Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp209706igc; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:17:48 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.77.129 with SMTP id s1mr17847646wiw.56.1392729468056; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:17:48 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d15si14529502wjn.103.2014.02.18.05.17.47 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:17:48 -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; dkim=pass header.i=@mx.aol.com Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1WFkSf-0003H2-OW for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:11:45 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1WFkSf-0003Gt-0s for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:11:45 +0000 Received: from omr-d01.mx.aol.com ([205.188.252.208]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1WFkSa-0004ar-Pc for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:11:43 +0000 Received: from mtaomg-mba02.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mba02.mx.aol.com [172.26.133.112]) by omr-d01.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 43F2A700544DA for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:11:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-dfe002a.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dfe002.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.55.135]) by mtaomg-mba02.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id EC26638000086 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:11:38 -0500 (EST) References: To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Markus Vester X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 38394-BASIC Received: from 194.138.39.60 by webmail-d130.sysops.aol.com (149.174.18.20) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:11:38 -0500 Message-Id: <8D0FAC217BC15F8-964-A2A@webmail-d130.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.138.39.60] Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:11:38 -0500 (EST) x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1392729099; bh=nGH2Hq5hMzGSR+TLOIaRaUILxG7JjJL9yflwug4wEHs=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=FeacDk3nXMA3/dTKMNcEgYziPYX+bD2KioxKi5F+cPHL6XQkw3zNlNqEM+BPAYHPW mHcSrm2UojOrL00JyO98HHgtv72dLkFOBoajVudCGZXrEHTOIMOnurYxUTYKQ+g7zA fTYIv4hKGpThoXDQbPH5a03rdS4EThYCw7gVQTKQ= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1a857053035c0a4626 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 Alan, Peter,  I doubt that there is such a thing as "generally weak propagation" on these low frequencies, at least probably not for intra-European ranges. Of course we do see modulations of ionospheric ceiling height during SID's. But opposed to LF and MF, increased D-layer ionisation will probably not have the effect of an absorber beneath the reflecting E-layer. Looking at the grabbers, Russian Alpha and MSK signals appear no weaker than at other times. So the most likely cause for low background noise would be favourable weather with less lightning activity around Europe.  Best 73, Markus (DF6NM)  [...] Content analysis details: (-0.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [205.188.252.208 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (markusvester[at]aol.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 0b503eb45ffb894d1a22386be380366d Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Noise level low at 8270 :-) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8D0FAC217CCBF9F_964_27E5_webmail-d130.sysops.aol.com" 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=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_50_60, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN,HTML_MESSAGE 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 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8D0FAC217CCBF9F_964_27E5_webmail-d130.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Alan, Peter, =C2=A0 I doubt that there is such a thing as "generally weak propagation" on these= low frequencies,=C2=A0at least probably not for=C2=A0intra-European ranges= . Of course we do see modulations of=C2=A0ionospheric ceiling height=C2=A0d= uring SID's.=C2=A0But opposed to LF and MF, increased D-layer ionisation wi= ll probably not have=C2=A0the effect of an absorber beneath=C2=A0the reflec= ting E-layer. Looking at the grabbers,=C2=A0Russian Alpha and MSK signals= =C2=A0appear no=C2=A0weaker than at other times.=C2=A0So the most likely ca= use for low background noise=C2=A0would be favourable weather with less lig= htning activity around Europe. =C2=A0 Best 73, Markus (DF6NM) =C2=A0 -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: Alan Melia <alan.melia@btinternet.com> An: rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org> Verschickt: Mo, 17 Feb 2014 9:42 pm Betreff: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Noise level low at 8270 :-) Hi Peter it might be that simple, or it might be a very complicated mixture= :-)) yes static should be low at the moment (I havent looked at the Eu lig= hning charts) I could also be that your local car-repairer is off work with= 'flu, though this event is obviously far wider than just local conditions,= now we have a wider range of grabbers to sample for conditions. It is inte= resting because I would not expect the current geomagnetic conditions to ha= ve made that much difference......but it is interesting to ask the question= s :-)) The only solution is try it and see if it IS better. =C2=A0 Good Luck Alan G3NYK ----- Original Message -----=20 From: PA1SDB, Peter=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 7:31 PM Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: RE: Noise level low at 8270 :-) Hello Alan, Tnx for info ! It is so simple, but=C2=A0I did not=C2=A0thought about this. I thought it h= as more to do with low lightning levels or static's. It is still difficult for me=C2=A0to connect a link between audio frequency= 's and propagation... =C2=A0 73's, Peter. =C2=A0 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Alan Melia=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:54 PM Subject: LF: Re: Re: RE: Noise level low at 8270 :-) You need to be careful in what you interpret from this! the noise may be lo= w because the propagation is rubbish :-))=C2=A0 The conditions dont necessa= rily support this but we have just had a minor storm Kp=3D5 and the Dst was= depressed to -60nT.=20 =C2=A0 I remember early on, on 136kHz when we thought that the best time for DX wo= uld be around dawn.......except it turned out that the morning and evening = quiet periods were poor propagation periods as well.=C2=A0 You=C2=A0need a = signal to determine=C2=A0S/N :-)) particularly if N is changing. =C2=A0 Alan G3NYK =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: PA1SDB, Peter=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:19 PM Subject: LF: Re: RE: Noise level low at 8270 :-) Hello Bob, Interesting to see that the low noise today is at least=C2=A0"Europe wide" = :-) Perhaps even Worldwide ??? =C2=A0 I wonder if you publish your spectogram's online somewhere ? I think I did not see you in a 'grabber' list somewhere... =C2=A0 Unfortunately I don't see anything right now at 8270.014 in your spectogram= . I think to early to see first spikes :-) =C2=A0 First sign here today=C2=A0was at 16:20 UTC. =C2=A0 73's, Peter - PA1SDB =C2=A0 www.qsl.net/pa1sdb =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Bohuslav Coufal=20 To: 'rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org'=20 Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 3:47 PM Subject: LF: RE: Noise level low at 8270 :-) Me too https://www.dropbox.com/s/c4wx1dukmctmhxh/Mereni-8270-last.bmp =C2=A0 73, =C2=A0 Bob., OK2BUM =C2=A0 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacks= heep.org] On Behalf Of PA1SDB, Peter Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 4:40 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Noise level low at 8270 :-) =C2=A0 Hi ! =C2=A0 Low noise at http://www.ok2bvg.cz/vlfgrabber/=C2=A0! =C2=A0 Btw, here to :-) =C2=A0 73's, Peter - PA1SDB =C2=A0 www.qsl.net/pa1sdb =C2=A0 ----------MB_8D0FAC217CCBF9F_964_27E5_webmail-d130.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Hi Alan, Peter,
 
I doubt that the= re is such a thing as "generally weak propagation" on these low frequencies= , at least probably not for intra-European ranges. Of course we d= o see modulations of ionospheric ceiling height during SID's.&nbs= p;But opposed to LF and MF, increased D-layer ionisation will probably not = have the effect of an absorber beneath the reflecting E-layer. Lo= oking at the grabbers, Russian Alpha and MSK signals appear no&nb= sp;weaker than at other times. So the most likely cause for low backgr= ound noise would be favourable weather with less lightning activity ar= ound Europe.
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF= 6NM)
 

-----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: Alan Melia <alan.melia@btinternet.com>
An: rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Verschickt: Mo, 17 Feb 2014 9:42 pm
Betreff: LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Noise level low at 8270 :-)

Hi Peter it might be that simple, or it mi= ght be a very complicated mixture :-)) yes static should be low at the mome= nt (I havent looked at the Eu lighning charts) I could also be that your lo= cal car-repairer is off work with 'flu, though this event is obviously far = wider than just local conditions, now we have a wider range of grabbers to = sample for conditions. It is interesting because I would not expect the cur= rent geomagnetic conditions to have made that much difference......but it i= s interesting to ask the questions :-)) The only solution is try it and see= if it IS better.
 
Good Luck
Alan
G3NYK
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 7:31= PM
Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: RE: Noise l= evel low at 8270 :-)

Hello Alan,
Tnx for info !
It is so simple, but I did not thought = about this. I thought it has more to do with low lightning levels or static= 's.
It is still difficult for me to connect a li= nk between audio frequency's and propagation...
 
73's, Peter.
 
----- Original Message -----
= From: Alan Melia
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:54= PM
Subject: LF: Re: Re: RE: Noise level= low at 8270 :-)

You need to be careful in what you interpr= et from this! the noise may be low because the propagation is rubbish :-))&= nbsp; The conditions dont necessarily support this but we have just had a m= inor storm Kp=3D5 and the Dst was depressed to -60nT.
 
I remember early on, on 136kHz when we tho= ught that the best time for DX would be around dawn.......except it turned = out that the morning and evening quiet periods were poor propagation period= s as well.  You need a signal to determine S/N :-)) particul= arly if N is changing.
 
Alan
G3NYK
 
 
  
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:19= PM
Subject: LF: Re: RE: Noise level low= at 8270 :-)

Hello Bob,
Interesting to see that the low noise today is at= least "Europe wide" :-)
Perhaps even Worldwide ???
 
I wonder if you publish your spectogram's online = somewhere ?
I think I did not see you in a 'grabber' list som= ewhere...
 
Unfortunately I don't see anything right now at 8= 270.014 in your spectogram.
I think to early to see first spikes :-)
 
First sign here today was at 16:20 UTC.
 
73's, Peter - PA1SDB
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 3:47= PM
Subject: LF: RE: Noise level low at = 8270 :-)

Me too https://www.dro= pbox.com/s/c4wx1dukmctmhxh/Mereni-8270-last.bmp
 
73,
 
Bob., OK2BUM
 
From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.o= rg] On Behalf Of PA1SDB, Peter
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 4:40 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@bl= acksheep.org
Subject: LF: Noise level low at 8270 :-)