Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mi02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id AE9C438000087; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 17:25:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UGy2U-0004WL-V0 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 20:49:14 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UGy2U-0004WC-J8 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 20:49:14 +0000 Received: from smtp-vbr10.xs4all.nl ([194.109.24.30]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UGy1M-0003Vw-Oi for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 20:49:13 +0000 Received: from pc-roelof (ndb.demon.nl [82.161.81.65]) by smtp-vbr10.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r2GKlOMG035711 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 21:47:24 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from roelof@ndb.demon.nl) To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <5143768E.6040400@eastlink.ca> <5143B2C0.8070500@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <5143B677.5030006@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <5144CED4.8030402@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 21:47:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Roelof Bakker" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5144CED4.8030402@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.14 (Win32) X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner 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: Hello Stefan, Yes, it should be very well possible. The brain of a skilled CW operator can simulate a filter with a bandwidth of about 50 Hz. So, to achieve a better SNR, a narrower filter is called for. [...] 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 [194.109.24.30 listed in list.dnswl.org] X-Scan-Signature: 87966b345956c8ef3389b993f6a18f4e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Subject: Re: LF: WE 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: 3039ac1d7b8a5144e35b3381 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hello Stefan, Yes, it should be very well possible. The brain of a skilled CW operator can simulate a filter with a bandwidth of about 50 Hz. So, to achieve a better SNR, a narrower filter is called for. With a bandwidth a 10 Hz and a keying speed of 10 wpm, it should work. No QRQ though, I'm afraid. Unfortunately I have no space for a LF antenna.... On an other note, WSPR is excellent for overnight T/A propagation study. Just following WE2XGR/6 this week has been an interesting demonstration of night to night variation in propagation. It also shows that for long range signals the much discussed deep fading problem is not so severe as on closer range signals. 73, Roelof, pa0rdt