Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: LF: MF/630M

from [David Bowman] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: MF/630M
From: David Bowman <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2018 23:46:39 +0000
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=4mh/fWh1MuT7WK3unkla4S+qApMA8Ay1uQ9Bjr3FZsA=; b=C3JCf8rGvz3guTcY7FrjF9ox/Ki4aFryl4ivNxmgjoANwn77puCB+yEZmcPcLy7nSY ylR7kZN7B5Ys6mqPuHdXzI1fP0phUNGIbTxMwsvzdx258TjtVYHD1MaBx1oDyOfAprDo ULdbl5km33HTtNj1YnZzqORoWOrDTVk8EetUK8GZb3OYlq4gbuBe4vzvZIspC5bqHONN QV6lC3NeEiyJEdBeCYKbiFuey5ULjlzJAKGHccjsD0nocR1tFylCeX+58OKeXYTc3gDB m3z3jaKHTZos+vnOBS8T5S50gMO/rkUIP/ObjvZyJDHnjm82TptXq4Sn+ohqisGz/t85 QLqg==
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Hi Paul

I had a similar exchange with Bob WA1OJN a couple of weeks ago.

Here's what I said about QRSS, but I agree, JT9 should be possible although I think you probably need -26.

If you want to let me know when you are calling CQ, I can certainly switch the receiver to look for JT9.
It sounds easy, but I have let the RX run for a few hours on different nights after 01.00 ....but have only seen 1 station from Europe.

Sorry about Bouvet, there's a lot of people here who have spent the last few weeks upgrading equipment just to make 1 QSO  !

WA1OJN:  How does the ability of QRSS compare to WSPR and JT9 as far as weak signals?  I see it is dependant upon the speed - looks like it should be able to be comparable to WSPR at the very slow speeds.  What speeds do you "normally" use?
G0MRF:    3 second or 5 second dots is a good place to start.   To speed up the process, you give your full call in a CQ, then when called reduce your ID to just the last 3 characters.
So  a QSO would go something like this:

      CQ de WA1OJN  WA1OJN k
      WA1OJN  N1BUG OO K
      N1BUG  OJN  R MM K
      OJN BUG  R 73

Note the use of moonbounce reporting rather than 599 etc.    Strong sigs are an O report.  M is equivalent to an S4 or 5.    T  is weak and barely readable.

WA1OJN:  Can you advise what carrier frequencies are generally used for QRSS on 630M? 
G0MRF:  (I think I said just above WSPR so people stand a chance of seeing your CW)

73

David

On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:47 AM, N1BUG <[email protected]> wrote:
Just think how many trans-Atlantic QSOs could be made. Some, like myself are very interested but the primary problem is no one awake on the east side of the pond at the right times!

I have seen signals strong enough for normal CW only a few times. JT9 would be easy and requires only about 3 dB more signal to decode than WSPR2. I am looking for information on QSO operating procedures for QRSS. I have only seen it used for beaconing.

I've been off MF for a while as I put up a temporary HF antenna to work the Bouvet DXpedition and it severely messed up tuning of the MF antenna. Now that the Bouvet trip has been aborted I will be taking that antenna down and returning to MF as soon as I get a reasonable weather window. I will likely be on MF for a week or so before moving to LF.

73,
Paul N1BUG



On 02/04/2018 05:05 AM, mal hamilton wrote:
Last nite results good but not unusual, had reports from

AA1A, KA1R, VE1YY

Transatlantic contacts seem a regular occurrence at present on MF between the UK and N.America

Most operators are using WSPR but more CW both normal and QRSS would be welcome like it used to be some years ago, ie real QSO mode

73 de mal/g3kev/io94sh


[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: LF: MF/630M, N1BUG
Next by Date:  VLF: 8270 Hz signals, Paul Nicholson
Previous by Thread:  Re: LF: MF/630M, N1BUG
Next by Thread:  Re: LF: MF/630M, N1BUG
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]