Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+183\s+kHz\s+BC\s+Q5\s+in\s+NC\s+at\s+sunset\!\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+183\s+kHz\s+BC\s+Q5\s+in\s+NC\s+at\s+sunset\!\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Dexter McIntyre W4DEX" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:36:16 +0000; I did move down to 920 to avoid Dex's Loran line. Dave, Sorry to say but you moved out of my Argo window. I am watching and uploading 920.5 to 923.5. Check out my loran lines at the real time Argo f; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00007.html (10,120 bytes)
2. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Dexter McIntyre W4DEX" <[email protected]>; Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 23:58:27 +0000; I'll radiate a test tonight on 135.921 (ish) dot 60 if things look hopeful. about -10dbW It's on now. Dave, Try to avoid 135,921.053 if you can please. That is a local loran line for me. See my live; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00008.html (10,097 bytes)
3. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Dexter McIntyre W4DEX" <[email protected]>; Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 22:48:39 +0000; Also 153, 162 and 177 kHz Q5 now at 2248 UT. Good signal on 183 kHz BC here in NC at sunset. Dex; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00009.html (9,483 bytes)
4. LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Dexter McIntyre W4DEX" <[email protected]>; Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 22:23:56 +0000; Good signal on 183 kHz BC here in NC at sunset. Dex; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00010.html (8,920 bytes)
5. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Dave Pick" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:39:39 +0100; John. Thanks for those, quite unambiguous, and my frequency calibration seems to agree with yours! There was someone on 922 at midnight but they went off and I didn't see anything from this side over; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00076.html (11,940 bytes)
6. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Dave Pick" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 09:19:10 +0100; John. I'd be interested to see that ( I was asleep so didn't se it live). The DC input to the PA is only 250W so QRSS10 would certainly have been possible at full power. I did move down to 920 to avo; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00077.html (11,305 bytes)
7. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Dave Pick" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 00:45:27 +0100; I'll radiate a test tonight on 135.921 (ish) dot 60 if things look hopeful. about -10dbW It's on now. The grabber is on too. http://www.wireless.org.uk/grab/ 73 Dave G3YXM Also 153, 162 and 177 kHz Q; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00078.html (10,407 bytes)
8. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Joe Craig" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:10:54 -0330 (NST); John, What do you think are the odds of CW between here and Holden (about 1000 miles)? I've been toying with the idea a bit. Joe VO1NA Dave, CW would have been very ambitious under those conditions.; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00242.html (11,492 bytes)
9. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "John Andrews" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:01:25 +0100; Dave, Given that one of the big guns would probably have 15dB advantage on that signal it might be worth monitoring reception until a peak is seen then trying a CW call? Means staying up all night th; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00262.html (10,811 bytes)
10. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "John Andrews" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:07:56 +0100; Dave, As it turned out, there were only two peaks that permitted any copy. Unfortunately, I goofed and didn't capture all of the first peak. It did show part of the "Y" and the complete "XM." Here is; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00263.html (10,628 bytes)
11. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "John Andrews" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 03:39:41 +0100; I got the end of the "Y," followed by a clear "XM" on 135.920 ending around 0130. The signal then faded, and I had a half-hour of elevated local noise. As of 0230, I can see a faint trace on 135.920,; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00264.html (10,179 bytes)
12. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "John Andrews" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:11:16 +0100; Dave, Keep sending! Am getting what I believe is your signal on 135.920 (exactly). Screen shots will follow when I have more copy. John Andrews, W1TAG; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00265.html (9,804 bytes)
13. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "Laurence KL1X" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 06:54:35 -0900; Mine too ! two overlapping screens 135,920.8-925.5 dot 60 Laurence KL1X operating remote in W5... uploadis viewable at http://www.kl1x.com Dave, Sorry to say but you moved out of my Argo window. I am; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00289.html (10,219 bytes)
14. Re: LF: 183 kHz BC Q5 in NC at sunset! (score: 1): Author: "LAWRENCE MAYHEAD" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 17:32:49 +0100; John. Thanks for those, quite unambiguous, and my frequency calibration seems to agree with yours! Thats great Dave, especially for 100mW, shows you dont need the full 1W to get across. Also I did'n; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2004-01/msg00309.html (10,892 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]