Good for emissions too Ed  wet road = no smoke
G,)
[notice there is no abs, wheel is locked , so any nonsense
about water clearing is not relevant, as the wheel is not
turning]
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: ULF: 5 wavelengths on the 101 km band? Valid or
not?
Hi Stefan
I am convinced, but do it again.
On UK TV many years ago there was an advertisement for car tyres, they
didn't use an actor but an ex chief of police to say "I am convinced that this
is a contribution to road safety". The one thing he didn't sound was convinced.
I cant write with that tone in my voice. :-)
73 Eddie G3ZJO
On 11/02/2017 13:49, DK7FC wrote:
Hi all,
Meanwhile my 1 week taking transmission, starting 01.FEB.2017
23:30 UTC on 2970.000000 Hz at 150...170 mA is completed. I tried to leave a
trace/peak into a range beyong 3 wavelengths.
Renato Romero / IK1QFK
is running a 5 uHz FFT spectrogram on 2970 Hz. He's using a well working E
field antenna in Cumiana/Italy.
The spectrogram is running since christmas
evening 2016, available at http://www.webalice.it/rromero/live_cumiana/last-LFtest_2970.jpg
There
are time markers in 1 week intervals.
I can see a dash, a trace right
on the frequency. It appeared 2 days after i started transmitting, which is
expected with an FFT window time of nearly 3 days. The SNR was up to 12 dB
during the visual observation of incoming spectra.
Partly, the trace
disappered during the transmission time (destructive interference with QRN).
However i can see a resulting trace of a high average SNR and exact (!)
frequency stability relative to the other traces beeing present in the
spectrogram.
I would tend to call it a serious detection of my signal.
Spectrogram experts, what's your opinion please?
The distance is quite
exactly at 5 wavelength on that 101 km band!
It would be a first
detection on ULF (0.3...3 kHz) between DL - I !
73,
Stefan
![Avast logo]()
|
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
