Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id w4LCoKTk000771 for ; Mon, 21 May 2018 14:50:23 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1fKkC4-0007e1-S1 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 May 2018 13:45:40 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1fKkC4-0007ds-II for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 May 2018 13:45:40 +0100 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91_59-0488984) (envelope-from ) id 1fKkC2-0004QE-NG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 May 2018 13:45:39 +0100 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47FFD211C7 for ; Mon, 21 May 2018 14:45:25 +0200 (CEST) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=posteo.de Result=Signature OK DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.de; s=2017; t=1526906726; bh=70J6SnPyCBheyStxVP/Cufk5djBgpIYNwSDUP4Awn+g=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=qfF2+lA03JjherUMWqwEHSNxkQjHn8X31mcV6Dt+mZB2XpC9MXYI2Q+rQ2pzDo/Re ixkr07zy4LBGFvOrBCiw/R8Q0riozfE0iRTh/ubHsbNgQjvEZHDgKmOm70j8LRJJ6n VHUPn+f75LqLem4QSI4I0ySxnubLis2FgMge5j8yHVOFm9Th4aSQMDhg8jWgnUBd58 1DPAtvseYQyxKd05SBJfGTuqnwC0dJTIFuUKE5X7+FTPJsBNVPh2Yd1+g69pLS/GSr 7av6dgN9eyRBT1JbDR9KdKhs4b5vgfFxN0qj82Lcyq9X1JwQodK+wjS0st9VVVl3Ps Ln4xtTSbLbrbQ== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 40qJQ81VRXz9rxG for ; Mon, 21 May 2018 14:44:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5B02BF40.7080000@posteo.de> Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 14:44:48 +0200 From: DK7FC 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: <5B017AE8.3080103@posteo.de> <5B02B1DB.7060503@posteo.de> In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Hi Joe, Pity. There was another message showing up. It was '@' but i had doubts although the Eb/N0 was shown higher. Now i'm back on the N-S antenna for Riccardos transmission. We can try again in some days. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [185.67.36.65 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 1.6 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS Subject is all capitals 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: ead411ce91f9601ce3974c7575797436 Subject: Re: LF: NA VLF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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 Hi Joe, Pity. There was another message showing up. It was '@' but i had doubts although the Eb/N0 was shown higher. Now i'm back on the N-S antenna for Riccardos transmission. We can try again in some days. You see i need two antennas on the tree, or better 3! Thanks for the experiment. 73, Stefan Am 21.05.2018 14:34, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca: > Hi Stefan, > > Sorry, that's not it. The WX was wet last night and there was some > arcing which probably didn't help. The WX will be dry so let's > try again tonight and if that fails, we can try your settings. > > Thanks for monitoring. > > 73 > Joe > > On Mon, 21 May 2018, DK7FC wrote: > >> Hello Joe, >> >> I think i've got your message. But it is very weak, quite close to >> the limit. The message is 'T', right? >> >> From: vtcat -T2018-05-20_23:00,+7h Joe1ch.vt | vtraw -oa | ./iqnorm2 >> | ebnaut -dp16K23A -N1 -S30 -k21 -c4 -r1 -L534849 -PS -f9 -v >> >> i got as the best result: >> phase 58 150 120 120 90 >> found rank 223512 ber 4.4898e-01 Eb/N0 0.6 M -3.561031494e+02 ph 58 >> 150,120,120,90 [T] >> carrier phase: 17.6 deg >> carrier Eb/N0: 0.2 dB >> carrier Es/N0: -21.21 dB >> carrier S/N: 7.73 dB in 42.5 uHz, -35.98 dB in 1Hz, -69.96 dB in 2.5kHz >> >> >> 73, Stefan >> >> >> Am 20.05.2018 17:33, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca: >>> >>> Hi Stefan and thank-you for the encouraging report. At the moment, all >>> is set (I hope!) for: >>> >>> One character, 8.2700075 kHz, >>> 2300, 1100 utc, 16K23A, CRC-21, >>> 784 symbols, 30 seconds >>> >>> It will take some time to change to the settings you suggested -- we >>> can >>> try this after. >>> >>> 73 and tnx agn >>> >>> Joe >>> >>> On Sun, 20 May 2018, DK7FC wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Joe, >>>> >>>> I searched for your last nights carrier in my recordings and found >>>> an impressive SNR, totally unexpected for this time in the year. >>>> See attachment. >>>> The carrier reaches 10.97 dB S/N in 39.7 uHz when starting at 23 >>>> UTC. This would easily decode a 1 char message. >>>> I remember we tried some weeks ago without success, even when >>>> stacking several days or nights. >>>> >>>> Do we want to try again to detect a 1 char message? >>>> Based on the last nights results i would suggest: 1 char, 16K21A, >>>> CRC26, Start 23:00 UTC, 30 sec symbols >>>> >>>> HW? :-) >>>> >>>> 73, Stefan >>>> >>>> Am 18.05.2018 01:54, schrieb jcraig@mun.ca: >>>>> >>>>> Hello VLF >>>>> >>>>> The TX is QRV 8270.0075 Hz 10 uW ERP unmodulated carrier. >>>>> >>>>> 73 >>>>> Joe VO1NA >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >