Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp146700igc; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:49:40 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.192.233 with SMTP id hj9mr10405591wjc.78.1389383379239; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:49:39 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c9si4264656wjy.47.2014.01.10.11.49.38 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:49:39 -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 1W1heb-0006jT-Iw for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:22:01 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1W1heb-0006jK-5x for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:22:01 +0000 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 1W1heZ-0000kj-1d for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:22:00 +0000 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 s0AJLv7u031454 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:51:57 -0330 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:51:57 -0330 (NST) From: jcraig@mun.ca X-X-Sender: jcraig@plato.ucs.mun.ca To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: ,<52C6EE6C.31591.1BEE17D@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> <52C711F7.2080905@gmx.de> <52CFFB49.7060803@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) 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 Markus, That is most interesting. I remember that occasion when TX was on later than usual. It will take a bit of tinkering to get the phase coherent exciter to the class E TX, but this is long overdue anyway. Would you like a continuous QRP carrier without any keying? [...] Content analysis details: (-0.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.1 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 7f2e5481aa97b3cbff3d653a1b2ddfbd Subject: Re: LF: Hartmut's Grabber -- QRP TA 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 Hi Markus, That is most interesting. I remember that occasion when TX was on later than usual. It will take a bit of tinkering to get the phase coherent exciter to the class E TX, but this is long overdue anyway. Would you like a continuous QRP carrier without any keying? Best Regards Joe VO1NA On Fri, 10 Jan 2014, Markus Vester wrote: > Joe, > > when you were sending CW a couple of days ago, the coherent carrier was detectable in my 438 uHz spectrogram in broad daylight, until 12 UT! So I'm wondering how a low power straight carrier would fare during night and day? > > Best 73, > Markus > > > > From: jcraig@mun.ca > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 7:44 PM > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: Hartmut's Grabber -- QRP TA > > > Hi Hartmut, > > Yes, DCF39 must be a real pest as it is so close geographically and > in frequency. You seem to be dealing with it very effectively. > Thank-you for running the grabber. > > It's a pest over here too, but sometimes useful to check the RX system. > > The TX will be on again tonight. In keeping with the spirit of energy > conservation being requested by our power company, the TX will run > at <5 watts tonight to the 100m wire. I hope to watch for the signals > on your grabber. > > Cheers > Joe VO1NA > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2014, Hartmut Wolff wrote: > >> Hello Joe, >> >> thank you for your kind words! >> >> Still struggling here with my local Pest DCF39. Between 03:15 and 04:40 UTC >> DCF39 was sending a higher pulse frequence. That is the reason of the higher >> noise level at that time and poorer reception of your beacon. >> >> Thank you for your signal! >> >> 73 >> Hartmut >> >> >> Am 2014-01-10 13:26, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca: >>> >>> Hello Hartmut and Group, >>> >>> Even with only 65 watts from the TX, strong QRSS100 signals were seen on >>> Hartmut's grabber at 137.777 so the power was cut to <10 watts by >>> reducing the drain voltage of the class E amp to 12 V. The grabber >>> traces faded substantially, but rebounded to clearly readable around >>> 0630 utc. >>> >>> Congrats on your impressive RX setup, Martmut! >>> >>> 73 >>> Joe VO1NA >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >