Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.67.23.138 with SMTP id ia10csp268109pad; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 16:29:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.63.228 with SMTP id j4mr17060424wjs.34.1379546950324; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 16:29:10 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k9si1934472wiy.18.1969.12.31.16.00.00; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 16:29:10 -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 1VMQZ2-0006UE-IN for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:49:40 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VMQZ2-0006U1-4h for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:49:40 +0100 Received: from nina.ucs.mun.ca ([134.153.232.76]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VMQYz-0008Pv-Ab for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:49:39 +0100 Received: from plato.ucs.mun.ca (plato.ucs.mun.ca [134.153.232.153]) by nina.ucs.mun.ca (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id r8IMnX93028878 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:19:33 -0230 Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:19:33 -0230 (NDT) From: jcraig@mun.ca X-X-Sender: jcraig@plato.ucs.mun.ca To: Graham cc: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <505020E9D2554C49B4B4F7258CFCC3DD@White> <12FD30B2DFA24C5B8D9F376415614152@AGB> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MUN-Disclaimer: http://www.mun.ca/cc/policies/elect_communications_disclaimer_2012.php X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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 Graham and Markus, It's a relief to learn that the TX has drifted off QRG! Thanks Markus. Will continue with OP32 tonight. Graham, to make OP8 from 32, just divide by 4, right? (8192/4 ms pulses) And will it be OK to stay on 137.555 as 650 seems a bit congested? [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 64a43ebf6189d3fbac7adf77f3718769 Subject: Re: LF: VO1NA Op-32 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME 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: 3233 Hi Graham and Markus, It's a relief to learn that the TX has drifted off QRG! Thanks Markus. Will continue with OP32 tonight. Graham, to make OP8 from 32, just divide by 4, right? (8192/4 ms pulses) And will it be OK to stay on 137.555 as 650 seems a bit congested? 73 to all Joe On Wed, 18 Sep 2013, Graham wrote: > Thanks for that Markus > > That info could be gathered at the RX stations and shared via the web beacon , but would only be of use is the 'audio' tx drive was used .. > > For such a short tx time , 4 mins of 'carrier' and anything over 2 mins needed for a decode , OP8 seems to be producing some very good results , unless there is some 'flutter' , which the shorter cycle is able to make use of ? if nothing else , the power bill is 25% of op32 ! > > W1VD is also showing on the PSK map , Gus is running higher power than at the start , so may be W1VD is in range ? > > 73-G, > > > From: Markus Vester > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 9:15 PM > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: VO1NA Op-32 > > > Yes op-8 would have been in easy reach. This morning, Joe's dashes were well discernible even in the 0.7 Hz grabber window. > > Having said that, my personal preference regarding overnight beaconing is more towards "the slower the better" ;-) In the morning I'd rather be greeted by 10 really deep detections than by a long list of spots with intermediate sensitivity. > > As for frequency, using 137650 exactly might not be ideal, as observers in East Europe would likely be affected by the Russian Loran / Chayka chain. Actually here in Central Europe the 6.25 Hz multiples reappeared today when Slonim (the most westerly station in the chain) came back on air after several weeks outage. Staying away from the Loran lines by a Hz or so will avoid that problem. > > Best 73, > Markus (DF6NM) > > From: Graham > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 5:36 PM > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: VO1NA Op-32 > > > Joe, > > Looking at the psk-map , Its quite possible , all the monitors where > looking for OP8 signals ve7bdq <> we2xpq is also showing as OP8 > as well > > No reason why OP8 should not decode from you , just need to qsy > to the OP8 centre qrg 137.650 KHz > > 73 -G, > This electronic communication is governed by the terms and conditions at http://www.mun.ca/cc/policies/electronic_communications_disclaimer_2012.php