Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers
From: Scott Tilley <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 06:38:54 +0000
In-reply-to: <00ac01cb918d$4ff45520$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <005001cb917a$15cb1720$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <[email protected]> <00ac01cb918d$4ff45520$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6

Hey Mal

Sure my CW is up to whatever you are likely to get here on this path. The question is your operating skill up to scratch due to the extreme conditions on this path? Can you even calibrate a sound card, produce a DFCW signal etc?

No one has proved that it is even possible to heave a signal over the pole to VE7 yet. Are you willing to do that by conducting some exploratory tests (note I didn't say beacon).

I can produce a 1W EIRP signal that's all that matters and I have wire coming next week for a new even larger loop aimed at EU.

All QSOs I have had on 2200m no matter the dot length have been with the exchange of FULL calls and reports using as a minimum EME QSO guidelines. Unlike most HF QSOs that often require next to no more information exchanged other than some incoherent beeping at each other...

Had we observed your O X O procedure VA7LF would have the DX record with ZM2E...! What we proved was that we could do it when the prop cooperated. With my JA tests we completed a QSO.

So if you're up to a real experiment and adventure I'm willing to try a true exchange with you. But my terms are you need to open your mind and be willing to 'play nice' with me and everyone else and together we'll do the seemingly impossible and communicate over the pole with amateur equipment on 2200m.

If this is some form of chest pounding exercise I believe there is DX now on 27MHz so please QSY where you'll fit in better...

73 Scott










On 12/1/2010 7:24 PM, mal hamilton wrote:
OM
I will fire up but is your CW up to scratch? You will hear me but will I be
able to hear you?
I want callsigns exchanged and not O X O procedure
de g3kev

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Tilley"<[email protected]>
To:<[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers


So Mal

Why are you not calling CQ then?  I'm listening!!

Stop talking and start radiating some of that mind numbing ERP you have.

Scott


On 12/1/2010 5:06 PM, mal hamilton wrote:
I have some nice pics of my signal a few years back being received TA at
QRS 3 on 137 Kcs also 500 Kcs last year.
also NC1K was able to copy G3KEV and MM0ALM on normal CW in the past.
When there was an abundance of acty on 137 a few years ago I could copy
the
USA stations on QRS1 and normal CW.
For those serious about TA qso's a well engineered station and elevated
antenna will do the trick without a struggle. There is no need for QRS
slower than 30 sec dot.
VE1JG was a big player in the past along with VE1ZZ and both  able to copy
my CW
Many TA QSO'S have taken place in the past when there was lots of acty
from
the UK in particular. and I have made dozens of contacts especially around
this time of year. In the early days the USA had to reply xband usually
for
me on 7 Mcs because they did not have a permit for 137
At the present time some seem to be RE-INVENTING the wheel, obviously not
reading past history about LF.
de Mal/G3KEV


----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan Schäfer"<[email protected]>
To:<[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers


Hi Mike,

Yes, some thoughts:

Am 01.12.2010 15:36, schrieb Mike Dennison
I believe the danger is to regard this as the 'optimum' speed for DX
working, simply because the S/N ratio is good.
Is that really a danger?
    In practice, there is
another factor in play. There is often rapid and deep fading on a DX
path, often resulting in only parts of letters being received at this
speed, even though the peak signal is quite strong (see many of the
pictures of transatlantic reception regularly posted on this group).

The situation becomes worse if the final aim of experimenting with a
path is to have a two-way DX QSO. Even exchanging minimal
information, a QSO will take several hours, during which time the
conditions must hold up.
When was the last real QSO done in QRSS>= 30? I rember the contact
between VE7TIL and JA7NI but most of the active people are just
transmitting a character (representing their callsign) in beacon mode. I
have never seen a "CQ ... K" in 60 or 120.
So if one just wants to transmit a beacon signal it doesn't matter if
there is some QSB. As an example, XGJ is monitored very often most of
the nights. If the G would be lost (X_J)and in the next turn the J would
be lost (XG_), anyway everbody would know it't (XGJ). Furthermore the DX
interested OMs gets the confirmation on the other grabbers.
If a QSO is wanted, i fully agree with your opinion. But a QSO means
that both stations are sitting in front of the PC, so they can change
the RX to the wanted QRSS/DFCW mode.
Anyway, i am providing both QRSS-60 and QRSS-120 for TA and EU, so
people may chosse what they like :-)
Take a look at VE7TIL's excellent DCF39
graph to see how short a good DX opening usually is - perhaps an hour
if you are lucky.
...which wouldn't be enough for a (real) QSO in QRSS-60 but enough for
"FC" or "NM" or "NI" in QRSS-120.
The very few who have had transatlantic QSOs have used QRSS30 or at
most QRSS60. I am not aware of a successful two-way involving a
longer dot length.

I would suggest that DX beacons and grabbers use a =maximum= of 60s
dot length (though a second grabber screen could be provided for 120
etc if desired). In my opinion this would be more likely to result in
useful propagation data.

Done.
Any thoughts?

Mike, G3XDV
==========

73, Stefan






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