Re: LF: VLF traces

[Gary - G4WGT <g4wgt@tiscali.co.uk>]

Graham, LF,

It looks pretty close to me, are you some kind of "book worm" finding/knowing these quotes ?? Hi.

73, Gary - G4WGT.

On 12 March 2011 11:47, Graham <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

Acts 20:35   may  be  applicable  in this case ?

--------------------------------------------------
From: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 8:43 AM
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: Re: LF: VLF traces

Yes Markus
But I do not intend to wait hours, weeks and months to observe a signal at
rediculous narrow bandwidths. My limit of time is QRS 60 and preferably
Faster.
We need the transmitting stations to increase power ie more ERP then there
would be no need for uH bandwidths and year long dashes hi
de mal/g3kev

----- Original Message -----
From: "Markus Vester" <markusvester@aol.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 9:30 PM
Subject: Re: LF: VLF traces

Dear Mal,

with all due respect, I very much disagree here.

Whenever I see a clear trace appear at the right time and within a milliHz
of a confirmed and correctly calibrated frequency, I have hardly a doubt
about the validity of the reception. Even more so if the transmission can

be

verified by comparison to a calibrated grabber in another location.

It seems that the G3KEV antenna does have excellent sensitivity at VLF. It
would be fantastic if you could augment that with a stable, properly
calibrated, and narrowband reception system. SpecLab has made that so easy
now - throw out the wildly drifting "receiver", connect your antenna
directly to the soundcard instead, lock to one of your MSK neighbours (GBZ
or GQD), and your in the game.

Best regards,
Markus (DF6NM)


From: mal hamilton
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 5:57 PM
To: rsgb
Subject: LF: VLF traces


I can see a couple of vy weak traces around 8970 but this is no guarantee
who it might be because there is no ID. Frequency alone is not a VALID
report- it could be anything.
G3KEV