF. So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem It is not working, as I said looking at the wspr database, some stns are not even aware that others are active because of lack of signal for what ever reason. mal/g3kev [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 X-Scan-Signature: 350b42a0642244046701ed1a68bf48aa Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0214_01CE0E05.1ED3DEB0" 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_40_50,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: 3039ac1d404d5122721455f8 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0214_01CE0E05.1ED3DEB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Graham It is all inter related. But a few fundamentals are necessary. If it is = so bad with for instance a 24 dB disadvantage I would MOVE or pack it = in. Too many excuses are used, the amateur has enough space for a reasonable = antenna but says he is concerned about what the neighbours might think. = I have heard this so many times. How much space does a 60 ft vertical = take up, less than half a sq metre. Surely when a radio amateur is looking for a property he has antennas in = mind and looks for the largest real estate he can afford. especially if interested in MF or LF.=20 So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet = location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem It is not working, as I said looking at the wspr database, some stns are = not even aware that others are active because of lack of signal for what = ever reason. mal/g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Graham=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 5:01 PM Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS May be , may be not Mal The system is reading the s/n at the Rx and not the field = strength ........ depends on the local noise level , rst 159 or = 599 , carrier still S9 , 1=3D qrm 5=3D no qrm=20 From: mal hamilton=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:49 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS Example I am receiving PA3EGO + 2dB another UK stn is showing -22 at a shorter = distance. A difference of 24 dB and this station says he is an Expert!!=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: mal hamilton=20 To: rsgb=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:42 PM Subject: LF: POOR ANTENNAS MF One thing the wspr DB shows is how poor some Receivers/Antennas are = comparing like with like approximately same distances from Transmitter.=20 g3kev ------=_NextPart_000_0214_01CE0E05.1ED3DEB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Graham
It is all inter related. But a few fundamentals = are=20 necessary. If it is so bad with for instance a 24 dB disadvantage I = would MOVE=20 or pack it in.
Too many excuses are used, the amateur has = enough space=20 for a reasonable antenna but says he is concerned about what the = neighbours=20 might think. I have heard this so many times. How much space does a 60 = ft=20 vertical take up, less than half a sq metre.
Surely when a radio amateur is looking for a = property he=20 has antennas in mind and looks for the largest real estate he can=20 afford.
especially if interested in MF or LF. =
So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive = operator ? and=20 a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this=20 problem
It is not working, as I said looking at the wspr = database,=20 some stns are not even aware that others are active because of lack of = signal=20 for what ever reason.
mal/g3kev
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Graham
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 = 5:01=20 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR = ANTENNAS

May be , may be not  Mal
 
The system is  reading  the  s/n   at = the =20 Rx   and  not the   field  strength=20 ........  depends on the  local  noise level = ,  =20 rst   159  or  599  , carrier  = still =20 S9  ,   1=3D qrm     5=3D no  = qrm=20
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:49 PM
Subject: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

Example
I am receiving PA3EGO + 2dB another UK stn is = showing=20 -22 at a shorter distance. A difference of 24 dB
and this station says he is an Expert!! =
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 mal=20 hamilton
To: rsgb
Sent: Monday, February 18, = 2013 4:42=20 PM
Subject: LF: POOR = ANTENNAS

MF
One thing the wspr DB shows is how poor = some=20 Receivers/Antennas are comparing like with like approximately same = distances=20 from Transmitter.
 
g3kev
 
------=_NextPart_000_0214_01CE0E05.1ED3DEB0--