Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: SAQ

To: [email protected]
Subject: LF: Re: SAQ
From: "Petr Maly \(Seznam\)" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:43:40 +0200
References: <001901c102c8$93b65780$9f5c01d5@dave>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
I heard SA6Q in the morning calling cq (cw) on 137.56.  They called cq but
they didn't give any QRX so it was not clear whether they listen to CW or
Visual-CW on 136 kHz band or HF. I called them in both modes in vain.
Did anybody worked them on LF?
Tranmission on 17.2 kHz was clear 589.

73 Petr OK1FIG


----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Sergeant <[email protected]>
To: rsgb_lf_group <[email protected]>
Cc: G4BRA <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 9:24 AM
Subject: LF: SAQ


From Dave G3YMC

SAQ on 17.2kHz copied 589 both sessions on my 'bit of string' untuned
longwire.
Solid copy despite intermittent elecrical QRN at a similar strength
(thermostat or
similar).  However the signal was many db below GBRs enormous signal.

John Sexton wrote:
>The message wasn't very interesting:

I agree.  It seems John's transcript was done with his morse copier
software rather
than by ear.  What fooled me was the proliferation of not normally used
puctuation
characters.  Perhaps it shows how inappropriate morse is for sending
things like web
site addresses, but I was particularly fooled by the + sign (I think)
before the FAX
telephone number (+46 for Sweden).  Don't think I have ever heard a + on
CW before!!

>Before restarting in the afternoon, I noticed the frequency going up and
>down a bit - problems with the regulator?

There was noticeable chirp on the signal at all times, especially on
dashes.

SA6Q not heard on 136 but it was probably while I was out in the morning.

73s Dave G3YMC
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://www.dsergeant.btinternet.co.uk










<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>