Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna |
| From: | Stefan Schäfer <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Sun, 09 Sep 2012 03:31:22 +0200 |
| In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
| References: | <[email protected]> <[email protected]> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 |
MF,Maybe they hope that a strong local station will answer the CQ call so they can at least do a few local QSOs? Probably it is a new experience for them and they didn't expect RX problems with such a proffessional antenna. Maybe a 30 dB attenuator would help them? Or the RX is completely overloaded, if they have QRM at S9... I find one can be happy to have an amateur generated MF signal which is nicely detectable and suitable for propagation and receive antenna tests even on far distant stations. And it is nice to see that there are some OMs who do the effort to use such a big antenna, including all the organisation. No need to complain about their poor RX situation. It is their first test and they will surely learn and make it better in the next test. 73, Stefan |
| Previous by Date: | Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna, jcraig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna, Stefan Schäfer |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna, jcraig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Re: LF: Re: Re: Re: DK0SWF antenna, uwe-jannsen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |