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 w85LmcV0006254 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 23:48:39 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1fxfab-0006Mf-E7 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 22:43:53 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1fxfaT-0006MQ-Pb for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 22:43:45 +0100 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91_59-0488984) (envelope-from ) id 1fxfaS-0003tz-6Z for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 22:43:44 +0100 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89E5C20FC1 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 23:43:43 +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=1536183823; bh=+Z5WZMkIhFaK0+7aCFuWPVj9DZ6DWpNOfC/5ZlU+hlY=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=GVkP7YmlrnvOzxFid6Peeg98yVndEV8YeqZ3NxCORA7C5TsXM9KnBVK+rmB8FLMF7 m4OpIdk9puMHdKW5nCta5bcZ4xQUzDRK/n8J19qPCHK357RQjXlJgNPpcpfT6A7C1a jGEHTw1VSRtRCZMLxX0LMbvRmb+ap9xtwyJUmUbK6X3Ky17lOD5aSYIOiz4LSy/0nE SyYmSJDwCqkaE1JA2RMv4ez5wvxoX61FsbcpEIfhUIhPxUK2sOtQ4hFXG/7K4pELPf G7sQ5pusyDgAn/iSX24hsPJSsgjTx8mqctKZPRV5oOpTyZ4KKg0FVMdgijLZ8blu1K xneqd/sU3aFxA== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 425HJZ6jfCz9rxQ for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 23:43:42 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5B904E0E.7010304@posteo.de> Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 23:43:42 +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: <5B8FD14A.2080403@posteo.de> <022101d4452f$a9c90510$fd5b0f30$@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <022101d4452f$a9c90510$fd5b0f30$@comcast.net> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) 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 Jim, Thanks. Yes, i actually noticed the the signal was not as stable as expected. The frequency on the TX side was absolutely stable, as well as the phase. But on the TX side i saw that the SNR did not rise with the time as expected (e.g. 3 dB when integrating 2 hours instead of 1 hour). The noise did not change significantly during that time. I did not expect this effect on other VLF or ULF frequencoes so far. Unfortunately the signal is not strong enough to watch the SNR in smaller steps, e.g. in 15 minute segments. Anyway, i wanted to put a step on that band and i've done it. So now i can conitune on 970 Hz now which was/is my next goal. I started to construct a 500 W PA operating on 12 V directly, using 2x 2x IRFP3206 which is no problem on that frequency :-) [...] Content analysis details: (-2.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [185.67.36.66 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 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 32d4aaaf019758ff5a0d8e92eec683e6 Subject: Re: LF: RE: First far field detection at 1570 Hz 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 Jim, Thanks. Yes, i actually noticed the the signal was not as stable as expected. The frequency on the TX side was absolutely stable, as well as the phase. But on the TX side i saw that the SNR did not rise with the time as expected (e.g. 3 dB when integrating 2 hours instead of 1 hour). The noise did not change significantly during that time. I did not expect this effect on other VLF or ULF frequencoes so far. Unfortunately the signal is not strong enough to watch the SNR in smaller steps, e.g. in 15 minute segments. Anyway, i wanted to put a step on that band and i've done it. So now i can conitune on 970 Hz now which was/is my next goal. I started to construct a 500 W PA operating on 12 V directly, using 2x 2x IRFP3206 which is no problem on that frequency :-) 73, Stefan Am 05.09.2018 17:46, schrieb hvanesce@comcast.net: > Stefan, > > Excellent news, a great day for ULF! > > 1570 Hz seems like rough propagation terrain (unpredictable spatial nulls > and temporal phase variations at distances less than 500 km); I wonder if > the earth-loop antenna magnetic field pattern helps with these. > > It seems that the rough part of ULF is yielding to your experimental > adjustments and innovation, well done! > > Regards, > > Jim AA5BW > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of DK7FC > Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 8:51 AM > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: ULF: First far field detection at 1570 Hz > > ULF, > > Last sunday i finally managed to detect a carrier transmission on the > 191 km band in the far field. In fact the distance is higher than 1/4 > wavelength. A new lowest frequency of a signal generated by amateurs, > detected in the far field. > > At 250 W RF power i transmitted for 2 hours (starting 08:08 UTC) on my 900m > long ground loop antenna. It seems to be a very hard band with poor > propagation. Furthermore my RX antenna becomes deaf below 2 kHz. So the S/N > is much lower as expected when comparing to the results at 1970 Hz. > Two spectrograms are arrached, showing the short trace in 424 uHz and > 212 uHz. > > Before finally entering the far field in the frequency range below 1 kHz it > may be necessary to build up an E field RX at the RX QTH. I first step for > that was done yesterday. > > To be continued... > > 73, Stefan > > >