Re: LF: Weak signals

[MarkusVester@aol.com]

Dear Bob, Teo and LF,

tonight's signals sorted by frequency were

18:00...19:52  923.19...922.98 qrss120 "S52AB" 
18:02...18:24  922.06/21.96; 18:27...19:15  921.99/.89 dfcw100 DF6"NM" (0.3W EMRP)
17:02...19:21  921.73...921.71 qrss60 YU7"AR" 
18:00...20:44  921.58/.51...921.39/.31 dfcw180 G3"AQC"
http://members.aol.com/df6nm2/testEu0504022100.gif (142kB)

Unfortunately the detective's vision on signal timing was somewhat impaired, due to the fragmentation by his own transmitted dashes. But time and frequency of your trace clearly indicate that you have caught Teo's fifth "AR", which he sent from 18:27 to 18:42.

The signal was visible on both Argo30s (21mHz, 12s) and Argo120s (5mHz, 3s) settings. BTW my own preferred setting usually is "90s slow", as it provides a reasonably long screenfill duration with less "pixel-stretching" at 10 milliHz resolution.   

73 and all the best

Markus, DF6NM 


In einer eMail vom 02.04.2005 23:12:28 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit schreibt vernall@xtra.co.nz: 

> Hi all,
>
> It looks like more weak signals in captures viewed this morning.  I've sent 
> 30 and 120 second dot length Argo files to Detective Vester for analysis.
>
> 73, Bob ZL2CA