LF: RE: AW: Re: LF TA

["Dave G3WCB" <ganymede444@btopenworld.com>]

Hi, Tom.

 

Caught this from you this morning at about 04:20 utc...

 

73 Dave G3WCB IO91RM

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]On Behalf Of Thomas Eckart
Sent: 01 February 2006 15:56
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: LF: AW: Re: LF TA

Hi Jay,

ok and thanks for response to my question.

So I think I'll use the 136319.5 khz for test.

 

Best 73' hope that you will see me! :-)

 

Tom DL4EAU

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]Im Auftrag von Jay Rusgrove
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 1. Februar 2006 16:29
An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Betreff: LF: Re: LF TA

Tom

 

136319 or 136320 should be fine here in terms of no interference - the closest loran line is at 320.3 and will not be a problem. Don't know if anyone has already spoken for those frequencies, though.

 

Jay, W1VD

----- Original Message -----

From: DL4EAU@t-online.de

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 6:56 AM

Subject: LF: LF TA

Hi all,

I want to test TA this night.
What is a good frequency?
Is 136.319KHz or 136.320KHz a good choice?

I have made a test this morning. At 04:20h UTC I TX only one EAU in
QRSS30

73' Tom DL4EAU