Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25;
Message-ID: <5210BB04.9000401@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 14:16:04 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= <Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>
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: <DUB114-W527B4B9708FCDF5FD0ABC5D3460@phx.gbl> <520F60AF.2000004@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <0127125B54F94B748D9AC87A4A813300@Clemens0811>
In-Reply-To: <0127125B54F94B748D9AC87A4A813300@Clemens0811>
Subject: Re: LF: QRM on 472.5kHz
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

Hello Clemens,

Sorry for taking off the chance to listen for OH1AH. But why did you 
write that email at 10 hours after the QSO took place? When beeing in 
the shack, i'm mostly watching incoming emails and they take just a few 
minutes to come through. We would have done QSY then...

I agree, we could have moved a few kHz away from the center of activity 
during that lighthouse activity last night.

Am 18.08.2013 11:38, schrieb Clemens Paul:
> [...]
> I feel it is mandatory to work now on the signal quality by removing
> the key clicks or at least reducing them to at least 50 or 60dB down.
> Otherwise stations within a radius of say 400km cannot copy weak signals
> when
> particularly Stefan is transmitting with his tremendous signal a few 100Hz
> away.
-What do you think, how many people in a radius of 400km are active (in 
CW) on that band for say 15 minutes per week (average over a year, not 
arround xmas time +- 1 week)?
-How often is more than 1 QSO taking place on that band, to the same 
time, while one of these QSOs is done by 2 weaker stations and the other 
one is done by 2 stronger stations?
-How many of then will do the QSO at 1:00 AM local time?

BTW usually the QSOs are done at 472.2 and 472.8 kHz (see the spots in 
the DX cluster). 472.5 kHz is not a good choice, as reported several 
times, due to the fact that there is a far field signal on that 
frequency (not my local QRM), sometimes appearing, with the typical QSB, 
observed by many stations here. Thus the problems. When DF5QG or even 
DK6SX/P (even stronger) are doing a QSO in > 500 Hz distance, i never 
observed problems. And they all use true class D PAs.
Somehow most of the active CW stations do not have a "clean" signal and 
those who have a clean signal are not QRV :-)

Anyway, as i said, we could have chosen another frequency. Just give us 
a hint next time and we will do QSY immediately.

> In the mean time it would be a good idea to stay away at least 2kHz from the
> usual calling qrg 472,5 when you are rag chewing for hours which was
> interesting to listen to.:-)
>    
Did you listen by ear or did you use a CW decoder?

> The band is wide and empty enough so there is plenty of room to choose.
>
> To clear up some uncertainties about my antenna you have been discussing
> last night
> I have attached a picture from last year:-)
> (Yellow is feeder,red is antenna).
>    
Somehow i was sure that you were listening while we were talking about 
your antenna :-)

73, Stefan/DK7FC
> 73
> Clemens
> DL4RAJ
>
>