Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.96.198 with SMTP id du6csp240871igb; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:29:02 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.112.171.41 with SMTP id ar9mr3774lbc.74.1385486941483; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:29:01 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d10si17382105lae.7.2013.11.26.09.29.00 for ; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:29:01 -0800 (PST) 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 1VlMPF-0001g9-QX for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:26:37 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VlMPF-0001fz-E2 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:26:37 +0000 Received: from smtpout4.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.68] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VlMPD-0006JT-Pb for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:26:36 +0000 Received: from AGB ([2.27.189.227]) by mwinf5d53 with ME id uHSb1m00C4uozEA03HSbgV; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 18:26:35 +0100 Message-ID: <00078D250F1A4AB9A55131079F716131@AGB> From: "Graham" To: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:26:35 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) 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: Not really , there where some weaker cw signals , but the time window was very short , band was quite empty , the 250 miles from the south coast makes a big difference ! 73 -G, From: "C. Groeger" Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 9:33 AM To: Subject: Re: LF: dk7fc cw 55 9 [...] Content analysis details: (0.2 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.12.242.68 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.2 STOX_REPLY_TYPE STOX_REPLY_TYPE X-Scan-Signature: 3f8d74a8c70dd416d0a3a1dbcb9bb89f Subject: Re: LF: dk7fc cw 55 9 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_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: 3388 Not really , there where some weaker cw signals , but the time window was very short , band was quite empty , the 250 miles from the south coast makes a big difference ! 73 -G, -------------------------------------------------- From: "C. Groeger" Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 9:33 AM To: Subject: Re: LF: dk7fc cw 55 9 > Thanks for report, Graham! > Did you also observe strong qrn at your site? > 73, df5qg > > Christian Groeger > > Graham schrieb: > >>DF5QG now 579 on 472.110 >> >>very big signal over 490 miles >> >> >>From: Stefan Schäfer >>Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 4:30 PM >>To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >>Subject: Re: LF: dk7fc cw 55 9 >> >> >> >>Am 24.11.2013 18:25, schrieb Graham: >> DK7FC in cw 559 dongle +inv L >> >>Hmmm, but i have not been active yesterday! Does the dongle decode CW? If >>so, it needs a firmware update :-) >> >> >> >> 742-390 ? >>= 352 ! >> >>73, Stefan/DK7FC >> >> >> >> >> G,