Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.96.198 with SMTP id du6csp197280igb; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:30:42 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.57.243 with SMTP id l19mr1906177wjq.54.1384270241287; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:30:41 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h4si7933241wie.62.2013.11.12.07.30.40 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:30:41 -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 1VgEn6-0007XN-Dj for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:18:04 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VgEn6-0007XE-1Y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:18:04 +0000 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.100.212]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VgEn4-0001b1-Gc for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:18:02 +0000 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id rACEI0aX026745 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:18:00 +0100 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id rACEI0ww022750 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:18:00 +0100 Message-ID: <52823893.7000902@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:17:55 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?U3RlZmFuIFNjaMOkZmVy?= 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: <52817DCA.1050205@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: <52817DCA.1050205@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> 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: MF, I just see that there was a lot of TA DX last night, however local signals in a range of 300 km were very poor! Could it have to do with the elevation angle of the radiated signal, so that a flat angle results in less attenuation? Less number of hops, that's clear but maybe not only that.. DST levels were in the range of -40...-50 nT but that seems not to be problematic for 630m. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [129.206.100.212 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: cc2e5baae40f8f7a09b47e6877ef0bfb Subject: LF: MF propagation Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed 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 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 558 MF, I just see that there was a lot of TA DX last night, however local signals in a range of 300 km were very poor! Could it have to do with the elevation angle of the radiated signal, so that a flat angle results in less attenuation? Less number of hops, that's clear but maybe not only that.. DST levels were in the range of -40...-50 nT but that seems not to be problematic for 630m. Does someone know more? 73, Stefan/DK7FC