Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.67.23.138 with SMTP id ia10csp73232pad; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:53:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.11.37 with SMTP id n5mr10530978wib.25.1380477238536; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:53:58 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id bz19si3118238wib.19.1969.12.31.16.00.00; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:53:58 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; 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) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1VQL1n-0007J3-2B for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 18:43:31 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VQL1m-0007In-Jr for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 18:43:30 +0100 Received: from blu0-omc1-s11.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.22]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VQL1k-0005xT-P1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 18:43:29 +0100 Received: from BLU180-W23 ([65.55.116.8]) by blu0-omc1-s11.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:43:28 -0700 X-TMN: [lVf2UAwD400Of1gRoIv1Wp8CteMrVBPt] X-Originating-Email: [rjraide@hotmail.com] Message-ID: From: Bob Raide To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 13:43:27 -0400 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <524864BC.60908@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> References: <524864BC.60908@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Sep 2013 17:43:28.0064 (UTC) FILETIME=[67B02400:01CEBD3B] X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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: Stefan; I have had great results using even an old Heath-kit SWR meter! > Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 19:34:52 +0200 > From: Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: HF SWR meters on MF? > > Hi MF, > > Did someone try to use a normal HF SWR meter on 630m? They are > specificated down to 1800 kHz of course but what about 472 kHz? > > At least it would be good to get some indication that: > > -There is some output power (e.g. when using an IC706) > -One is coming closer to resonance > -Impedance is/comes close to 50 Ohm > > I'm supporting a new potential MF RX station with limited equipment (no > oscilloscope...)... > > > 73, Stefan/DK7FC > [...] Content analysis details: (-0.6 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [65.55.116.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rjraide[at]hotmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 896f9ee4f10c5db37812c155e804756d Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_13a634ad-a6e5-4494-8835-e01f97060890_" Subject: RE: LF: HF SWR meters on MF? 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=FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD, HTML_MESSAGE,TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1510 --_13a634ad-a6e5-4494-8835-e01f97060890_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stefan=3B I have had great results using even an old Heath-kit SWR meter! =20 > Date: Sun=2C 29 Sep 2013 19:34:52 +0200 > From: Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: HF SWR meters on MF? >=20 > Hi MF=2C >=20 > Did someone try to use a normal HF SWR meter on 630m? They are=20 > specificated down to 1800 kHz of course but what about 472 kHz? >=20 > At least it would be good to get some indication that: >=20 > -There is some output power (e.g. when using an IC706) > -One is coming closer to resonance > -Impedance is/comes close to 50 Ohm >=20 > I'm supporting a new potential MF RX station with limited equipment (no=20 > oscilloscope...)... >=20 >=20 > 73=2C Stefan/DK7FC >=20 = --_13a634ad-a6e5-4494-8835-e01f97060890_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Stefan=3B
I have had great re= sults using even an old Heath-kit SWR meter!
 =3B
>=3B Dat= e: Sun=2C 29 Sep 2013 19:34:52 +0200
>=3B From: Stefan.Schaefer@iup.un= i-heidelberg.de
>=3B To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>=3B Subjec= t: LF: HF SWR meters on MF?
>=3B
>=3B Hi MF=2C
>=3B
>= =3B Did someone try to use a normal HF SWR meter on 630m? They are
>= =3B specificated down to 1800 kHz of course but what about 472 kHz?
>= =3B
>=3B At least it would be good to get some indication that:
&g= t=3B
>=3B -There is some output power (e.g. when using an IC706)
&= gt=3B -One is coming closer to resonance
>=3B -Impedance is/comes clos= e to 50 Ohm
>=3B
>=3B I'm supporting a new potential MF RX stati= on with limited equipment (no
>=3B oscilloscope...)...
>=3B
= >=3B
>=3B 73=2C Stefan/DK7FC
>=3B
= = --_13a634ad-a6e5-4494-8835-e01f97060890_--