Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: Intercontinental LF waterholes

To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: Intercontinental LF waterholes
From: Rik Strobbe <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:00:11 +0100
In-reply-to: <88EEC52E6C874CCEB966804D073A3376@White>
References: <BC520BF69FBC4F4B9B8E1C9B8AAB8A9B@White> <88EEC52E6C874CCEB966804D073A3376@White>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Hello Marcus,

if all stations switch at local midnight (UTC of course) this would result that in Europe there will be sub-band switching over a 4 hours period (from UA at the east to G/CT at the west), a period that both windows might be filled with "locals".
Maybe it is better that all Europeans switch at the same moment (the same for North-America, and SE-Asia) ?

73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T

At 09:38 11/12/2009, you wrote:
Dear LF,
 
the passage should have said:
 
Taking into account the path of mutual darkness, this would mean that all stations should transmit in the UPPER band during their evenings until local midnight, and then QSY to the lower band for the rest of the night.
 
Sorry for the confusion.
 
73, Markus

From: Markus Vester
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 12:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: LF: Intercontinental LF waterholes

Dear LF group,
 
recently we find the "transatlantic waterhole" around 137.777 kHz quite busy. Several Europeans have started beaconing within this segment. And there has been some fast (QRSS3 or 10) activity, with wide traces covering up possible transatlantic DX signalling frequencies.
 
During the last years, we have attempted to split the frequency bands for both directions of transatlantic work. Traditional segments were around 137.777 kHz west-to-east (for Americans transmitting towards Eu), and around 136.320 kHz east-west (for Eu to stateside). Slow modes (QRSS or DFCW, 60 second and longer) were used almost exclusively there, and several stations were able to successfully cross the pond in either direction.
 
The situation has become a little more intricate as more stations from other parts of the world (eg. Asia, China, Japan) are joining the game with sensitive receivers and good signals. But I still think it would be helpful to separate RX and TX bands within each area as much as possible.
 
My suggestion would be to stick with the east-west versus west-east allocation of the two slots. Taking into account the path of mutual darkness, this would mean that all stations should transmit in the lower band during their evenings until local midnight, and then QSY to the lower band for the rest of the night. Receiver settings would of course be vice versa.
 
I'm aware that this scheme cannot be perfect and universal. It won't cover North-South hauls, and would not protect signals during early or late openings. But it's simple enough, and I believe it would still be very useful. Please don't get me wrong - I do not want to discourage anyone from putting out a signal, and certainly reject the notion of anything reminiscent of a "band police". I just think a little coordination may help all of us to be successful on this challenging and fascinating band.
 
Let me have your thoughts...
 
73 de Markus, DF6NM
 
http://freenet-homepage.de/df6nm/Grabber.htm
 
 
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>