From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27244 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 01:43:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 01:43:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xJvR-0001f5-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 02:37:33 +0100 Received: from tomts1.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.139] helo=tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xJvQ-0001f0-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 02:37:32 +0100 Received: from server1 ([206.172.245.41]) by tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000601013658.XYUZ15500.tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net@server1>; Wed, 31 May 2000 21:36:58 -0400 Message-ID: <004901bfcb69$03f25140$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: "Talbot Andrew" , rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: DDS Board Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 21:30:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Andy: Please consider running the pc trace from Pin 18 of the PIC to Pin 8 of the AD9850 over near the edge of the board and putting some extra contact pads on the line so it will be possible with minimum risk to get at the FQ_UD line for external coherent control of the signaling events. I would also be prepared to pay a bit more for the board if you had a prototyping area on the edge of the board, say about 50% of the size of the basic board. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14791 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 08:48:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 08:48:58 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xQYT-000304-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 09:42:17 +0100 Received: from mserv1a.u-net.net ([195.102.240.34]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xQYS-0002zz-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 09:42:16 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1a.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 12xQYh-00044o-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 09:42:32 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from denizh by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 09:32:01 +0100 From: "George Brown" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Organization: Radio Society of Great Britain To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 09:31:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: SAQ times X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: georgeb@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I can confirm the times at which SAQ will be on the air on July 2nd, the information coming by e-mail from Lennart Benson at Grimeton. SAQ is due on the air at: 0830, 0845, 1230 and 1245 UTC. George Brown, M5ACN. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 282 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 08:57:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 08:57:28 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xQgz-00033A-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 09:51:05 +0100 Received: from chalfont.mail.easynet.net ([195.40.1.44]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xQgy-000333-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 09:51:04 +0100 Received: from kevin (tnt-14-172.easynet.co.uk [212.134.24.172]) by chalfont.mail.easynet.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 12F75F8835 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 09:51:01 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <003e01bfcba6$70b54200$ac1886d4@kevin> From: "Kevin Ravenhill" To: "LF Group" Subject: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 09:48:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: There's a lot of discussion going on at the moment on the US "LowFER" mailing list about the relative merits of slow CW versus BPSK (in this case relating to the COHERENT/AFRICA software by Bill de Carle, VE2IQ). The general consensus of opinion seems to be that if you are going to use "machine" modes, BPSK has considerable superiority over any form of slow CW for the kind of very weak signals often encountered on the LF bands. Estimates of the effective improvement range from 6dB to 23dB depending on what factors are taken into account! At the risk of causing some heated discussion, I'm curious to know the views of members of this list - particularly in relation to future transatlantic attempts. Also, does anyone have an idea of the relative usage of slow CW (QRSs and related FSK modes) versus modes like PSK31/PSK08 etc, in Europe? My impression is that various forms of slow CW are still favoured by most people (and perhaps rightly so, in terms of picking the best/most convenient mode for what you are trying to do), but I haven't been able to monitor the LF bands for some time so I don't really know what the current situation is like. For anyone who isn't subscribed to the abovementioned list and wishes to subscribe, send an email to majordomo@qth.net with no title and with "subscribe lowfer" in the body of the text. You'll get a return email with a password which has to be sent back, after which you'll be subscribed. Regards Kevin, G1HDQ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11738 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 09:15:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 09:15:12 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xQvu-00038m-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 10:06:30 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xQvt-00038h-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 10:06:29 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 12xQvp-00023r-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 10:06:25 +0100 Message-ID: <2062.200006010906@gemini> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 10:13:27 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Diversity reception References: In-reply-to: X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear LF Group, The Idea of having several widely separated, synchronised receivers for diversity reception sounds rather like the 'Very Long Baseline Interferometer' techniques used by radioastronomers. Presumably one could use an existing broadcast carrier, or perhaps the TV colour burst signal, as a clock signal for synchronisation, to make the system a bit simpler. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5118 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 10:49:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 10:49:45 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xSRk-0003Wr-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 11:43:28 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xSRj-0003Wl-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 11:43:27 +0100 Received: from isis (usercp09.uk.uudial.com [62.188.156.38]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA21647 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 11:42:11 +0100 (BST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 11:42:44 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: LF: Aerial tests. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Re Jim's aerial tests, I had a word with my pal the (retired) Decca aerial guru and showed him some of the emails. He said : (a) If both aerials are vertically polarised only then there shouldn't be any difference between their radiated fields if they're radiating the same power because both are electrically very small. The only difference would be in their conversion efficiency (RF in to RF out). If there is a genuine difference in observed field strength then it simply means there is something wrong in the calculation of ERP - ae efficiency perhaps. Decca obtained their ae. efficiency figures by feeding with a known amount of power and making absolute field strength observations at multiple distant points allowing for different path conductivities. (b) If the small one has an assymetric horizontal component (flat-top) this will complicate matters considerably since it will radiate both vertical and horizontally-polarised and there will be interaction between them that will affect the radiation pattern. So it would be unlikely to have a circular polar pattern and this might account for some of the observed variations. Said it would be better from this viewpoint to make a "T" rather than a "L", then the horizontal would cancel out. (c) Jim's precautions against interaction between aerials were correct and with the big one grounded there would have been very little, if any. between the aerials themselves. However, the small one would have been sharing the earth mat of the big one since it was well within the induction field so it was probably more efficient than thought. (d) The dropped wires were put in simply to increase capacitance back up to the standard Decca 3750 pf. All their coils etc were designed for this figure and it was much cheaper to do this than to have to design and build new coil systems. Don't forget Decca had to transmit five frequencies simultaneously every 20 seconds (lane idents) and getting the same power at the correct phases without any interaction was quite a problem. Hence the complicated ATU coil setup. (e) At one time Decca had a transportable Decca system that used a 100ft mast with a 100ft radius ground plane (wires run out on the surface). Using a 500W Tx they used to get ranges of up to 300 miles over water. (f) Finally he said the main problem with small aerials was the greatly increased voltages and insulation problems. They always had problems on the transportable system to the extent they had a man whose job it was to clean all the insulators every morning and they couldn't be located on coasts because the salt water shorted out everything "in hours". The 100m aerials were only installed at a few sites in the early days in the hope of reducing the number of chains required but it turned out skywave was the limiting range factor (screwed up phasing on which the whole system depended). This meant Decca couldn't be used more than about 200 miles at night, so later transmitters had smaller and much cheaper aerials (150ft "T") which covered up to 200 miles quite adequately. Walter G3JKV. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8621 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 10:58:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 10:58:05 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xSZP-0003Zc-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 11:51:23 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xSZO-0003ZX-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 11:51:22 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id LAA28509; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 11:55:14 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 28064 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 11:46:35 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 11:46:35 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id LAA03985; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 11:47:06 GMT Received: from unknown(146.80.11.40) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma003921; Thu, 1 Jun 00 11:46:41 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 11:56:36 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 11:49:52 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C82@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 11:49:49 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >There's a lot of discussion going on at the moment on the US "LowFER" >mailing list about the relative merits of slow CW versus BPSK (in this case >relating to the COHERENT/AFRICA software by Bill de Carle, VE2IQ). The >general consensus of opinion seems to be that if you are going to use >"machine" modes, BPSK has considerable superiority over any form of slow CW >for the kind of very weak signals often encountered on the LF bands. >Estimates of the effective improvement range from 6dB to 23dB depending on >what factors are taken into account! (Slow) CW vs BPSK etc.. To compare theoretically, firstly we need to make the assumption that data rates are similar for the two modes. CW employs a reasonably efficient variable length coding scheme where character length depends on letter frequency of occurence. We need to compare like with like, and in PSK31 something similar is used. Both schemes (CW and varicode) offer about 6 bits per character coding efficiency, not allowing for inter letter framing pulses. For a given data rate, there is at least a 6dB advantage to be had in going from an on / off keyed waveform to a BPSK one. This is because the amplitude differnece for the 1 and 0 states is doubled. For on /off keying (OOK) it is from 0 to (say) 1 Volt. For an equivalent BPSK signal, since the amplitude is plus / minus for 180 degree keying the total amplitude change is 2 Volts, ie. 6dB better in noise using this very simple back of an envelope calculation. There is further adavantage to be had by using PSK as well. For OOK a non coherent detector is usually employed - ie human ears for CW or eyes for QRSS etc. Lets we have a perfect operator with golden ears (or eyes) and assume these are perfect power detectors for now, in other words they cannot respond to voltage or phase so are definitely non-coherent. Various statistical calculations can be made to define at what level the signal is detectable above noise, but in practice a S/N value of 10dB is usually the best we can get away with - this is in the theoretical minimum bandwidth of the signal at roughly half the signalling rate and does not take into account bandwidth limiting for spectral reasons. BPSK, however, is received coherently. ie voltage is integrated over the symbol period rather than power, which immediately calls up a square root term to the detection statistics compared with power. Again statistical rules can be applied and Signal to Noise vs. error rate curves can be generated for minimum bandwidth. The results usually end up with a S/N of 6 - 8dB being sufficient for 'reasonable' error rate. By reasonable, we mean something that will communicate useful information with errors that the brain can correct for, - and lets not get into a discussion of error correction coding. While coherent decoding could be applied to OOK signals, what is the point ? If we go to the effort of building a coherent detector, then we might as well make the most of it and use BPSK which is as easy to generate as CW. (You can even use a changeover realy in the antenna feed as a desperate last resort) So we now have something like 6db advantage from peak power alone, and around another 3dB for coherent vs incoherent detection resulting in 9dB advantage for PSK over On Off Keying. I don't know if Coherent offers the variable length coding to get the average data rate down, if it doesn't then the advantage is marginally less but this is easily offset by the heavy error correction that it does have as an option. This is a very simple calculation and communications theory experts will probably drill all sorts of holes in it, but I bet many of their arguments will cancel out. We do actually observe 8 - 10dB S/N advantage in coherent PSK modes versus incoherent ones such as CW. Broadly similar arguments apply to SSB vs. AM and no one disputes the advantage there. A completely different set of rules apply when noise is non Gaussian (non white) such as bursts and for ionospheric propagation modes with multipath, and mean that non coherent modes such as multilevel FSK do have certain other advantages to offer. The Shannon theoretical limit for communications in a noisy channel is (Signaling Rate / Bandwidth, Bn) = LOG2(1 + S/N). In other words, for Signalling rate equal to Bandwidth which is the easy to understand case, Signal to Noise equals Unity = 0dB !! Consider CW, the best ears are probably equivalent to 50 Hz bandwidth and the best operator can probably cope with 24WPM (= 20 Hz) in very noisy conditions. S / BW = 0.4 so according to Shannons limit, it ought to be possible to receive this in a S/N ratio of 2^(0.4) - 1 = 0.32 = -5dB (yes, negative S/N !) In the 200 Hz bandwidth filter usually employed this becomes -11db S/N Uncoded PSK itself will nowhere achieve the Shannon limit either, but with very efficient Turbo error correction coding schemes now appearing, it is possible to get within 0.7db of it. PSK31 has a lot to offer on LF, but unfortunately due to the almost universal use of switching high efficiency power amplifiers and dearth of tranceivers, is hardly used. While PSK can be transmitted over non linear class C/D/E amplifiers, it generates disgusting sidelobes that beat even key clicks for their annoyance value! In the Data column in RadCom, in the fundamentals section which will appear each issue, I am slowly developing an easy intuitive guide to data communications. So far three have appeared - any feedback would be appreciated. Which reminds me, the deadline for August's issue is only 15 days away ! Must get on with it. Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2367 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 11:35:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 11:35:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xTAR-0003kR-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 12:29:39 +0100 Received: from d06lmsgate-3.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.3] helo=lmsfw2.emea.ibm.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xTAQ-0003kC-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 12:29:38 +0100 Received: from d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.166.84.148]) by lmsfw2.emea.ibm.com (1.0.0) with ESMTP id MAA52554 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 12:21:13 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from usa.net (dyn9-87-116-182.italy.ibm.com [9.87.116.182]) by d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with ESMTP id MAA31626 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 12:28:56 +0100 Message-ID: <393648EF.ADBCDF55@usa.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:28:47 +0200 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. References: <003e01bfcba6$70b54200$ac1886d4@kevin> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Kevin Ravenhill wrote : > The general consensus of opinion seems to be that if you are going to use > "machine" modes, BPSK has considerable superiority over any form of slow CW > for the kind of very weak signals often encountered on the LF bands. When you say "machine" modes, are you meaning CW decoded by software or by the brain (be it aurally or visually) ? There is a profound difference... 73, Alberto I2PHD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28459 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 12:07:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 12:07:33 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xTc1-0003s1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 12:58:09 +0100 Received: from mail.sci.fi ([195.74.0.41] helo=pyyhe.saunalahti.fi ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xTbz-0003rw-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 12:58:08 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from DVII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi (DVII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.74.4.207]) by pyyhe.saunalahti.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA08735 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 15:10:47 +0300 (EET DST) From: "Paul Keinanen" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 14:58:46 +0300 Message-ID: References: <003e01bfcba6$70b54200$ac1886d4@kevin> In-reply-to: <003e01bfcba6$70b54200$ac1886d4@kevin> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 09:48:59 +0100, "Kevin Ravenhill" wrote: >There's a lot of discussion going on at the moment on the US "LowFER" >mailing list about the relative merits of slow CW versus BPSK I think it is appropriate time to remind that some countries have emission mode limitations on LF (as far as I know A1A is the only mode allowed in Norway). It should be a good idea for amateurs in these countries to contact their national amateur radio society and ask them to discuss lifting the mode limitation with their telecom authorities. When designing a new mode/protocol the station identification must be handled in some way, hopefully compatible with ID requirements in most countries. Paul OH3LWR From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29403 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 12:09:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 12:09:34 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xThF-0003u9-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:03:33 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from smtper.inrete.it ([212.110.32.184] helo=mailer.inrete.it) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xThE-0003u3-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:03:32 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from cel266 (ppp-151-20-78-60.151-20.libero.it [151.20.78.60]) by mailer.inrete.it (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA14290 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:03:20 +0200 Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:03:20 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.1.20000531214143.0110df00@mailer.inrete.it> Message-ID: <4.1.20000531214143.0110df00@mailer.inrete.it> X-Sender: spin@mailer.inrete.it X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Versione 4.1 Data: Wed, 31 May 2000 21:43:00 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M. Bruno" Subject: Re: LF: Mutual couplingi of antennas at Puckeridge In-reply-to: <000401bfcb01$5670c4a0$ee06b28f@w8k3f0> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In 22.17 31/05/00 , Dick wrote: > >> >> To All from PAoSE >> >> ... >> 73, Dick, PA0SE >> >> >> P.S.: Sorry for the vertical line at the left, I don't know how to get rid >> of it. > > >> >> > Stop using Outlook .... ;-))) 73, Marco IK1ODO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19317 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 12:25:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 12:25:40 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xTuZ-0003yJ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:17:19 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from smtper.inrete.it ([212.110.32.184] helo=mailer.inrete.it) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xTuY-0003yE-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:17:18 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from cel266 (ppp-151-20-78-60.151-20.libero.it [151.20.78.60]) by mailer.inrete.it (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA18723 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:17:11 +0200 Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:17:11 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.1.20000601131141.01835df0@mailer.inrete.it> X-Sender: spin@mailer.inrete.it X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Versione 4.1 Data: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:17:32 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M. Bruno" Subject: LF: Slow CW, BPSK, machine modes In-reply-to: <393648EF.ADBCDF55@usa.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In 14.06 01/06/00 , hai scritto: >Kevin Ravenhill wrote : > >> The general consensus of opinion seems to be that if you are going to use >> "machine" modes, BPSK has considerable superiority over any form of slow CW >> for the kind of very weak signals often encountered on the LF bands. > >When you say "machine" modes, are you meaning CW decoded by software or >by the brain (be it aurally or visually) ? There is a profound difference... > >73, >Alberto I2PHD > > I agree, visually decoded CW is NOT a machine mode; the final decoding being done by the operator eye-brain, instaead of ear-brain. I found it fascinating for that reason; you have to add some operator skill. BPSK is a real machine mode; somebody talks about having a large bell calling him when AFRICA locks on a signal. I see no interest in this, except for propagation studies. A QSO obtained trying day after day, by previous schedule and so on, is more rewarding to me. 73, Marco IK1ODO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3510 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 12:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 12:53:25 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xULj-00045x-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:45:23 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xULi-00045s-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:45:22 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 12xULg-0006qR-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:45:20 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <16911.200006011245@gemini> From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:52:22 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: QRSS vs. BPSK, etc. X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear LF Group, I'm sure that modes such as BPSK have considerable technical advantages compared to the slow CW modes. But as in most areas of engineering, technical excellence is not the only factor. The advantages of QRSS include the following: - It is very easy to modify an existing CW station for QRSS operation - all that is required are some simple keying circuits and leads, and a rather basic PC with some free software. -QRSS is not demanding on the transmitter/receiver. The duty cycle is much the same as normal CW, any transmitter capable of on-off keying can be used, all that is required of the receiver is an audio output. Exceptional frequency stability is not required. -There are no synchronisation or clock recovery issues with QRSS; also, the PC spectrogram display effectively 'decodes' all the signals present in a relatively wide bandwidth. These things make random QSO's straightforwards - there is no need to know the exact frequency a station is using, the time it will be operating, or even to know the exact modulation method that will be used. In summary, slow CW may not give the very best results, or be a particularly satisfying intellectual challenge, but it does give rather good results with simple equipment. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19652 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 12:57:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 12:57:19 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xUR3-000474-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:50:53 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xUR1-00046z-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 13:50:51 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id NAA12904; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:54:44 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 6003 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 13:46:04 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 13:46:04 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id NAA17115; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:46:39 GMT Received: from unknown(146.80.11.40) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma016829; Thu, 1 Jun 00 13:45:27 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:55:21 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:48:35 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C83@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:48:32 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > Kevin Ravenhill wrote : > > >> The general consensus of opinion seems to be that if you are going > to use > >> "machine" modes, BPSK has considerable superiority over any form of > slow CW > >> for the kind of very weak signals often encountered on the LF > bands. > >When you say "machine" modes, are you meaning CW decoded by software or >by the brain (be it aurally or visually) ? There is a profound difference... Actually, there probably isn't that much difference in practice, again comapring like with like. The ear(or eye) / brain combination serves as a very good error correction mechanism where the mode being transmitted contains sufficient redundancy to allow this. Examples are CW with it's long and short elements, Hellschreiber with its pattern of letter shapes and, of course, the enormous redundancy given by the context and spelling of words which means we can usually understand text whxre eveqy wbrd h6a i smeluing misyaki in it . If this is contrasted with machine generated codes, such as convolutional and block coding superimposed onto plain ASCII coded text, then I guess that the fully machine based system can produce very much better results if you are prepared to accept the overheads. One major drawback being that the better an error correction scheme is, the longer it takes to process all the interleaved data. One amateur-developed data mode using 64 parallel tones (MT63) has 10 second overhead on data at normal typing speed. Whilst being extremally good at coping with QRM (it is designed primarily for the HF environment, not white noise) the 10s between typing a character and it's appearing on the receiver's screen does make for enforced leisurely QSOs. For a decent real time communications system, with a reasonable trade-off of delay against error correction, the machine system probably is about on a par with a (very good) human ear brain combination. The real advantage comes in that the machine can cover a much wider range of data rate vs. error correction trade off values, instantly, and can automatically adapt itself to changing propagation condidtions. Just compare PSK31 with 20 - 30 WPM CW, it is considerably better. CW operators do constantly trade off time delay vs S/N. A few years ago I once sat on a (windy and rainswept as usual) hilltop taking over 20 minutes to receive a report and locator on 10 GHz using CW - with the other station sending repeatedly one letter or number at a time in conjunction with a 144MHz talkback link where I called whenever the character had been copied. That equates to something like 0.05 Bits / second using a protocol which in machine terms would be a multiple redundant error correcting Automatic reQuest Repeat system. And all just to set a new personal best distance on this band. 10GHz does not lend itself to low data rate narrow bandwidth communications so CW is still of considerably more use there than it is on the LF bands. So much for the class A/B licence debate and access to HF bands ! The QSO would have gone something like this : G4JNT on 2m: "Send the first number of the report" G8### on 10GHZ "1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 " 'jnt "OK Got that, now the second letter" G8### "2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 " 'jnt "Negative again, again" G8### "2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 " etc. etc. How much easier if we could have just wound the software down to 0.05 B/s and told it to get on with the job. Even QRSS can't work on the higher microwave bands, drift of most systems is a few tens or hundreds of Hz taking the signal well outside the tuning range of Spect,,,, Incidently, QSOs like this are common on the uW bands and, before anyone asks, contest rules have allowances for this dual band operation built in. Whilst on this matter, If there are any communication specialists out there who know of a scheme - is there a way of coding and getting the full benefit of (say) 0.05 B/s using a spread spectrum waveform 1 - 3kHz wide (SSB transceiver) that is immune to several 100 Hz of frequency shift. The moonbounce community would leap at such a data scheme as well as the uW operators Not a very LF orientated ramble for this reflector, but .......... Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21556 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 13:51:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 13:51:15 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xVIx-0004M5-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 14:46:35 +0100 Received: from latimer.mail.easynet.net ([195.40.1.40]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xVIw-0004M0-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 14:46:34 +0100 Received: from kevin (tnt-14-30.easynet.co.uk [212.134.24.30]) by latimer.mail.easynet.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 20B2953BCF for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:46:31 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <002701bfcbcf$b0c2f9e0$f41a86d4@kevin> From: "Kevin Ravenhill" To: "LF Group" References: <003e01bfcba6$70b54200$ac1886d4@kevin> <393648EF.ADBCDF55@usa.net> Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 14:44:15 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > When you say "machine" modes, are you meaning CW decoded by software or > by the brain (be it aurally or visually) ? There is a profound difference... > > 73, > Alberto I2PHD By "machine" modes, I mean anything which requires a PC or other hard/software to change the raw CW+QRM/QRN audio input into something which can be interpreted by human senses (usually involving translating the signal from audible to visible form). This is in contrast to direct aural decoding of CW by the brain, filter-assisted or otherwise, which generally requires a lot more human "processing power". Apart from the obvious i.e. the various decoders with text output, I would put software such as Spectran (VY NICE program, by the way!), Spectrogram, etc. in the "machine modes" category. This is because it takes a wanted audio signal which is buried in QRM/QRN and therefore indistinguishable, and translates it into a visual form, separating it from the unwanted stuff as a discrete trace on a screen. The only part the brain is required to play in this process is to interpret the trace as letters and numbers - most of the hard work has been done already. Hope this explanation is reasonably coherent! Regards Kevin, G1HDQ. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16271 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 15:28:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 15:28:14 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xWmn-0004l8-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 16:21:29 +0100 Received: from mserv1c.u-net.net ([195.102.240.33]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xWmm-0004l3-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 16:21:28 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1c.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #35) id 12xWly-0000yL-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 16:20:40 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 16:08:26 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 16:08:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. In-reply-to: <393648EF.ADBCDF55@usa.net> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > When you say "machine" modes, are you meaning CW decoded by software or by > the brain (be it aurally or visually) ? There is a profound difference... > 73, Alberto I2PHD This is all-important. Extremely weak stations require considerable additional work by the 'computer between the ears' to decipher what is signal and what is noise on the screen - just like aural Morse, but visual. This accounts for several extra dB of gain, and however slow you send the Morse, this advantage is still available. It would take a very sophisticated computer to be as good. There are, of course, advantages in having modes with little or no manual intervention. Suppose, for instance, it were possible to monitor for a transatlantic beacon and raise an alarm when a callsign (or some pattern) was recognised by the computer. This may be where BPSK comes into its own as being superior other purely machine-read modes. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1256 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 17:05:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 17:05:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xYHA-00055w-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 17:56:56 +0100 Received: from mserv1a.u-net.net ([195.102.240.34]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xYH8-00055r-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 17:56:54 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1a.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 12xYHO-000620-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 17:57:10 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 17:40:31 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 17:40:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. In-reply-to: <002701bfcbcf$b0c2f9e0$f41a86d4@kevin> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: G2HDQ wrote: > Apart from the obvious i.e. the various decoders with text output, I would > put software such as Spectran (VY NICE program, by the way!), Spectrogram, > etc. in the "machine modes" category. This is because it takes a wanted > audio signal which is buried in QRM/QRN and therefore indistinguishable, > and translates it into a visual form, separating it from the unwanted > stuff as a discrete trace on a screen. The only part the brain is required > to play in this process is to interpret the trace as letters and numbers - > most of the hard work has been done already. > See my other message. If the only work was to interpret the trace as letters and numbers, it would be trivial for a bit more coding to be included to do just that - and of course 'strong' signals (ie those that are louder than a mere 10db below noise) come into this category. However, it is quite possible to dig much deeper than this by using the brain to work out what is rubbish and what is signal. Most machines are quite incapable of ignoring static and other noise. In the few reports I have read about the various PSK modes, they appear to have similar error rate to CW, which is very impressive for something read by a machine (conventional CW read by a machine is terrible in the presence of QRM), but at sub-noise levels the error rate increases. This is not the case with visual CW modes for the reasons mentioned above. Of course, very low bit rate PSK may well be a different matter, and that is really comparing like for like. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4991 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 17:16:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 17:16:09 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xYSP-0005AM-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 18:08:33 +0100 Received: from d12lmsgate-2.de.ibm.com ([195.212.91.200]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xYSO-0005AF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 18:08:32 +0100 Received: from d12relay02.de.ibm.com (d12relay02.de.ibm.com [9.165.215.23]) by d12lmsgate-2.de.ibm.com (1.0.0) with ESMTP id TAA232792 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 19:07:56 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from usa.net (dyn9-87-116-182.italy.ibm.com [9.87.116.182]) by d12relay02.de.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with ESMTP id TAA86962 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 19:07:52 +0200 Message-ID: <39369853.653BEED4@usa.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 19:07:31 +0200 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. References: <003e01bfcba6$70b54200$ac1886d4@kevin> <393648EF.ADBCDF55@usa.net> <002701bfcbcf$b0c2f9e0$f41a86d4@kevin> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Kevin Ravenhill wrote: > ......... The only part the brain is required to play in > this process is to interpret the trace as letters and numbers - most of the > hard work has been done already. > I have to disagree. The brain has also the task to sort out white spots, caused by noise, from true signal lines (or fragmented fractions of them). And this is where the powerful pattern recognition mechanism embedded in our personal 'CPU' plays an invaluable role. Wonder why the AI (Artificial Intelligence) so much touted a decade and half ago hasn't taken off as they would have been expected ? So far the brain has mainly resisted to divulge the secrets of its inner algorithmical working. The only pale approximations to it are the neural networks, which aren't a technological breakthough, at least with the present state of art. 73 Alberto I2PHD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13664 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2000 22:45:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Jun 2000 22:45:02 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xdY3-0006Qd-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 23:34:43 +0100 Received: from rhenium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.93] helo=rhenium) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xdY1-0006QY-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 23:34:42 +0100 Received: from [213.1.83.64] (helo=default) by rhenium with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 12xdXt-0006wC-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2000 23:34:34 +0100 Message-ID: <000201bfcc19$7d40a320$405301d5@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: QRS, BPSK and diversity Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 20:19:04 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi all, I monitored Dave G3YXM's attempts to make a PSK31 with Reino OH1TN earlier in the year (or was it last year now). I could see the signal from Reino easily on FFTDSP4 (not one of the most sensitive of DSP waterfall displays available these days) but using the soundcard PSK31 decoder I could not copy a signal at all from Reino, though I had a perfect copy of Dave so the system was working. It may be that the soundcard decoder is not the most sensitive, but that test showed that Dave (with a better aerial than me) could only get PSK31 copy when Reino was fully R5 on hand-keyed morse (not even QRS). I suspect the power output from both Dave and Reino was probably down about 3dB on their normal CW power, due to the need to use a linear system for PSK31. I await Andy's experiments with interest. Several of us have recently copied a QRS beacon from Marco running an estimated 1mW ERP south of the Alps (900kms from me) I think this is well into the area of powers being radiated by the Lowfer beacons allowing for their frequency 50% higher, so their aerials are twice as efficient. Also I suspect the Lowfer beacon keepers who radiate BPSK may be the more technical ones who have the more efficient stations. I think it may be a case of 'horses for courses' and it all depends what you wish to achieve. On the diversity topic, strangely enough I related it to the astronomers correlation proceedures as well Jim, but am I wrong or is it a case of diminishing returns? I suspect you have to double the number of aerials for each 3dB. Four aerials is feasible but gives only 6dB and we would need eight aerials for 9dB which would be a bit of an epic. I did once write a simulation of this using an FFT writen in Basic (a sort of Slow Fast Fourier Transform!) with uncorrelated random noise masking the wanted signal. It certainly works but got the feeling that it was a lot of effort for a fairly small return. We are not interested in locating a source accurately, as are the astronomers so we do not use one of the main points of the VLBA, its spatial resolution. All interesting stuff. Cheers de Alan G3NYK JO02PB Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19331 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 01:48:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 01:48:18 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xgRY-000787-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 02:40:12 +0100 Received: from smtp11.bellglobal.com ([204.101.251.53]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xgRW-000782-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 02:40:11 +0100 Received: from server1 (Kingston-ppp112258.sympatico.ca [216.209.138.141]) by smtp11.bellglobal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA26013 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 21:46:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <003e01bfcc32$9f7bb920$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: BPSK's, not all the same. Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 21:33:53 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: The thread that has been running about BPSK / QRS CW covers the technical issues, but I sense there is an assumption that BPSK as per AFRICA/COHERENT by Bill de Carle and the PSK31 (and it's variants) by G3PLX are radically different implementations of PSK. The purpose of this note is to stimulate a discussion of the differences between the two systems. For starters, PSK31 was defined by Peter Martinez, G3PLX, as being for "keyboard to keyboard" types of applications. This is a new system implementation of what we used to call "Green Keys" type of teletype operation. The basic tenet as I understand it is for keyboard to keyboard QSO's over the radio. In the very opposite sense, C-BPSK as implemented in Coherent/Africa by Bill de Carle, VE2IQ, will accommodate users who wish to use the package for Keyboard to Keyboard, but the REAL PURPOSE of the programs is to get down and dig a signal out of the mud, to do so with the single determination of finding a signal and using every mathematical resource available to pull that signal out of the noise. The application of these packages should take into consideration the job that is desired to be done. Using PSK31 to work over the North Atlantic on 136 would be a gross misapplication of the software unless there was certain knowledge that the task can in fact be accomplished within a reasonable time period. On the other hand Coherent/Africa will patiently wait for months or even years with a minimum of demands on the users for a signal to pop out of the noise. The technical discussion are enlightening and really great but the discussion also needs to consider what the objectives are for the experiment that the user desires to perform. It is obvious to me that there is a need to identify what applications can make the best use of the existing software programs such as QRS CW, PSK31, and Coherent/Africa. If careful attention is given to the details of the system requirements then at the end of the day the software system developers will have new opportunities to make their systems stay on the leading edge of performance. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13345 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 08:33:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 08:33:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xmjP-0008UC-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:23:03 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xmjO-0008U7-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:23:02 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id JAA17348; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:26:52 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 12551 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 09:18:09 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 09:18:09 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id JAA07232; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:18:41 GMT Received: from unknown(146.80.11.40) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma007202; Fri, 2 Jun 00 09:18:26 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:28:30 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:21:43 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C85@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK. & Computer modes Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:21:17 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >This is all-important. Extremely weak stations require considerable >additional work by the 'computer between the ears' to decipher >what is signal and what is noise on the screen - just like aural >Morse, but visual. This accounts for several extra dB of gain, and >however slow you send the Morse, this advantage is still available. >It would take a very sophisticated computer to be as good. NO ! With these modes the computer is not doing anything to aid extraction of the signal that could not be done with conventional hardware. The 'several extra dB gain' is just there because more noise has been filtered out. The brain is just looking at amplitude changes in this narrow bandwidth and integrating over the signalling period (looking at brightness over the length of a dot). All Spect.... is, is a bank of narrow filters. There is nothing in theory to stop you making a crystal filter, or a whole bank of them this narrow. For a display mechanism, a chart recorder - multiple pen ones are available. All this technology was available in the 1950s as I'm sure those who were around in that era will remember. All the computer does is make this much simpler and cheaper and available to everyone, it is only a filter and display mechanism so please can we stop referring to Spect... as computer modes. It can be done in other ways. Coherent etc and PSK31 are computer modes, SPECT..... is not, it is only a filter bank and display. Real computer / DSP modes mean making use of coherent detection and error correction - and have nothing to do with the speed of the signalling. There seems to be no appreciation on this newsgroup of the real value of coherent detection - that is, having phase information available when the signal is decoded and coherently locking to the signal carrier and bit timing. Simple theory, as I covered in a previous email, shows mathematically the considerable theoretical advantage of coherent detection over non coherent, there is no dispute about this. SO unless your ears / eyes can respond to signal phase, is doesn't matter how much personal pride says that the brain is a marvelous computer, is will never compete against PSK : Given the same TOTAL overall signalling speed and comparing like with like on the end to end link. Repeating CW characters time and time again has to be compared with true error correction and low data rate signalling. Computer error correction does the same job as the eye interpreting between the dots on Spect..., and with well chosen codes can do an awful lot better. These optimum codes are only just beginning to appear thanks primarily to the huge research effort funded by the mobile phone industry, but hopefully Coherent etc will soon make use of them - the equations are public information. The maths is similar, just the implementation different. Coherent etc and PSK31 are computer modes, Spect... is not. Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27786 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 08:50:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 08:50:08 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xn4B-000020-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:44:31 +0100 Received: from latimer.mail.easynet.net ([195.40.1.40]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xn4A-00001v-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:44:30 +0100 Received: from kevin (tnt-14-68.easynet.co.uk [212.134.24.68]) by latimer.mail.easynet.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A2C0537F3 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:44:26 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <000501bfcc6e$af6899c0$441886d4@kevin> From: "Kevin Ravenhill" To: "LF Group" Subject: LF: BPSK and other modes Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:43:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: The comments from Larry, VA3LK echo my thoughts to a large extent. I feel that, FOR CERTAIN SITUATIONS e.g. transatlantic attempts, BPSK as implemented in Coherent/Africa is specifically designed for the job and would probably stand a better chance of success than, say, PSKxx or QRSS, given adequate phase stability of the propagation path. It certainly seems to have been used with success in the USA, with Part 15 LowFER beacons (<1mW ERP?) apparently producing reliable copy over paths of 1600km+ under the right conditions. Having said this, I believe the US LowFER distance record may still be USA-Hawaii using standard CW! It is, indeed, very much a case of "horses for courses" and I certainly wouldn't make a blanket claim that any one mode is superior to any others. Basically, like everything in this hobby, it comes down to using whatever you are comfortable with and/or have the kit for. Lastly, and with reference to recent comments on the reflector, perhaps a more correct term than "machine modes" would be "machine-assisted modes"! Regards Kevin, G1HDQ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24226 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 09:38:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 09:38:45 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xnle-0000Ey-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 10:29:26 +0100 Received: from mserv1c.u-net.net ([195.102.240.33]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xnld-0000Et-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 10:29:25 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1c.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #35) id 12xnko-0000M8-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:28:34 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 10:15:27 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:15:25 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: BPSK and other modes In-reply-to: <000501bfcc6e$af6899c0$441886d4@kevin> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > Lastly, and with reference to recent comments on the reflector, perhaps a > more correct term than "machine modes" would be "machine-assisted modes"! > Regards > Kevin, G1HDQ At the risk of winding everyone up, what is "machine assisted"? What is the difference between DSP for audio reception and DSP for screen reception? Or is the analogue filter a machine, or the receiver itself? In trying to formulate the rules for the Peter Bobeck Award, we agonised over this sort of thing, and concluded that if you are going to make any distinction at all, it should be related to the time taken to conclude the QSO (the bit rate in data terms). If it takes an hour to exchange reports and calls, this is arguably a different level of achievement to taking a few minutes, no matter whether you repeat CW or SSB over and over (and who hasn't done that from time to time?) or have very long dots, or a clever redundancy arrangement. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11769 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 11:49:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 11:49:23 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xpqc-0000pa-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:42:42 +0100 Received: from lepidachrosite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.3]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xpqb-0000pV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:42:41 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (1Cust157.tnt6.rtm1.nl.uu.net [212.153.214.157]) by lepidachrosite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id B7A3BCB1CA for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 11:41:32 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: "LF-Group" References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> Subject: LF: Re: Aerial tests. Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 13:41:08 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: To All from PA0SE Walter Blanchard quoted the RACAL expert who has in the past designed the Decca antennas as follows: >(...) If the small one has an assymetric horizontal component (flat-top) > this will complicate matters considerably since it will radiate both > vertical and > horizontally-polarised and there will be interaction between them that > will affect the radiation pattern. So it would be unlikely to have a circular > polar pattern and this might account for some of the observed variations. This is not confirmed by computer simulation. Computer program AO by Brian Beezley, K6STI, shows for the L-antenna over medium ground an almost perfect omnidirectional radiation pattern. The deviation from a circle is no more than about 0.1dB. The program also shows that the maximum of the horizontally polarised wave is straight up and 21.1dB down on the maximum of the vertically polarised wave. The latter maximum occurs under an angle of 12 degrees (direct + reflected wave). In the region where the inverse distance law is applicable the space in the vertical radiation pattern between zero degrees and the lobe under 12 degrees is filled by the surface wave. 73, Dick, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3193 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 11:56:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 11:56:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xpye-0000sf-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:51:00 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xpyd-0000sa-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:50:59 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from gemini.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.44] helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 12xpyZ-0006nu-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:50:55 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <134.200006021150@gemini> From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 12:57:58 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: Litz wire stripping method X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear LF Group, I recently salvaged some thick litz wire, and have been trying to find a workable method of stripping the insulation. The enamel is of the older, dark coloured type, which cannot be removed by dipping in molten solder. The overall conductor thickness is about 4mm with 729 strands, and a spirit burner as previously suggested on this reflector just does not make any impression. A blowtorch does, but also burns away the outer strands and the plastic sheathing. I believe chemical strippers are available, but have to be melted at high temperature, and then neutralised afterwards. However, the following seems to work quite well - strip about 50mm of the plastic sheathing, and wrap the end 25mm of wire strands tightly in a piece of copper foil (such as can be peeled off some PCB laminate, or the type used for EMC shielding). Wrap a smaller piece of foil around the 12mm of wire strands nearest the stripped back sheathing, and grip with a pair of pliers - this acts as a heatsink to protect the sheathing. Heat the foil covered end red hot with a blowtorch. The enamel burns off with a small flame at the end of the foil, while the foil protects the copper strands from the blowtorch flame. When the flame goes out, leave to cool and unwrap the foil. The wire strands are coated in black, shiny residue, which can be cleaned off by rubbing the end of the wire against the bottom of a shallow dish full of water, as if cleaning a paint brush. Somewhat suprisingly, this leaves clean, shiny strands of copper that can be soldered in the usual way. Just thought this might be useful to know, Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18577 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 12:42:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 12:42:36 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xqh3-00017H-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 13:36:53 +0100 Received: from cmailg6.svr.pol.co.uk ([195.92.195.176]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xqh2-00017C-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 13:36:52 +0100 Received: from modem-13.dextroamphetam.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.90.13] helo=PC) by cmailg6.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.13 #0) id 12xqgz-0005pT-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 13:36:49 +0100 Message-ID: <001101bfcc87$1060e4e0$0d5a883e@iway.co.uk> From: "Robin Greenwood" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <134.200006021150@gemini> Subject: LF: Re: Litz wire stripping method Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 12:38:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Splay wires slightly, heat in a methelated spirit flame. until red hot then plunge into a small pot of Meths It comes out clean. Do this cautiously and outside...!!!.. Robin G3LBA ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Moritz" To: Sent: 02 June 2000 13:57 Subject: LF: Litz wire stripping method > Dear LF Group, > I recently salvaged some thick litz wire, and have been trying to > find a workable method of stripping the insulation. The enamel is of > the older, dark coloured type, which cannot be removed by dipping > in molten solder. The overall conductor thickness is about 4mm > with 729 strands, and a spirit burner as previously suggested on > this reflector just does not make any impression. A blowtorch does, > but also burns away the outer strands and the plastic sheathing. I > believe chemical strippers are available, but have to be melted at > high temperature, and then neutralised afterwards. > > However, the following seems to work quite well - strip about 50mm > of the plastic sheathing, and wrap the end 25mm of wire strands > tightly in a piece of copper foil (such as can be peeled off some > PCB laminate, or the type used for EMC shielding). Wrap a smaller > piece of foil around the 12mm of wire strands nearest the stripped > back sheathing, and grip with a pair of pliers - this acts as a > heatsink to protect the sheathing. Heat the foil covered end red hot > with a blowtorch. The enamel burns off with a small flame at the > end of the foil, while the foil protects the copper strands from the > blowtorch flame. When the flame goes out, leave to cool and > unwrap the foil. The wire strands are coated in black, shiny > residue, which can be cleaned off by rubbing the end of the wire > against the bottom of a shallow dish full of water, as if cleaning a > paint brush. Somewhat suprisingly, this leaves clean, shiny strands > of copper that can be soldered in the usual way. > > Just thought this might be useful to know, > Cheers, Jim Moritz > 73 de M0BMU > > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10039 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 13:43:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 13:43:57 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xrfN-0001P9-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 14:39:13 +0100 Received: from d06lmsgate.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.1]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xrfM-0001P2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 14:39:12 +0100 Received: from d06relay01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.166.84.147]) by d06lmsgate.uk.ibm.COM (1.0.0) with ESMTP id OAA74846 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:27:45 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from usa.net (dyn9-87-116-182.italy.ibm.com [9.87.116.182]) by d06relay01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with ESMTP id OAA26842 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:38:28 +0100 Message-ID: <3937B8C4.3B437859@usa.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 15:38:12 +0200 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK. & Computer modes References: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C85@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Talbot Andrew wrote: > [snip] > There seems to be no appreciation on this newsgroup of the real value of > coherent detection - that is, having phase information available when > the signal is decoded and coherently locking to the signal carrier and > bit timing. Simple theory, as I covered in a previous email, shows > mathematically the considerable theoretical advantage of coherent > detection over non coherent, there is no dispute about this. > [snip] Andy, from a theoretical point of view you are damn right. But I am not so sure that LF/HF propagation can preserve phase coherence and with it the decoding gain achieved with coherent detection, unless you are willing to use some extra bandwidth to transmit phase information. But, then, I am not a propagation expert, so my comments stop here. 73, Alberto I2PHD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4443 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 14:07:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 14:07:54 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xs1O-0001WP-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 15:01:58 +0100 Received: from chalfont.mail.easynet.net ([195.40.1.44]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xs1N-0001WK-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 15:01:57 +0100 Received: from kevin (tnt-15-87.easynet.co.uk [212.134.26.87]) by chalfont.mail.easynet.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 40299F9C4E for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:01:54 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <002d01bfcc9b$09b7c960$571a86d4@kevin> From: "Kevin Ravenhill" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: Subject: LF: Definitions Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:59:24 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > At the risk of winding everyone up, what is "machine assisted"? > What is the difference between DSP for audio reception and DSP > for screen reception? Or is the analogue filter a machine, or the > receiver itself? Hmm. I had a feeling it was a bad idea to send that last posting.... OK, so it's a matter of the language you choose. I don't want to get into precise and pedantic definitions of what does or does not constitute a "machine" - this was never my intention and frankly I can't see why it should be such an issue. All I was originally trying to convey was the difference, as I saw it, between using the ear/brain combination to directly interpret an audio signal (if you like, the definition of a "classic" amateur radio voice or CW contact) as opposed to any method which involves converting the audio signal into something which isn't audio any more, but which then allows human interpretation which would otherwise have been very difficult or impossible. I used "machine" for want of anything better - feel free to substitute whatever language you're happy with. To sum up, apologies if my postings are anything other than in perfectly clear English and of precise technical correctness - I will try to ensure that they are of the highest standard in future. Can we get back to the original subject now, please? Regards Kevin, G1HDQ. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9693 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 15:10:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 15:10:25 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xszU-0001na-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 16:04:04 +0100 Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xszT-0001nV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 16:04:03 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id QAA28336; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 16:07:57 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 19867 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 15:57:06 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 15:57:06 -0000 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id PAA26547; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:57:13 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from unknown(146.80.11.40) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma026543; Fri, 2 Jun 00 15:57:10 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 16:07:17 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 16:00:30 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C8F@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: "'LF Group'" Cc: harry@woodhou.freeserve.co.uk Subject: LF: Decca Loading coils for sale Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 16:00:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Harry Woodhouse G3MFW from St. Austell Cornwall wrote to me re. the following : He went to the Scilly Isles last month and dismantled the antenna loading coils of the Decca station there. Then, with the aid of wheelbarrow and hired lorry, got them to the cargo boat for Penzance and home in a Landrover (quote "Phew !!") He wants to dispose of three of them and is asking £32 for each which just covers the cost of the recovery. They cannot be packed into crates for sending on, so anyone who wants them will need to collect from St. Austell. If nothing else, they are an excellent low cost source of 729 strand Litz wire, but are "A fatal combination of Fragile and Heavy". Details of similar (identical ?) coils are on Mike G3XDV's LF Website. Dimensions are 914mm OD x 480mm ID x 230mm thick and weigh in th eregion of 25kg each. I suggest if you are interested, you contact Harry direct on 01726 73608. While he is on EMail, this is only collected once a week on Mondays, so this would not appear to be a good method. He does not want to cope with the flood of EMails this reflector generates. Personally, I would have thought an auction might be more in order. Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution,o r any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17731 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 17:34:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 17:34:55 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xv6Q-0002OO-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:19:22 +0100 Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xv6O-0002OJ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:19:20 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id TAA09718 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 19:19:18 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20000602191443.2d2f2f20@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 19:14:43 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. In-reply-to: <003e01bfcba6$70b54200$ac1886d4@kevin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello Kevin, I took part in some PSK31 tests (receiving only) with G3YXM and I was not very impressed by PSK31. At levels were it gave a more or less usable copy the signal was strong enough to be copied in normal CW. I cannot tell you about BPSK (COHERENT/AFRICA sofware) but the statement that it by far superior to QRSS or DFCW is hard to believe, for some sipmle physical facts : 1. due to its nature BPSK has an advantage of 6dB over a 'normal' signal at the same baudrate 2. the SNR (signal to noise ratio) is, regardless of what mode you are using, dependent on the bandwidth of the signal. Reducing the bandwidth to half will improve SNR by 3dB. >From what I understand a baudrate of 10Hz is used for BPSK on LF (what means a minimal bandwidth of 10Hz), so that means that it would have the same efficieny as an other signal at 2.5Hz (what equals a dotlenght of 0.4 seconds or a speed of 3WPM). The QRSS standard (in Europe) is a dotlength of 3 seconds (= bandwidth of 0.333Hz) and using DFCW a dotlength of 10 seconds (= 0.1Hz bandwidth) can be used (at the same 'QSO speed'). The 'sliding technique' used by I2PHD in his program SPECTRAN allows the use of the minimal bandwidth. So even taking the 6dB advantage of BPSK into account QRSS / DFCW have a 9 to 14dB better SNR, because the can be copied at a much narrower bandwidth . Please do not misunderstand me, I believe that BPSK is probably the best mode in the WPM (words per minute) datatransfer range. But I do not think that it can compete with modes with a MPW (minutes per word) datatransfer that can be copied at a 30 to 100 times narrower bandwidth. Besides that : while QRSS /DFCW can be used with a class E amp. (efficiency close to 100%), BPSK needs a linear amp (efficiency 70%), a 1.5dB disadvantage for BPSK. 73, Rik ON7YD At 09:48 1/06/00 +0100, you wrote: >There's a lot of discussion going on at the moment on the US "LowFER" >mailing list about the relative merits of slow CW versus BPSK (in this case >relating to the COHERENT/AFRICA software by Bill de Carle, VE2IQ). The >general consensus of opinion seems to be that if you are going to use >"machine" modes, BPSK has considerable superiority over any form of slow CW >for the kind of very weak signals often encountered on the LF bands. >Estimates of the effective improvement range from 6dB to 23dB depending on >what factors are taken into account! > >At the risk of causing some heated discussion, I'm curious to know the views >of members of this list - particularly in relation to future transatlantic >attempts. > >Also, does anyone have an idea of the relative usage of slow CW (QRSs and >related FSK modes) versus modes like PSK31/PSK08 etc, in Europe? My >impression is that various forms of slow CW are still favoured by most >people (and perhaps rightly so, in terms of picking the best/most convenient >mode for what you are trying to do), but I haven't been able to monitor the >LF bands for some time so I don't really know what the current situation is >like. > >For anyone who isn't subscribed to the abovementioned list and wishes to >subscribe, send an email to majordomo@qth.net with no title and with >"subscribe lowfer" in the body of the text. You'll get a return email with a >password which has to be sent back, after which you'll be subscribed. > >Regards > >Kevin, G1HDQ > > > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24719 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 17:42:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 17:42:41 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xvHJ-0002Pi-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:30:37 +0100 Received: from fortune-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.203] helo=fortune.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xvHI-0002Pa-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:30:37 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by fortune.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000602173008.CFZL16589.fortune.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:30:08 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <11681474.959967008281.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 10:30:08 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: BPSK's, not all the same. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 213.120.56.53 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Larry, Where can we learn more about BPSK, and in particular AFRICA/COHERENT by Bill de Carle? John, G4CNN _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2904 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 17:53:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 17:53:11 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xvRo-0002T5-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:41:28 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xvRn-0002T0-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:41:27 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 12xvRk-0006Bq-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:41:24 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <19213.200006021741@gemini> From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 18:48:27 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: Re: Aerial tests X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear LF Group, Some comments on G3JKV's recent E-mail - I calculated the ERP on the basis of the measured antenna current and estimated radiation resistance of the two antennas. Part of the reasoning behind this was that the antenna efficiency would not be an issue; the radiated power is just I squared times the radiation resistance, and the calculated radiation resistance is a function only of the antenna geometry, and not it's losses. In principle at least, the only result of improved efficiency due to the Decca earth mat would be to reduce the amount of transmitter power required to produce the measured value of antenna current. So antenna efficiency did not actually enter into the calculation of ERP, and the presence or absence of the Decca earth would not have affected the result of the calculation. Having said that, clearly the ERP calculations are wrong, because there was a significant difference in signal strength, and so by definition ERP, between the two antennas, where the calculations said they should be the same. Unfortunately, my field strength measuring equipment is not accurate enough to say for certain that this was because the small antenna was producing more ERP than it should, or that the Decca antenna was producing less than it should. However, it is probably easier to believe the former, since the assumptions on which the calculations are based are more nearly met by the Decca antenna than the small inverted L. I don't know if this experiment has much to tell us about the presence or absence of horizontally polarised signals; however, the ferrite rod antenna I used to measure field strengths showed the difference in field strength of roughly 4dB observed by nearly everyone else, and should not have been sensitive to horizontally polarised signals (ie. vertical H field). Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24597 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 19:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 19:05:15 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xwZn-0002k6-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 19:53:47 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.34]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xwZl-0002k1-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 19:53:45 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.7d.5af4eef (4333) for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:53:09 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <7d.5af4eef.26695c95@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:53:09 EDT Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 102 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >There's a lot of discussion going on at the moment on the US "LowFER" >mailing list about the relative merits of slow CW versus BPSK Indeed there has been. Some of it has gotten rather silly and occasionally a bit abusive, in fact. I'm glad to see the discussion has been more civilized here, although there are still evident tendencies to compare apples with oranges and to draw too many conclusions from accepted premises. Some of the rather extreme arguments in favor of BPSK and similar modes tend to count the same chickens twice; perhaps more often, for those claiming 23db advantages . The most credible proponents say that, for a given bit rate, coherent methods have a 9db advantage. Andy Talbot's post yesterday argues this case well. Six decibels are the result of the effective doubling of detected signal output by one state of the received signal adding in-phase and the other adding out of phase in the detector. Integration of voltage over the symbol period accounts for the other three. The latter effect is a direct consequence of coherence (one might call it the definition of coherent detection), and the former requires coherence to exist before it can be true...or for any detection to exist at all. With coherence, a BPSK-based mode has a 9db advantage over on-off keying detected non-coherently, or 6db over coherent CW. Does this mean, therefore, that BPSK is inherently "better" than Slow CW? Andy was careful to preface his comments with the qualification, "To compare theoretically, firstly we need to make the assumption that data rates are similar for the two modes." However, there is an additional qualifier that follows from all this: we must also assume that coherence _can_ in fact be achieved and maintained over the duration of enough symbols for the message to be reconstructed. If this latter condition cannot be met, then PSK-based modes have no advantage. They simply don't work at all. The traditional technique of reducing data rates and narrowing communication bandwidth only work for coherent methods to the extent that the path between the transmitter and receiver is stable enough to accomodate the slower bit rate. It doesn't matter if the sender and receiver are using perfectly synchronized atomic clock frequency standards: if propagation effects distort the all-crucial phase information enough during each individual symbol, the symbol will not be recovered. Hence, for a given propagation mode--and, where the ionosphere is involved, this is also a function of carrier frequency, path length, launch angle, geomagnetic conditions, and so on--there will be some _minimum_ data rate below which a given coherent method will not work. Weak-signal reception techniques based on power integration over extremely narrow bandwidths (i.e., spectral analysis techniques) do not suffer nearly as strongly from the same effects. Let's re-evaluate the numbers in this light. Suppose, over a given long path, we find that BPSK will let us receive an acceptable percentage of a transmission at 10 bits per second, but faster rates are limited by noise and slower rates are limited by phase errors in the propagating medium. To achieve the same result, we would have to slow down our on-off keying by 9db, to roughly one dot per second. Now, however, let's suppose that either the noise levels increase, or we attempt to receive the same signal over a greater distance. We can't slow the speed of the BPSK transmission any further without losing the ability to recover it coherently; which is to say, at all. Yet, we can slow down the CW transmission and tighten the resolution of our receiving software and continue the exchange of information. (This can't be done without limit, of course. At some point, propagation phase shifts will spread the spectrum of the on-off carrier enough to disperse it across multiple channels, considering how narrow the detected channels have become at that point, and the analog signal-to-noise ratio will then rapidly collapse too.) I don't follow the BPSK e-mail group, so this may not be the most current information, but as far as I am aware, the best LF DX results with BPSK over here have been at 100 and 200 milliseconds per bit. Some have tried 500 and 1000 milliseconds, but have not done as well; whereas on HF, rates of 50 milliseconds per bit or faster seem most effective. If 200 milliseconds per bit turns out to be the lowest practical speed for longwave DX, then we already know that Slow CW at 3 seconds per bit should be able to match its data recovery performance if the time penalty is acceptable. We also know that 10 seconds per dot, or longer, is entirely feasible with the available receiving software. The only thing we don't know is how Slow CW performs under conditions of very long paths at LF, on the order of 1600km or more at 5mw radiated power, for which we do have some experience with BPSK. The essential point is that there are conditions below which coherent methods cannot work at all, but in which other (slow) weak-signal methods may provide at least a chance of getting signal through. There's room for a lot of experimentation with these "different horses!" 73, John KD4IDY From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28462 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 19:10:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 19:10:28 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xwif-0002mW-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:02:57 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r17.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.71]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xwie-0002mP-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:02:56 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-r17.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.38.6bf8e1c (4333) for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:02:18 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <38.6bf8e1c.26695eba@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:02:18 EDT Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 102 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: R From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28455 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 19:16:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 19:16:23 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xwns-0002na-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:08:20 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from finch-post-11.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.39]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xwnr-0002nV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:08:19 +0100 Received: from pickmere.demon.co.uk ([158.152.117.143]) by finch-post-11.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12xwno-000JEM-0B for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 19:08:17 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 16:08:39 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M.J.Powell" Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests. References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> In-reply-to: <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In message <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0>, Dick Rollema writes >To All from PA0SE > >Walter Blanchard quoted the RACAL expert who has in the past designed the >Decca antennas as follows: > >>(...) If the small one has an assymetric horizontal component (flat-top) >> this will complicate matters considerably since it will radiate both >> vertical and >> horizontally-polarised and there will be interaction between them that >> will affect the radiation pattern. So it would be unlikely to have a >circular >> polar pattern and this might account for some of the observed variations. > >This is not confirmed by computer simulation. > >Computer program AO by Brian Beezley, K6STI, shows for the L-antenna over >medium ground an almost perfect omnidirectional radiation pattern. The >deviation >from a circle is no more than about 0.1dB. > >The program also shows that the maximum of the horizontally polarised wave >is straight up and 21.1dB down on the maximum of the vertically polarised >wave. >The latter maximum occurs under an angle of 12 degrees (direct + reflected >wave). >In the region where the inverse distance law is applicable the space in the >vertical radiation pattern between zero degrees and the lobe under 12 >degrees is filled by the surface wave. And yet did not Marconi use a vertical antenna with a long horizontal wire to obtain directivity from Cape Race? When the original aerials came down in a gale he found equal or stronger signal strengths using an inverted 'L' with the arm pointing the right way. Mike -- M.J.Powell From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5829 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 19:34:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 19:34:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xx5r-0002u1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:26:55 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.40]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xx5q-0002tt-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:26:54 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.c.5f80486 (4333) for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:26:17 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:26:16 EDT Subject: Re: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK etc. To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 102 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Rik posted while I was still struggling to finish typing mine. If he had been a bit faster or I had been a bit slower, I could have addressed some part of the bandwidth issue. The necessary bandwidth of these methods may be correct as stated, but the actual radiated bandwidths may not be. North American-style BPSK, a least that which is generated in LowFER transmitters, is not particularly spectrum-efficient. It's a constant-envelope type, which means it can be amplified in high-efficiency stages (provided the output tuning isn't too sharp). The extra sidebands are not a problem since we have 30kHz in which to play, and negligible radiated power to start with. PSK31 gains its spectrum efficiency through envelope shaping, but that same requirement probably makes it a lot more susceptible to impulse noise than its brute-force BPSK counterpart. As I mentioned in my previous message, I agree with Rik's assessment that narrower bandwidths with QRSS give us another window of opportunity for communication below signal levels where pure digital modes fall over the cliff edge. The window is not limitless, because propagation-related phase shifts will eventually impact very narrow communication channels in the analog domain too. Still, I think that window needs to be explored fully, and not dismissed out of hand just because it's slower or lacks digital purity. 73, John From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24350 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 19:50:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 19:50:20 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xxOL-0002y8-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:46:01 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r20.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.162]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xxOJ-0002y3-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:46:00 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-r20.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.75.4efd9eb (4333) for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:45:54 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <75.4efd9eb.266968f2@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:45:54 EDT Subject: Re: LF: BPSK's, not all the same. To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 102 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: John, G4CNN writes: << Where can we learn more about BPSK, and in particular AFRICA/COHERENT by Bill de Carle? >> The links on the LWCA "LF Ham and Digital" page (lwca.org/sitepage/lfham/lfham.htm), although not always as current as I'd like to maintain them, are a good place to start. There are two links in particular which should help: Bill de Carle's own site - http://www.ietc.ca/home/bill/bbs.htm An article by Lyle Koehler - http://www.computerpro.com/~lyle/watsbpsk.htm 73, John From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25159 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 19:51:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 19:51:47 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xxPw-0002yO-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:47:40 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from smtper.inrete.it ([212.110.32.184] helo=mailer.inrete.it) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xxPu-0002yJ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:47:39 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from cel266 (ppp-151-20-78-110.151-20.libero.it [151.20.78.110]) by mailer.inrete.it (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA20399 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 21:47:34 +0200 Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 21:47:34 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.1.20000602204630.0170bd50@mailer.inrete.it> X-Sender: spin@mailer.inrete.it X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Versione 4.1 Data: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:48:04 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M. Bruno" Subject: LF: M8 solar flare now ......... In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: For anyone interested, an M- class (currently M8 level and rising) solar flare is in progress now (1947z). http://www.sec.noaa.gov/rt_plots/xray_5m.cgi 73, Marco IK1ODO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12387 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 00:25:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 00:25:16 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y1f1-00047r-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 01:19:31 +0100 Received: from tomts2.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.140] helo=tomts2-srv.bellnexxia.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y1f0-00047m-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 01:19:30 +0100 Received: from server1 ([216.209.110.48]) by tomts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000603001856.YCXG25209.tomts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@server1> for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 20:18:56 -0400 Message-ID: <00a001bfccf0$5c740d30$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: BPSK's, not all the same. Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 20:11:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: John: >Where can we learn more about BPSK, and in particular AFRICA/COHERENT by >Bill de Carle? http://www.alltel.net/~k3pgp/opening.htm Look at this URL John and then look down for Bill Cantrell's articles about "BPSK Adventures". A good read and an even better eye-opener about BPSK. Someone else gave you the URL for the two other good items available. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25958 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 04:09:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 04:09:55 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y57i-0004tW-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 05:01:22 +0100 Received: from mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.3]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y57g-0004sF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 05:01:21 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.178.108] by mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000603040043.MYEU11571275.mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.178.108]> for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:00:43 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393881DE.3D9D@xtra.co.nz> Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 15:56:14 +1200 From: "Vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Bessel bandpass filter? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Thanks for reading this, I'm doing some study on audio bandpass filters before building a different variant of the PA0LQ stagger tuned filter. Texts suggest that the type of multiple feed back (MFB) op amp filter should not use a Q of greater than about 5, for performance stability, but the PA0LQ design has a Q of just over 30 per stage. I'm going to try a much lower Q and pass band width of 150 Hz or so, and also 800 Hz centre frequency. My thinking is that several sidebands are needed to give reasonable rates of rise and fall times of the keyed signal, and a square wave has odd harmonics. I have also read the SM7CMY thesis and there is mention of a "critical bandwidth" that seems to me to be typically around 150 Hz. The human brain is part of the overall aural filter. It seems that selected stagger tuning is the "answer" to minimising ringing in the (electronic) filter. I guess I will find out in due course if a 150 Hz stagger tuned version "sounds better". For anyone considering active filter variants, there is design information on page 16.28 of the 1999 ARRL Handbook, for a single stage. For the desired application, the mulit stage stagger tuning still needs to be somehow worked out! But the intended thrust of this email is to ask about if anyone can find a reference to a BESSEL BANDPASS filter. Text books all say that the Bessel low pass filter has the most linear phase response (best group delay) of the basic range of filters (Butterworth, Chebyshev, elliptic, Bessel). But I can not find any reference to a BANDPASS variant of the Bessel filter. I have a feeling that it is not realisable mathematically, and that is why it is obvious by its absence as a text book band pass filter, but if there is a filter theory guru on the reflector I would dearly like to hear a response. 73, Bob ZL2CA From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8613 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 05:33:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 05:33:47 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y6SN-0005BA-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 06:26:47 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo15.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.5]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y6SL-0005B5-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 06:26:45 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo15.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.3b.5b0ebd6 (3974) for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 01:26:07 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <3b.5b0ebd6.2669f0ef@aol.com> Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 01:26:07 EDT Subject: Re: LF: Bessel bandpass filter? To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 102 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Bob, Bessel filters do have wonderful group delay characteristics, and a bandpass version is entirely mathematically realisable...but not especially useful. The skirts of such a filter are so gentle that there is little point in using it for communications audio filtering unless you used many, many stages. If you were to do that, however, the inevitable minor defects in the physical realisation would likely result in phase characteristics little better than a simpler Butterworth design of comparable steepness. It is not an absolute requirement to have linear phase over the entire band of interest; only enough of it to allow the shape of the more-or-less square wave envelope to be reproduced without excessive overshoot. (This could be as little as 50 Hz of the overall bandwidth for normal CW.) We have been using brick-wall highpass and lowpass filters in broadcast audio paths for some time now, exhibiting virtually no ringing or overshoot. This is done partly by incorporating active phase shift networks to compensate for the normal huge group delay excursions in the elliptical designs needed to achieve the required rolloff characteristics. Alas, design formulae for some of the fancier implementations are hard to come by. 73, John KD4IDY From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17190 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 05:48:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 05:48:26 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y6iB-0005Ep-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 06:43:07 +0100 Received: from teapot25.domain0.bigpond.com ([139.134.5.173]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y6i9-0005Ek-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 06:43:06 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by teapot25.domain0.bigpond.com (NTMail 3.02.13) with ESMTP id ta522905 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 15:37:48 +1000 Received: from MOIP-A-003-pool-167.tmns.net.au ([139.134.91.167]) by mail0.bigpond.com (Claudes-Hot-MailRouter V2.7e 13/1747428); 03 Jun 2000 15:37:47 Message-ID: <000d01bfcd1e$0f429d00$a75b868b@zimslaptop> From: "Graeme Zimmer" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org, vernall@xtra.co.nz References: <393881DE.3D9D@xtra.co.nz> Subject: LF: Re: Bessel bandpass filter? Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 15:39:15 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Bob, > But the intended thrust of this email is to ask about if anyone can find > a reference to a BESSEL BANDPASS filter. "Electronic Filter Design Handbook" by Williams and Taylor has a section on "Capacitive Coupled Resonant" bandpass filters. (These are the kind where a number of parallel tuned circuits are coupled together via capacitors) The book offers a table for Bessel parameters. It does a design for "constant delay over passband" bandpass using the Bessel tables... Let me know if you could use a photocopy of a few pages..... ......................... Zim ............. VK3GJZ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18280 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 07:32:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 07:32:03 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y8LH-0005br-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 08:27:35 +0100 Received: from mb09.swip.net ([193.12.122.212]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y8LG-0005bm-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 08:27:34 +0100 Received: from win95 (d212-151-59-129.swipnet.se [212.151.59.129]) by mb09.swip.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA03712 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 09:26:34 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <000c01bfcd2d$9edbf1a0$813b97d4@win95.swipnet.se> From: "C Andersson" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: SV: Re: Bessel bandpass filter? Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 09:30:39 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >> a reference to a BESSEL BANDPASS filter. There's a nice software called "Filter Wiz Pro" which can be downloaded at: http://www.schematica.com/Fil_Xfer/Transfer.htm The unregistered version has some masked componet values in the circuit diagrams. 73 Christer sm6pxj From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1352 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 07:50:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 07:50:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y8cP-0005fG-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 08:45:17 +0100 Received: from teapot06.domain1.bigpond.com ([139.134.5.237]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12y8cO-0005fB-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 08:45:16 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by teapot06.domain1.bigpond.com (NTMail 3.02.13) with ESMTP id ca790506 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 17:45:13 +1000 Received: from MOIP-A-001-pool-9.tmns.net.au ([139.134.91.9]) by mail1.bigpond.com (Claudes-Tiny-MailRouter V2.7e 1/1644232); 03 Jun 2000 17:45:12 Message-ID: <001401bfcd2f$d96512a0$095b868b@zimslaptop> From: "Graeme Zimmer" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Cc: vernall@xtra.co.nz Subject: LF: Re: Bessel bandpass filter? Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 17:46:36 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Bob, > But the intended thrust of this email is to ask about if anyone can find > a reference to a BESSEL BANDPASS filter. "Electronic Filter Design Handbook" by Williams and Taylor has a section on "Capacitive Coupled Resonant" bandpass filters. (These are the kind where a number of parallel tuned circuits are coupled together via capacitors) The book offers a table for Bessel parameters. It does a design for "constant delay over passband" bandpass using the Bessel tables... Let me know if you could use a photocopy of a few pages..... ......................... Zim ............. VK3GJZ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23772 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 11:49:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 11:49:28 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yCJf-0006Sl-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 12:42:11 +0100 Received: from mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.15]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yCJd-0006Sf-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 12:42:10 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.178.135] by mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000603114133.XRHC19584752.mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.178.135]> for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 23:41:33 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3938ED38.36F4@xtra.co.nz> Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 23:34:16 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Bessel bandpass filter? References: <3b.5b0ebd6.2669f0ef@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: WarmSpgs@aol.com wrote: > > Hi Bob, > > Bessel filters do have wonderful group delay characteristics, and a bandpass > version is entirely mathematically realisable...but not especially useful. I was not planning to use one. My query was about apparent lack of a band pass version being mentioned in text books. > The skirts of such a filter are so gentle that there is little point in using > it for communications audio filtering unless you used many, many stages. If > you were to do that, however, the inevitable minor defects in the physical > realisation would likely result in phase characteristics little better than a > simpler Butterworth design of comparable steepness. Yes. It seems the stagger tuned Butterworth is the design to go for. > It is not an absolute requirement to have linear phase over the entire band > of interest; only enough of it to allow the shape of the more-or-less square > wave envelope to be reproduced without excessive overshoot. (This could be > as little as 50 Hz of the overall bandwidth for normal CW.) We have been > using brick-wall highpass and lowpass filters in broadcast audio paths for > some time now, exhibiting virtually no ringing or overshoot. This is done > partly by incorporating active phase shift networks to compensate for the > normal huge group delay excursions in the elliptical designs needed to > achieve the required rolloff characteristics. Alas, design formulae for some > of the fancier implementations are hard to come by. > > 73, > John KD4IDY What I am not sure of is how to stagger the stages of bandpass active filters. However, they can easily be tweaked, and applying "input beeping" and using a scope to minimise ringing in the output seems to be a good experimental way of adjusting it for the desired characteristic. Thanks for the comments. Bob ZL2CA From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29412 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 11:49:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 11:49:38 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yCJm-0006Sr-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 12:42:18 +0100 Received: from mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.15]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yCJk-0006Sg-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 12:42:17 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.178.135] by mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000603114141.XRHJ19584752.mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.178.135]> for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 23:41:41 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3938EE64.503A@xtra.co.nz> Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 23:39:16 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: SV: Re: Bessel bandpass filter? References: <000c01bfcd2d$9edbf1a0$813b97d4@win95.swipnet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: C Andersson wrote: > > >> a reference to a BESSEL BANDPASS filter. > > There's a nice software called "Filter Wiz Pro" which can be downloaded at: > http://www.schematica.com/Fil_Xfer/Transfer.htm > > The unregistered version has some masked componet values in the circuit diagrams. > > 73 > Christer > sm6pxj Thanks for the URL info. I will check it out. Bob ZL2CA From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16791 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 15:30:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 15:30:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yFir-0007C8-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 16:20:25 +0100 Received: from [192.139.219.10] (helo=claven.fanshawec.on.ca) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yFiq-0007Bg-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 16:20:24 +0100 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [198.96.18.21] by claven.fanshawec.on.ca with ESMTP; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 11:19:19 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 11:20:23 -0500 Subject: LF: FilterCAD From: "Mitch Powell" To: vernall@xtra.co.nz Cc: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit FilterCAD Bob:
Try the following site - for filter design - I believe you can enter the parameters, and the filter is designed on the spot.

FILTERCAD WEB SITE INFO

www.linear.com/apps/download.html    -  download information

www.linear.com/apps/         -   lots of application notes

www.linear.com/source_html/form_sent_software.html    - the actual download site

73
Mitch     VE3OT From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3191 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 16:05:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 16:05:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yGMC-0007JT-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:01:04 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yGMB-0007JN-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:01:03 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [195.44.214.181] (helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yGM7-0005NZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 16:01:00 +0000 Message-ID: <3938D945.60D6678F@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 10:09:09 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "rsgb" Subject: LF: communications systems Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Having read and studied many messages lately about various modes and advantages of one over another. BPSK, PSK31, SLOW CW, NORMAL CW etc My conclusion like I have always stated is that NORMAL CW or SLOW CW is more suitable on LF for what we are trying to achieve, especially long distance dx, and short exchanges of information like callsigna and RST. If one wants to shift large volumes of traffic then use data modes and suitable frequencies like vhf/uhf and satellites, where noise is mimimal and phase distortion due to propagation anomalies is also mimimal. Propagation conditions on LF with all the environmental noise and high static levels that most users of the band complain about plus low transmitter power of a max of 1w is more suited to the use of CW where a mimimum of fuss and equipment is required. The operators ideally should be fully competent and experienced in CW. On the question of machine v manual modes. If one uses a computer to visually read slow cw that cannot be heard aurally then it must be a machine function system, otherwise the message or qso could not be conducted. In most cases the very slow cw that I have seen on a screen can be read directly from the speaker and in this case is not considered a machine system. If one is totally dependent on a machine to send and receive very slow cw then it must be considered a machine system. The machine/computer with suitable software is converting the audio into a visual format, and with FFT, processing the signal. If automated sending is used, again this is a machine generated system. The operator participation using a computer for sending/receiving very slow cw is no different to sending/receiving PSK31. You must read the screen in both cases to get the message and you must type the message information to send it. Another factor to consider. Very slow morse generated/received by a computer does not require the operator to know the morse code. The message is typed to be sent and instead of reading the received dots and dashes on the screen, existing software can be modified to print out the message. A couple of professional cw operators one at each end of the proposed transatlantic link will achieve the object. There is no need for synchronised atomic clocks and bandwidths of 0.00000000007hz Keep it simple and all can enjoy and verify it. If someone using the new Hydrogen/Stentlesch clock and a b/w of 0.0000000000000000000007 hz told us that they had made the first qso across the atlantic on 136 khz, how would the rest of us know if they were telling the truth. Would they qualify for any awards????? 73 de G3KEV From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3808 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 16:08:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 16:08:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yGMD-0007JZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:01:05 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yGMC-0007JS-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:01:04 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [195.44.214.181] (helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yGMA-0005Nl-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 16:01:02 +0000 Message-ID: <39391CF5.9CB25F31@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 14:57:58 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "rsgb" Subject: LF: MODES AND ANTENNAS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: There is such a diverse opinion about antennas both little and large and modes one versus the other that the best course of action is for each individual to build and use what they think is best for them. There is an abundance of theoritical discussion going on that bears no relationship to REALITY. Too many assumptions, and too wide of the mark when one tries to implement them. The real proof of success will be judged by listening on LF to signals being emitted from the various sources. Those doing the job properly will be obvious from the strength of the signals received. Data modes would not fair very well today with static crashes S9 plus 40, but I could manage a short exchange of RST and callsign on CW without difficulty. 73 de G3KEV From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4081 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 17:57:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 17:57:09 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yI3G-0007ej-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 18:49:38 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from hs-img-3.compuserve.com ([149.174.177.148] helo=sphmgaac.compuserve.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yI3F-0007ee-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 18:49:37 +0100 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by sphmgaac.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.9) id NAA12978 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 13:49:31 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 13:49:09 -0400 From: "'Geri' Kinzel, DK8KW" Subject: LF: MODES AND ANTENNAS To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <200006031349_MC2-A761-A5F3@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: G3KEV wrote: >There is such a diverse opinion about antennas both little and large and >modes one versus the other that the best course of action is for each >individual to build and use what they think is best for them.< Mal, I do not always agree with what you say, but here I fully agree. May the people using small antennas be happy with their system and the people who have the ability to erect large antenna arrays use those. Same is true for the most suitable mode. I like to conduct experiments to see what is suitable to me, sometimes it depends on my mood. I have the ability to cross the channel (not the Atlantic, yet), but I have just build a QRP LF transmitter and was happy that Wil in PA was able to copy me. So thats what counts: have fun and try what you think is best suitable for what you want to reach. May your god be with you! Best 73 Geri, DK8KW (W1KW) P.S.: I was a keen 50 MHz operator until the band became too crowded ... too easy to work into the states or other dx ... will be back when sunspots disappear ... more fun! From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12887 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 18:30:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 18:30:09 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yIaQ-0007m7-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:23:54 +0100 Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yIaO-0007m2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:23:53 +0100 Received: from oemcomputer (man-038.dialup.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.41.47]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id TAA22634 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 19:23:46 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: irwell.zetnet.co.uk: Host man-038.dialup.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.41.47] claimed to be oemcomputer Message-ID: <002601bfcd89$06e2be40$2f29f7c2@oemcomputer> From: "John Rabson" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <22021.200005301550@gemini> Subject: LF: Re: Big & Small antennas - Reply to comments Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 19:24:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: ----- Original Message ----- From: James Moritz To: Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 5:57 PM Subject: LF: Big & Small antennas - Reply to comments > Possible Causes: > > My money is on the increased field strengths being due to fields > and currents under the ground surface, resulting in greater > effective height of the antenna. Obviously, this needs more > investigation, which I hope to try later. By the way, have any of the > cave radio community made underground field strength > measurements? Yes, we have. There is a piece on earth electrode based cave radio experiments in issue 40 of the Cave Radio & Electronics Group Journal (ISSN 1361-4800). See also http://www.mcrosolv.demon.co.uk/caves.org/radio/ to search for articles using David Gibson's on-line digest. 73 de John Rabson G3PAI From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14766 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 18:37:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 18:37:20 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yIiU-0007nL-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:32:14 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yIiS-0007nG-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:32:13 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from isis (usercl08.uk.uudial.com [62.188.154.149]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA29409 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 19:30:59 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000603192717.00960ad0@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:32:13 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests. In-reply-to: <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: At 13:41 02/06/00 +0200, you wrote: >To All from PA0SE > >Walter Blanchard quoted the RACAL expert who has in the past designed the >Decca antennas as follows: > > >(...) If the small one has an assymetric horizontal component (flat-top) > > this will complicate matters considerably since it will radiate both > > vertical and > > horizontally-polarised and there will be interaction between them that > > will affect the radiation pattern. So it would be unlikely to have a >circular > > polar pattern and this might account for some of the observed variations. > >This is not confirmed by computer simulation. > >Computer program AO by Brian Beezley, K6STI, shows for the L-antenna over >medium ground an almost perfect omnidirectional radiation pattern. The >deviation >from a circle is no more than about 0.1dB. > >The program also shows that the maximum of the horizontally polarised wave >is straight up and 21.1dB down on the maximum of the vertically polarised >wave. >The latter maximum occurs under an angle of 12 degrees (direct + reflected >wave). >In the region where the inverse distance law is applicable the space in the >vertical radiation pattern between zero degrees and the lobe under 12 >degrees is filled by the surface wave. Dick, I haven't got AO so could you see what it says about the following: An inverted-L half-wave resonant at 1950 kHz, vertical section 25m high, horizontal 55m long. What does it predict the VERTICALLY-POLARISED horizontal polar pattern to be ? I know the answer, because I've measured it, I just want to know what your AO says! Walter G3JKV. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10344 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 21:24:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 21:24:49 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yLJg-0008N7-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 22:18:48 +0100 Received: from mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.1]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yLJf-0008Mw-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 22:18:47 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.178.186] by mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000603211812.ZSLD5139981.mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.178.186]> for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 09:18:12 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <39396EAA.39F0@xtra.co.nz> Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 08:46:34 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: FilterCAD References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Mitch Powell wrote: > > Bob: > Try the following site - for filter design - I believe you can enter > the parameters, and the filter is designed on the spot. > > FILTERCAD WEB SITE INFO > > www.linear.com/apps/download.html - download information > > www.linear.com/apps/ - lots of application notes > > www.linear.com/source_html/form_sent_software.html - the actual > download site > > 73 > Mitch VE3OT Thanks Mitch, I will check that out as well. 73, Bob From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26781 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 21:25:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 21:25:15 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yLJb-0008N1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 22:18:43 +0100 Received: from mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.1]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yLJZ-0008Mj-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 22:18:42 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.178.186] by mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000603211803.ZSKV5139981.mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.178.186]> for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 09:18:03 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <39396E01.5A2C@xtra.co.nz> Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 08:43:45 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Re: Bessel bandpass filter? References: <001401bfcd2f$d96512a0$095b868b@zimslaptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Graeme Zimmer wrote: > > Hi Bob, > > > But the intended thrust of this email is to ask about if anyone can find > > a reference to a BESSEL BANDPASS filter. > > "Electronic Filter Design Handbook" by Williams and Taylor > has a section on "Capacitive Coupled Resonant" bandpass filters. > (These are the kind where a number of parallel tuned circuits are coupled > together via capacitors) > > The book offers a table for Bessel parameters. > > It does a design for "constant delay over passband" bandpass using the > Bessel tables... > > Let me know if you could use a photocopy of a few pages..... > > ......................... Zim ............. VK3GJZ My first reply was direct to Zim, but I should also acknowledge it to reflector reader: I would like a copy, thanks for the offer Zim. I'm intending to build an active filter equivalent, where each stage is practically independent of others, which is different to the mutually coupled passive filter, but the design info would be interesting in its own right. 73, Bob From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3357 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 22:52:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 22:52:31 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yMgx-00008K-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 23:46:55 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.36]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yMgw-00008F-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2000 23:46:54 +0100 Received: from G0MRF@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.4a.63e9364 (3870) for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 18:46:18 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: G0MRF@aol.com Message-ID: <4a.63e9364.266ae4ba@aol.com> Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 18:46:18 EDT Subject: LF: GPS Frequency reference. To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 32 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I've been looking for a high stability source to act as a timebase for a frequency counter and for a PLL reference. I notice that the older Magellan GPS300 is available at $ 99. Does anyone know if: 1) The GPS300 has a 1Hz pulse output. (Or any other sensible frequency with high accuracy) 2) It can display Maidenhead locators. 73 David G0MRF From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22935 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2000 23:39:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 3 Jun 2000 23:39:31 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yNQW-0000Ma-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 00:34:00 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.40]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yNQV-0000MV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 00:33:59 +0100 Received: from G0MRF@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.a9.66cd49a (4366) for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 19:33:20 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: G0MRF@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 19:33:19 EDT Subject: LF: Kits and Bits To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 32 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: With apologies to the group. a) Glenn W7GS. Unable to reply to your enquiry via your hotmail address. Messages are bounced. Help /qsp pse. David G0MRF From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26525 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 08:03:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 08:03:39 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yVBa-0001vv-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 08:51:06 +0100 Received: from smtp2.ihug.co.nz ([203.109.252.8]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yVBX-0001vq-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 08:51:04 +0100 Received: from tractorb (p23-max12.chc.ihug.co.nz [209.79.136.151]) by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id TAA15012 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:50:50 +1200 Message-ID: <02b001bfcdf7$200b7060$d8804dd1@tractorb> From: "Dave Brown" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <39396EAA.39F0@xtra.co.nz> Subject: Re: LF: FilterCAD Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:32:55 +1200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: ----- Original Message ----- From: vernall To: Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 8:46 AM Subject: Re: LF: FilterCAD I downloaded the 'full catastrophe' from the LTC (Linear Technology) site some time back but it's on the pc at work. Output of the filter design pgm is in terms of varoius LTC op amps etc but useful if you want to get an appreciation of what may be needed to achieve a given spec. Can't recall the options available but I dare say yu will have a peek anyway! The handbook(downloadable too) for use with the software is quite interesting as well. 73 Dave, ZL3FJ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2327 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 08:31:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 08:31:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yViM-00022j-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 09:24:58 +0100 Received: from post.interalpha.co.uk ([195.26.224.18] helo=post.interalpha.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yViL-00022e-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 09:24:57 +0100 Received: from g4jnt (sot-mod14.interalpha.net [195.26.225.14]) by post.interalpha.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA16050 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 09:33:45 +0100 Message-ID: <000601bfcdfe$831f0a20$0ee11ac3@g4jnt> From: "Andy Talbot" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: GPS Frequency reference. Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 09:25:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I have the Magellan Trailblazer, oldish GPS handheld circa 1994. There are no 1s pulses anywhere to be found on it, and the unit only displays NGR, Lat/Long or UTM. Look at the TAPR website for their deals on Garmin GPS25 and other boards. It is much faster locking up than the old Magellan and has 1s pulses Andy G4JNT -----Original Message----- From: G0MRF@aol.com To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: 04 June 2000 00:20 Subject: LF: GPS Frequency reference. >I've been looking for a high stability source to act as a timebase for a >frequency counter and for a PLL reference. > >I notice that the older Magellan GPS300 is available at $ 99. > >Does anyone know if: > >1) The GPS300 has a 1Hz pulse output. (Or any other sensible frequency with >high accuracy) > >2) It can display Maidenhead locators. > >73 > >David G0MRF > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16837 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 09:05:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 09:05:40 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yWHb-0002A5-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 10:01:23 +0100 Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yWHa-0002A0-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 10:01:22 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from isis (userb514.uk.uudial.com [193.149.82.243]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA22190 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 10:00:08 +0100 (BST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000604080903.00971dc0@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 10:01:28 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: Re: LF: GPS Frequency reference. In-reply-to: <4a.63e9364.266ae4ba@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: David, Your query: >I've been looking for a high stability source to act as a timebase for a >frequency counter and for a PLL reference. > >I notice that the older Magellan GPS300 is available at $ 99. > >Does anyone know if: > >1) The GPS300 has a 1Hz pulse output. (Or any other sensible frequency with >high accuracy) > >2) It can display Maidenhead locators. I haven't been following this thread so not sure what you actually want these for, but a word of warning. These cheapo GPS's either (a) will not have any outputs, or (b) timing-wise they won't be worth a damn if you want any real accuracy. They use the cheapest VXO they can and depend on the software to hold time so it's very jittery. Are you looking for accurate relative time or accurate absolute time? - there's a big difference. Why don't you use MSF? It's very easy to filter out the 60 kHz carrier and divide down to whatever you want - even I can do it! And it's based on one of the frequency standards that USNO uses for GPS. You could always buy an MSF clock module from Maplin for a few quid and dig into it to pull out what you want. Have a word with Dr John Laverty at NPL - he supplies the controlling timing reference for MSF and is happy to talk to anyone about time and timing references. Walter G3JKV. Walter G3JKV. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16207 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 11:48:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 11:48:45 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yYnf-0002fH-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 12:42:39 +0100 Received: from ulexite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yYnd-0002f7-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 12:42:37 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (1Cust147.tnt11.rtm1.nl.uu.net [212.136.251.147]) by ulexite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id F282BFB014 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 10:40:59 -0100 (GMT) Message-ID: <003701bfce1a$2a24f580$93fb88d4@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk><000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests. Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 11:48:43 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: To All from PA0SE In an earlier e-mail I wrote: > >Computer program AO by Brian Beezley, K6STI, shows for the L-antenna over > >medium ground an almost perfect omnidirectional radiation pattern. The > >deviation > >from a circle is no more than about 0.1dB. Mike Powell commented: > And yet did not Marconi use a vertical antenna with a long horizontal > wire to obtain directivity from Cape Race? When the original aerials > came down in a gale he found equal or stronger signal strengths using an > inverted 'L' with the arm pointing the right way. Mike, It depends on the length of the horizontal part af the antenna. Jim used only 42m. When the top is increased to 0.1 wavelength than a F/B-ratio of 2.23dB results. With a top of 0.25 wavelength F/B becomes 3.51dB. 73, Dick, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18049 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 11:50:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 11:50:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yYnf-0002fI-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 12:42:39 +0100 Received: from ulexite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yYnd-0002f8-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 12:42:37 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (1Cust147.tnt11.rtm1.nl.uu.net [212.136.251.147]) by ulexite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id CFA79FB018 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 10:41:04 -0100 (GMT) Message-ID: <003901bfce1a$2d0f1d20$93fb88d4@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> <4.2.0.58.20000603192717.00960ad0@mail.pncl.co.uk> Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests. Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 12:57:58 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: G3JKC wrote: > Dick, > > I haven't got AO so could you see what it says about the following: > > An inverted-L half-wave resonant at 1950 kHz, vertical section 25m high, > horizontal 55m long. What does it predict the VERTICALLY-POLARISED > horizontal polar pattern to be ? > I know the answer, because I've measured it, I just want to know what > your AO says! > > Walter G3JKV. Walter, I will send you the patterns (vertical polarisation, horizontal and vertical pattern) as attachments to a direct e-mail because the reflector does not accept these. 73, Dick, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 170 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 11:58:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 11:58:27 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yYxw-0002il-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 12:53:16 +0100 Received: from smtp-out2.bellatlantic.net ([199.45.39.157]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yYxv-0002ig-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 12:53:15 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bellatlantic.net (client-151-200-118-195.bellatlantic.net [151.200.118.195]) by smtp-out2.bellatlantic.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA02458; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 07:52:41 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393A437B.2E4ADDAA@bellatlantic.net> Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 07:54:35 -0400 From: "Andre' Kesteloot" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD47 (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "lf-amrad" , "AMRAD Tacos" , "Rsgb_lf_group" , "Lawrence Kesteloot" Subject: LF: Photons again... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: If verified, an interesting development, Andre' N4ICK > http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2000/06/04/stifgnusa01007.html From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14208 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 15:06:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 15:06:43 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybtg-0003L1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 16:01:04 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybtf-0003Jd-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 16:01:03 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from as33-s15-150-21.cwci.net ([195.44.150.21] helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybtZ-0002Dw-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 15:00:57 +0000 Message-ID: <393A5D33.D8EE45F7@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 13:44:19 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "rsgb" Subject: LF: communications systems Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Having read and studied many messages lately about various modes and advantages of one over another. BPSK, PSK31, SLOW CW, NORMAL CW etc My conclusion like I have always stated is that NORMAL CW or SLOW CW is more suitable on LF for what we are trying to achieve, especially long distance dx, and short exchanges of information like callsigna and RST. If one wants to shift large volumes of traffic then use digital/data modes and suitable frequencies like vhf/uhf and satellites, where noise is mimimal and phase distortion due to propagation anomalies is also mimimal. Propagation conditions on LF with all the environmental noise and high static levels that most users of the band complain about plus low transmitter power of a max of 1w is more suited to the use of CW where a mimimum of fuss and equipment is required. The operators ideally should be fully competent and experienced in CW. On the question of machine v manual modes. If one uses a computer to visually read slow cw that cannot be heard aurally then it must be a machine function system, otherwise the message or qso could not be conducted. In most cases the very slow cw that I have seen on a screen can be read directly from the speaker and in this case is not considered a machine system. If one is totally dependent on a machine to send and receive very slow cw then it must be considered a machine system. The machine/computer with suitable software is converting the audio into a visual format, and with FFT, processing the signal. If automated sending is used, again this is a machine generated system. The operator participation using a computer for sending/receiving very slow cw is no different to sending/receiving PSK31. You must read the screen in both cases to get the message and you must type the message information to send it. Another factor to consider. Very slow morse generated/received by a computer does not require the operator to know the morse code. The message is typed to be sent and instead of reading the received dots and dashes on the screen, existing software can be modified to print out the message. A couple of professional cw operators one at each end of the proposed transatlantic link will achieve the object. There is no need for synchronised atomic clocks and bandwidths of 0.00000000007hz Keep it simple and all can enjoy and verify it. If someone using the new Hydrogen/Stentlesch clock and a b/w of 0.0000000000000000000007 hz told us that they had made the first qso across the atlantic on 136 khz, how would the rest of us know if they were telling the truth. Would they qualify for any awards????? 73 de G3KEV From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14245 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 15:06:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 15:06:56 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybtf-0003Kv-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 16:01:03 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybtd-0003Kq-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 16:01:02 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from as33-s15-150-21.cwci.net ([195.44.150.21] helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybtb-0002E1-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 15:00:59 +0000 Message-ID: <393A6092.1E13426E@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 13:58:43 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests References: <19213.200006021741@gemini> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: James Moritz wrote: > Dear LF Group, > Some comments on G3JKV's recent E-mail - > > I calculated the ERP on the basis of the measured antenna current > and estimated radiation resistance of the two antennas. Part of the > reasoning behind this was that the antenna efficiency would not be > an issue; the radiated power is just I squared times the radiation > resistance, and the calculated radiation resistance is a function > only of the antenna geometry, and not it's losses. In principle at > least, the only result of improved efficiency due to the Decca earth > mat would be to reduce the amount of transmitter power required to > produce the measured value of antenna current. So antenna > efficiency did not actually enter into the calculation of ERP, and the > presence or absence of the Decca earth would not have affected > the result of the calculation. > > Having said that, clearly the ERP calculations are wrong because > there was a significant difference in signal strength, and so by > definition ERP, between the two antennas, where the calculations > said they should be the same. Unfortunately this makes the whole comparison tests between the small inv L and the large vertical FLAWED. Next time compare the large vertical against a small 9 metre vertical without any horizontal wires. Resonate each vertical in turn and check the reports. I will put my money on the large vertical. G3KEV > Unfortunately, my field strength > measuring equipment is not accurate enough to say for certain that > this was because the small antenna was producing more ERP than > it should, or that the Decca antenna was producing less than it > should. However, it is probably easier to believe the former, since > the assumptions on which the calculations are based are more > nearly met by the Decca antenna than the small inverted L. > > I don't know if this experiment has much to tell us about the > presence or absence of horizontally polarised signals; however, > the ferrite rod antenna I used to measure field strengths showed > the difference in field strength of roughly 4dB observed by nearly > everyone else, and should not have been sensitive to horizontally > polarised signals (ie. vertical H field). > > Cheers, Jim Moritz > 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 596 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 15:10:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 15:10:38 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybx4-0003NM-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 16:04:34 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.92]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ybx3-0003NH-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 16:04:33 +0100 Received: from pickmere.demon.co.uk ([158.152.117.143]) by anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12ybww-0008Gs-0Y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 16:04:29 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 13:43:08 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M.J.Powell" Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests. References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> <003701bfce1a$2a24f580$93fb88d4@w8k3f0> In-reply-to: <003701bfce1a$2a24f580$93fb88d4@w8k3f0> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In message <003701bfce1a$2a24f580$93fb88d4@w8k3f0>, Dick Rollema writes >To All from PA0SE > >In an earlier e-mail I wrote: > >> >Computer program AO by Brian Beezley, K6STI, shows for the L-antenna >over >> >medium ground an almost perfect omnidirectional radiation pattern. The >> >deviation >> >from a circle is no more than about 0.1dB. > >Mike Powell commented: > >> And yet did not Marconi use a vertical antenna with a long horizontal >> wire to obtain directivity from Cape Race? When the original aerials >> came down in a gale he found equal or stronger signal strengths using an >> inverted 'L' with the arm pointing the right way. > >Mike, > >It depends on the length of the horizontal part af the antenna. > >Jim used only 42m. > >When the top is increased to 0.1 wavelength than a F/B-ratio of 2.23dB >results. > >With a top of 0.25 wavelength F/B becomes 3.51dB. Thanks, Dick Considering the poor receivers in use at the time and the ratio of vertical to horizontal (1:1?) I would have expected a bigger improvement. Mike -- M.J.Powell From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25160 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 19:48:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 19:48:00 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ygAE-0004CT-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 20:34:26 +0100 Received: from post.interalpha.co.uk ([195.26.224.18] helo=post.interalpha.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ygAD-0004CO-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 20:34:25 +0100 Received: from g4jnt (sot-mod05.interalpha.net [195.26.225.5]) by post.interalpha.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA31162 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 20:43:19 +0100 Message-ID: <003b01bfce5c$0d1d4b80$05e11ac3@g4jnt> From: "Andy Talbot" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: GPS Frequency reference. Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 20:35:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: One PPS output on the Garmin GPS25 is specified at 1us accuracy. This ought to be adequate if the PLL has a long enough time constant. I use mine to drive the B input of a counter timer and using teh A/B * 10^n functionm can get gating times of 10000s Have a look at the Brooks Sheera GPS Disiplined frequency standard in QST last year or the year before sometime. I've got a copy somwhere if you're stuck Andy G4JNT -----Original Message----- From: Walter Blanchard To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: 04 June 2000 10:37 Subject: Re: LF: GPS Frequency reference. >David, > >Your query: > >>I've been looking for a high stability source to act as a timebase for a >>frequency counter and for a PLL reference. >> >>I notice that the older Magellan GPS300 is available at $ 99. >> >>Does anyone know if: >> >>1) The GPS300 has a 1Hz pulse output. (Or any other sensible frequency with >>high accuracy) >> >>2) It can display Maidenhead locators. > >I haven't been following this thread so not sure what you >actually want these for, but a word of warning. >These cheapo GPS's either (a) will not have any outputs, >or (b) timing-wise they won't be worth a damn if you >want any real accuracy. >They use the cheapest VXO they can and depend on the >software to hold time so it's very jittery. >Are you looking for accurate relative time or accurate absolute >time? - there's a big difference. >Why don't you use MSF? It's very easy to filter out >the 60 kHz carrier and divide down to whatever you want - >even I can do it! And it's based on one of the frequency >standards that USNO uses for GPS. >You could always buy an MSF clock module from Maplin for >a few quid and dig into it to pull out what you want. >Have a word with Dr John Laverty at NPL - he supplies the >controlling timing reference for MSF and is happy to talk >to anyone about time and timing references. > >Walter G3JKV. > > > > > > >Walter G3JKV. > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1042 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 22:40:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 22:40:33 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yizw-0004qO-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 23:36:00 +0100 Received: from mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.1]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yizv-0004qJ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 23:35:59 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.181.36] by mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000604223521.FOUU5139981.mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.181.36]> for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 10:35:21 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393AD4ED.3561@xtra.co.nz> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 10:15:09 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: communications systems References: <393A5D33.D8EE45F7@netscapeonline.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: g3kev wrote: snip > If someone using the new Hydrogen/Stentlesch clock and a b/w of > 0.0000000000000000000007 hz told us that they had made the first qso > across the atlantic on 136 khz, how would the rest of us know if they > were telling the truth. Would they qualify for any awards????? > 73 de G3KEV Sounds to me to be a sour grapes comment from a "CW for ever" believer? The stations of such a QSO would of course have their self-reward for the achievement, even if there is a level of keeping high tech at arms length from others. The amateur is progressive? Bob ZL2CA From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24931 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2000 23:11:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 4 Jun 2000 23:11:38 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yjRS-00051B-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 00:04:26 +0100 Received: from tantalum.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.80] helo=tantalum) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yjRR-000516-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 00:04:25 +0100 Received: from [62.7.58.97] (helo=default) by tantalum with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 12yjRG-00077w-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 00:04:14 +0100 Message-ID: <000d01bfce79$110a0fe0$613a073e@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: Sorry no Dx Cluster spots from GB7DXM Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 23:20:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi all, I am sorry to say that the local DX Cluster crashed late last week and there are no entries on it for LF. Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13505 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 00:18:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 00:18:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ykWT-0005DV-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 01:13:41 +0100 Received: from smtp11.bellglobal.com ([204.101.251.53]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ykWR-0005DQ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 01:13:39 +0100 Received: from server1 (Kingston-ppp64640.sympatico.ca [216.208.85.21]) by smtp11.bellglobal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA01814 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 20:19:49 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <003201bfce81$f1a552f0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: a really weak signal in Canada.... Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 20:06:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Greetings: Bill de Carle has aggressively gone after my ultra weak signal on 137.710 and managed to copy it. He sent the following email to the LowFer reflector, I am resending it here for those who might be interested. With the antenna finally up here I am working on the test set so I can tune up the antenna. The signal is QRS CW at the speed of .4 WPM. Quote I don't know if this has been tried before, but I just tried it and it worked nicely. The general idea is to record an ultra-slow CW signal, then to play it back speeded up so the human operator can copy the CW message by ear at normal speed. Ham operators have years of experience trying to dig weak CW signals out of the noise - by ear - not by looking at a picture on a computer monitor. I used VA3LK's ultra-weak test signal. Using FFTZZ, I knew the signal was being received at 803 Hz - after some minutes of integration, the spectral line came up out of the noise, so I knew beforehand what the exact frequency was. Unfortunately the signal was way too weak to be able to decode by any spectral display technique available to me, so I hit upon the idea of time-compression. I recorded some 578 seconds of audio to hard disk at 7200 samples per sec. Then I post-processed that file as follows: 1. Run it through a narrow bandpass filter centered on 803 Hz. 2. Multiply the resulting data with a sinewave at 825.4 Hz - that acts like a mixer producing sum and difference frequencies at 1628.4 and 22.4 Hz respectively. 3. Run that waveform through a 32-point FIR lowpass filter to keep only the 22.4 Hz component. 4. Keep only 1 resulting filtered sample out of 32 - essentially compressing the total recording time by a factor of 32. 5. Make it into a .wav file specified as sampled at 8000 s/s and lasting 16.25 seconds. When I played the 16.25 second wav file back I could actually hear the CW at a reasonable speed (about 35.5 times faster than it was transmitted) and at a reasonable tone (about 800 Hz). The ident was easily recognized. It worked on first try. I will now optimize the filter coefficients and write a single program to go directly from digitized samples on disk at 7200 s/s to a .wav file time-compressed at 8000 s/s. Anybody else tried this? Bill VE2IQ Unquote I have the .WAV file and will send to anyone who asks. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3753 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 01:54:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 01:54:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ym0t-0005Uw-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 02:49:11 +0100 Received: from m11.boston.juno.com ([63.211.172.74]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ym0s-0005Ur-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 02:49:10 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"yokUgcxCbtTP7XLrpefewJVffiJc0ijwSZ0wnWhppBUcrgB92wH5Tg=="> Received: (from riese-k3djc@juno.com) by m11.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id E9RX9XU7; Sun, 04 Jun 2000 21:48:44 EDT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 21:27:20 -0400 Subject: Re: LF: a really weak signal in Canada.... Message-ID: <20000604.214437.-73217.3.riese-k3djc@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11 X-Juno-Att: 0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "Bob RIESE" Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Larry when you get a list together include it to me a really novel idea Bob I have the .WAV file and will send to anyone who asks. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16778 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 07:11:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 07:11:30 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yqtb-0006QK-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 08:01:59 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mail.sci.fi ([195.74.0.53] helo=pefletti.saunalahti.fi ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yqtZ-0006QF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 08:01:57 +0100 Received: from default (MCCXVIII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.40.18]) by pefletti.saunalahti.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA01874 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 10:01:34 +0300 (EET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20000605100201.007e9b40@pop.saunalahti.fi> X-Sender: vaiski1@pop.saunalahti.fi (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 10:02:01 +0300 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?V=E4in=F6_Lehtoranta?= Subject: LF: Signal Strength Measurements by OH2LX, 05 June 2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Signal strength measurements of various LF stations by OH2LX: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Day ------------------ 29May 30May 31May 01Jun 02Jun 03Jun 04Jun MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN Time, UTC ------------ 2040- 2020- 2030- 2035- 2035- 2040- 2030- ------------------------------------------------------------------ kHz Stn d,km AZI Indicated ESH2 input, dBmW ------------------------------------------------------------------ 68.9 DHJ58? 1115, 242 -99 -105 -101 -102 -99 -101 -103 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 73.3 Rugby, 1825, 252, -107 -107 -105 -106 -104 -104 -106 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 75.0 HBG, 1992, 226, -104 -103 -107 -104 -103 -102 -106 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 77.5 DCF77, 1543, 228, -89 -90 -92 -89 -87 -87 -92 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 128.9 DCF49, 1544, 228, -95 -93 -89 -91 -87 -92 -96 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 138.8 DBF39, 1221, 226, -85 -85 -85 -85 -83 -96 -85 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 135.8 SXV, 2490, 182, -103 -112 -104 -106 -116 -106 -107* ------------------------------------------------------------------ 137.0 CFH, 5750, 295, Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil ------------------------------------------------------------------ * One deep minimum observed practically every evening (fade) ------------------------------------------------------------------ 03June 1932 OH1TN -112; 1946:-112; 1953:-112; 2000:-112 (clg CQ) 2006:-111; 2013:-111; 2040:-112; 2045:-112; 2106:-112 ------------------------------------------------------------------ (R&S ESH2/---- 10m coax----/1:10/-----15m wire-----): Noise level with antenna: with 200Hz IF BandWidth: -24..-20 dB(uV), -131..-127dBmW (varies with frq, qrm, qrn etc) ------------------------------------------------------------------ End of message of 05th June 2000, 0700 UTC, from OH2LX ---------------------------------------------------------- V.K.Lehtoranta, OH2LX, POBox 50, FIN-05401 Jokela, Finland ------ Tel: +358-9-4173965 ---- Fax: +358-9-4173961 ------ E-mail: vaiski@dlc.fi - alias: oh2lx@dlc.fi & oh2lx@sral.fi From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27193 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 08:39:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 08:39:52 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ysG5-0006i8-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 09:29:17 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ysG3-0006i3-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 09:29:15 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id JAA28347; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 09:33:09 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 25865 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 09:24:15 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 09:24:15 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id JAA20184; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 09:24:30 GMT Received: from unknown(146.80.11.40) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma020149; Mon, 5 Jun 00 09:24:00 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 09:34:35 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 09:27:40 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C93@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: a really weak signal in Canada.... Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 09:27:35 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >From VE2IQ >It worked on first try. I will now optimize the filter coefficients and >write a single program to go directly from digitized samples on disk at >7200 s/s to a .wav file time-compressed at 8000 s/s. >Anybody else tried this? Yes- It was a bit of fun after my 393km 73kHz contact with G3PLX in 1997 using 50 second dot CW. Peter recorded my signals in I/Q format after mixing down to zero IF at a sampling rate of 6.25 Hz, then sent me the raw data file. I treated this as if it were sampled at a much higher rate - trivial in DSP by just pretending it is at a higher rate - effectively multiplying the signalling by 1000 times. Then upconverted to audio by multiplying the I/Q pairs by SIN / COS samples of a tone of 800 Hz. The resulting samples were then stored in a .WAV file which could be played back conventionally. 50s dots became 50ms which was about 24 WPM (which 'JNT could copy coz he knew what was being sent). A signal comfortably visible on the screen (10 - 15dB S/N in 0.05 Hz bandwidth) became a conventional CW signal easy to copy - with the same S/N effectively in 50Hz bandwidth. Incidently, there was no ringing on this in spite of the narrow filter due to the ability to perfectly optimise DSP filtering. When we tried with weaker signals, it was interesting, but probably not surprising that a signal that became difficult to see also became difficult to hear. To my mind, and memory of three years ago, the results for audio and visual were very similar. Doing the same rate conversion on an early evening to late morning 3.5MHz Dopplergram recording, (see G3PLX's article in RadCom a couple of years ago), resulted in the most wonderful 'whale' like whistling and tones as the ionosphere shifted the signal up and down and introduced extra components. Another in the 'natural sounds' series - wonder if a recording company would be interested ? Andy G4JNT > Quote > I don't know if this has been tried before, but I just tried it and it > worked nicely. > > The general idea is to record an ultra-slow CW signal, then to play it > back speeded up so the human operator can copy the CW message by ear > at normal speed. Ham operators have years of experience trying to dig > weak CW signals out of the noise - by ear - not by looking at a > picture > on a computer monitor. > > I used VA3LK's ultra-weak test signal. > Using FFTZZ, I knew the signal was being received at 803 Hz - after > some > minutes of integration, the spectral line came up out of the noise, so > I > knew beforehand what the exact frequency was. Unfortunately the > signal > was way too weak to be able to decode by any spectral display > technique > available to me, so I hit upon the idea of time-compression. > > I recorded some 578 seconds of audio to hard disk at 7200 samples per > sec. > Then I post-processed that file as follows: > > 1. Run it through a narrow bandpass filter centered on 803 Hz. > > 2. Multiply the resulting data with a sinewave at 825.4 Hz - that > acts like a mixer producing sum and difference frequencies at > 1628.4 and 22.4 Hz respectively. > > 3. Run that waveform through a 32-point FIR lowpass filter to keep > only the 22.4 Hz component. > > 4. Keep only 1 resulting filtered sample out of 32 - essentially > compressing the total recording time by a factor of 32. > > 5. Make it into a .wav file specified as sampled at 8000 s/s and > lasting 16.25 seconds. > > When I played the 16.25 second wav file back I could actually hear the > CW at a reasonable speed (about 35.5 times faster than it was > transmitted) > and at a reasonable tone (about 800 Hz). The ident was easily > recognized. > > It worked on first try. I will now optimize the filter coefficients > and > write a single program to go directly from digitized samples on disk > at > 7200 s/s to a .wav file time-compressed at 8000 s/s. > > Anybody else tried this? > > Bill VE2IQ > > Unquote > > I have the .WAV file and will send to anyone who asks. > > Larry > VA3LK > > > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26803 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 12:33:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 12:33:40 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yvuH-0007cz-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:23:01 +0100 Received: from d12lmsgate-2.de.ibm.com ([195.212.91.200]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yvuF-0007cu-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:22:59 +0100 Received: from d12relay02.de.ibm.com (d12relay02.de.ibm.com [9.165.215.23]) by d12lmsgate-2.de.ibm.com (1.0.0) with ESMTP id OAA29352 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:22:25 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from usa.net (dyn9-87-116-182.italy.ibm.com [9.87.116.182]) by d12relay02.de.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with ESMTP id OAA50744 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:22:19 +0200 Message-ID: <393B9B6A.9583127A@usa.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 14:22:02 +0200 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: a really weak signal in Canada.... References: <003201bfce81$f1a552f0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Larry Kayser wrote: > Greetings: > > Quote > I don't know if this has been tried before, but I just tried it and it > worked nicely. > [snip] > I recorded some 578 seconds of audio to hard disk at 7200 samples per sec. > [snip] Seems really a good idea, which could attract also the die-hard CW-must-be-copied-by-ears crop around. Just one simple question : why 7200 samples/sec ? It is not a standard sound card sampling rate. Is there a specific reason for this sampling speed ? Perhaps Bill was using an external A/D converter. For the technique to become widespread and accepted by many (all), it shouldn't rely on an ad-hoc hardware. Modern sound cards have superb A/D converters, so why not use them ? 73, Alberto I2PHD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3951 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 12:50:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 12:50:48 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ywCN-0007h1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:41:43 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ywCM-0007gw-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:41:42 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 12ywCJ-0005Hp-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:41:39 +0100 Message-ID: <23462.200006051241@gemini> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 13:48:45 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Bessel bandpass filter? In-reply-to: <393881DE.3D9D@xtra.co.nz> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear LF Group, ZL2CA wrote: > But the intended thrust of this email is to ask about if anyone can find a > reference to a BESSEL BANDPASS filter. Text books all say that the Bessel > low pass filter has the most linear phase response (best group delay) of > the basic range of filters (Butterworth, Chebyshev, elliptic, Bessel). > But I can not find any reference to a BANDPASS variant of the Bessel > filter. I have a feeling that it is not realisable mathematically, and > that is why it is obvious by its absence as a text book band pass filter, > but if there is a filter theory guru on the reflector I would dearly like > to hear a response. Not sure if I could be called a 'filter guru', but I have a fair bit of experience designing filters. It is a huge area, and difficult to scratch the surface, but here are some useful bits of info: You won't find tables of Bessel or other bandpass filter values very often - this is because the standard filter design procedure starts with a normalised low pass design (ie. designed for 1ohm source & load, 1rad/s cut off frequency) and transforms it into whatever low- high-, bandpass, or bandstop filter you desire. So the Bessel low pass tables are where you need to start to design a Bessel bandpass filter. For passive LC filters, these are usually given as a table of L and C values, but active filter designs usually start from the tables of pole locations (these effectively specify the cut off frequency and Q of each section of the filter). The reason for doing this is that the possible permutations of bandwidths and centre frequencies are more or less infinite, so tabulating all the values would be impossible. An alternative is the 'coupled resonator' approach, which is normally reserved for passive bandpass filters with bandwidths less than 5 or 10% of the centre frequency. This uses tables of k and q values for different types of filter response. As to how to do it, the A.B. Williams / F.J. Taylor 'Electronic filter design handbook' is excellent for passive LC and active designs, and includes many worked examples and formulas for different types of circuit suitable for different applications. Later editions have a section on digital filters too. The bible for passive designs including crystal filters is A.I. Zverev's 'Handbook of filter synthesis'. These are the two references I have used most, but there are others too. As to different types of filter response, there is always compromise. Filters with sharp cut-off always have poor transient response, those with good transient response have lousy skirt selectivity. So Chebyshev and eliptic filters have lots of ringing and overshoot, but good selectivity, while Bessel, Gaussian, linear phase etc. have little ringing and overshoot, but poor selectivity. Increasing the number of poles (in a bandpass filter the number of resonators) will improve the selectivity / transient response trade- off, but require higher Q for each element, and greater precision in component values, and have higher insertion losses. There are also many compromise filter responses, which have both reasonable transient response and selectivity. These include the Butterworth, and various 'transitional' responses. I have had good results with 100 and 250Hz, 5 pole CW filters using a 'transitional Gaussian to -6dB' response; this has a rounded response like a Bessel filter until it falls of by 6dB, when the skirts get steeper like a Chebyshev filter. I was impressed by the 'crispness' of CW through these filters. In general, any passive filter design can also be implemented using an active filter and vice versa. Passive filters have lower component count and better dynamic range, and work better at high frequencies. Active filters do not require inductors, and are better suited to very narrow band filters where very high Q is required. It seems to be difficult to design a passive CW audio filter with a bandwidth much less than about 50Hz, due to the finite Q of inductors available. This is fairly easy with active filters, but requires the use of multiple op-amp filter sections, rather than the single op-amp multiple feedback circuits. It gets increasingly difficult to make good active filters at high frequencies, but the audio range is no problem. Whether active or passive, it is usually neccessary to trim component values with narrow filters. For audio filters, BiFET op amps like TL071/81, LF351 etc and their dual and quad variants are a much better choice than 741 type op amps; their lower bias currents make for more choice in the range of resistor and capacitor values. Some of the newer CMOS op-amps are good too, but relatively costly. The most important op-amp parameter for filters is the gain-bandwidth product - the higher it is, the higher the filter Q that can be obtained with a given circuit. There are usually many ways of producing a given filter performance; it's best to have a read of one of the handbooks before you start. Hope this E-mail is legible - something funny has happened to the text wrap on this software! Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11064 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 14:04:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 14:04:07 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yxPI-0007zd-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 14:59:08 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yxPH-0007zY-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 14:59:07 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id PAA13848; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:03:04 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 2594 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 14:54:09 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 14:54:09 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id OAA11794; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:54:24 GMT Received: from unknown(146.80.11.40) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma011745; Mon, 5 Jun 00 14:53:52 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:04:28 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:57:33 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C97@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE a really weak signal in Canada.... Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:57:30 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: It's been my experience that Soundcards replaying .WAV files can usually cope with any sampling rate above 5513Hz, although the resultant frequency generated may not be very accurate. The speeded up ones I tried were at 6250Hz One way to test, is to use a hex editor to access the header information in a .WAV file and just change the value of sampling rate, then see how well it can be replayed. Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: Alberto di Bene[SMTP:dibene@usa.net] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-05 13:22 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: a really weak signal in Canada.... > > Larry Kayser wrote: > > > Greetings: > > > > Quote > > I don't know if this has been tried before, but I just tried it and > it > > worked nicely. > > [snip] > > I recorded some 578 seconds of audio to hard disk at 7200 samples > per sec. > > [snip] > > Seems really a good idea, which could attract also the > die-hard CW-must-be-copied-by-ears crop around. > > Just one simple question : why 7200 samples/sec ? It is not a standard > sound card sampling rate. Is there a specific reason for this sampling > speed ? > Perhaps Bill was using an external A/D converter. For the technique to > become widespread and accepted by many (all), it shouldn't rely on an > ad-hoc hardware. Modern sound cards have superb A/D converters, > so why not use them ? > > 73, > Alberto I2PHD > > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23034 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 14:57:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 14:57:03 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yy9C-0008B1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:46:34 +0100 Received: from mta03.talk21.com ([62.172.192.172] helo=t21mta03-app.talk21.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yy9B-0008At-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:46:33 +0100 Received: from dave ([213.120.40.40]) by t21mta03-app.talk21.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with SMTP id <20000605144633.DSJI6169.t21mta03-app.talk21.com@dave> for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:46:33 +0100 Message-ID: <000e01bfcefc$b56c0920$282878d5@dave> From: "Dave Sergeant" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: 'Dyed in the wood CW' Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:43:19 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >From Dave G3YMC There has been some stinging comment on here in recent days on 'dyed in the wood' CW operators, which perhaps I have to admit to being. The implication is that if you persue such modes you are a little dated and should be using fancy digital thingemy modes these days. Having spent a most enjoyable weekend in HF NFD on Top Band it is very apparent that CW is very far from a dead mode, and anybody who cares to listen to the CW parts of the HF bands during a major contest will see that it is very much still alive. In spite of high static levels there was no shortage of stations able to have quick exchanges at the normal speeds of 25-30 wpm. It was commented on here recently that users of the band should use the modes they wish to use, and any method of having a QSO is equally valid. Let us stop the bickering - if you want to develop high tech DSP algorithms etc that is fine, however please accept that some wish to use normal amateur techniques as well. Cheers Dave dsergeant@iee.org http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/sergeantd From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8896 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 15:03:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 15:03:43 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yyDf-0008CC-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:51:11 +0100 Received: from mserv1b.u-net.net ([195.102.240.137]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yyDe-0008C7-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:51:10 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1b.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 12yyDT-00049o-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:51:00 +0100 Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:34:36 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:34:33 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: Copying CW X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I have been playing around with feeding differently derived audio into the two halves of stereo headphones with some interesting results. I will report in detail when the tests are complete. In short, it is certainly possible to improve headphone reception, both in terms of close-in selectivity and resistance to static. One question. How do I make an electronic circuit to delay a broadband audio signal by about one-thousandth of a second, without resorting to DSP? Any genius out there with a simple circuit? And yes I do know about the methods (that were originally used for electric guitar echo) such as connecting the diaphragms of a loudspeaker and a microphone by using a spring, and also the tape recorder method. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12304 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 15:31:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 15:31:40 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yyfI-0008Jx-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:19:44 +0100 Received: from front1.grolier.fr ([194.158.96.51]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yyfF-0008Js-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:19:42 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from club-internet.fr (ppp-44-28-244.wmar.club-internet.fr [213.44.28.244]) by front1.grolier.fr (8.9.3/No_Relay+No_Spam_MGC990224) with ESMTP id RAA22023 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 17:19:32 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <393BD2F1.A76B71A5@club-internet.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 17:19:45 +0100 From: "M & S" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: fr,fr,es-ES MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: 'Dyed in the wood CW' References: <000e01bfcefc$b56c0920$282878d5@dave> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I agree, and agree again. As the editor of the French edition of CQ, and I guess my American collegues will agree, the latest results of our CW contests confirm that CW has never been so popular. On a more personal basis, outside-contest CW is also well and alive. However, one must not discard all those digital modes which are obviously very useful when it comes to narrow band reception. I think it's just different, and maybe complementary. 73, Mark, F6JSZ Dave Sergeant a *crit : > > >From Dave G3YMC > > There has been some stinging comment on here in recent days on 'dyed in the > wood' CW operators, which perhaps I have to admit to being. The implication > is that if you persue such modes you are a little dated and should be using > fancy digital thingemy modes these days. Having spent a most enjoyable > weekend in HF NFD on Top Band it is very apparent that CW is very far from a > dead mode, and anybody who cares to listen to the CW parts of the HF bands > during a major contest will see that it is very much still alive. In spite > of high static levels there was no shortage of stations able to have quick > exchanges at the normal speeds of 25-30 wpm. > > It was commented on here recently that users of the band should use the > modes they wish to use, and any method of having a QSO is equally valid. > Let us stop the bickering - if you want to develop high tech DSP algorithms > etc that is fine, however please accept that some wish to use normal amateur > techniques as well. > > Cheers Dave > dsergeant@iee.org > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/sergeantd From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3054 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 15:46:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 15:46:12 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yysR-0008Ow-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:33:19 +0100 Received: from mserv1a.u-net.net ([195.102.240.34]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yysQ-0008Or-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:33:18 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1a.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 12yysk-0007Wv-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:33:39 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:16:02 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:15:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: 'Dyed in the wood CW' In-reply-to: <000e01bfcefc$b56c0920$282878d5@dave> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > >From Dave G3YMC > > There has been some stinging comment on here in recent days on 'dyed in > the wood' CW operators, which perhaps I have to admit to being. The > implication is that if you persue such modes you are a little dated and > should be using fancy digital thingemy modes these days. [cut] > Let us stop the bickering - if you want to develop high tech DSP > algorithms etc that is fine, however please accept that some wish to use > normal amateur techniques as well. Who are you calling abnormal! Seriously, though, as a very keen CW operator (I do have a microphone but you'd have to give me a day's notice to find it), the really encouraging thing about LF is that it has demonstrated many of the benefits of this fine old mode - low bandwidth, tolerant of low S/N ratio, simple to execute, and good fun. Several regular ops have re-learned Morse simply to use the band. It will be a long time before the more complex modes match every one of those advantages, even if they excel at one or two. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27883 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 16:34:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 16:34:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yzgF-00004P-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 17:24:47 +0100 Received: from d06lmsgate-3.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.3] helo=lmsfw2.emea.ibm.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12yzgD-00004J-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 17:24:46 +0100 Received: from d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.166.84.148]) by lmsfw2.emea.ibm.com (1.0.0) with ESMTP id RAA143142 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 17:16:13 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from usa.net (dyn9-87-116-182.italy.ibm.com [9.87.116.182]) by d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with ESMTP id RAA62366 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 17:23:58 +0100 Message-ID: <393BD406.C493E145@usa.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:23:34 +0200 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: 'Dyed in the wood CW' References: <000e01bfcefc$b56c0920$282878d5@dave> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dave Sergeant wrote: > >From Dave G3YMC > > There has been some stinging comment on here in recent days on 'dyed in the > wood' CW operators, which perhaps I have to admit to being. The implication > is that if you persue such modes you are a little dated and should be using > fancy digital thingemy modes these days. > [snip] > Dave, frankly I don't know whether you were addressing me for an half sentence I put in my last message to the reflector. The English language is full of subtleties that escape to a non-native speaker. If you took my sentence as dismissive of aural CW, perhaps I didn't make my thoughts clear enough. As a matter of fact, I sometimes enjoy listening to CW, though my skills are far from being perfect. What I meant was a sort of criticism of the komeinist position that says that "if it ain't copied by ears, it's rubbish". I wasn't trying to convey any other subliminal message. And, from what you say, you don't certainly qualify as a target for that my comment. Cheers, Alberto I2PHD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20416 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 17:21:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 17:21:45 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z0QX-0000Fw-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:12:37 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from oso.slonet.org ([207.114.180.2] ident=cbuttsch) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z0QU-0000Fr-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:12:34 +0100 Received: from localhost by oso.slonet.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA11235; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 10:12:10 -0700 (PDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 10:12:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "Clifford Buttschardt" To: "Mike Dennison" Cc: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Copying CW In-reply-to: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: There are chips called "bucket brigade" delay lines that will do this job easily. Radio Shack and Digi-Key here in the States would have them. I'd check MAPLEN (spelling could be wrong here!) using that terminology. Cliff K7RR On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, Mike Dennison wrote: > I have been playing around with feeding differently derived audio into > the two halves of stereo headphones with some interesting results. > I will report in detail when the tests are complete. In short, it is > certainly possible to improve headphone reception, both in terms of > close-in selectivity and resistance to static. > > One question. How do I make an electronic circuit to delay a > broadband audio signal by about one-thousandth of a second, > without resorting to DSP? Any genius out there with a simple > circuit? And yes I do know about the methods (that were originally > used for electric guitar echo) such as connecting the diaphragms of > a loudspeaker and a microphone by using a spring, and also the > tape recorder method. > > > > Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8024 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 17:59:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 17:59:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z11s-0000OK-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:51:12 +0100 Received: from public1.thorcom.com ([212.172.148.10] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z11r-0000OF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:51:11 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mail.cybergap.net ([205.146.129.15] helo=piiserver.cybergap.net) by public1.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z11p-0004T1-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:51:09 +0100 Received: from hifidelity.com (judy6.cybergap.net [205.146.129.41]) by piiserver.cybergap.net (2.5 Build 2640 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with ESMTP id NAA06271 for ; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:51:31 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393BE7C4.BC109C1C@hifidelity.com> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:47:48 -0400 From: "Steve Dove" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Copying CW References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Mike, Ooooh, analogue. I remember that. Possibly still available (I checked the Digikey book without success, but RS etc. maybe?) would be bucket-brigade delay lines, which were used extensively for audio effects (delay / spin / reverb etc.) in the olde days. Recoton was a manufacturer if memory serves, as I think were NatSemi, but they've been shedding even less esoteric product than that in recent years. They had only so-so noise performance, but their dynamic range would be plenty good enough for what you're suggesting. The through delay is varied by clocking their fixed-length chain of buckets faster or slower. 73 Steve W3EEE / G3YDV Mike Dennison wrote: > I have been playing around with feeding differently derived audio into > the two halves of stereo headphones with some interesting results. > I will report in detail when the tests are complete. In short, it is > certainly possible to improve headphone reception, both in terms of > close-in selectivity and resistance to static. > > One question. How do I make an electronic circuit to delay a > broadband audio signal by about one-thousandth of a second, > without resorting to DSP? Any genius out there with a simple > circuit? And yes I do know about the methods (that were originally > used for electric guitar echo) such as connecting the diaphragms of > a loudspeaker and a microphone by using a spring, and also the > tape recorder method. > > Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3856 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 19:58:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 19:58:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z2ra-0000rC-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 20:48:42 +0100 Received: from mail.cybergap.net ([205.146.129.15] helo=piiserver.cybergap.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z2rZ-0000r5-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 20:48:41 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from hifidelity.com (judy6.cybergap.net [205.146.129.41]) by piiserver.cybergap.net (2.5 Build 2640 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with ESMTP id PAA00052 for ; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:48:00 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393C0349.DC15DF1C@hifidelity.com> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:45:13 -0400 From: "Steve Dove" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Copying CW References: <393BE7C4.BC109C1C@hifidelity.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Mike, Reticon was who I meant, however they seemed to have skipped out of that town, too. A further 30 seconds perusal of the Digikey book turned up a bunch of Panasonic parts of various lengths and permutations. For a millisecond or two even the shortest devices would be adequate (sampling-rate limitations rule here just as they do in digital); at a stab I'd say the 8-pin DIP MN3009 256-bucket alleged 'low-noise' part at $4.84 would be the one. It with a 555 to clock it is basically all you'd need. Other parts listed are MN3003,8,10,11,12, MN3204,6,8,9 and 14 if that helps you source them closer to home. 73 Steve Steve Dove wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Ooooh, analogue. I remember that. > > Possibly still available (I checked the Digikey book without success, but > RS etc. maybe?) would be bucket-brigade delay lines, which were used > extensively for audio effects (delay / spin / reverb etc.) in the olde > days. Recoton was a manufacturer if memory serves, as I think were > NatSemi, but they've been shedding even less esoteric product than that in > recent years. > > They had only so-so noise performance, but their dynamic range would be > plenty good enough for what you're suggesting. The through delay is > varied by clocking their fixed-length chain of buckets faster or slower. > > 73 > > Steve W3EEE / G3YDV > > Mike Dennison wrote: > > > I have been playing around with feeding differently derived audio into > > the two halves of stereo headphones with some interesting results. > > I will report in detail when the tests are complete. In short, it is > > certainly possible to improve headphone reception, both in terms of > > close-in selectivity and resistance to static. > > > > One question. How do I make an electronic circuit to delay a > > broadband audio signal by about one-thousandth of a second, > > without resorting to DSP? Any genius out there with a simple > > circuit? And yes I do know about the methods (that were originally > > used for electric guitar echo) such as connecting the diaphragms of > > a loudspeaker and a microphone by using a spring, and also the > > tape recorder method. > > > > Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) > > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27618 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 21:57:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 21:57:13 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z4my-0001QY-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 22:52:04 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from finch-post-11.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.39]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z4mx-0001QT-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 22:52:03 +0100 Received: from pickmere.demon.co.uk ([158.152.117.143]) by finch-post-11.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12z4mu-000EVE-0B for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 21:52:01 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <11gPHDANOAP5EwgM@pickmere.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 20:46:21 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M.J.Powell" Subject: Re: LF: Copying CW References: In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In message , Mike Dennison writes >I have been playing around with feeding differently derived audio into >the two halves of stereo headphones with some interesting results. >I will report in detail when the tests are complete. In short, it is >certainly possible to improve headphone reception, both in terms of >close-in selectivity and resistance to static. > >One question. How do I make an electronic circuit to delay a >broadband audio signal by about one-thousandth of a second, >without resorting to DSP? Any genius out there with a simple >circuit? And yes I do know about the methods (that were originally >used for electric guitar echo) such as connecting the diaphragms of >a loudspeaker and a microphone by using a spring, and also the >tape recorder method. The method we used at a TV station I once worked for was to use a long corridor with a mic and a loudspeaker! Mike -- M.J.Powell From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13325 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 22:29:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 22:29:05 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z5Ez-0001Y3-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 23:21:01 +0100 Received: from mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z5Ex-0001Xy-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2000 23:21:00 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.178.92] by mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000605220529.NLFA12761555.mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.178.92]> for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 10:05:29 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393C1C5C.6D4@xtra.co.nz> Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 09:32:12 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Bessel bandpass filter? References: <23462.200006051241@gemini> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I wish to thank Jim M0BMU for his good summary comments on filter design, including Bessel types. I do not have either of the two reference books Jim named and I will request the public library to seek them on interloan. While I happen to have quite a good selection of salvaged high Q audio inductors, as for the PA0LQ filter, any confirmed good design is of wider applicability to others if it is an active filter type (and using good op amps). While a coupled passive filter may give good results, it is closer to a special one-off result if the inductor types are hard to acquire. Also if it needs a high impedance load, then it could need an op amp anyway, so it would not be an entirely passive circuit as an accessory. I'm going to include an audio PA chip so the accessory filter can have a volume control and feed a loudspeaker or low impedance headphones or a PC sound card. Suggestions of others resulted in some PC CAD software being downloaded, and this is mostly of the "demo" or "knobbled" variety as it is "free". I have found it to be very interesting where group delay curves are available. However, as at present I have yet to find out what results from selected stagger tuning (of isolated resonators, using active filters). 73, Bob ZL2CA From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2444 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 03:04:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 03:04:54 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z9X7-0002bL-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 03:56:01 +0100 Received: from mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.3]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12z9X6-0002bD-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 03:56:00 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.181.46] by mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000606025524.DNTZ11571275.mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.181.46]> for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 14:55:24 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393C669F.5C52@xtra.co.nz> Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:49:03 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Trans-Pacific test schedule References: <23462.200006051241@gemini> <393C1C5C.6D4@xtra.co.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: TRANS-PACIFIC LF TEST SCHEDULE 6 June 2000 Arrangements have been made for a number of West Coast stateside LF listeners to find out what they can receive from ZL LF test transmissions. The timing is Saturday night 17 June (New Zealand time) which is Friday night and Saturday morning California time. It is intended to also try again on Saturday 24 June, but subject to review, depending on what is reported for 17 June. The following table shows the respective sunset and sunrise times: ZL sunset CA sunrise ZL sunrise ========= ========== ========== 17 June 0455 UTC 1252 UTC 1950 UTC 24 June 0457 1253 1952 The timing happens to be around the longest day (mid summer) in the northern hemisphere, which of course corresponds to the longest night in the southern hemisphere (mid winter). The following stations intend to be transmitting: ZL1WB 181.42 kHz ZL6QH 182.10 kHz (operated by ZL2BBJ and ZL2CA) ZL3PN 182.70 kHz ZL4MD 183.50 kHz ZL3VN 184.00 kHz ZL3JE 184.50 kHz ZL4OL 185.00 kHz AX2TAR 176.50 kHz (VK7ZAL, Tasmania, Australia) The station with highest radiated power is likely to be the Quartz Hill station ZL6QH. It is intended to run ZL6QH as a continuous beacon transmission, from around 0400 - 2000 UTC on 17 June. This covers times for many "dark" paths, both east and west. AX2TAR is also planning to run continuously, from 0630 - 1300 UTC on 17 June. All other stations will definitely try to be transmitting for around half an hour either side of ZL sunset time as well as the California sunrise time. As each station has a unique test frequency, there is no co-channel pile-up. Frequencies have already been checked for not coinciding with local QRM for receiving stations in California. In general, stations will attempt to maintain their assigned carrier frequency within 10 Hz. In general emissions will be conventional CW at around 5 wpm. Reception reports are welcomed. Email to reflector sites would generally be the fastest and most effective way to disseminate reports. Bob ZL2CA From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12488 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 11:38:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 11:38:30 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zICG-00018M-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:11:04 +0100 Received: from ulexite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zICF-00018F-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:11:03 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (1Cust189.tnt18.rtm1.nl.uu.net [213.53.10.189]) by ulexite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id F01BBFDD79 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 10:22:23 -0100 (GMT) Message-ID: <001701bfcfa9$ea7322e0$1fd499d4@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: Subject: LF: Re: Copying CW Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 13:24:44 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: To All from PA0SE Mike, G3XDV, wrote > I have been playing around with feeding differently derived audio into > the two halves of stereo headphones with some interesting results. > I will report in detail when the tests are complete. In short, it is > certainly possible to improve headphone reception, both in terms of > close-in selectivity and resistance to static. I have tested "pseudo-stereophonic" reception of CW by feeding the halves of a stereo headphone via series tuned circuits resonating at 1002 and 842Hz (922 ± 80Hz) respectively. At first the result was pleasant; it sounded like being in a room with the wanted 922Hz signal in the centre. But it did not take me long to find out that it contributed absolutely nothing to the readibility of signals under difficult conditions. It proved again that our sophisticated ear/brain system cannot be helped by such primitive contraptions. 73, Dick, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13623 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 12:58:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 12:58:00 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zJUN-0001TB-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:33:51 +0100 Received: from mserv1b.u-net.net ([195.102.240.137]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zJUM-0001T6-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:33:50 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1b.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 12zIkh-0003zU-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 13:46:41 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:30:38 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 13:30:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Re: Copying CW In-reply-to: <001701bfcfa9$ea7322e0$1fd499d4@w8k3f0> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dick, PA0SE wrote: > I have tested "pseudo-stereophonic" reception of CW by feeding the halves > of a stereo headphone via series tuned circuits resonating at 1002 and > 842Hz (922 ± 80Hz) respectively. At first the result was pleasant; it > sounded like being in a room with the wanted 922Hz signal in the centre. > But it did not take me long to find out that it contributed absolutely > nothing to the readibility of signals under difficult conditions. > It proved again that our sophisticated ear/brain system cannot be helped > by such primitive contraptions. Yes, I'm aware of this but am keeping an open mind. I have already done some interesting tests that combine some of the advantages of both analogue and digital techniques. One crude test last weekend produced significantly better readability of a weak station in heavy static than was available either direct from my radio, or via a DSP unit. What sparked off this idea was the number of people who agreed that listening to a pair of headphones on the bench gave them better reception than when the phones were on the head. Therefore there appears to be at least one uninvestigated way of enhancing reception which at present relies on chance and acoustics. I agree that all theoretical work tends to ignore the colossal advantage of using the brain, but I am not a theorist and would like to find ways of helping the brain along a bit. Thanks very much to all those who replied re time delays. As soon as I have reached some conclusions I will report my results - or that Dick is indeed right and the brain can't be helped at all! Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6870 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 19:28:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 19:28:12 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zPaU-00038h-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 21:04:34 +0100 Received: from anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.91]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zPaT-00038b-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 21:04:33 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from pickmere.demon.co.uk ([158.152.117.143]) by anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12zOqz-000EyT-0X for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 20:17:33 +0100 Message-ID: <$EFdbGAbFRP5EwTv@pickmere.demon.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 15:57:31 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M.J.Powell" Subject: Re: LF: Re: Copying CW References: <001701bfcfa9$ea7322e0$1fd499d4@w8k3f0> In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In message , Mike Dennison writes >Dick, PA0SE wrote: >> I have tested "pseudo-stereophonic" reception of CW by feeding the halves >> of a stereo headphone via series tuned circuits resonating at 1002 and >> 842Hz (922 ± 80Hz) respectively. At first the result was pleasant; it >> sounded like being in a room with the wanted 922Hz signal in the centre. >> But it did not take me long to find out that it contributed absolutely >> nothing to the readibility of signals under difficult conditions. >> It proved again that our sophisticated ear/brain system cannot be helped >> by such primitive contraptions. > >Yes, I'm aware of this but am keeping an open mind. I have already >done some interesting tests that combine some of the advantages >of both analogue and digital techniques. One crude test last >weekend produced significantly better readability of a weak station >in heavy static than was available either direct from my radio, or via >a DSP unit. > >What sparked off this idea was the number of people who agreed >that listening to a pair of headphones on the bench gave them >better reception than when the phones were on the head. Therefore >there appears to be at least one uninvestigated way of enhancing >reception which at present relies on chance and acoustics. > >I agree that all theoretical work tends to ignore the colossal >advantage of using the brain, but I am not a theorist and would like >to find ways of helping the brain along a bit. > >Thanks very much to all those who replied re time delays. > >As soon as I have reached some conclusions I will report my >results - or that Dick is indeed right and the brain can't be helped at >all! Don't forget the old trick of fixing a loudspeaker to the end of a pipe and using the organ pipe resonance frequency. Quite common in the 40s and 50s. I wonder if two could be used, tuned to different frequencies and placed at opposite ends of the room? 73 Mike -- M.J.Powell From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21370 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 21:08:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 21:08:36 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zREF-0003ah-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 22:49:43 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from hs-img-5.compuserve.com ([149.174.177.154] helo=sphmgaae.compuserve.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zREE-0003aa-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 22:49:42 +0100 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by sphmgaae.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.9) id RAA03069 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 17:02:36 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 17:01:59 -0400 From: "Prof R. Jennison" Subject: LF: Copying CW To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <200006061702_MC2-A7C1-1189@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Mike, We used to use delay lines! Roger. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11214 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 23:10:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 23:10:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zT79-00049G-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 00:50:31 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zT78-00049B-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 00:50:30 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from central.zetnet.co.uk (central.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.20]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id AAA19745 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 00:03:25 +0100 X-ZSender: g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk Message-ID: <2000060621400768199@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 21:40:07 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Peter Dodd" X-Mailer: ZIMACS Version 1.20c 10000836 Subject: LF: Re: Antenna Z measurements at LF Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Measurement of Antenna System Impedance at LF Although a suitable matching transformer can be arrived at empirically the design can be simplified if the antenna feed impedance is known. An impedance value will also give you some idea of how good your ground system is, once you have estimated the coil loss. There may be other uses. The method of measuring impedance I use is called the 3 Meter Impedance Measuring Method (3m Z Bridge) and I have used it for the last 20 years on HF. It is described in more detail in 'The Antenna Experimenter's Guide' (from RSGB Bookshop). The 3-meter impedance measurement technique is very simple. It compares the unknown impedance with a fixed standard impedance, (a 50 ohm resistor and a .01uF capacitor). An excitation source (signal generator) applies an RF voltage to the standards and diode voltmeters, selected by a switch allow digital voltmeter readings to be made at various points. Impedance is indicated by the ratio of three voltmeter readings. One additional reading allows in-place calibration of the reference capacitor and the second permits several solutions for the unknown impedance, thus giving an indication of the random errors that may be present in the data. Impedance values are derived from the voltage data by calculation. However, this may be simplified by using a graphic method (using graph paper and a pair of compasses and a ruler) or a computer. The BASIC (do you remember that stuff?) source code is available at the RSGB Web site If you download it as a text file it will run in Q-Basic - I dont know about Visual Basic. If you are using the standard Marconi antenna measure the feedpoint impedance from the bottom of the loading coil and earth. The following measured impedances in the range 136.4 to 138kHz indicate some errors just below 137kHz, which I have not yet identified. G3LDO_LF_Antenna Results +/-Errors Freq MHz Res jX Res jX ---------------------------------------- .1364 37.9 - 29.4 2 2.1 .1366 37.4 - 22.8 4.6 5.3 .1368 33.5 - 22.2 5.1 5.7 .1370 33.4 - 17.3 5.8 7.4 .1372 35.6 - 8.8 2.8 3.5 .1374 36.4 -0 1 1.7 2 .1376 36.9 +0 5 1.1 1.3 .1378 36.5 + 13.3 1 1.3 .1380 38.1 + 21 1.1 1.8 The above measurements were made in the late afternoon when the ground was relatively dry. In the morning the resistance was above 40ohms and resonance was around 136.8kHz. A full description will appear in the forthcoming LF Book. -- Regards, Peter, G3LDO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 744 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 23:39:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 23:39:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zTZk-0004Hw-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 01:20:04 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from finch-post-12.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.41]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zTZk-0004HU-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 01:20:04 +0100 Received: from pickmere.demon.co.uk ([158.152.117.143]) by finch-post-12.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12zSq6-000MUJ-0C for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 23:32:55 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 23:00:30 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M.J.Powell" Subject: Re: LF: Copying CW References: <200006061702_MC2-A7C1-1189@compuserve.com> In-reply-to: <200006061702_MC2-A7C1-1189@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In message <200006061702_MC2-A7C1-1189@compuserve.com>, Prof R. Jennison writes >Mike, >We used to use delay lines! We were too poor to afford a delay line! TWW, Cardiff 1959. Mike -- M.J.Powell From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19287 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 01:23:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 01:23:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zVD0-0004er-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 03:04:42 +0100 Received: from teapot29.domain7.bigpond.com ([139.134.5.236]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zVCz-0004ej-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 03:04:41 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by teapot29.domain7.bigpond.com (NTMail 3.02.13) with ESMTP id ja972045 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:17:47 +1000 Received: from MOIP-A-002-pool-66.tmns.net.au ([139.134.91.66]) by mail7.bigpond.com (Claudes-Germane-MailRouter V2.7e 15/2507777); 07 Jun 2000 11:17:46 Message-ID: <002901bfd01e$685bb4a0$425b868b@zimslaptop> From: "Graeme Zimmer" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <001701bfcfa9$ea7322e0$1fd499d4@w8k3f0> <$EFdbGAbFRP5EwTv@pickmere.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: LF: Re: Copying CW Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:19:18 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Greetings, > Don't forget the old trick of fixing a loudspeaker to the end of a pipe > and using the organ pipe resonance frequency. Re Resonant Loudspeakers.. You might like to look at http://www.io.com/~maddog/hamradio/res_spkr.htm cheers ................... Zim From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1761 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 01:42:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 01:42:25 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zVVG-0004is-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 03:23:34 +0100 Received: from tomts1.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.139] helo=tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zVVF-0004if-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 03:23:33 +0100 Received: from server1 ([206.172.245.58]) by tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000607013635.TCPM18496.tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net@server1> for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 21:36:35 -0400 Message-ID: <006a01bfd01f$e2380930$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: a really weak signal in Canada.... Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 21:28:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Alberto: >> I recorded some 578 seconds of audio to hard disk at 7200 samples per sec. >> [snip] > >Seems really a good idea, which could attract also the >die-hard CW-must-be-copied-by-ears crop around. > >Just one simple question : why 7200 samples/sec ? It is not a standard >sound card sampling rate. Is there a specific reason for this sampling speed ? >Perhaps Bill was using an external A/D converter. For the technique to >become widespread and accepted by many (all), it shouldn't rely on an >ad-hoc hardware. Modern sound cards have superb A/D converters, >so why not use them ? Yes, your right sound cards today are at least good. However Bill started his work way back and he uses a small card that implements in discrete logic a Sigma Delta A/D, published in QST in 1992. The card runs the serial port at 115200 baud with 10 of the 16 bits being a full async character with start bit, 8 data bits, and a stop bit. the blank 6 bits let the processor get some work done between data characters. http://www.ietc.ca/home/bill/bbs.htm if you go and look and download some of the material at Bills web site you can see how he does things. >For the technique to >become widespread and accepted by many (all), it shouldn't rely on an >ad-hoc hardware. Fair opinion for you Alberto, possibly relevant in your terms. >Modern sound cards have superb A/D converters, >so why not use them ? Computer sound cards did not exist when Bill started his work, since they were not available they were not used. Having been around A/D converters for many years, the superlative of "superb A/D converters" seems to have a degree of hyperbole from my perspective. Bill will probably speak to the sound card issue at some point in the future, that is his choice of course. In the interim he has done DSP work that is superb for weak signal work and has been demonstrated to perform excellently. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25658 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 09:40:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 09:40:55 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zctO-0006Vk-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 11:16:58 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zctN-0006Vf-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 11:16:58 +0100 Received: from isis (userec82.uk.uudial.com [62.188.10.162]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA23379 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 10:28:42 +0100 (BST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000607100135.00966c00@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 10:25:14 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: LF: Formula MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I found the following in an article recently. Quote: "The intensity E (known as the field strength) of a transmission at a distance D from a source transmitting P watts of RF power via a half-wave dipole in a free, unobstructed space, can be estimated using the formula: E=(7*sqrt (P))/D. Thus, for a 2 watt transmitter, the theoretical field strength in free space at one metre distance is approximately 10 V/m and at 100 metres distance 0.1 V/m" This formula is new to me and I can't find it in any textbooks I have. Since it ignores frequency shouldn't it be power flux per unit area and not field strength? Can anyone tell me where it comes from? Walter G3JKV. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8510 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 10:49:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 10:49:02 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ze31-0006od-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 12:30:59 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ze2y-0006oY-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 12:30:56 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id LAA08396; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:48:02 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 21739 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 11:38:59 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 11:38:59 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id LAA17509; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:39:01 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma017482; Wed, 7 Jun 00 11:38:35 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:49:28 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:42:29 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CA1@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: Formula Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:42:27 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Walter et al :- Doesn't specifying a dipole as the radiator automatically take antenna aperture into account, and cancels out frequency from the equation ? So if you take just the spreading out of the total power over the area of a sphere : Watts per m^2 = P . / (D ^ 2 x 4.pi) and E ( V/m ) = SQTR( Power x. Resistance of free space ) so Volts / m = SQRT(W/m^2 * Z free space) = SQRT(P x 377 / 4.pi / D^2) = SQRT(P) * 30 / D A dipole has a gain of 1.64 (power) so its "voltage gain" could be said to be 1.28 so I reckon the formula should read E (V/m) = 38.4 . SQRT(P) / D (all in SI units of course) Some way off a value of 7, but in the right region. Can anyone spot if I've slipped a digit or something ? Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: Walter Blanchard[SMTP:blanch@pncl.co.uk] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-07 10:25 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: Formula > > I found the following in an article recently. > > Quote: > > "The intensity E (known as the field strength) of a transmission > at a distance D from a source transmitting P watts of RF power via > a half-wave dipole in a free, unobstructed space, can be estimated > using the formula: > > E=(7*sqrt (P))/D. > > Thus, for a 2 watt transmitter, the theoretical field strength in free > space at one metre distance is approximately 10 V/m and at 100 metres > distance 0.1 V/m" > > This formula is new to me and I can't find it in any > textbooks I have. Since it ignores frequency shouldn't > it be power flux per unit area and not field strength? > Can anyone tell me where it comes from? > > Walter G3JKV. > > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3728 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 10:57:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 10:57:28 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ze4x-0006p0-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 12:32:59 +0100 Received: from mserv1b.u-net.net ([195.102.240.137]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ze4w-0006ou-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 12:32:58 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1b.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 12zdLG-0006Zm-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:45:47 +0100 Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 11:29:27 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:29:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: Flares X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Yesterday there were three major solar flares (two X class and an M). There should be a major impact on LF conditions as a result, as well as auroras and HF fade-out. See http://www.dxlc.com/solar/ for more info. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21809 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 11:22:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 11:22:57 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zeV3-0006wX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 12:59:57 +0100 Received: from mail1.dada.it ([195.110.96.68] helo=mail.dada.it) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zeV1-0006wS-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 12:59:56 +0100 Received: (qmail 1416 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 11:12:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cestag) (195.110.103.177) by mail.dada.it with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 11:12:10 -0000 Message-ID: <000601bfd071$35b501c0$b1676ec3@cestag> From: "cesare tagliabue" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: R: Formula Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:11:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Walter The formula is derived from the general one that is: E = SQR(30*P*G)/D. Being the gain G of an half-wave dipole equal to 1.64, 30*1.64 = 49.2, rounded to integer and written out of the square root it becomes 7. E is the field strength in V/mt, provided that P is in Watts and D in meter; in fact the field strength is independent from frequency. 73 Cesare Cesare Tagliabue I 5 TGC e-mail: cestag@dada.it url: http://www.dadacasa.com/i5tgc -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Walter Blanchard A: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Data: mercoledì 7 giugno 2000 11.58 Oggetto: LF: Formula >I found the following in an article recently. > >Quote: > >"The intensity E (known as the field strength) of a transmission >at a distance D from a source transmitting P watts of RF power via >a half-wave dipole in a free, unobstructed space, can be estimated >using the formula: > >E=(7*sqrt (P))/D. > >Thus, for a 2 watt transmitter, the theoretical field strength in free >space at one metre distance is approximately 10 V/m and at 100 metres >distance 0.1 V/m" > >This formula is new to me and I can't find it in any >textbooks I have. Since it ignores frequency shouldn't >it be power flux per unit area and not field strength? >Can anyone tell me where it comes from? > >Walter G3JKV. > > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15291 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 11:37:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 11:37:09 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zejG-00071l-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 13:14:38 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zejF-00071g-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 13:14:37 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 12zdzp-00013g-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 12:27:41 +0100 Message-ID: <2539.200006071127@gemini> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:34:49 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Formula In-reply-to: <4.2.0.58.20000607100135.00966c00@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Date sent: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 10:25:14 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: Walter Blanchard Subject: LF: Formula Send reply to: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > I found the following in an article recently. > > Quote: > > "The intensity E (known as the field strength) of a transmission > at a distance D from a source transmitting P watts of RF power via > a half-wave dipole in a free, unobstructed space, can be estimated > using the formula: > > E=(7*sqrt (P))/D. Dear Walter & Group, If the propagating wave is a transverse electromagnetic wave (which it will be a reasonable distance from the antenna, in 'free space'), the electric (E volts/m) and magnetic (H amps/m) fields are proportional; E/H = 120pi ohms. This 'free space wave impedance' is about 377ohms and is a constant provided the permeability and permittivity of the medium is the same as a vacuum, or air is near enough. This comes about ultimately from the definitions of volts and amps. E times H has the dimensions of watts/sq. metre and so is called the power density, S. A bit of algebra gives you power density S = (Esquared)/120pi (compare with P = (Vsquared)/R), so measuring E is effectively also a measure of power density, and also a measure of H. Rearranging this gives E = sqrt(120piS) If the antenna in free space radiated equally in all directions, (ie. an 'isotropic radiator'), at a distance d the radiated power P would be evenly distributed over the surface of a sphere of radius d. the surface of the sphere would have an area 4pi(d squared), so power density would be S = P / 4pi(d squared). Putting this value of power density into the equation for E gives E= sqrt (30P/(d squared), or E= 5.477 sqrt(P)/d. This applies to an isotropic radiator, but all real antennas have a directional pattern, and so in the direction of their maximum radiation, the power density is increased by a factor D (note not d, the distance), the directivity or directional gain. This makes E = 5.477 sqrt (PD)/d. The value of D depends on the geometry and voltage and current distribution of the antenna. It's quite complex to work out, but can be done for simple antennas - refer to an antenna text book for details! - it can be calculated by programs such as EZNEC for more complicated antennas. For a half wave dipole it is 1.64, for a short monopole it is 3. Putting D = 1.64 into the formula gives E = 7.01 sqrt (P) / d for a half wave dipole, E = 9.49 sqrt (P) / d for a short monopole. Hope that is some help, Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15891 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 12:07:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 12:07:33 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zfAZ-0007A6-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 13:42:51 +0100 Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zfAV-0007A1-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 13:42:47 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id MAA04362; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:59:50 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 29410 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 12:50:48 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 12:50:48 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id MAA26974; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:50:55 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma026959; Wed, 7 Jun 00 12:50:44 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:01:38 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:54:38 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CA2@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: R: Formula Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:54:34 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Ah - I'd taken the factor of 30 outside the square root then. Careless !! Andy 'JNT > ---------- > From: cesare tagliabue[SMTP:cestag@dada.it] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-07 12:11 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: R: Formula > > Hi Walter > The formula is derived from the general one that is: E = > SQR(30*P*G)/D. Being the gain G of an half-wave dipole equal to 1.64, > 30*1.64 = 49.2, rounded to integer and written out of the square root > it > becomes 7. E is the field strength in V/mt, provided that P is in > Watts and > D in meter; in fact the field strength is independent from frequency. > 73 Cesare > > Cesare Tagliabue I 5 TGC > e-mail: cestag@dada.it > url: http://www.dadacasa.com/i5tgc > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Walter Blanchard > A: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Data: mercoledì 7 giugno 2000 11.58 > Oggetto: LF: Formula > > > >I found the following in an article recently. > > > >Quote: > > > >"The intensity E (known as the field strength) of a transmission > >at a distance D from a source transmitting P watts of RF power via > >a half-wave dipole in a free, unobstructed space, can be estimated > >using the formula: > > > >E=(7*sqrt (P))/D. > > > >Thus, for a 2 watt transmitter, the theoretical field strength in > free > >space at one metre distance is approximately 10 V/m and at 100 metres > >distance 0.1 V/m" > > > >This formula is new to me and I can't find it in any > >textbooks I have. Since it ignores frequency shouldn't > >it be power flux per unit area and not field strength? > >Can anyone tell me where it comes from? > > > >Walter G3JKV. > > > > > > > > > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution,o r any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6590 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 12:13:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 12:13:01 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zfKi-0007BO-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 13:53:20 +0100 Received: from mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.1]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zfKg-0007BA-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 13:53:19 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.178.17] by mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000607120547.PHHS5139981.mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.178.17]> for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 00:05:47 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <393E3A1A.7E14@xtra.co.nz> Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 00:03:38 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Formula References: <4.2.0.58.20000607100135.00966c00@mail.pncl.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Walter Blanchard wrote: > > I found the following in an article recently. > > Quote: > > "The intensity E (known as the field strength) of a transmission > at a distance D from a source transmitting P watts of RF power via > a half-wave dipole in a free, unobstructed space, can be estimated > using the formula: > > E=(7*sqrt (P))/D. > > Thus, for a 2 watt transmitter, the theoretical field strength in free > space at one metre distance is approximately 10 V/m and at 100 metres > distance 0.1 V/m" > > This formula is new to me and I can't find it in any > textbooks I have. Since it ignores frequency shouldn't > it be power flux per unit area and not field strength? > Can anyone tell me where it comes from? > > Walter G3JKV. In free space, field strength for a given radiated power is independent of frequency. This is basically the case for a point source radiator surrounded by an imaginary sphere, and the power flux density is constant for any given same area of the imaginary sphere. This is not to say that the received power using a reference antenna is independent of frequency: it is not. For the likes of half wave dipoles, receiving aperture has a -6 dB per octave relationship with increasing frequency. So field strength is independent of frequency, but received power is -6 dB/octave. Whatever, at LF we hardly ever encounter "free space" around our antennas. Free space is a concept for VHF and higher frequencies as far as ground-based radio stations are concerned. 73, Bob ZL2CA From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4818 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 13:35:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 13:35:34 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zgcf-0007aa-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 15:15:57 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from ds-img-7.compuserve.com ([149.174.206.153] helo=spdmbaaa.compuserve.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zgcd-0007aP-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 15:15:55 +0100 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by spdmbaaa.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.9) id JAA12875 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 09:28:28 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 09:28:12 -0400 From: "DEREK ATTER" Subject: LF: Decca Loading coils, 1Kw Transmitters, Litz wire etc. To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <200006070928_MC2-A7CC-766A@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: The Crawley Club have managed to collect a number of items of hardware from the redundant Decca stations before they were scrapped. These include several of the 1.2Kw transmitters, a considerable amount of Litz wire of various gauges, one or two variometers, several of the large loading coils described on Mike G3XDV's website plus a number of high stability 5Mhz xtal oscillators. The Club propose to offer these for disposal among the LF fraternity at modest prices to cover the transport costs from site plus a donation to local clubs for their efforts in collecting and storing the equipment. The the Club does not wish to get involved in arranging delivery so equipment will have to be collected from Crawley. Anyone interested please contact me for information on details on prices etc. by phone on 01293 520424 or by E-mail at. (datter@compuserve.com) The Crawley Club are hosting the South Eastern session of the Microwave Round Table this coming Sunday, 11th June. The morning session starting at 10 am will include a small 'bring and buy' sale at which the LF items will be also be available. Information on the ex-Decca items will also be posted on the Crawley Club website at www://http.bigfoot.com/~crawleyarc/ Further details of the some of the hardware: Tranmitters : 1.2Kw RF out from 3 separate PA modules each with 4 power MOSFETs operating in class "D" in a bridge configuration. The units are rack mounted with integral driver and protection circuitry in each module. RF drive input 3V pk-pk. DC input supplies 67.5V about 25A and 24V at 1A. Technical info and circuit diagrams are available. Depending on demand we could split up some TX units into individual PA modules each nominally rated at 400W but believed capable of about 600W each. Litz Wire : In addition to the large loading coils ( about 900mm diam x 250mm wide with 729 strand Litz wire) we have a variety of different gauges from quite thin up to some about 3mm diam double cotton covered with large number of strands. Probably the most interesting to LF'ers is a quantaty of 2mm and 3mm diam Litz wire with a thin outer sheath of polythene or similar (may be PTFE ?) which will have a much higher insulation rating than the usual cotton covered variety which will reduce turn-turn voltage breakdown for loading coil use. 73 de Derek Atter, G3GRO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29958 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 14:11:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 14:11:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zh5J-0007k5-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 15:45:33 +0100 Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zh5I-0007k0-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 15:45:32 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id PAA11836; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 15:02:38 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 10279 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 14:53:36 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 14:53:36 -0000 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id OAA13678; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 14:53:41 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma013606; Wed, 7 Jun 00 14:53:36 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 15:04:30 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 14:57:30 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CA5@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: "'LF Group'" Cc: "'KZY'" , chris@hf-inst.co.uk Subject: LF: DDS Board Progress Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 14:57:27 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: The AD9850 DDS Board is now with the PCB manufacturers. I went there yesterday to check the solder mask, and had a fascinating trip round the factory looking at PCB manufacture and SMT component pick and place mounting. Delivery is still quoted as 30 days so we have about 3 - 4 weeks left as these are being batched with other PCBs. Price of the PCB will probably be £8.00, plus p&p whatever that will come out at. HF Instruments will also coordinate a bulk purchase of AD9850 chips and some AD9851 devices too (see below), prices still to be fixed. I have also been told that it will be possible to supply chips mounted on the PCB for those frightened by the thought of soldering 28 0.65mm spaced pins - although its not as difficult as you might think especially with a solder mask there to help avoid shorts underneath. The AD9851 DDS chip is pin compatible with the AD9850 device and has an internal x6 clock multiplier allowing it to be used with up to a 30 MHz oscillator to give a clock freqeuncy to 180 MHz - output range can then go from DC to 70 MHz in steps of 0.04 Hz. For LF use however, I would still recommend the AD9850 device with a drive frequency of 4 - 5 MHz giving mHz steps. One interesting aspect that comes out of the 9851 data sheet is the use of the aliassed DDS products, after bandPASS filtering, to generate frequencies in the VHF range up to 100s of MHz. Very useful to microwavers. Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution,o r any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7766 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 16:28:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 16:28:01 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zjEa-0008QM-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 18:03:16 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zjEZ-0008QF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 18:03:15 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [195.44.217.103] (helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12ziV5-0000Y2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 16:16:16 +0000 Message-ID: <393D28D1.A1B6F213@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 16:37:38 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Re: Copying CW References: <001701bfcfa9$ea7322e0$1fd499d4@w8k3f0> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dick Rollema wrote: > To All from PA0SE > > Mike, G3XDV, wrote > > > I have been playing around with feeding differently derived audio into > > the two halves of stereo headphones with some interesting results. > > I will report in detail when the tests are complete. In short, it is > > certainly possible to improve headphone reception, both in terms of > > close-in selectivity and resistance to static. > > I have tested "pseudo-stereophonic" reception of CW by feeding the halves of > a stereo headphone via series tuned circuits resonating at 1002 and 842Hz > (922 ± 80Hz) respectively. > At first the result was pleasant; it sounded like being in a room with the > wanted 922Hz signal in the centre. But it did not take me long to find out > that it contributed absolutely nothing to the readibility of signals under > difficult conditions. You are correct, this has all been tried before years ago and proved useless. The only solution is to become a compentent cw operator. You will then be able to read cw under all adverse conditions. which is often the case of HF/LF. And cw is far from DEAD. It is virtually impossible to find a slot on the cw portion of any band especially during a contest. How about a high speed cw contest on 136 khz. Is there such a thing as a BPSK, PTOR or PSK31 contest ??????????? G3KEV > > > It proved again that our sophisticated ear/brain system cannot be helped by > such primitive contraptions. > > 73, Dick, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21013 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 17:21:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 17:21:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zjSP-00008T-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 18:17:33 +0100 Received: from kuku-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.63] helo=kuku.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zjSO-00008N-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 18:17:32 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by kuku.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000607171700.HNYL19613.kuku.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 10:17:00 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <24421820.960398220053.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 10:17:00 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Solar flares MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 213.120.56.53 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi All, Thought the following might be of interest: Space Weather News for June 6, 2000 An intense "X-class" solar flare today was followed by a full-halo coronal mass ejection. Material from the leading edge of the disturbance is expected to arrive on Thursday, June 8, with possible auroral displays to follow. For images and updates please visit http://www.spaceweather.com John, G4CNN _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23901 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2000 17:24:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Jun 2000 17:24:52 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zjVQ-00009I-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 18:20:40 +0100 Received: from d06lmsgate-3.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.3] helo=lmsfw2.emea.ibm.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zjVP-000096-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 18:20:39 +0100 Received: from d06relay01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.166.84.147]) by lmsfw2.emea.ibm.com (1.0.0) with ESMTP id SAA89116 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 18:12:18 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from usa.net (lig32-239-203-136.emea.lig-dial.ibm.com [32.239.203.136]) by d06relay01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v2.07) with ESMTP id SAA158792 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 18:20:02 +0100 Message-ID: <393E8426.A9A388AA@usa.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 19:19:34 +0200 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: a really weak signal in Canada.... References: <006a01bfd01f$e2380930$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Larry Kayser wrote: > > >Modern sound cards have superb A/D converters, > >so why not use them ? > > Computer sound cards did not exist when Bill started his work, since they > were not available they were not used. Having been around A/D converters > for many years, the superlative of "superb A/D converters" seems to have a > degree of hyperbole from my perspective. > 'Superb' in this context refers of course to the adequateness (sp?) to the task. Having 16 bits of resolutions, and, for the best cards, a noise floor approaching -90 dB, seems to be much more than adequate for whatever radio-received audio-range signals one could need to process. For hi-fi applications, this doesn't hold any more, of course. > > In the interim he has done DSP work that is superb for weak signal work and > has been demonstrated to perform excellently. > Yes, his work is excellent, and if/when he will port it to a sound card, it will surely be a winner also in terms of number of users. 73 Alberto I2PHD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9596 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 08:10:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 08:10:51 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zxEk-0003Nk-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 09:00:22 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zxEh-0003Nf-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 09:00:19 +0100 Received: from isis (userax85.uk.uudial.com [62.188.139.76]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA28303 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 08:58:58 +0100 (BST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000608085912.009805a0@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 09:01:10 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: LF: Formula MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Thanks, chaps. Old grey cells getting scrambled by all the RF over the years, I guess! Walter G3JKV. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19544 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 09:24:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 09:24:39 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zySJ-0003jA-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 10:18:27 +0100 Received: from ns1.swh.sk ([192.108.125.33]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zySH-0003j2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 10:18:26 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from hermes.swh.sk (hermes [195.41.64.129]) by ns1.swh.sk (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA19459 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:18:15 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from btss103a.swh.sk (btss103a.swh.sk [195.41.64.27]) by hermes.swh.sk (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id LAA08105 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:18:09 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by btss103a.swh.sk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <2MGT088N>; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:18:06 +0200 Message-ID: <29BDD4F529FCD311B631009027357C4E85568B@btss103a.swh.sk> From: "Gasparik Richard" To: "Rsgb_Lf_Group \(E-mail\)" Subject: LF: LF PA with tube... Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:18:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi all... Anybody have an idea how to build an power amplifier with single tube ? I have some GU81's. They needs about Ua=2000 V and Ia(max)=600mA. I calculated Pi match, but values of capacitors are to high...anybody knows how to do it other way ? Thank you very much for all info... Rich OM2TW From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19715 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 10:46:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 10:46:06 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zzjm-00042Z-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 11:40:34 +0100 Received: from gatek.vs.dasa.de ([195.243.118.226] helo=gatekeeper.vs.dasa.de) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zzjl-00042T-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 11:40:33 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: by gatekeeper.vs.dasa.de; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id MAA28244; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:42:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from somewhere by smtpxd X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from somewhere by smtpxd Message-ID: From: "Koenig, Wolfgang" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: AW: Sorry no Dx Cluster spots from GB7DXM Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:40:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hallo Group, there was only one spot on db0mdx last weekend: 136.7 OZ1KMR 2-Jun-2000 1610Z I was not able to be qrv on lf or spot any station because I was involved in the FD-activity of DL0UL/p. Hope to be qrv during whitsuntide. hopefully the static crashes keep low. 73 de dl1san wolf -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Alan Melia [mailto:Alan.Melia@btinternet.com] Gesendet am: Montag, 5. Juni 2000 00:20 An: rsgb_lf_group Betreff: LF: Sorry no Dx Cluster spots from GB7DXM Hi all, I am sorry to say that the local DX Cluster crashed late last week and there are no entries on it for LF. Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26890 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 12:11:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 12:11:56 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1300t3-0004Px-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 12:54:13 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1300t2-0004Ps-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 12:54:12 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id MAA07828; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:58:12 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 5707 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 12:49:06 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 12:49:06 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id MAA20009; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:49:09 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma019994; Thu, 8 Jun 00 12:48:46 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:59:48 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:52:45 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CAC@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: LF PA with tube... Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 12:52:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >Anybody have an idea how to build an power amplifier with single tube ? >I have some GU81's. They needs about Ua=2000 V and Ia(max)=600mA. >I calculated Pi match, but values of capacitors are to high...anybody knows >how to do it other way ? >Thank you very much for all info... >Rich OM2TW Sell it and get some power Mosfets.......... More seriously though, what is wrong with this pi-network ? assuming an Rl for the valve of 2000V / 0.6 A = 3300 ohms which will allow over 1kW out, a pi match with Q of 12 to get to 50 ohms needs Cin = 4nF (rated 4kV plus) L = 361uH Cout 23.3nF Rated 500V. The first one is slightly tricky, but high voltage ceramic caps up to 10kV do exist up to a few nF do exist, so connect them in parallel to tune. Cout is no problem. The inductor could be 140 - 150 turns of 2mm wire on an 80mm diameter former. Get hold of some Litz wire from old Decca transmitter loading coils. The DC choke will be interesting though. An LOT of turns on a ferrite core, and remember it has to be gapped or a dust core as it has DC flowing. Alternatively feed in the DC through a more modest choke at the 50 ohm point in which case Cout has to be rated at 3kV and another blocking cap of say 100n rated 3kV is needed. Alternatively find the biggest ferrite core suitable for switch mode PSU you can lay your hands on and wind an output transformer. Even stack cores if you have to. Minimum number of turns for a given ferrite core area is given by : N = Vrf(RMS) / (4.44. F . A . B) Using B = 0.2 Tesla (suitable for most SMPSU ferrite materials), A = 300 x 10^-6 m^2 for a large SMPSU core and V = 3kV, at 137kHz gives minimum number of turns of just 55. Transformation ratio = SQRT(3300 / 50) = 8.2 : 1 Remember the winding has to be insulated for 3 - 4kV and DC flowing through it could present a problem of saturation, so monitor core temperature carefully. 100deg is usually OK provided the wire can take it. You will also need an output low pass filter but component values here are a bit less restrictive. It is all a lot easier, even at the 1kW level, with solid state devices. Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: Gasparik Richard[SMTP:Richard.Gasparik@siemens.sk] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-08 10:18 > To: Rsgb_Lf_Group (E-mail) > Subject: LF: LF PA with tube... > > Hi all... > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27355 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 13:59:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 13:59:54 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1302jg-0004vP-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:52:40 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1302jf-0004vK-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:52:39 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [195.44.221.238] (helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1302jZ-0005At-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 13:52:34 +0000 Message-ID: <393F96B7.5D4D09D9@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 12:51:03 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "rsgb" Subject: LF: Sounder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: There is an on/off (A1A)keyed reversals transmission on 138.15 khz. This is possibly a fixed frequency ionospheric sounder. I could also hear it in GI. Can anyone else hear it ? de G3KEV From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19407 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 15:09:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 15:09:17 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1303qb-0005He-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 16:03:53 +0100 Received: from front3.grolier.fr ([194.158.96.53]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1303qa-0005HZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 16:03:52 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from club-internet.fr (ppp-44-48-142.wmar.club-internet.fr [213.44.48.142]) by front3.grolier.fr (8.9.3/No_Relay+No_Spam_MGC990224) with ESMTP id RAA08526 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 17:03:48 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <393FC39F.4A97F39F@club-internet.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 17:03:11 +0100 From: "M & S" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: fr,fr,es-ES MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Sounder References: <393F96B7.5D4D09D9@netscapeonline.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Mal & group, I can hear 'something', but not strong enough to be readable. 73, Mark, F6JSZ --- http://perso.club-internet.fr/sovergne --- g3kev a *crit : > > There is an on/off (A1A)keyed reversals transmission on 138.15 khz. This > is possibly a fixed frequency ionospheric sounder. I could also hear it > in GI. Can anyone else hear it ? > de G3KEV From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23077 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 18:47:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 18:47:39 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1307DG-0006Cg-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 19:39:30 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1307DF-0006Cb-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 19:39:29 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from central.zetnet.co.uk (central.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.20]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id TAA28026 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 19:39:27 +0100 X-ZSender: g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk Message-ID: <2000060818414368199@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 18:41:43 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Peter Dodd" X-Mailer: ZIMACS Version 1.20c 10000836 Subject: LF: Re: Mystery Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Tune to 137.60kHz and use Spectran set at Resolution 0.125Hz and speed about one fifth from bottom of scale - and tell us what you see! From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23803 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 21:03:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 21:03:11 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1309NV-0006iI-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 21:58:13 +0100 Received: from merlins.plus.net.uk ([195.166.128.23] helo=merlins.force9.net) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1309NU-0006iD-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 21:58:12 +0100 Received: (qmail 30482 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 21:05:08 -0000 Received: from ruin.servers.plus.net.uk (212.159.2.66) by merlins.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 21:05:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 31995 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 20:58:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO picks) (212.159.24.237) by ruin.servers.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 20:58:44 -0000 Message-ID: <012f01bfd18c$b5f62fa0$6b109fd4@f9.net.uk> From: "Dave" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <2000060818414368199@zetnet.co.uk> Subject: LF: Re: Re: Mystery Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 22:00:35 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Yes I noticed that... Looks like sawteeth on Spectrogram but in little steps rather than smooth drift. About S7 here. Dave G3YXM > Tune to 137.60kHz and use Spectran set at Resolution 0.125Hz and > speed about one fifth from bottom of scale - > and tell us what you see! > > > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3918 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 21:25:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 21:25:09 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1309hj-0006ns-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 22:19:07 +0100 Received: from bru5-rc-mx1.uunet.be ([194.7.179.228]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1309hi-0006nn-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2000 22:19:06 +0100 Received: (qmail 17757 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2000 21:19:03 -0000 Received: from uu212-190-2-75.unknown.uunet.be (HELO DeWildeg) (212.190.2.75) by bru5-rc-mx1.uunet.be with SMTP; 8 Jun 2000 21:19:03 -0000 Message-ID: <000601bfd18f$38b3cfe0$4b02bed4@DeWildeg> From: "Gaspard De Wilde" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Re: Mystery Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 23:19:22 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: hello I remark a broad band about 8Hz width centert around 137600 hz some intensity modulation on??????? -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Peter Dodd Aan: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Datum: donderdag 8 juni 2000 21:12 Onderwerp: LF: Re: Mystery >Tune to 137.60kHz and use Spectran set at Resolution 0.125Hz and >speed about one fifth from bottom of scale - >and tell us what you see! > > > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9554 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 04:36:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 04:36:59 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130GPA-0008QK-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 05:28:24 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r15.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.69]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130GP9-0008QF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 05:28:23 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-r15.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id l.24.61609ce (3972) for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 00:27:45 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <24.61609ce.2671cc40@aol.com> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 00:27:44 EDT Subject: LF: Copying Slow CW by Ear To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 107 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Bill VE2IQ announced his new time-crunching software Thursday for recording QRS transmissions via the sigma-delta converter and playing them back at an accelerated rate through a regular PC sound card for conventional aural "decoding." The text of the announcement is available at: http://lwca.org/miscdocs/crunch.htm It contains links to download the software. 73, John KD4IDY From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18772 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 06:30:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 06:30:38 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130I90-0000IH-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 07:19:50 +0100 Received: from mta4-svc.virgin.net ([194.168.54.145]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130I8y-0000Gs-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 07:19:49 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from virgin.net ([194.168.72.2]) by mta4-svc.virgin.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with ESMTP id <20000609061954.UYJZ7247.mta4-svc.virgin.net@virgin.net>; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 07:19:54 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <39408C1A.BD301317@virgin.net> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 07:18:02 +0100 From: "Stewart Bryant" Organization: . X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: [Fwd: [Lowfer] New software available for copying weak QRS-CW] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit This interesting post appeared on the lowfer mailing list last night. It gives more information on the CRUNCH program. Stewart G3YSX From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20390 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 06:33:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 06:33:49 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130II8-0000JW-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 07:29:16 +0100 Received: from mta1-svc.virgin.net ([194.168.54.142]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130II7-0000JR-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 07:29:15 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from virgin.net ([194.168.56.150]) by mta1-svc.virgin.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with ESMTP id <20000609063041.XPCB14604.mta1-svc.virgin.net@virgin.net>; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 07:30:41 +0100 Message-ID: <39408E1C.3CC76A10@virgin.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 07:26:36 +0100 From: "Stewart Bryant" Organization: . X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests. References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dick Rollema wrote: > To All from PA0SE > > Walter Blanchard quoted the RACAL expert who has in the past designed the > Decca antennas as follows: > > >(...) If the small one has an assymetric horizontal component (flat-top) > > this will complicate matters considerably since it will radiate both > > vertical and > > horizontally-polarised and there will be interaction between them that > > will affect the radiation pattern. So it would be unlikely to have a > circular > > polar pattern and this might account for some of the observed variations. > > This is not confirmed by computer simulation. > Shouldn't you say "Computer simulations do not model this". Decca did a lot of measurements when they developed Navigator, and the physics always has the last word. The question should therefore be "what is wrong with the computer model?" Stewart G3YSX From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24178 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 08:48:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 08:48:39 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130KMy-0000oo-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 09:42:24 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130KMx-0000oj-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 09:42:23 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from central.zetnet.co.uk (central.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.20]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id JAA07844 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 09:42:21 +0100 X-ZSender: g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk Message-ID: <2000060908451768199@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 08:45:17 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Peter Dodd" X-Mailer: ZIMACS Version 1.20c 10000836 Subject: LF: Re: Mystery Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Yesterday evening I suggested that you all try and look for the mystery signal on 137.60kHz There were a couple of reports but no one guessed what it was. How about trying again tonight Use Spectran set at Resolution 0.125Hz and speed about one fifth from bottom of scale. Let it integrate for at least half a page. It might also work using Spectrogram on similar settings. Tell us what you see! -- Regards, Peter, G3LDO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12450 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 12:18:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 12:18:11 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130NdN-0001h1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 13:11:33 +0100 Received: from ns1.swh.sk ([192.108.125.33]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130NdL-0001gw-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 13:11:32 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from hermes.swh.sk (hermes [195.41.64.129]) by ns1.swh.sk (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA24560 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:11:23 +0200 Received: from btss103a.swh.sk (btss103a.swh.sk [195.41.64.27]) by hermes.swh.sk (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id OAA05221 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:11:19 +0200 (MET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by btss103a.swh.sk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <2MG4AA3P>; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:11:18 +0200 Message-ID: <29BDD4F529FCD311B631009027357C4E8F2417@btss103a.swh.sk> From: "Gasparik Richard" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: [Fwd: [Lowfer] New software available for copying weak QRS-CW] Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:11:14 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi LF-ers... That's great...easy to copy va3lk.wav...no problem. Congrats to such a good idea. Best regards...and have a nice weekend. Rich OM2TW > -----Original Message----- > From: Stewart Bryant [SMTP:stewart.bryant@virgin.net] > Sent: 9. jún 2000 8:18 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: [Fwd: [Lowfer] New software available for copying weak > QRS-CW] > > This interesting post appeared on the lowfer mailing list last night. It > gives > more information on the CRUNCH program. > > Stewart G3YSX << Message: [Lowfer] New software available for copying weak > QRS-CW >> From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24632 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 13:54:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 13:54:52 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130P40-00023r-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 14:43:08 +0100 Received: from rubellite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.4]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130P3y-00023m-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 14:43:06 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (2410808673.dialin.freeler.nl [143.178.5.97]) by rubellite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id 1803327CB for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 13:41:56 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <001101bfd218$e0a94160$6105b28f@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <4.2.0.58.20000601105903.0097a890@mail.pncl.co.uk> <000301bfcc87$d6d381a0$9dd699d4@w8k3f0> <39408E1C.3CC76A10@virgin.net> Subject: Re: LF: Re: Aerial tests. Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 15:13:43 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > > This is not confirmed by computer simulation. > > > > Shouldn't you say "Computer simulations do not model this". Decca did a lot of > measurements when they developed Navigator, and the physics always has the last > word. The question should therefore be "what is wrong with the computer model?" > > Stewart G3YSX The computer did not simulate the Decca mast but the small L-antenna used by Jim. 73, Dick, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22078 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 16:34:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 16:34:41 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130Rcj-0002rU-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:27:09 +0100 Received: from neodymium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.83] helo=neodymium) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130Rci-0002rP-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:27:08 +0100 Received: from [62.7.13.191] (helo=default) by neodymium with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 130Rcg-0005fk-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:27:07 +0100 Message-ID: <000301bfd22f$57c83e20$bf0d073e@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: 137.600.....Hell its Andy Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 17:24:39 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Peter, yes the secret is having the scroll rate rate ....good 'O' signal here just after 1600z.....interesting. Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5986 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 19:56:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 19:56:06 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130UnQ-0003jH-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 20:50:24 +0100 Received: from neodymium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.83] helo=neodymium) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130UnO-0003jC-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 20:50:23 +0100 Received: from [213.1.207.142] (helo=default) by neodymium with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 130UkG-00057l-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 20:47:09 +0100 Message-ID: <002d01bfd24b$4c25f780$8ecf01d5@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: 137600 ....more.. Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 19:30:49 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi all the only trouble is that a lot of us use LSB on 136 to drop DCF39 over the edge of the filter.......this results in and upside down message....literally. Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26294 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 20:51:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 20:51:22 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130Vf2-0003y8-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 21:45:48 +0100 Received: from post.interalpha.co.uk ([195.26.224.18] helo=post.interalpha.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130Vf1-0003y3-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 21:45:47 +0100 Received: from g4jnt (sot-mod13.interalpha.net [195.26.225.13]) by post.interalpha.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA32744 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 21:55:24 +0100 Message-ID: <002001bfd253$d8fc5fc0$0de11ac3@g4jnt> From: "Andy Talbot" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: 137600 ....more.. Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 21:46:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In that case, use vertical scrolling and turn your head sideways, that gives the proper mirror image doesn't it ? I'm not turning it upside down ! Andy -----Original Message----- From: Alan Melia To: rsgb_lf_group Date: 09 June 2000 21:39 Subject: LF: 137600 ....more.. >Hi all the only trouble is that a lot of us use LSB on 136 to drop DCF39 >over the edge of the filter.......this results in and upside down >message....literally. > >Cheers de Alan G3NYK >Alan.Melia@btinternet.com > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1892 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 21:33:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 21:33:04 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130WG8-0004A8-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:24:08 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130WG7-0004A3-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:24:08 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from central.zetnet.co.uk (central.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.20]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id WAA30953 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 22:24:06 +0100 X-ZSender: g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk Message-ID: <2000060921253368199@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 21:25:33 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Peter Dodd" X-Mailer: ZIMACS Version 1.20c 10000836 Subject: Re: LF: 137600 ....more.. Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit > Hi all the only trouble is that a lot of us use LSB on 136 to drop DCF39 > over the edge of the filter.......this results in and upside down > message....literally. How do you use the Spectran frequency scale when you are on LSB? If you tune the receiver to 137kHz USB then the scale on Spectran is meaningful For example 137kHz on the Rx, plus a Spectran reading of 600 = 137.600kHz. The receiver is set to SSB bandwidth and any strong out of band signal can be attenuated using the IF SLOPE TUNING. This seems simple to me - but is there a better way? The TS-850 has a 1Hz tuning resolution but a 10Hz readout resolution. The fix is the set the receiver frequency at the point where it changes from 136.99 to 137.00. -- Regards, Peter, G3LDO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7131 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 21:41:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 21:41:58 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130WOp-0004Au-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:33:07 +0100 Received: from fortune-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.203] helo=fortune.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130WOo-0004Ao-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:33:06 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by fortune.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000609213229.FBED836.fortune.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:32:29 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <1517139.960586349352.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:32:29 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Mystery MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 213.120.56.53 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Peter, The secret is to be patient. My first reaction was there was nothing there, but after waiting a whole page, all was revealed. It reminds me of sky writing. I hope that Andy is going to explain to us all, what it is all about, i.e. is it just fun or is there a serious purpose? Nothing wrong with fun by the way. It is interesting how it varies in intensity with time of day. At 17.00 today, it was very clear, but by 22.30 had faded considerably. John, G4CNN _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12302 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 22:52:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 22:52:17 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130XQ4-0004US-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 23:38:28 +0100 Received: from fly.hiwaay.net ([208.147.154.56] helo=mail.hiwaay.net ident=0) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130XQ3-0004UN-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2000 23:38:27 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from lowga (tc06-216-180-10-113.dialup.HiWAAY.net [216.180.10.113]) by mail.hiwaay.net (8.11.0.Beta1/8.11.0.Beta1) with SMTP id e59McNG03457 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2000 17:38:23 -0500 (CDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20000609173332.0372acfc@highnoonfilm.com> X-Sender: les@highnoonfilm.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:33:32 -0500 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: les@highnoonfilm.com Subject: Re: LF: Copying Slow CW by Ear In-reply-to: <24.61609ce.2671cc40@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: At 12:27 AM 6/9/00 EDT, you wrote: >Bill VE2IQ announced his new time-crunching software Thursday for recording >QRS transmissions via the sigma-delta converter and playing them back at an >accelerated rate through a regular PC sound card for conventional aural >"decoding." > >The text of the announcement is available at: >http://lwca.org/miscdocs/crunch.htm >It contains links to download the software. > >73, >John KD4IDY John, I may QSY my beacon, XMGR to 187.500khz. I need to know if that's a clear frequency for you. According to my computer, you're only 129 miles from my location, so you may be my best bet for a reception this fall. Les Rayburn, KT40Z 4919 Cox Cove Helena, AL 35080 (205) 253-4867 CELL From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10224 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 08:45:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 08:45:50 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130giu-0006cr-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:34:32 +0100 Received: from post.interalpha.co.uk ([195.26.224.18] helo=post.interalpha.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130git-0006cm-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:34:31 +0100 Received: from g4jnt (sot-mod02.interalpha.net [195.26.225.2]) by post.interalpha.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA14359 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:44:18 +0100 Message-ID: <001601bfd2b6$defbfbc0$02e11ac3@g4jnt> From: "Andy Talbot" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Re: Mystery Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:35:08 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Peter has asked me for a write up for the LF Book, so full details will appear there. But basically it was a bit of fun to show how something can be done with a DDS in real time other than just using it as a simple frequency source. The mode is more commonly known as Hellschreiber, or at least one of its varients, and is available for Soundcard and EVM with an SSB transmitter (with transverter for LF). However, that is a wide band system using up to 1kHz bandwidth. What I did was take the technique a stage further and use a DDS to generate a narrow band version for use with Spectran. It can go narrower, in fact today I may try a 5 Hz version. DSP derived versions can transmit the tones in parallel, leading to proper vertical lines, but need linear transmitters. This one -at-a-time frequency version is called Sequential Multi Tone Hellscheiber or SMT Hell. Hellschreiber comes within the term "Fuzzy Modes" like SLOWCW etc where there is a crossover between data and human interpretation. See how it compares with medium speed CW - whatever would be transmitted in 10 Hz bandwidth. I'll change to a 5 Hz version around Midday today Incidently, to save tying up a useful computer just generating a message repeatedly, I've pressed an ancient 10MHz 286 Laptop into service. Who needs Pentium 400s for Data comms ? Andy G4JNT -----Original Message----- From: john sexton To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: 09 June 2000 23:12 Subject: LF: Re: Mystery > >Hi Peter, >The secret is to be patient. My first reaction was there was nothing there, >but after waiting a whole page, all was revealed. It reminds me of sky >writing. >I hope that Andy is going to explain to us all, what it is all about, i.e. >is it just fun or is there a serious purpose? Nothing wrong with fun by the >way. >It is interesting how it varies in intensity with time of day. At 17.00 >today, it was very clear, but by 22.30 had faded considerably. > > John, G4CNN > > > > > >_______________________________________________________ >Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite >Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20251 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 11:30:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 11:30:45 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130jLa-0007Ds-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:22:38 +0100 Received: from post.interalpha.co.uk ([195.26.224.18] helo=post.interalpha.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130jLX-0007Dk-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:22:36 +0100 Received: from g4jnt (sot-mod47.interalpha.net [195.26.225.47]) by post.interalpha.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA18069 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:31:36 +0100 Message-ID: <000901bfd2ce$57620200$2fe11ac3@g4jnt> From: "Andy Talbot" To: "LF Group" Subject: LF: SMT-Hell on 137.6kHz Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:22:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: The signal is now running using a 5 Hz bandwidth on 137.6kHz. Change Spectran settings to 0.06 Hz resolution and adjust the speed control for best looking copy. Be patient.... Each pixel is timed for 1.2 seconds with an 8x8 Font. Andy G4JNT From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25947 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 11:59:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 11:59:17 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130jmj-0007Ku-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:50:41 +0100 Received: from mashie.force9.net ([195.166.128.30]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130jmi-0007Kp-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:50:40 +0100 Received: (qmail 20471 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 11:57:57 -0000 Received: from rack.servers.plus.net.uk (212.159.2.65) by mashie.force9.net with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 11:57:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 23448 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 11:50:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO picks) (212.159.19.175) by rack.servers.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 11:50:29 -0000 Message-ID: <003501bfd2d2$91507ec0$af139fd4@f9.net.uk> From: "Dave" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000901bfd2ce$57620200$2fe11ac3@g4jnt> Subject: LF: Re: SMT-Hell on 137.6kHz Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 12:54:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Andy et al. Some screenshots are at http://www.picks.f9.co.uk/newspic22.htm I left the bandwidth at 0.12 and slowed down the scan for the 5Hz version and it still looks cleaner than the 10Hz. Dave G3YXM. > The signal is now running using a 5 Hz bandwidth on 137.6kHz. > Change Spectran settings to 0.06 Hz resolution and adjust the speed control > for best looking copy. Be patient.... > Each pixel is timed for 1.2 seconds with an 8x8 Font. > > Andy G4JNT > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18879 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 12:55:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 12:55:23 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130keT-0007WE-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 13:46:13 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from valley1.valleynet.on.ca ([204.40.198.3]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130keS-0007W9-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 13:46:13 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: (from ab196@localhost) by valley1.valleynet.on.ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA32607; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 08:46:11 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 08:46:10 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bill de Carle" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: My ISP having difficulties Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: My apology to anyone trying to download the CRUNCH software from my regular webpage www.ietc.ca/home/bill/bbs.htm - my local ISP, ietc.ca was bought out by another company (COGECO) recently and it seems they are having difficulties getting things changed over. I have been unable to send or receive e-mails from my regular account over the past few hours and no doubt the web page at ietc is inaccessible as well. Hope they get it all sorted out soon. Sorry for the difficulties. Bill VE2IQ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26804 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 13:15:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 13:15:40 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130kyz-0007dL-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 14:07:25 +0100 Received: from kuku-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.63] helo=kuku.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130kyy-0007dG-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 14:07:24 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by kuku.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000610130652.CECA25834.kuku.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 06:06:52 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <28540596.960642412155.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 06:06:52 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: Mystery MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 62.7.174.157 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Andy, Thanks for the explanation. As I am sure you know HellSchreiber, means Bright Writer, which this certainly is. This PM noticed that it had reduced to 5 Hz, so I decreased the resolution to 0.064 and the speed to one division (approx 1/12). It is just as legible as before. However I am noticing a long period fading and recovery of some hours. 73 John, G4CNN _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9843 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 15:24:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 15:24:59 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130n1n-00086x-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 16:18:27 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from valley1.valleynet.on.ca ([204.40.198.3]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130n1l-00086r-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 16:18:26 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: (from ab196@localhost) by valley1.valleynet.on.ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA08729; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 11:18:21 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 11:18:21 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bill de Carle" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org, lowfer@qth.net Subject: LF: CRUNCH V2.1 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: CRUNCH V2.1 is up on my web page at IETC.CA - Even though most DNS's will tell your browser that www.ietc.ca does not exist, I found you can still download it (at least for a while) by connecting with the IP address, bypassing your nameserver. Just tell your browser to go to 24.226.220.15/home/bill/bbs.htm It works for me! And you will probably get very good download performance because I kinda doubt anyone else is accessing web pages on IETC today :-) Bill VE2IQ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4471 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 21:37:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 21:37:13 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130sjS-0000iY-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 22:23:54 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from finch-post-11.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.39]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130sjR-0000iT-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 22:23:53 +0100 Received: from pickmere.demon.co.uk ([158.152.117.143]) by finch-post-11.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 130sjP-000Nit-0B for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 21:23:52 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 19:46:19 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M.J.Powell" Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: Mystery References: <28540596.960642412155.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> In-reply-to: <28540596.960642412155.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In message <28540596.960642412155.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com>, john sexton writes > >Hi Andy, >Thanks for the explanation. As I am sure you know HellSchreiber, means >Bright Writer, which this certainly is. I thought it was because it was invented by Dr. Hell. A rare German pun, perhaps? Mike -- M.J.Powell From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26682 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2000 22:11:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Jun 2000 22:11:02 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130tLb-0000rG-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 23:03:19 +0100 Received: from tantalum.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.80] helo=tantalum) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 130tLa-0000rA-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 23:03:18 +0100 Received: from [213.1.145.101] (helo=default) by tantalum with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 130tLY-0006qY-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 23:03:16 +0100 Message-ID: <000e01bfd327$7fb1b080$659101d5@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: SMT-Hell and Spectran. Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 22:59:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi all, cor I have a pain in the neck (or do I mean I am being a pain in the neck?) I have to drink me beer through a straw now Andy. I decided an easier way was to relearn a skill I developed many years ago when I worked in London and was too mean (or too late ) to buy a paper before boarding the tube-train. I got very good at reading upside-down.....Its a skill you never forget...bit like morse I suppose....just need to practice it. The 5Hz signal was readable all day and only started to get difficult after dark as the noise came up. I found I needed a time-scale of 3000 and 5.5k sample rate, with 16k points on Spectrogram which may be why some didn't decode it Peter I run the rx permanently on 138.100kHz LSB and put and offset into Spectran (the latest build) The problem is the RX is in a different room to the PC running Win95 and Spectran. I dont use narrow filters for the PC modes as if doesn't help, but I can listen on the PC speaker to other QSOs and CQs up the band. I just find that LSB gives the best 'whole band' view that way which I monitor on FFTDSP4 alongside the radio. That is sensitive enough to show traces from signals I cannot read, with the 500Hz filter and the outboard 80Hz audio filter. FFTDSP4 doesn't have an offset so I have a paper scale pasted to the monitor screen surround. Great fun and some nice pictures for the next time I have to give a Club talk. Does anyone run the mechanical Hell' in this country? I think I once saw one in action many years ago. From memory the display was produced by a continously rotating helix which was brought into contact with the moving paper strip by a solenoid. Quite ingenious! Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6294 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2000 07:51:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 11 Jun 2000 07:51:16 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1312Ki-0002db-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 08:39:00 +0100 Received: from ulexite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1312Kg-0002dW-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 08:38:59 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (1Cust92.tnt15.rtm1.nl.uu.net [213.53.4.92]) by ulexite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id AF839FAF04; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 06:37:24 -0100 (GMT) Message-ID: <001501bfd378$5a502000$5c0435d5@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Cc: "Koos Fockens, PA0KDF" References: <000e01bfd327$7fb1b080$659101d5@default> Subject: LF: Re: Hellschreiber Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 09:39:57 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > Does anyone run the mechanical Hell' in this country? I think I once saw one > in action many years ago. From memory the display was produced by a > continously rotating helix which was brought into contact with the moving > paper strip by a solenoid. Quite ingenious! > > Cheers de Alan G3NYK > Alan.Melia@btinternet.com Hello Alan and others, There are several ones in your country Alan, eg at the Science Museum. I also worked G's using a machine, for instance the late G5XB and others whose calls I can't remember. I have one on "permanent" loan from PA0AOB and are using it on the air since 1976. There is a Hellschreiber meeting on Sundays at 14.30 UTC (in winter 15.40 UTC) at about 3580kHz using the "Feldhell" system. You can learn a lot about the Hellschreiber by visiting one of the websites of Murray Greenman, ZLBPU, for instance: http://www..qsl.net/zl1bpu/FUZZY/History/history.html Software for it can be downloaded from http://www.qsl.net/zl1bpu/FUZZY/starting.html Murray can be contacted at as149@detroit.freenet.org An informative article on the Hellscreiber by ZL1BPU can be found in QST January 2000: "Let's See you in Hellschreiber". It contains a photograph of "my" machine. 73, Dick, PAoSE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20384 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2000 21:36:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 11 Jun 2000 21:36:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131FCf-0005Hg-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:23:33 +0100 Received: from carbon.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.92] helo=carbon) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131FCd-0005HZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:23:31 +0100 Received: from [62.7.103.176] (helo=default) by carbon with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 131FCb-00009p-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:23:30 +0100 Message-ID: <000e01bfd3eb$1992f560$b067073e@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: Sorry no Cluster spots for June 10/11 from GB7DXM Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 21:33:32 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi All, there are no Cluster spots for LF on my local Cluster node again this week. There has been a lot of static , and there seemed very little activity this morning. Roll on the autumn (well maybe not TOO quickly!) Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 110 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 07:42:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 07:42:07 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131OhU-0007CQ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:32:00 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from posti.saunalahti.fi ([195.74.0.45] helo=vihta.saunalahti.fi) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131OhS-0007CL-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:31:58 +0100 Received: from default (MMDLVIII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.44.158]) by vihta.saunalahti.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA03102 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:23:25 +0300 (EET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20000612103200.007c5cb0@pop.saunalahti.fi> X-Sender: vaiski1@pop.saunalahti.fi (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:32:00 +0300 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?V=E4in=F6_Lehtoranta?= Subject: LF: Signal Strength Measurements by OH2LX, 12 June 2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Signal strength measurements of various LF stations by OH2LX: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Day ------------------ 05Jun 06Jun 07Jun 08Jun 08Jun 10Jun 11Jun MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN Time, UTC ------------ 2045- 2015- 2100- 2045- 2055- 2040- 2055- ------------------------------------------------------------------ kHz Stn d,km AZI Indicated ESH2 input, dBmW ------------------------------------------------------------------ 68.9 DHJ58? 1115, 242 -105 -101 -98 -104 -98 -104 -99 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 73.3 Rugby, 1825, 252, -105 -106 -105 -104 Nil -105 -105 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 75.0 HBG, 1992, 226, -102 -107 -108 -104 -97 -107 -105 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 77.5 DCF77, 1543, 228, -90 -94 -93 -89 -87 -93 -92 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 128.9 DCF49, 1544, 228, -92 -93 -85 -94 -91 -93 -88 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 138.8 DBF39, 1221, 226, -86 -92 -84 -90 -85 -91 -89 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 135.8 SXV, 2490, 182, -108 -108 -105 -111 -104 -105 -107 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 137.0 CFH, 5750, 295, Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil ------------------------------------------------------------------ (R&S ESH2/---- 10m coax----/1:10/-----15m wire-----): Noise level with antenna: with 200Hz IF BandWidth: -24..-20 dB(uV), -131..-127dBmW (varies with frq, qrm, qrn etc) ------------------------------------------------------------------ End of message of 12th June 2000, 0700 UTC, from OH2LX ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ DISCUSSION: In RadCom May 2000, (p 95) "the last Word" C J Osborne, G3XIZ writes about "Watt Nonsense" and suggests: "Ditch dBW and use watts...". In RadCom June 2000 Peter Chadwick, G3RZP comments under caption: "The much Maligned dBW"; G3RZP writes: "..it (dBW) came from the use of dBm for measuring receiver sensitivity, which originated from the radar/electronic warfare community, where matched impedances and received powers were the major parameters of interest ..... dBm is the power in decibels relative to 1mW, which would be provided to the equipment if the load impedance was 50 ohms - a lot of assumptions...". OH2LX: Actually there is no reason to tabulate my measurements in dBmW. I wouldn't even dream of using "received power" unless I use for measurements a genuine MEASURING RECEIVER, an R&S ESH2. Note: In my case approximate field strength (around 136 kHz) is: F-s (dBuV/m) = dBmW + 127dB, e.g. -127dBmW + 127dB = 0 dBuV/m. (have not yet attempted to calibrate it around 70-80 kHz). ---------------------------------------------------------- V.K.Lehtoranta, OH2LX, POBox 50, FIN-05401 Jokela, Finland ------ Tel: +358-9-4173965 ---- Fax: +358-9-4173961 ------ E-mail: vaiski@dlc.fi - alias: oh2lx@dlc.fi & oh2lx@sral.fi From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27910 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 09:06:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 09:06:46 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Q21-0007UE-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:57:17 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r19.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.73]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Q20-0007U5-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:57:16 +0100 Received: from G0MRF@aol.com by imo-r19.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id l.9a.60500ae (3892) for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 04:56:35 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: G0MRF@aol.com Message-ID: <9a.60500ae.2675ffc2@aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 04:56:34 EDT Subject: LF: Decca Users Group? To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 32 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I understand there are now several reflector members who now own ex-Decca Transmitters. Is anyone interested in a temporary 'Decca Users group' for the purposes of exchanging information on modifying the transmitters for use on the amateur LF bands? I hope to have my one operational by this Friday! (Unrealistic enthusiasm) and would like to exchange thoughts on calamity avoidance. 73 David From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 799 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 09:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 09:22:06 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131QJv-0007Zb-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:15:47 +0100 Received: from mserv1c.u-net.net ([195.102.240.33]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131QJu-0007ZU-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:15:46 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1c.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #35) id 131QIu-0003Ig-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:14:44 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:05:44 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:05:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: 137600 ....more.. In-reply-to: <2000060921253368199@zetnet.co.uk> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > > > Hi all the only trouble is that a lot of us use LSB on 136 to drop DCF39 > > over the edge of the filter.......this results in and upside down > > message....literally. > > How do you use the Spectran frequency scale when you are on LSB? > I use LSB for this reason, too, and had troubles with Andy's Hell until I twigged that a dot at the top of a series of symbols probably wasn't right. As for using the frequency scale on Spectran or Spectrogram. I just wouldn't do it. The simplest way of calibrating your receiver is to put VFO 1 on 60.000kHz, adjust Spectran or your RIT so that the signal appears in a convenient place on the screen (say, 600Hz), then switch to VFO 2. When the dial says 137.700kHz any signal on that frequency should appear at 600Hz on the screen. This assumes a 1Hz read-out of course, but it does eliminate all calibration errors and you don't have to set the receiver or Spectran to a wide setting to make it work. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6655 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 13:35:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 13:35:02 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131UDl-0008Uy-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:25:41 +0100 Received: from alpha.dii.unisi.it ([193.205.7.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131UDk-0008Ur-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:25:41 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mailsrv.dii.unisi.it (pcfasec.dii.unisi.it [193.205.7.103]) by alpha.dii.unisi.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B1F1824D for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:30:01 +0200 (CEST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3944E4C6.ED74F8EE@mailsrv.dii.unisi.it> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:25:26 +0200 From: "Valerio Gabbani" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12-20 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "LF Group" Subject: LF: Surplus INFO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello all, i got an object that seems to be a TXCO but i need some info about how to use it. The manufacturer is Siemens, the device looks like e black cilinder,diameter about 6.5 cm and 9 cm high, with a 9 poles circular male connector (similar to octal type) on the bottom and on the top the following inscription: "Siemens Schwingquarz-thermostat 4,000000 Mhz 70° C 20V 14W Q91502-A4000-E-1". If there is someone reading the reflector that knows the output connector pin map please tell me ! Thanks in advance '73, Valerio (IK5ZPV) From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21159 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 14:32:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 14:32:48 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131V9u-0000DR-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:25:46 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r16.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.70]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131V9s-0000DE-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:25:44 +0100 Received: from MarkusVester@aol.com by imo-r16.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id l.9c.48eaab3 (3850) for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:24:59 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: MarkusVester@aol.com Message-ID: <9c.48eaab3.26764cbb@aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:24:59 EDT Subject: LF: Chirped MT-Hell and Fourier-SSTV To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0.i for Windows 95 sub 64 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Geri, hi group, encouraged by the "Mystery Signal" discussion, I had an enjoyable qso with DK8KW today, sending out a couple of pictures around 137.73 kHz. I had been experimenting with fourier image transmission for a while. The modulation I used is similar to parallel multitone hell (MT Hell) as described on ZLBPU's page. For n lines and a column duration of T only the optimal total bandwidth of n/T is required. It's disadvantage is a linear transmitter with a high crest factor (peak to average ratio), as for a bright vertical line all the energy is concentrated in a narrow sin(t)/t pulse, only T/n long. As phase is not displayed in the received spectrograms, a chirp filter can be used to smear out the same energy over the symbol time T, reducing peak power by a factor of n for chirped multi-tone (CMT). Its easy and efficient to apply a quadratic phase term to the image intensity before the FFT. For a full white image, the resulting sweep signal looks similar to the SMT (sequential multitone) mode Andy used in his experiments. But for a single horizontal line, SMT would transmit a series of full-power pulses of short duration T/n. To separate these spectrally, the rx would have to use a bandwidth of n/T for each channel, or n*n/T for the full image height. Thus, SMT is less bandwidth-efficient by that factor of n compared to MT or CMT. This makes CMT interesting for fast "high resolution" grey-scale image transfer like the 64*64 pixel portraits I have sent to Walter and Geri. So, where's the catch, besides the linear tx? Theoretically, there could be a "reversed chirp" luminosity pattern in the image, refocussing all the smeared energy into a high peak. For random images, the crest factor would be on the order of sqrt(n) regardless of any phase modulation scheme. But as pixel values are always positive, the image has a strong spatial zero-frequency component, and thus chirping still helps. Practically I found that an extra 6dB dynamic headroom was usually sufficient. When precalculating the sound data, one could always scale them down or try a reversed chirp direction. In the current implementation, a QBasic program transforms a bmp image to a 1MB wav file. I can play this to my SSB rig with a second instance of gram using "Scan File", while leaving the "Scan Input" monitor running. Due to limited FFT size (8192) and playback sample rate (11025 Hz), minimum bandwidth is 1.3 Hz per line. Its fast, but too wide for the LF qrss band and rather tall on an 86 Hz display, so I will try to use 64*0.33 Hz in the future. So much for now, 73 cu Markus, DF6NM From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21252 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 14:32:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 14:32:55 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131V9w-0000DX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:25:48 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r15.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.69]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131V9v-0000DF-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:25:47 +0100 Received: from MarkusVester@aol.com by imo-r15.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id l.c1.40d85f4 (3850) for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:25:10 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: MarkusVester@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:25:10 EDT Subject: LF: Russian ALPHA qrt ? To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0.i for Windows 95 sub 64 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello group, yesterday I checked the very low end and wondered that I didn't see a trace of the familiar ALPHA beeps. Today nothing either on any of their qrgs 11.905, 12.089, 12.667 and 14.88 kHz. With precise GPS, are they finally gone for good now, following the fate of OMEGA? Hearing all four beacons certainly was an excellent rx test, but natural-radio listeners will probably enjoy the lack of qrm. One I would NOT miss would be the 124 kHz DGPS service from Mainflingen with all its noisy intermodulation... 73s de Markus, DF6NM From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23900 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 14:59:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 14:59:26 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131VTA-0000Ih-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:45:40 +0100 Received: from ds9.sci.fi ([195.74.0.54]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131VT9-0000Ia-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:45:39 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from default (MMMCDII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.47.102]) by ds9.sci.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA14110 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:45:32 +0300 (EET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20000612174544.00812100@pop.saunalahti.fi> X-Sender: oh2lx@pop.saunalahti.fi X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:45:44 +0300 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?V=E4in=F6_Lehtoranta?= Subject: Re: LF: Russian ALPHA qrt ? In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello Markus and others, It has been common to Alpha since 1970 to be qrt for shorter and longer periods. The 5th Alpha station Seydi has been off air totally but even Revda has been on. A while ago I thought Mars-75 went qrt but after a few days it came back. 73 de Vaino, OH2LX At 10:25 12.6.2000 EDT, you wrote: >Hello group, > >yesterday I checked the very low end and wondered that I didn't see a trace >of the familiar ALPHA beeps. Today nothing either on any of their qrgs >11.905, 12.089, 12.667 and 14.88 kHz. With precise GPS, are they finally gone >for good now, following the fate of OMEGA? Hearing all four beacons certainly >was an excellent rx test, but natural-radio listeners will probably enjoy the >lack of qrm. One I would NOT miss would be the 124 kHz DGPS service from >Mainflingen with all its noisy intermodulation... > >73s de Markus, DF6NM ---------------------------------------------------------- V.K.Lehtoranta, OH2LX, POBox 50, FIN-05401 Jokela, Finland ------ Tel: +358-9-4173965 ---- Fax: +358-9-4173961 ------ E-mail: vaiski@dlc.fi - alias: oh2lx@dlc.fi & oh2lx@sral.fi From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13440 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 17:29:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 17:29:45 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Xsw-0000t1-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:20:26 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from ds-img-7.compuserve.com ([149.174.206.153] helo=spdmbaaa.compuserve.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Xsv-0000sZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:20:25 +0100 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by spdmbaaa.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-1.9) id NAA24094 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:19:53 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:19:13 -0400 From: "'Geri' Kinzel, DK8KW" Subject: LF: Re: LF Chirped MT-Hell and Fourier-SSTV To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <200006121319_MC2-A874-6312@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello LF-friends, a picture of Markus', DF6NM's transmission in Slow-Hell can be found at http://www.qru.de/df6nm-hell.html Best 73 Geri, DK8KW (W1KW) http://www.qru.de From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16415 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 17:37:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 17:37:13 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Y0i-0000tX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:28:28 +0100 Received: from ewey-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.191] helo=ewey.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Y0h-0000tS-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:28:27 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by ewey.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000612172825.CXXJ14745.ewey.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:28:25 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <18823271.960830905371.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:28:25 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: HellSchreiber MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 62.7.168.200 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Mitch and All, Mitch VE3OT wrote that HellSchreiber is named after the inventor, Dr. Hell. You are of course right Mitch. It just goes to show how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, hi! I thought I knew German reasonably well. My only defence is that the family name Bright is also common in English. Maybe it was indeed meant to be a pun as you suggest? Who knows what was in his mind when he named it? The name reminded me of what we used to call Legible Text, which we puched at the beginning of our Computer tapes, although we became quite proficient at reading ASCII on paper tapes. This was a long time ago, when computers were rare and viewed as electronic brains, instead of as glorified typewriters for modern secretaries. John, G4CNN _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17533 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 17:39:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 17:39:35 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Y2p-0000uN-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:30:39 +0100 Received: from kuku-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.63] helo=kuku.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131Y2o-0000u7-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:30:38 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by kuku.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000612173005.CORQ21142.kuku.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:30:05 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3992152.960831005172.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 10:30:05 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: RTTY station MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 62.7.168.200 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi All, Can anyone tell me what the RTTY station on 136.648 is? This appears to be the spacing frequency, and there appears to be a marking frequency only 20 Hz lower. John, G4CNN _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7024 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 20:28:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 20:28:24 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131ajC-0001XX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:22:34 +0100 Received: from firebird.planetinternet.be ([195.95.34.5]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131ajB-0001XS-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:22:33 +0100 Received: from l9k1z8 (u195-95-44-109.pop-brussel7.planetinternet.be [195.95.44.109]) by firebird.planetinternet.be (8.10.1/8.10.0) with SMTP id e5CKMV806647 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:22:31 +0200 Message-ID: <000301bfd4a3$538ef9e0$6d2c5fc3@l9k1z8> From: "Guido Roels" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Audio filters Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:20:08 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello everyone, Lately I obtained two AF filters. One is marked as: FILTER BAND PASS 5915-99-920-1117 500 C/S TX & RX The other one: FILTER BAND PASS 5915-99-920-1118 700 C/S TX & RX Dimensions about 8cm cube and with a DB-9 male connector fitted on top. As they are painted in the well known RACAL RA-17 green I suppose they are RACAL origin. I have measured the B/W and it's about 180Hz by 6dB when connected to 600R. Anyone in the group who knows more about this specimen? Best regards, Guido, ON6RL. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22619 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 20:57:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 20:57:10 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131bBC-0001dQ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:51:30 +0100 Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131bBB-0001dJ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:51:29 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from isis (usercl30.uk.uudial.com [62.188.154.171]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA06361 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:50:05 +0100 (BST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000612214414.0097dd50@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:48:04 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: LF: Russian ALPHA qrt ? In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Markus, The Alpha operators probably haven't paid their electricity bill. There were three Russian high-ups at a conference I went to recently who had some say in operating that system and they said that when it came to a choice between paying their salaries and paying the electricity guess which won! Also said they were having some problems keeping Chaika on the air for the same reason. Walter G3JKV. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22754 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 20:57:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 20:57:29 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131bBA-0001dK-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:51:28 +0100 Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131bBA-0001dE-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:51:28 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from isis (usercl30.uk.uudial.com [62.188.154.171]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA06358 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:50:03 +0100 (BST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000612212403.00979d00@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:41:08 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: LF: Decca Users Group In-reply-to: <9a.60500ae.2675ffc2@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: G0MRF wrote: >I understand there are now several reflector members who now own ex-Decca >Transmitters. > >Is anyone interested in a temporary 'Decca Users group' for the purposes of >exchanging information on modifying the transmitters for use on the amateur >LF bands? > >I hope to have my one operational by this Friday! (Unrealistic enthusiasm) >and would like to exchange thoughts on calamity avoidance. I've been asking those who get one to do just this - did I miss you on Sunday, David? I can get to the guys who designed them if necessary so just put queries on this reflector, and if nobody else can answer I'll buy them a beer and get "horses' mouth" advice. We ex-Decca narks meet once a month at a local pub. Walter G3JKV. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24599 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 21:41:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 21:41:18 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131bsC-0001oc-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:35:56 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131bsA-0001oX-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:35:55 +0100 Received: from pickmere.demon.co.uk ([158.152.117.143]) by anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 131bs4-000LKM-0W for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:35:49 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:01:42 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M.J.Powell" Subject: Re: LF: Re: HellSchreiber References: <18823271.960830905371.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> In-reply-to: <18823271.960830905371.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In message <18823271.960830905371.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com>, john sexton writes >Hi Mitch and All, > >Mitch VE3OT wrote that HellSchreiber is named after the inventor, Dr. Hell. > >You are of course right Mitch. It just goes to show how a little knowledge >is a dangerous thing, hi! I thought I knew German reasonably well. My only >defence is that the family name Bright is also common in English. Maybe it >was indeed meant to be a pun as you suggest? Who knows what was in his mind >when he named it? The name reminded me of what we used to call Legible Text, >which we puched at the beginning of our Computer tapes, although we became >quite proficient at reading ASCII on paper tapes. This was a long time ago, >when computers were rare and viewed as electronic brains, instead of as >glorified typewriters for modern secretaries. Not Mitch. Twas me! Mike -- M.J.Powell From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4282 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 23:06:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 23:06:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131dDR-0002Ag-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:01:57 +0100 Received: from m11.boston.juno.com ([63.211.172.74]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131dDQ-0002Ab-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:01:57 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"yokUgcxCbtTP7XLrpefewJVffiJc0ijw94PtFPEKgv3BZKcJzXfyqA=="> Received: (from riese-k3djc@juno.com) by m11.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id FAD9VHWZ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:01:31 EDT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:57:47 -0400 Subject: Re: LF: 137600 ....more.. Message-ID: <20000612.185748.-73297.3.riese-k3djc@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1,3,5,7-25 X-Juno-Att: 0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "Bob RIESE" Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: FYI Mikes method is the same one I use. The receiver I use for an IF has a variable Offset which I attempt to keep at 600 Cycles. However over time the Knob gets moved I have always made it a routine when checking something new to do a 60 Khz check before looking at the specific frequency I wish to check. Gives that little added confidence HI Bob >ju>to put VFO 1 on 60.000kHz, adjust Spectran or your RIT so that >the signal appears in a convenient place on the screen (say, >600Hz), then switch to VFO 2. When the dial says 137.700kHz >any signal on that frequency should appear at 600Hz on the >screen. This assumes a 1Hz read-out of course, but it does >eliminate all calibration errors and you don't have to set the >receiver >or Spectran to a wide setting to make it work. > >Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) >http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17833 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2000 23:28:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 12 Jun 2000 23:28:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131dUq-0002Fk-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:19:56 +0100 Received: from smtp11.bellglobal.com ([204.101.251.53]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131dUp-0002Ff-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:19:55 +0100 Received: from server1 (Kingston-ppp108585.sympatico.ca [216.209.110.24]) by smtp11.bellglobal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA02697 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:26:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <005401bfd4c3$b12f6dd0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Surplus 5 MHz frequency standards? Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:12:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Greetings: Recently on this reflector there was reference to the availability of some 5 MHz frequency standards. An issue has come up here and I sure could use an extra standard to make life a little easier on a small side project. If any of those surplus items are still available I sure would like to get a price ASAP. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6686 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 03:49:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 03:49:50 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131hYD-00039J-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 04:39:41 +0100 Received: from [192.139.219.10] (helo=claven.fanshawec.on.ca) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131hYB-00039B-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 04:39:40 +0100 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [198.96.18.40] by claven.fanshawec.on.ca with ESMTP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:38:37 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:39:43 -0500 Subject: Re: LF: Re: HellSchreiber From: "Mitch Powell" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >> >>Mitch VE3OT wrote that HellSchreiber is named after the inventor, Dr. Hell. > Not Mitch. Twas me! > > Mike > -- > M.J.Powell Thanks for the correction Mike - appreciate the confirmation that my mind was not slipping !! Mitch > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12649 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 06:43:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 06:43:07 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131kKT-0003hh-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 07:37:41 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from mail.sci.fi ([195.74.0.53] helo=pefletti.saunalahti.fi ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131kKS-0003hc-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 07:37:40 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from default (MMMDCXXXV.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.164.35]) by pefletti.saunalahti.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA03776 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 09:37:22 +0300 (EET DST) Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20000613093736.007eb210@pop.saunalahti.fi> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Sender: vaiski1@pop.saunalahti.fi X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 09:37:36 +0300 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?V=E4in=F6_Lehtoranta?= Subject: Re: LF: Russian ALPHA qrt ? In-reply-to: <4.2.0.58.20000612214414.0097dd50@mail.pncl.co.uk> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Walter, You are no doubt right about the reason for Alpha etc qrt, I know one Russian captain... Four Alpha stations were on and off during the first four months of 2000, including Revda. The official USSR name for Alpha is RSDN-20 where D stands for long-range (dalnoye). Russians place Mars-75 system in its own category "sinteziruyemim" and my old friend suggested that Decca also is a "synthesized" system, I always thought Decca belongs to "cw hyperbolic" category, What say? Loran is a "(im)pulse hyperbolic" system. In Mars all the other frequencies are said to be "synthesized" from the main frequency. The Russian language is not very easy... 73 de Vaiski At 21:48 12.6.2000 +0100, you wrote: >Hi Markus, > >The Alpha operators probably haven't paid their electricity bill. >There were three Russian high-ups at a conference I went to >recently who had some say in operating that system and they >said that when it came to a choice between paying their salaries >and paying the electricity guess which won! Also said they >were having some problems keeping Chaika on the air for the >same reason. > >Walter G3JKV. ---------------------------------------------------------- V.K.Lehtoranta, OH2LX, POBox 50, FIN-05401 Jokela, Finland ------ Tel: +358-9-4173965 ---- Fax: +358-9-4173961 ------ E-mail: vaiski@dlc.fi - alias: oh2lx@dlc.fi & oh2lx@sral.fi From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12850 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 09:31:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 09:31:59 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131moX-0004I7-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:16:53 +0100 Received: from lepidachrosite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.3]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131moU-0004I2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:16:51 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (1Cust41.tnt20.rtm1.nl.uu.net [213.53.14.41]) by lepidachrosite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id 3EB71CAE54; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 09:15:35 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <002301bfd518$5d450900$290e35d5@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: "LF-Group" Cc: "Murray Greenman" , "Koos Fockens, PA0KDF" , "Cas Caspers, PA0CSC" , "Arthur Bauer, PA0AOB" Subject: LF: Fw: Hellschreiber History Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 11:16:52 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: To All from PAoSE In my e-mail of June 11 2000 9.39 I gave the URL of one of ZL1BPU's websites on which the history of the Hellschreiber can be found. When afterwards I tried to visit it there was no access. Asking ZL1BPU what could be the cause of the failure Murray replied as follows: > Dick, > > The URL that was posted was wrong. It had an extra dot in it! > > This one definitely works, because I just tried it: > > http://www.qsl.net/zl1bpu/FUZZY/History/History.html > > And yes, your mechanical machine has it's picture there too. > > By the way, Mike KF4HEY are putting together a new and better "History" > site, to be hosted by Mike. Look out for that when it is ready! > > 73, > > Murray ZL1BPU I can fully recommend visiting the site; it gives an excellent overview of the Hell system of teleprinting. 73, Dick, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14143 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 11:26:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 11:26:11 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131okK-0004nX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:20:40 +0100 Received: from mserv1b.u-net.net ([195.102.240.137]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131okI-0004nR-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:20:39 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1b.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 131ok3-0006OC-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:20:23 +0100 Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:18:35 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:18:34 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: Litz X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: A couple of weeks ago, I connected up my ex-Puckeridge giant Litz coil (see my web site for a picture). I used a variation of the stripping/soldering method described by Jim, M0BMU. He recommended wrapping copper foil around the wires and then applying a blowlamp. I used kitchen aluminium foil which worked OK. The only failure I had was when I stripped too little of the PTFE insulation off and the melting PTFE coated the wires with a black goo that was impossible to remove. The resultant coils - they are all different; mine has four parallel- wound windings - each had less than one ohm DC resistance. I connected up one winding, and the antenna (plus the coil at the top of the mast) resonated at 150kHz. Connecting another in series reduced the frequency to 88kHz. This is not the sort of coil you can tap so it was back to the old dustbin to supplement a single Litz coil. I haven't yet tried three windings to get to 73kHz. The built-in variometer changes the frequency by only a few kHz. My antenna current has increased by 20 per cent and there is obviously a higher Q as I have had to prevent the pa from oscillating on key up. When we were first experimenting with LF there was a lot of discussion about Litz wound inductors. The conclusion then was that any advantage would be small compared with earth and other losses. I think that was true, but it does show that once you have reduced the other losses as far as possible there is some advantage in going for a properly wound low-loss coil. Next projects - a shed for the big loading coil (though perhaps one of those plastic luggage boxes that sit on top of cars would do) and a Litz-wound mast-head inductor. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23222 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 15:04:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 15:04:24 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131s5Q-0005eX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:54:40 +0100 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.111] helo=gadolinium) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131s5N-0005eS-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:54:37 +0100 Received: from [62.7.81.139] (helo=default) by gadolinium with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 131s5G-0005Lu-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:54:31 +0100 Message-ID: <000d01bfd547$170bb220$8b51073e@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Re: RTTY station Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:47:51 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi John, I think Markus told me that was an intermod product from DCF39/42 ...I will copy Markus's message direct to you John. Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com -----Original Message----- From: john sexton To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: 13 June, 2000 7:36 AM Subject: LF: Re: RTTY station >Hi All, > >Can anyone tell me what the RTTY station on 136.648 is? This appears to be >the spacing frequency, and there appears to be a marking frequency only 20 >Hz lower. > >John, G4CNN > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________________ >Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite >Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9672 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 17:18:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 17:18:42 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131uGb-0006Cz-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:14:21 +0100 Received: from fortune-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.203] helo=fortune.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 131uGZ-0006Cn-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:14:19 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by fortune.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000613171346.PFB19361.fortune.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:13:46 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <15420738.960916426855.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:13:46 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Re: HellSchreiber MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 62.7.178.28 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Mike, Not my day for getting things right is it! Unfortunately I had deleted the original E-mail and could only remember that it was M. Powell. Curiously there are two of you! Thanks for putting me straight. John _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28952 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2000 06:27:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 14 Jun 2000 06:27:14 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1326WN-0000o3-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 07:19:27 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from web221.mail.yahoo.com ([128.11.68.121]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1326WL-0000ny-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 07:19:26 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <20000614061917.19980.rocketmail@web221.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [195.243.118.226] by web221.mail.yahoo.com; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 23:19:17 PDT Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 23:19:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "wolfgang koenig" Subject: Re: LF: Sorry no Cluster spots for June 10/11 from GB7DXM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hallo Group, we had some activity on LF last Monday (12. Jun) morning. The band was quiet without static crashes. I heared a few stations : DJ2EY 559, DL3FDO 559, DJ1RL 559 in qso with df8zr 559, DJ7RD 599, DL0FTZ/P 549, OZ8NJ 439 73 de dl1san Wolf --- Alan Melia wrote: > Hi All, there are no Cluster spots for LF on my > local Cluster node again > this week. There has been a lot of static , and > there seemed very little > activity this morning. Roll on the autumn (well > maybe not TOO quickly!) > > Cheers de Alan G3NYK > Alan.Melia@btinternet.com > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23566 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2000 08:40:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 14 Jun 2000 08:40:16 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1328d1-0001NT-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:34:27 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1328d0-0001NO-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:34:26 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from central.zetnet.co.uk (central.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.20]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id JAA30301 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:34:24 +0100 X-ZSender: g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk Message-ID: <2000061408363368199@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 08:36:33 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Peter Dodd" X-Mailer: ZIMACS Version 1.20c 10000836 Subject: LF: Re: Just the cat's whiskers Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit The Industrial museum at Amberley put on 'theme' weekends, such as model steam engines or vintage cars etc. This coming weekend we are having a 'cats whisker' theme - some the vintage kit that the museum has is up and running. I have volenteered to operated an amateur station comprising the old 'breadboard' layout, probably on 7MHz. Hopefully there will be a demonstration of 40 line mechanical scanned TV. I have not planned to operate the LF station but that might change. -- Regards, Peter, G3LDO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21602 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2000 11:45:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 14 Jun 2000 11:45:11 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132BV7-00029j-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 12:38:29 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132BV6-00029e-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 12:38:28 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 132BUw-0003gz-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 12:38:18 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <9179.200006141138@gemini> From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 12:45:33 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: LF crystals X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear LF group, Looking through my box of crystals recently, I found some operating in the range 30 - 40kHz. They are in glass envelopes, and I noticed that the metalisation on each side of the quartz plate is divided into two halves, giving four electrodes. On some units, all four electrodes are connected to seperate pins, while on others two diagonally oposite electrodes are commoned, giving only 3 external connections. They look a little like 2 pole monolithic crystal filters, but have no bandwidth marked on them, and I have not heard of such filters being used at low frequencies. Does anybody know how these 3 and 4 terminal crystals are used? Just curious really. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12594 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 08:35:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 08:35:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 29947 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 08:32:45 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 08:32:45 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132rLa-0000PB-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:19:26 +0100 X-Priority: 3 Received: from public1.thorcom.com ([212.172.148.10] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132qwK-0000IH-01 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 08:53:20 +0100 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from orodruin.esoterica.pt ([195.22.0.166]) by public1.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132gs6-0000Cn-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 22:08:18 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from ea.esoterica.pt (ea.esoterica.pt [195.22.0.204]) by orodruin.esoterica.pt (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5FAgCI28844; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:42:18 GMT Received: from por183.esoterica.pt (por183.esoterica.pt [195.22.5.183]) by ea.esoterica.pt (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA24484; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:41:06 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: ea.esoterica.pt: por183.esoterica.pt [195.22.5.183] didn't use HELO protocol Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20000615093603.0089e920@pop3.esoterica.pt> X-Sender: brian@pop3.esoterica.pt X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 09:36:03 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Brian Rogerson" Subject: LF: Beacon on 2200m Cc: alberto.dinis@icp.pt, carlos.carvalho@icp.pt MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Goodmorning to all, Having just finished assembling and adjusting the aerial tuning and matching unit, I was wondering if some kind person would transmit a beacon signal. The band is exceptionally quiet now after a fairly noisy night. I cannot transmit since I am still waiting for a license to be issued and the transmitter is not complete. 73's de Brian, CT1DRP, IN51QD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19323 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 11:47:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 11:47:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 8798 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 11:44:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 11:44:54 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132uSv-0000wg-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:39:13 +0100 Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132uSu-0000wb-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:39:12 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id MAA04835; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:43:23 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 14970 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 12:32:01 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 12:32:01 -0000 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id MAA08032; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:31:05 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma007672; Fri, 16 Jun 00 12:29:33 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:26:05 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:18:42 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CC0@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: "'LF Group'" Subject: LF: The secret is out Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:18:39 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Now that the 'mystery signal' of last week has been identified and decoded by a number of people, I'll be transmitting Low Speed Sequential Multi Tone Hellschreiber again this weekend on 137.6kHz, this time with bandwidths of 20Hz and 2.5Hz. Time duration per pixel will be scaled in line with the frequency deviation in proportion to the tests last weekend, so around 0.3s / pixel for the 20 Hz version and 2.5s for the 2.5Hz version. These correspond to 19 seconds and 2.67 minutes per character respectively. Power will be in the 50 - 100 Watt region to the antenna, giving 5 - 10mW (or probably less) ERP. If anyone would like these parameters varied let me know on the other EMail account G4JNT@ARRL.ORG or via the reflector and I hope to be able to accomodate this. You can also try phoning on 01489 787424 but expect to get an answering machine as I'll be in the garden most of the day building a conservatory and getting irradiated by the RF fields from overhead ! Unfortunately, Dave and Mike, LSB is not an currently an option, so for now get a mirror / scroll vertically / practise reading back to front. I could alter the software in the future for this mode though, or even transmit USB and LSB simultaneously, one above the other. Presumably that becomes ISB. Three other fonts are available, a simple 5x7 font similar to the original Hellschreiber one, though reported by G3LDO to be not as good as the 8x8 I was using; and larger 8x14 and 8x16 fonts which probably have nothing to offer - on local strong signal copy anyway. Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2854 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 14:19:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 14:19:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 6789 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 14:17:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 14:17:03 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132wq3-0001Kb-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:11:15 +0100 Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 132wq1-0001KW-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:11:14 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id PAA20149; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:15:28 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 31210 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2000 15:05:51 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 16 Jun 2000 15:05:51 -0000 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id PAA27881; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:05:15 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma027825; Fri, 16 Jun 00 15:05:00 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:17:23 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:09:59 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CC5@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: EMail address correction Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:09:57 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: That should read g4jnt@arrl.net not .org as stated. Andy G4JNT >If anyone would like these parameters varied let me know on the other >EMail account .......... -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23184 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 07:50:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnus.force9.net) (195.166.128.27) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 07:50:29 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: (qmail 32259 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 07:43:50 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnus.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 07:43:50 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133DD3-0003S4-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 08:40:05 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from tele-post-20.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.20]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133DD2-0003Rz-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 08:40:04 +0100 Received: from telemetry.demon.co.uk ([194.222.19.114]) by tele-post-20.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 133DD1-000KBa-0K for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:40:03 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 08:38:58 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Tom Boucher" Subject: LF: Cut short in mid-QSO! MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike (32) Trial Version 3.05 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello LF Folk I don't know if Bob G8RW monitors this reflector, if so, apologies for disappearing mid QSO on 136KHz at 0715 Z this morning. We are having some strong winds and my antenna must have blown against a branch, arced and broken. So that's another job for this week-end! 73, Tom G3OLB From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26940 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 13:02:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 13:02:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 4293 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 13:02:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 13:02:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133I6n-000433-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:53:57 +0100 Received: from postfix2.free.fr ([212.27.32.74] ident=postfix) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133I6m-00042y-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:53:56 +0100 Received: from f5maf (toulouse-1-52-53.dial.proxad.net [213.228.52.53]) by postfix2.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id B1BB9741DC for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 14:53:43 +0200 (MEST) Message-ID: <000e01bfd85b$05c0acc0$3534e4d5@f5maf> From: "f5maf" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Cut short in mid-QSO! Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 14:53:21 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Tom I have listened you this morning on 136.750 at 07:15AM with good signal on 2meters loop and 10 meters vertical antenna. But I would like to record you but you had qrt (at about 07:20). Best 73 Marc F5MAF JN03PP -----Message d'origine----- De : Tom Boucher À : rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date : samedi 17 juin 2000 10:15 Objet : LF: Cut short in mid-QSO! >Hello LF Folk > >I don't know if Bob G8RW monitors this reflector, if so, apologies for >disappearing mid QSO on 136KHz at 0715 Z this morning. We are having >some strong winds and my antenna must have blown against a branch, arced >and broken. So that's another job for this week-end! > >73, Tom G3OLB > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9522 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 13:09:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 13:09:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 5134 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 13:09:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 13:09:39 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133IFF-000452-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 14:02:41 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from finch-post-12.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.41]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133IFE-00044x-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 14:02:40 +0100 Received: from alg.demon.co.uk ([194.222.171.80]) by finch-post-12.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 133IFC-0004F9-0C for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:02:38 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <394B7591.6A2DD533@alg.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 14:56:49 +0100 From: "Steve Rawlings" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Cut short in mid-QSO! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Tom, Bob doesn't monitor the reflector, but I have relayed your message to him. Bob sends his 73, and hopes to work you again soon. Regards to all, Steve GW4ALG From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28673 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 16:08:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnus.force9.net) (195.166.128.27) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 16:08:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 8042 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 16:04:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnus.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 16:04:19 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133L1M-0004PH-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:00:32 +0100 Received: from fortune-rwcmta.excite.com ([198.3.99.203] helo=fortune.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133L1L-0004Op-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:00:31 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by fortune.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000617155953.DNTO5274.fortune.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 08:59:53 -0700 Message-ID: <27819937.961257593908.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 08:59:53 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: The secret is out MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 213.120.56.53 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Andy, What I presume was the 20Hz bandwidth signal transmitted in the morning, was quite readable, but weak. How do we give reports for these transmissions? The 2.5Hz bandwidth signal was bright and clear on Spectran around 17.00 local. The following settings worked well for me: 0.32 Hz resolution (finest) Speed setting to second slot on scale from bottom. John, G4CNN, Caversham, Reading (Not up on the hill beside the BBC monitoring station, but down in a hollow, known locally as Bugs Bottom!) Rx: AOR 7030 (CW setting) Antenna: G3LNP loop, oriented East - West. _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19005 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 21:34:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 21:34:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 21721 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2000 21:32:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 17 Jun 2000 21:32:22 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133Q4c-00053z-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 22:24:14 +0100 Received: from post.interalpha.co.uk ([195.26.224.18] helo=post.interalpha.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133Q4b-00053u-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 22:24:13 +0100 Received: from g4jnt (sot-mod04.interalpha.net [195.26.225.4]) by post.interalpha.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA13362 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 22:31:31 +0100 Message-ID: <001d01bfd8a2$924bb580$04e11ac3@g4jnt> From: "Andy Talbot" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: The secret is out Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 22:25:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Tomorrow, I may run much lower power on 5Hz or 2.5Hz span. So if the signal appears much weaker than today's it will be because I'm using a 10 Watt amplifier module instead of the usual 250W job (throtted back to 130W today). Andy G4JNT From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12830 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2000 07:04:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 18 Jun 2000 07:04:56 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: (qmail 26605 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2000 07:05:01 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 18 Jun 2000 07:05:01 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133Z0U-0006E0-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2000 07:56:34 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133Z0S-0006Dv-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2000 07:56:33 +0100 Received: from telemetry.demon.co.uk ([194.222.19.114]) by anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 133Z0Q-000NAE-0W for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2000 07:56:30 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 07:55:32 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Tom Boucher" Subject: LF: Broken antennas MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike (32) Trial Version 3.05 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Thanks Steve for the QSP and thanks also to Marc and Alan for reports. I put my 1100 ft long wire back up but it's even lower than before. Quite difficult dis-entangling halyards and wires from trees especially when the wind is blowing hard and the trees are in full leaf! 73, Tom G3OLB From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10396 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2000 23:16:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 18 Jun 2000 23:16:47 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133o9V-0008Mh-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:06:53 +0100 Received: from tantalum.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.80] helo=tantalum) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133o9T-0008Mc-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:06:51 +0100 Received: from [62.7.50.71] (helo=default) by tantalum with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 133o9S-0006cc-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:06:50 +0100 Message-ID: <000901bfd979$9f955f20$4732073e@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "LF-Group" Subject: LF: DX Cluster spots for 17/18 June at GB7DXM Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:02:08 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi All, not a lot of activity heard here this weekend but maybe I was listening at the wrong time (I'm too lazy to get up early!). Static levels were fairly reasonable considering the very warm weather. Good solid 'O' signals on QRS on Saturday from Petr OK1FIG but then he was probably audible as well, also heard PA0BWL and DF0WD at good strength. LX1PD is a call I have not heard for a while which surfaced again this week. Out most of Sunday so no log. Good copy of Andy's 2.5Hz SMT Hell on Spectran. I am not sure but I suspect he was being copied further east as I saw "HELL ?" and later Petr and Marcus DF6NM discussing Hell on QRS/DFCW at 1630z. (Spectrogram 0.3Hz, 1000msec time scale) There was a reasonable catch on the cluster this week with one or two new calls helping Wolf out with postings. Note an HA6 posting ....does this mean Hungary is due to have the band released? I must admit to not having heard any F callsigns yet. Hopefully Brian's (CT1DRP) persistance in CT1 will pay off soon, before the November transatlatic schedules with luck. It might be worth quoting those dates to your authorities Brian just to show that there is international activity and experiments. Cluster spots below, 1800.0 slot still not usable here as it is full of inane stateside chatter via an internet cluster link. G3NYK de GB7DXM 18-Jun 2222Z > 136.5 OK1DTN 18-Jun-2000 1848Z now-like ever-vy gd 136.7 DK6NI 18-Jun-2000 1309Z cq 136.5 DJ2EY 18-Jun-2000 1121Z cq 136.9 OK1DTN 18-Jun-2000 1120Z cq 136.6 DF0WD 18-Jun-2000 1043Z 529 qso with dk6ni 539 137.0 PA0BWL 18-Jun-2000 1036Z in qso w DL1SAN 137.0 PA0BWL 18-Jun-2000 1029Z 529 cq 136.9 DF0WD 18-Jun-2000 1005Z cq 136.7 DJ2EY 18-Jun-2000 0936Z 559 cq 136.4 OK1DTN 18-Jun-2000 0911Z 549 cq 136.6 DK6NI 18-Jun-2000 0849Z 549 137.0 G3YXM 18-Jun-2000 0828Z vy strong on my magn. Loop 137.3 DF8ZR 18-Jun-2000 0807Z in qso with df6nm 136.5 DJ9IE 18-Jun-2000 0805Z in qso with oz8nj 136.3 DJ2LF 18-Jun-2000 0802Z cq 136.7 DL3FDO 18-Jun-2000 0800Z 136.9 OZ8NJ 18-Jun-2000 0720Z in qso with ok1fig 136.3 IK5ZPV 18-Jun-2000 0711Z in qso with ok1dtn 137.0 OK1FIG 18-Jun-2000 0704Z 136.7 OK1FIG 18-Jun-2000 0649Z 569 cq 136.3 HB2ASB 18-Jun-2000 0648Z 579 cq 137.0 G3OLB 17-Jun-2000 1313Z 136.8 OK1FIG 17-Jun-2000 1110Z 559 cq 136.6 DJ7RD 17-Jun-2000 0932Z 579 cq 136.6 DK6NI 17-Jun-2000 0823Z 539 just wkd 136.9 OK1DTN 17-Jun-2000 0610Z 559 cq 136.5 LX1PD 12-Jun-2000 1207Z 136.9 DL0FTZ/P 12-Jun-2000 0904Z 549 G3NYK de GB7DXM 18-Jun 2225Z > Cheers and 73 de Alan G3NYK JO02PB Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15836 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 08:01:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 08:01:21 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133wKI-0000zp-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:50:34 +0100 Received: from kerberos.telecom.cz ([194.228.2.35] helo=mail.core.telecom.cz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133wKG-0000zk-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:50:32 +0100 Received: from dell1.cz.gmc.net ([194.228.225.18]) by mail.core.telecom.cz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA16130 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:50:28 +0200 Received: from p (p.maly.cz.gmc.net [192.168.1.35]) by dell1.cz.gmc.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id NGWFM5AM; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:52:27 +0200 Message-ID: <006d01bfd9c3$501b9be0$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> From: "Petr Maly" To: "136 group" Subject: LF: Screen shot of Slow-HELL of DF6NM Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:52:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello LF'ers On Saturday I had cross-mode (Visual-CW/Slow-HELL) QSO with Marcus, DF6NM. Take a look to screenshot from Spectran: http://mujweb.cz/www/ok1fig/H_galler.htm I regret I missed LX1PD, new country for me. 73, Petr, OK1FIG From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2500 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 08:14:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 08:14:24 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133wXF-00013o-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:03:57 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from ds9.sci.fi ([195.74.0.54]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133wXE-00013g-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:03:56 +0100 Received: from default (MMMCMXXXV.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.165.35]) by ds9.sci.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA29220 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 11:03:47 +0300 (EET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20000619110358.007c7cb0@pop.saunalahti.fi> X-Sender: oh2lx@pop.saunalahti.fi (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 11:03:58 +0300 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?V=E4in=F6_Lehtoranta?= Subject: LF: Signal Strength Measurements by OH2LX, 19 June 2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Signal strength measurements of various LF stations by OH2LX: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Day ------------------ 12Jun 13Jun 14Jun 15Jun 16Jun 17Jun 18Jun MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN Time, UTC ------------ 2050- 2040- 2035- 2045- 2050- 2030- 2045- ------------------------------------------------------------------ kHz Stn d,km AZI Indicated ESH2 input, dBmW ------------------------------------------------------------------ 68.9 DHJ58? 1115, 242 -98 -103 -100 -103 -102 -96 -102 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 73.3 Rugby, 1825, 252, -104 -105 -106 -104 -105c -105c -103c ------------------------------------------------------------------ 75.0 HBG, 1992, 226, -104 -105 -107 -105 -107 -108 -105 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 77.5 DCF77, 1543, 228, -89 -92 -93 -90 -91 -94 -89 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 128.9 DCF49, 1544, 228, -97 -93 -93 -91 -93 -96 -94 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 138.8 DBF39, 1221, 226, -89 -89 -91 -89 -87 -92 -91 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 135.8 SXV, 2490, 182, -112 -109 -108 -113 -108 -107 -106 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 137.0 CFH, 5750, 295, Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil ------------------------------------------------------------------ (R&S ESH2/---- 10m coax----/1:10/-----15m wire-----): Noise level with antenna: with 200Hz IF BandWidth: -24..-20 dB(uV), -131..-127dBmW (varies with frq, qrm, qrn etc) ------------------------------------------------------------------ 73.3: - c = carrier not identified, assumed to be Rugby ------------------------------------------------------------------ End of message of 19th June 2000, 0800 UTC, from OH2LX ------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------- V.K.Lehtoranta, OH2LX, POBox 50, FIN-05401 Jokela, Finland ------ Tel: +358-9-4173965 ---- Fax: +358-9-4173961 ------ E-mail: vaiski@dlc.fi - alias: oh2lx@dlc.fi & oh2lx@sral.fi From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17207 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 09:01:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 09:01:22 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133xMU-0001Df-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:56:54 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 133xMT-0001DZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:56:53 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id KAA19238; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:01:11 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 14393 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 09:51:23 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 09:51:23 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id JAA03292; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:50:33 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma003168; Mon, 19 Jun 00 09:49:51 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:02:41 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:55:11 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CC8@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: "'LF Group'" Subject: LF: Very Slow Hell Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:55:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Yesterday (Sunday) I was transmitting a low power slow Hellschreiber beacon signal all day. Signal width was 2.5Hz / Pixel rate 2s on 137.6kHz. Power to the antenna was 6 Watts with ERP around 0.6mW. Did anyone see anything ? Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2874 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 12:33:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 12:33:01 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1340cJ-0001rE-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 13:25:27 +0100 Received: from fm215.facility.pipex.com ([194.131.104.225]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1340cI-0001r9-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 13:25:27 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from isis (userev67.uk.uudial.com [62.188.17.250]) by fm215.facility.pipex.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA16366 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 13:23:53 +0100 (BST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000619132434.009afeb0@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 13:26:57 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" Subject: Re: LF: Very Slow Hell In-reply-to: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CC8@pdw-mercury-1.der a.gov.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: At 09:55 19/06/00 +0100, you wrote: >Yesterday (Sunday) I was transmitting a low power slow Hellschreiber >beacon signal all day. Signal width was 2.5Hz / Pixel rate 2s on >137.6kHz. Power to the antenna was 6 Watts with ERP around 0.6mW. Did >anyone see anything ? Yes, received here OK but must say it's a bit impractical. I only have Spectrogram and to get the aspect ratio right I needed to have a 20000 mS scan time - far too long. Your 20 Hz on Saturday was far better and much quicker - 500 mS scan. Walter G3JKV - Dorking, IO91UF. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6828 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 17:28:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 17:28:16 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1345A1-0002nI-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 18:16:33 +0100 Received: from bucky-rwcmex.excite.com ([198.3.99.218] helo=bucky.excite.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1345A0-0002n2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 18:16:32 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from bubbles.excite.com ([199.172.153.29]) by bucky.excite.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id <20000619171600.FKJR7644.bucky.excite.com@bubbles.excite.com> for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:16:00 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <13330278.961434960098.JavaMail.imail@bubbles.excite.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:16:00 -0700 (PDT) From: "john sexton" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Very Slow Hell MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Excite Inbox X-Sender-Ip: 213.120.56.37 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Andy, I didn't have much time on Sunday, but did look briefly around 11.30 local. It was just visible, but very weak. Knowing what the letters were, made it possible to identify it. John, G4CNN _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27585 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 18:09:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 18:09:26 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1345tI-0002zx-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 19:03:20 +0100 Received: from mashie.force9.net ([195.166.128.30]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1345tH-0002zr-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 19:03:19 +0100 Received: (qmail 28089 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 18:11:32 -0000 Received: from ruin.servers.plus.net.uk (212.159.2.66) by mashie.force9.net with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 18:11:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 20004 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2000 18:05:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO picks) (212.159.21.18) by ruin.servers.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 19 Jun 2000 18:05:11 -0000 Message-ID: <002501bfda19$32253500$12159fd4@f9.net.uk> From: "Dave" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CC8@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> Subject: LF: Re: Very Slow Hell Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 19:07:13 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Andy. I did run Spectran at 0.086? setting and could plainly see the signal but far too stretched out due to my speed setting being too fast. As it had taken about an hour to build it up I didn't try again.... It would have been easily readable with the right settings although I could hear nothing. 73, Dave G3YXM. > Yesterday (Sunday) I was transmitting a low power slow Hellschreiber > beacon signal all day. Signal width was 2.5Hz / Pixel rate 2s on > 137.6kHz. Power to the antenna was 6 Watts with ERP around 0.6mW. Did > anyone see anything ? > > Andy G4JNT > > > -- > The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence > is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). > For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, > or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is > prohibited and may be unlawful. > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6536 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2000 07:56:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 20 Jun 2000 07:56:08 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134IjM-0005An-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:45:56 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134IjK-0005Ai-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:45:55 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id IAA26664; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:50:14 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 14209 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2000 08:40:22 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 20 Jun 2000 08:40:22 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id IAA23914; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:39:24 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma023866; Tue, 20 Jun 00 08:38:54 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:51:53 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:44:20 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CCC@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Very Slow Hell trial results Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:44:18 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: That was the idea of the low power transmission. It looks as if there may still be some work to be done on optimising the pixel duration against particular decoding software settings - Spectrogram does not seem particularly useful except for the widest version tried - and at 20Hz bandwidth this defeats the purpose I had in mind. It would be a difficult test to arange, but I wonder if there is any fair way to compare readability of Slow SMT Hell with Slow CW using equivalent bandwidth and equivalent time versions of both. Calculation should give most of the answers and needs doing anyway to find comparable speeds/bandwidths for a fair testing programme. Then perhaps I could transmit alternate modes throughout a day for some serious measurements. Walter, I suggest you get a copy of Spectan - Hi. Andy G4JNT >>beacon signal all day. Signal width was 2.5Hz / Pixel rate 2s on >>137.6kHz. Power to the antenna was 6 Watts with ERP around 0.6mW. >Yes, received here OK but must say it's a bit impractical. I only have >Spectrogram and to get the aspect ratio right I needed to have a 20000 >mS scan time - far too long. Your 20 Hz on Saturday was far better and >much quicker - 500 mS scan. Walter G3JKV >It was just visible, but very weak. Knowing what the letters were, made it >possible to identify it. John, G4CNN >I did run Spectran at 0.086? setting and could plainly see the signal but >far too stretched out due to my speed setting being too fast. As it had >taken about an hour to build it up I didn't try again.... >It would have been easily readable with the right settings although I could >hear nothing. Dave G3YXM. -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29978 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2000 13:59:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2000 13:59:55 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134OQo-0006La-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:51:10 +0100 Received: from front6.grolier.fr ([194.158.96.56]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134OQk-0006LV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:51:07 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from club-internet.fr (ppp-44-25-80.wly.club-internet.fr [213.44.25.80] (may be forged)) by front6.grolier.fr (8.9.3/No_Relay+No_Spam_MGC990224) with ESMTP id PAA10715 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:50:59 +0200 (MET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <394F7643.7AC83ACF@club-internet.fr> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:48:53 +0200 From: "M & S" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: fr,fr,es-ES MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: CFA Antenna: miraculous? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Information of interest: What is different about the CFA? As an example, a CFA only 21 feet (6.5 m) tall, located at Tanta in the center of Egypt, provides AM broadcast service at 1.16 MHz (258 Meters) to millions of people from Cairo north to the coast. Certified measurements provide evidence that this small CFA produces a radiated signal almost 6 dB stronger than the previous 1/4 wavelength vertical broadcast tower which was 211 feet (65 Meters) tall. To express the performance a different way >> with the tall tower, a 100,000 watt transmitter was required for the desired coverage. With the miniature CFA the same coverage was attained with the transmitter power reduced to 30,000 watts. As seen on: http://www.antennex.com/ 73, Mark, F6JSZ http://perso.club-internet.fr/sovergne From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5424 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2000 15:12:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2000 15:12:35 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134PXV-0006b6-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:02:09 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134PXT-0006b1-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:02:07 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id QAA01254; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:06:27 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 1285 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2000 15:56:35 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 20 Jun 2000 15:56:35 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id PAA28010; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:55:39 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma027963; Tue, 20 Jun 00 15:55:14 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:08:16 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:00:42 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CCD@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: CFA Antenna: miraculous? Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:00:34 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: The real question is, why was the quarter wave antenna worse, not why was the CFA so good. A 1/4 monopole can approach 100% efficiency and can be 3dB up on a dipole when erected properly - in which case any other single element antenna cannot have any MORE gain. As Egypt is surrounded by sand, doesn't it look like a ground conductivity issue destroying the efficiency of the conventional radiator. As the CFA is less dependant on a ground for termination of the Reactive fields it could just possibly be better in these circumstances. All the CFAs built and tested at higher freqs have never been as good as the dipoles or similar they were supposed to replace. In fact usually 6dB or more worse Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: M & S[SMTP:sovergne@club-internet.fr] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-20 14:48 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: CFA Antenna: miraculous? > > Information of interest: > > What is different about the CFA? As an example, a CFA only 21 feet > (6.5 > m) tall, located at Tanta in the center of Egypt, provides AM > broadcast > service at 1.16 MHz (258 Meters) to millions of people from Cairo > north > to the coast. Certified measurements provide evidence that this small > CFA produces a radiated signal almost 6 dB stronger than the previous > 1/4 wavelength vertical broadcast tower which was 211 feet (65 Meters) > tall. To express the performance a different way >> with the tall > tower, > a 100,000 watt transmitter was required for the desired coverage. With > the miniature CFA the same coverage was attained with the transmitter > power reduced to 30,000 watts. > > As seen on: > http://www.antennex.com/ > > 73, Mark, F6JSZ > http://perso.club-internet.fr/sovergne > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15086 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2000 20:29:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2000 20:29:34 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134UTQ-0007kR-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:18:16 +0100 Received: from front1.grolier.fr ([194.158.96.51]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134UTP-0007kM-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:18:15 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from club-internet.fr (ppp-44-70-236.wly.club-internet.fr [213.44.70.236]) by front1.grolier.fr (8.9.3/No_Relay+No_Spam_MGC990224) with ESMTP id WAA05245 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 22:18:12 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <394FD12E.5A0D349E@club-internet.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 22:16:54 +0200 From: "M & S" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: fr,fr,es-ES MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: RE: CFA Antenna: miraculous? References: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CCD@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Talbot Andrew a *crit : > > The real question is, why was the quarter wave antenna worse, not why > was the CFA so good. A 1/4 monopole can approach 100% efficiency and > can be 3dB up on a dipole when erected properly - in which case any > other single element antenna cannot have any MORE gain. Thank you, Andy. That DOES confirm what I thought. I just found this information on the Net and wondered if there was something extraordinary about it, just in case any lowfer had experimented the stuff... 73, Mark, F6JSZ Soon on the air: just a small problem with the antenna; JN04PX. "There was an owl who sat in an oak, The more he heard, the less he spoke, The more he spoke, the less he heard, Why not copy that wise old bird ?" --- From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16004 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2000 22:39:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 20 Jun 2000 22:39:15 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134WZC-00082z-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:32:22 +0100 Received: from tantalum.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.80] helo=tantalum) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134WZB-00082u-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:32:21 +0100 Received: from [213.1.178.148] (helo=default) by tantalum with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 134WZ8-0004HM-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:32:19 +0100 Message-ID: <000201bfdb07$2004c220$94b201d5@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: re CFA antennas Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 20:07:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Mark, I think we are all waiting for the proposed station on the I of Man to start transmission so we can compare it with the strength we received from the "two Daves and Graham" LF expedition. If you have not seen them there is a good exposition of the theory aspects on http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/D.Jefferies/poynting.html There was also a report of experiments done by or on behalf of John Belrose VE2CV. I do not have a site URL for this. John's e-mail address is given as john.belrose@crc.ca and a URL is given for the pictures and wire model as http://members.home.net/propagation/cfa.html This may lead to the text of the experimental report. These are not the sarcastic knocking copy that has been around but are reasoned reports saying that the claimed results have yet to be duplicated..........remember 'Cold Fusion' !! It could be the next breakthough but don't hold your breath. Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7849 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 08:06:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 08:06:44 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134fED-0000n2-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:47:17 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134fEC-0000mx-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:47:16 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from central.zetnet.co.uk (central.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.20]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id IAA19950 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:47:14 +0100 X-ZSender: g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk Message-ID: <2000062107512768199@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 07:51:27 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Peter Dodd" X-Mailer: ZIMACS Version 1.20c 10000836 Subject: LF: Re: CFA Antenna: miraculous? Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit The CFA antenna is made by Hately Antenna Technology (GM3HAT). Every month for many years now the RSGB has carried an advertisment for this company. (until May, when the advertisment said they were moving QTH and don't try and contact them until further notice) One outstanding characteristic of this antenna is the lack of information on it - after all these years. The other characteristic is the lack of comparitive test (review) information on it - after all these years. The Wireless World (now Electronics World + Wireless World) did several articles on the CFA but there was never enough information to duplicate it. Finally an article 'CFA - RIP' appeared in May 1993 (I have a copy), where a test version of the CFA radiation was -23dB relative to a reference dipole. However, the radiation level did not vary as the phase angle (using the phasing unit) was changed, therefore it was not performing as the theory said it should. The website promises information - at a price. Has any one used a CFA (or knows of someone who has used one) on any band? -- Regards, Peter, G3LDO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27020 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 08:49:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 08:49:21 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134g52-0000wj-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:41:52 +0100 Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134g51-0000we-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:41:51 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id KAA38362 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:41:49 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20000621103659.0af713fc@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:36:59 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: CFA Antenna: miraculous? In-reply-to: <394F7643.7AC83ACF@club-internet.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I have been looking for information on the CFA antenna and found some on internet. Links to them are found on my webpage : http://www.qsl.net/on7yd/136lit.htm (3 last articles) Who would not be interested in a compact antenna with the performance of a quarter-wave ? Most of us would even be more than happy to accept a loss of 20dB referred to a quarter-wave ... but : - If you convert 6.5m on 16Mhz to 136kHz, the antenna is still 55m high - Building (and adjusting) the antenna will be far more complicated and expensive than making a simple vertical or loop antenna. -So far I have not found any report that a CFA antenna has been built by a ham for any frequency. - While other antennas for 136kHz mainly consist of wires and are rather invisible, the CFA seems to be a massive construction, so a height of 5 to 10 meters will be the limit that most hams can achieve without getting into trouble with the neighbourgs and the authorities. Converted back to 1.16MHz this would mean a height of 1 meter or less. It might be a good idea to try it on topband or even on 80m, let's see what it is worth there. 73, Rik ON7YD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3234 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 08:54:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 08:54:39 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134gCb-0000xr-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:49:41 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134gCa-0000xm-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:49:40 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id JAA29662; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:53:56 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 2897 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 09:44:01 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 09:44:01 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id JAA11606; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:42:55 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma011538; Wed, 21 Jun 00 09:42:08 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:55:17 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:47:41 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CCF@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: CFA Antenna Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:47:37 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Can anyone identify the issue(s) of Wireless World where it first appeared. It would be interesting to extract them from the archives and read up on just what was published Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: Peter Dodd[SMTP:g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-21 07:51 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: Re: CFA Antenna: miraculous? > > > The CFA antenna is made by Hately Antenna Technology (GM3HAT). Every > month for many years now the RSGB has carried an advertisment for > this company. (until May, when the advertisment said they were moving > QTH and don't try and contact them until further notice) > > One outstanding characteristic of this antenna is the lack of > information on it - after all these years. > > The other characteristic is the lack of comparitive test (review) > information on it - after all these years. > > The Wireless World (now Electronics World + Wireless World) did > several articles on the CFA but there was never enough information to > duplicate it. Finally an article 'CFA - RIP' appeared in May 1993 (I > have a copy), where a test version of the CFA radiation was -23dB > relative to a reference dipole. However, the radiation level did not > vary as the phase angle (using the phasing unit) was changed, > therefore it was not performing as the theory said it should. > > The website promises information - at a price. > > Has any one used a CFA (or knows of someone who has used one) on any > band? > > > > -- > Regards, Peter, G3LDO > > > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10846 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 10:02:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 10:02:38 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134hDF-000198-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:54:25 +0100 Received: from mserv1d.u-net.net ([195.102.240.96]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134hDE-000193-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:54:24 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1d.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #36) id 134hFr-0003Ez-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:57:08 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:48:46 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:48:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Re: CFA Antenna: miraculous? In-reply-to: <2000062107512768199@zetnet.co.uk> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: The CFA was described in Radio Today magazine last October. In the Feb 2000 edition a phasing unit (essential to correct operation) for an 80m CFA was described. Back numbers are available from sales@rsgb.org.uk End of advert. Mike Dennison, G3XDV Publications Manager * RadCom * Ham Radio Today * GB2RS News * * RSGB Books and CDs * Radio Society of Great Britain Lambda House, Cranborne Road Potters Bar, Herts UK, EN6 3JE Tel: +44 (0) 1707 659015; Fax: +44 (0) 1707 645105 RSGB - UK AMATEUR RADIO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18817 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 11:13:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 11:13:55 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134iLK-0001Lx-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:06:50 +0100 Received: from ns0.to.cnr.it ([150.145.32.10] helo=ccs0.to.cnr.it) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134iLB-0001Lr-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:06:49 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from aldo (aldo.to.cnr.it [150.145.34.49]) by ccs0.to.cnr.it with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id NH2WYVGK; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:06:25 +0200 From: "Aldo Marchetto" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Organization: CNR To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:06:08 +1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: CFA Antenna: miraculous? In-reply-to: <3.0.1.16.20000621103659.0af713fc@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> References: <394F7643.7AC83ACF@club-internet.fr> Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I agree with you that CFAs seen in the literarture are too big for 135 kHz, and not enough efficient To avoid to be flamed, I states immediately that I'm not a supporter nor a detractor of CFA, but I'm only intrigued to see the results of accurate testing of the antenna >-So far I have not found any report that a CFA antenna has been >built by a ham for any frequency. On the contrary, I read on the Antennex magazine that some OM have built CFA for 40 and 80 m, someone are testing one for 160 m and someone also reported a CFA working in VHF (around 100 MHz) I had some interesting exchange of e-mail with some of them and I too I built one for 40/80 meters, 25 cm high. However in most cases (mine included) there was no measurement of the actual performance of the antenna. Most of the OM which built CFAs (including me) did some QSO in the range of 1000 km with the antenna indoor, reported satisfaction or unsatisfaction, but had no instrument or experience to make an accurate comparison among HF antennas. CFA antennas for the ham bands can also be purchased: in December 8th, 1999, G3SMW trasmitted a 10-W beacon Hellschreiber signal in 20 meters using a commercial Crossed-Field (Horizontal Monoband Loop) Antenna 10m above ground, and got several reports. I received his signal in Northern Italy with signals comparable to other G or PA stations running 100 watts to ground planes. However this is only an episodic report, and he was not trying to test the performance of this antenna (we were testing the relative performance of different Hellschreiber codes). I found only two papers reporting field strenght measurement, one from supporters and one from a dectractor of CFAs: 1) WA6HZT and N6YIP in Antennex (June 2000) report a loss of 24 db respect to the filed strenght predicted by models for a quarter wave monopole with 120 radials, for their 1.6-m high CFA on 160 meters. However they declare that this result is provisional, while they are still trying to build better tuning networks. 2) VE2CV in the same journal reports a radiation efficiency of about 1% for his 1.2-m high CFA on 80 meters In my opinion most of the debate is related on the claims that the CFA should perform as well or better than a quarter wave monopole. Probably it would be more proficient evaluate it against other antenna of similar height. It has also been supposed that CFA could represent an alternative way to feed a short, fat monopole and, in this case, it would be interesting to evaluate advantages and disadvantages of this alternative feeding. 73 Aldo IZ1ANT From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15108 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 12:05:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 12:05:57 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134j8p-0001Tt-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:57:59 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134j8n-0001To-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:57:58 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id NAA60876 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:57:52 +0200 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20000621135302.12f7ace4@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:53:02 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: CFA Antenna: miraculous? In-reply-to: References: <3.0.1.16.20000621103659.0af713fc@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> <394F7643.7AC83ACF@club-internet.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >I found only two papers reporting field strenght measurement, one >from supporters and one from a dectractor of CFAs: > >1) WA6HZT and N6YIP in Antennex (June 2000) report a loss of 24 db >respect to the filed strenght predicted by models for a >quarter wave monopole with 120 radials, for their 1.6-m high CFA on >160 meters. However they declare that this result is provisional, >while they are still trying to build better tuning networks. > >2) VE2CV in the same journal reports a radiation efficiency of about >1% for his 1.2-m high CFA on 80 meters This would mean that a 0.015 lambda CFA has a gain of about -20dB (2) and a 0.01 lambda CFA has a gain of about -24dB (1). Extrapolating this figures would lead to -30/-35dB for a 10m high CFA on 136kHz (about 0.005 lambda) and -35/-40dB for 6m high CFA. These are values that one can achieve with a decent T or inverted-L antenna of the same height. I do not doubt that the CFA principle works, but when the size of the antenna becomes very small (compared to wavelength) you will get high losses. For a short vertical these are mainly in the 'surrounding' (grounds, nearby objects) while for the CFA (as for the magnetic loop) these are probably within the antenna. This could make the CFA a valid alternative for those sufferering from very high groundloss. 73, Rik ON7YD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10552 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 14:01:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 14:01:47 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134kqc-0001nB-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 14:47:18 +0100 Received: from ulexite.lion-access.net ([212.19.217.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134kqb-0001n6-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 14:47:17 +0100 Received: from w8k3f0 (2410824834.dialin.freeler.nl [143.178.68.130]) by ulexite.lion-access.net (I-Lab) with SMTP id E6267FB00C for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:47:14 -0100 (GMT) Message-ID: <000401bfdb87$89a011a0$8244b28f@w8k3f0> From: "Dick Rollema" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CCF@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> Subject: LF: Re: Re: CFA Antenna Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:48:47 +0200 Organization: Freeler MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > Can anyone identify the issue(s) of Wireless World where it first > appeared. It would be interesting to extract them from the archives and > read up on just what was published > > Andy G4JNT > The article appeared in Electronics & Wireless World of March 1989: F.M. Kabbay, M.C. Hately and B.G. Stewart: "Maxwell's equations and the Crossed Field Antenna". 73, Dick Rollema, PA0SE From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27406 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2000 15:46:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2000 15:46:11 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134mOl-00026W-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:26:39 +0100 Received: from front2.grolier.fr ([194.158.96.52]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 134mOk-00026R-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:26:38 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from club-internet.fr (ppp-44-82-49.wmar.club-internet.fr [213.44.82.49]) by front2.grolier.fr (8.9.3/No_Relay+No_Spam_MGC990224) with ESMTP id RAA14992 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 17:26:32 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <3950DE60.A9647BEF@club-internet.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 17:25:48 +0200 From: "M & S" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: fr,fr,es-ES MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: CFA Antenna: miraculous? References: <3.0.1.16.20000621103659.0af713fc@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> <394F7643.7AC83ACF@club-internet.fr> <3.0.1.16.20000621135302.12f7ace4@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Rick, Hi all, I'll be constructing one of these antennas starting from next weekend. All the literature about it seem's so interesting that I will absolutely try one. I'll start with 160 meters and give you the results. Then, I'll try one for 136 kHz In the mean time, my full-size dipole has been repaired with success. Reception is very good. Just wait for that big signal from the south-west of France... 73, Mark, F6JSZ JN04PX http://perso.club-internet.fr/sovergne Rik Strobbe a *crit : > > >I found only two papers reporting field strenght measurement, one > >from supporters and one from a dectractor of CFAs: > > > >1) WA6HZT and N6YIP in Antennex (June 2000) report a loss of 24 db > >respect to the filed strenght predicted by models for a > >quarter wave monopole with 120 radials, for their 1.6-m high CFA on > >160 meters. However they declare that this result is provisional, > >while they are still trying to build better tuning networks. > > > >2) VE2CV in the same journal reports a radiation efficiency of about > >1% for his 1.2-m high CFA on 80 meters > > This would mean that a 0.015 lambda CFA has a gain of about -20dB (2) and a > 0.01 lambda CFA has a gain of about -24dB (1). > Extrapolating this figures would lead to -30/-35dB for a 10m high CFA on > 136kHz (about 0.005 lambda) and -35/-40dB for 6m high CFA. > These are values that one can achieve with a decent T or inverted-L antenna > of the same height. > > I do not doubt that the CFA principle works, but when the size of the > antenna becomes very small (compared to wavelength) you will get high > losses. For a short vertical these are mainly in the 'surrounding' > (grounds, nearby objects) while for the CFA (as for the magnetic loop) > these are probably within the antenna. This could make the CFA a valid > alternative for those sufferering from very high groundloss. > > 73, Rik ON7YD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15887 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2000 07:25:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 22 Jun 2000 07:25:30 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1351A5-0004Go-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:12:29 +0100 Received: from kerberos.telecom.cz ([194.228.2.35] helo=mail.core.telecom.cz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1351A3-0004Gj-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:12:27 +0100 Received: from dell1.cz.gmc.net ([194.228.225.18]) by mail.core.telecom.cz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA17102 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:12:22 +0200 Received: from p (p.maly.cz.gmc.net [192.168.1.35]) by dell1.cz.gmc.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id NM6YSSY2; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:14:26 +0200 Message-ID: <001b01bfdc19$7f9186c0$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> From: "Petr Maly" To: "136 group" Subject: LF: Reference sound for shrinking Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:14:25 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello LF'ers Does anybody have recorded sound of Visual-CW (as *.WAV with reasonable length) where the signal is not hearable by ear? Could we have such a reference sound to compare the results of processing? I would like to try to shrink the sound in SW like SoundForge or CoolEdit and compare results with the others, mainly with Bill. 73, Petr, OK1FIG From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15874 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2000 09:37:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 22 Jun 2000 09:37:31 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1353I7-0004aV-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:28:55 +0100 Received: from mserv1d.u-net.net ([195.102.240.96]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1353I5-0004aQ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:28:53 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1d.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #36) id 1353Ki-00000n-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:31:36 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:24:44 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:24:42 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Reference sound for shrinking In-reply-to: <001b01bfdc19$7f9186c0$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > Does anybody have recorded sound of Visual-CW (as *.WAV with reasonable > length) where the signal is not hearable by ear? Could we have such a > reference sound to compare the results of processing? I would like to try > to shrink the sound in SW like SoundForge or CoolEdit and compare results > with the others, mainly with Bill. > > 73, Petr, OK1FIG > Petr, On my web site is a .WAV of a transmission made in 1998 by the late Peter Bobeck as DA0LF. The Morse has a 20s dot period. It is 1.3Mb and lasts for 2 minutes, during which he sends a dash and a dot! He is not quite inaudible but certainly would have been unreadable at normal speeds as the signal is only just perceptible. The page also gives spectrograms traces of the signal - absolutely 100% with no noise. http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/da0lf621.htm 73 Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24305 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2000 10:40:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 22 Jun 2000 10:40:48 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1354JR-0004mZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:34:21 +0100 Received: from kerberos.telecom.cz ([194.228.2.35] helo=mail.core.telecom.cz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1354JQ-0004mU-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:34:20 +0100 Received: from dell1.cz.gmc.net ([194.228.225.18]) by mail.core.telecom.cz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA04338 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:34:15 +0200 Received: from p (p.maly.cz.gmc.net [192.168.1.35]) by dell1.cz.gmc.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id NM6YSSZW; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:37:04 +0200 Message-ID: <005001bfdc35$b3f7c480$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> From: "Petr Maly" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: Subject: Re: LF: Reference sound for shrinking Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:36:19 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Dennison To: Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 11:24 AM Subject: Re: LF: Reference sound for shrinking > > Does anybody have recorded sound of Visual-CW (as *.WAV with reasonable > > length) where the signal is not hearable by ear? Could we have such a > > reference sound to compare the results of processing? I would like to try > > to shrink the sound in SW like SoundForge or CoolEdit and compare results > > with the others, mainly with Bill. > > > > 73, Petr, OK1FIG > > > > Petr, > > On my web site is a .WAV of a transmission made in 1998 by the > late Peter Bobeck as DA0LF. The Morse has a 20s dot period. It is > 1.3Mb and lasts for 2 minutes, during which he sends a dash and a > dot! He is not quite inaudible but certainly would have been > unreadable at normal speeds as the signal is only just perceptible. > The page also gives spectrograms traces of the signal - absolutely > 100% with no noise. > > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/da0lf621.htm > > 73 > Thank you. It is not a typical sound we need to process, but I will try it also. In any way, it will be a big honour for me to process Peter Bobek's tranmission. Does he know....? 73, Petr > > Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29602 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2000 11:38:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 22 Jun 2000 11:38:45 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1355EV-0004w3-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:33:19 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mail.sci.fi ([195.74.0.41] helo=pyyhe.saunalahti.fi ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1355EU-0004vy-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:33:18 +0100 Received: from default (MMDCCXCVII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.45.97]) by pyyhe.saunalahti.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA05747 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:46:21 +0300 (EET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20000622143336.0087e3e0@pop.saunalahti.fi> X-Sender: oh2lx@pop.saunalahti.fi X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:33:36 +0300 To: "136 group" From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?V=E4in=F6_Lehtoranta?= Subject: LF: Reference sound for shrinking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: While writing histories - at the moment about the first Sputniks - let me recall a tape recording made by our friend Lenna, OH1NL on the 11th April 1964 of the 1st 144 MHz EME QSO. The original recording was played to numerous hams, some of them heard something but heard nothing at all. Much depends on the individual person's abilities to trace and 'decode' the A1 signal from below the noise, even with the same arrangement. Petr's suggestion is OK, would be interested to get such copy and still looking for Lenna's recording. 73 de Vaino, OH2LX (I have a copy of SM7CMY's thesis) Hello LF'ers Does anybody have recorded sound of Visual-CW (as *.WAV with reasonable length) where the signal is not hearable by ear? Could we have such a reference sound to compare the results of processing? I would like to try to shrink the sound in SW like SoundForge or CoolEdit and compare results with the others, mainly with Bill. 73, Petr, OK1FIG ---------------------------------------------------------- V.K.Lehtoranta, OH2LX, POBox 50, FIN-05401 Jokela, Finland ------ Tel: +358-9-4173965 ---- Fax: +358-9-4173961 ------ E-mail: vaiski@dlc.fi - alias: oh2lx@dlc.fi & oh2lx@sral.fi From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12567 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 09:22:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnus.force9.net) (195.166.128.27) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 09:22:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 29826 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 08:03:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnus.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 08:03:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135OHt-0007pM-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:54:05 +0100 Received: from kerberos.telecom.cz ([194.228.2.35] helo=mail.core.telecom.cz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135OHs-0007pH-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:54:04 +0100 Received: from dell1.cz.gmc.net ([194.228.225.18]) by mail.core.telecom.cz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA19520 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:54:01 +0200 Received: from p (p.maly.cz.gmc.net [192.168.1.35]) by dell1.cz.gmc.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id N39LKQQK; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:56:46 +0200 Message-ID: <003301bfdce8$94309b00$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> From: "Petr Maly" To: "136 group" Subject: LF: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:56:46 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello all Yesterday I spent a while with shrinking WAV's in SoundForge and CoolEdit. In the original file (da0lf), there is nothing heard by ear, but when the file is open in the Gram, the signal trace is clearly visible. I tried to shrink to 50% of the previous length as a first step. I could not hear anything either. When I opened the new file in the Gram, the signal disappeared completely. I guess the main reason is that unlike the Bill's method, this one doesn't lead to narrowing the bandwidth. Simply, it doesn't work. I must try Bill's software. 73, Petr, OK1FIG From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29844 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 10:11:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 10:11:35 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135Pfw-00084M-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:23:00 +0100 Received: from smtp4.ihug.co.nz ([203.109.252.5]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135Pfv-00084E-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:22:59 +0100 Received: from tractorb (p57-max1.chc.ihug.co.nz [207.214.13.249]) by smtp4.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id VAA27410 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:19:44 +1200 Message-ID: <001d01bfdcf3$823d91e0$f90dd6cf@tractorb> From: "Dave Brown" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <003301bfdce8$94309b00$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> Subject: LF: Re: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:14:41 +1200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: A good test .WAV file is the Z2 file that is still I think the best LOWFER beacon aural DX, a mainland USA LOWFER beacon copied in Hawaii on a portable setup. I have a copy of the wave file here but I believe it is available ex the K0LR web site. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29919 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 10:11:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 10:11:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135Ph7-00084Y-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:24:13 +0100 Received: from smtp4.ihug.co.nz ([203.109.252.5]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135Ph5-00084O-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:24:11 +0100 Received: from tractorb (p57-max1.chc.ihug.co.nz [207.214.13.249]) by smtp4.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id VAA27749 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:24:00 +1200 Message-ID: <002c01bfdcf4$14be25c0$f90dd6cf@tractorb> From: "Dave Brown" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <003301bfdce8$94309b00$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> Subject: LF: Re: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:18:54 +1200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: ---Second bit of message having hit the send button by accident!!!! The Z2 wav file is quite a challenge aurally as well. I had to listen to it several times before I could pick out the callsign. 73 Dave, ZL3FJ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4506 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 10:13:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 10:13:53 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135Pnt-00085U-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:31:13 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135Pnr-00084r-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:31:12 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id KAA03919; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:33:51 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 4808 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 10:23:48 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 10:23:48 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id KAA08320; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:22:38 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma008274; Fri, 23 Jun 00 10:22:14 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:35:42 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:28:01 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CD9@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:27:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: You will not be able to shrink files and make them audible without processing the .WAV file data considerably. Merely changing the sampling rate will do nothing to improve readability. The stages necessary are : 1) Take the off air signal recording at (say) 8000 Hz sampling rate 2) Digitally mix down to some arbitrarily low frequency by multiplying each waveform sample by COS and SIN samples of a digital local oscillator signal. 3) Filter to the necessary sub-Hz bandwidth centred on the signal of interest . This stage is what makes the signal 'audible' and brings it out of the noise. 4) Decimate this filtered data to a much lower sampling rate by just taking one sample out of every (say) 256 . Save as if it were a .WAV file giving the data sampled at 31.25 Hz. Choose a decimated sampling rate adequate to meet the Nyquist criteria of the bandpass filtered signal 5) Re label the .WAV file to make it 'think' the sampling rate is 8000Hz and replay. The result will be a tone centred on 256 * the mixed down frequency with a bandwidth 256 * the filtered bandwidth. All the numbers can of course be changed arbitrarily provided teh rules for sampling and Nyquist are adhered to. As you can see, the process is not as straighforward as some have lead to believe on this reflector. For anyone contemplating writing software to do this, note that stages 3) and 4) can be taken together - if using an FIR filter, the filtering process needs to be done for each decimated sample only - this saves considerable processing overhead for the long filter tap lengths necessary I have software to do this process for other (non-amateur) signal analysis purposes and use an intermediate I/Q file format where signals are first mixed down to zero centre frequency and stored in their complex form with a spectrum ranging from minus to plus half the sampling rate. Processing is then more straightforward as bandpass filtering becomes lowpass etc. After decimation a final conversion to .WAV format is then made and the tone frequency and false sampling rate can be set arbitrarily. The most fascinating signal produced this way was a Dopplergram of a carrier on 3.572MHz recorded overnight and played back 500 times faster. The ionospheric Doppler shifts and multipath result in sounds not unlike those of Whales talking ! Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: Petr Maly[SMTP:p.maly@gmc.net] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-23 08:56 > To: 136 group > Subject: LF: Shrinking sounds - fiasco > > Hello all > Yesterday I spent a while with shrinking WAV's in SoundForge and > CoolEdit. > In the original file (da0lf), there is nothing heard by ear, but when > the > file is open in the Gram, the signal trace is clearly visible. I tried > to > shrink to 50% of the previous length as a first step. I could not hear > anything either. When I opened the new file in the Gram, the signal > disappeared completely. I guess the main reason is that unlike the > Bill's > method, this one doesn't lead to narrowing the bandwidth. Simply, it > doesn't > work. I must try Bill's software. > > 73, Petr, OK1FIG > > > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25558 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 11:42:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 11:42:54 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135RIC-0008Nb-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:06:36 +0100 Received: from ds9.sci.fi ([195.74.0.54]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135RIB-0008Mq-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:06:36 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from DCCCXXI.hdyn.saunalahti.fi (DCCCXXI.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.74.25.221]) by ds9.sci.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA15414 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:03:40 +0300 (EET DST) From: "Paul Keinanen" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:04:52 +0300 Message-ID: References: <003301bfdce8$94309b00$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> In-reply-to: <003301bfdce8$94309b00$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:56:46 +0200, "Petr Maly" wrote: >Hello all >Yesterday I spent a while with shrinking WAV's in SoundForge and CoolEdit. >In the original file (da0lf), there is nothing heard by ear, but when the >file is open in the Gram, the signal trace is clearly visible. I tried to >shrink to 50% of the previous length as a first step. I could not hear >anything either. When I opened the new file in the Gram, the signal >disappeared completely. Just a check, but what method did you use to shrink these files ? Any pesky lossy psychoacoustic compression method such as MP3, Musicam etc. is definitely NOT suitable for compressing such files. The idea with all the psychoacoustic compression is to remove all the data that is not going to be _heard_ due to masking by a strong nearby signal or by wideband noise (as in this case). If you use some kind of compression, make sure that you are using some _lossless_ compression method. Paul OH3LWR From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26761 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 12:55:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 12:55:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135SrN-00007p-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:47:01 +0100 Received: from ds9.sci.fi ([195.74.0.54]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135SrM-00007k-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:47:01 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from DCCCXLVIII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi (DCCCXLVIII.hdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.74.25.248]) by ds9.sci.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA16626 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:46:59 +0300 (EET DST) From: "Paul Keinanen" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:48:12 +0300 Message-ID: References: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CD9@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> In-reply-to: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CD9@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:27:59 +0100, Talbot Andrew wrote: >1) Take the off air signal recording at (say) 8000 Hz sampling rate >2) Digitally mix down to some arbitrarily low frequency >3) Filter to the necessary sub-Hz bandwidth centred on the signal >4) Decimate this filtered data to a much lower sampling rate by >just taking one sample out of every (say) 256 . >For anyone contemplating writing software to do this, note that stages >3) and 4) can be taken together - if using an FIR filter, the filtering >process needs to be done for each decimated sample only - this saves >considerable processing overhead for the long filter tap lengths >necessary If you plan to combine steps 3) and 4) by doing first decimating and then narrow band (sub-Hz) filtering, shouldn't you low pass filter the signal produced by the mixdown at 2) to have a bandwidth less than 15 Hz for the final 31.25 Hz sample rate to meet the Nyquist criteria ? Paul OH3LWR From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6830 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 13:15:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 13:15:48 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135TBP-0000ET-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:07:43 +0100 Received: from kerberos.telecom.cz ([194.228.2.35] helo=mail.core.telecom.cz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135TBO-0000EO-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:07:42 +0100 Received: from dell1.cz.gmc.net ([194.228.225.18]) by mail.core.telecom.cz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA10873 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:07:36 +0200 Received: from p (p.maly.cz.gmc.net [192.168.1.35]) by dell1.cz.gmc.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id N39LKQSY; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:10:24 +0200 Message-ID: <012001bfdd14$64ccefe0$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> From: "Petr Maly" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <003301bfdce8$94309b00$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> Subject: Re: LF: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:10:24 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Paul, you haven't read the previous messages, have you. We don't talk about compressing sound files. Petr, OK1FIG ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Keinanen To: Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 1:04 PM Subject: Re: LF: Shrinking sounds - fiasco > On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 09:56:46 +0200, "Petr Maly" > wrote: > > >Hello all > >Yesterday I spent a while with shrinking WAV's in SoundForge and CoolEdit. > >In the original file (da0lf), there is nothing heard by ear, but when the > >file is open in the Gram, the signal trace is clearly visible. I tried to > >shrink to 50% of the previous length as a first step. I could not hear > >anything either. When I opened the new file in the Gram, the signal > >disappeared completely. > > Just a check, but what method did you use to shrink these files ? > > Any pesky lossy psychoacoustic compression method such as MP3, Musicam > etc. is definitely NOT suitable for compressing such files. The idea > with all the psychoacoustic compression is to remove all the data that > is not going to be _heard_ due to masking by a strong nearby signal or > by wideband noise (as in this case). > > If you use some kind of compression, make sure that you are using some > _lossless_ compression method. > > Paul OH3LWR > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13560 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 13:34:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 13:34:27 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135TWY-0000Hh-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:29:34 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135TWW-0000Hc-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:29:33 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id OAA12502; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:33:56 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 30816 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 14:23:53 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 14:23:53 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id OAA10053; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:22:41 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma009987; Fri, 23 Jun 00 14:22:06 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:35:37 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:27:55 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CDC@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: Re: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:27:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Well, the way I do it is to use a mixed down frequency centred on zero and use low pass filtering to give bandpass when mixed back up for listening. As described the method would need some low pass filtering as part of the initial mixing down process. Filtering may well also be needed in the final upconversion process Andy >>3) and 4) can be taken together - if using an FIR filter, the filtering >>process needs to be done for each decimated sample only - this saves >>considerable processing overhead for the long filter tap lengths >>necessary > > >If you plan to combine steps 3) and 4) by doing first decimating and >then narrow band (sub-Hz) filtering, shouldn't you low pass filter the >signal produced by the mixdown at 2) to have a bandwidth less than 15 >Hz for the final 31.25 Hz sample rate to meet the Nyquist criteria ? > >Paul OH3LWR -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6340 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 15:39:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 15:39:55 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135VRV-0000d0-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:32:29 +0100 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.111] helo=gadolinium) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135VRU-0000cv-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:32:28 +0100 Received: from [62.6.88.162] (helo=default) by gadolinium with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 135VRS-0004GG-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:32:27 +0100 Message-ID: <000e01bfdd27$ee3866c0$a258063e@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: CFH and solar event?? Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:21:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi All, as a result of some converstaions with Brian CT1DRP I have determined that CFH the Canadian Navy station located at Halifax in Nova Scotia is back on air again. The reason I missed it, was that at this time of year it only becomes 'visible' after about 2400z. A couple of nights monitoring has confirmed to my satisfaction that the FSK (I think!) signal on 137 is our old friend, back on a new state-of-the-art transmitter. The profile of the appearance and peaks correlates well with the darkness path and what we know from monitoring earlier in the year. The modulation looks different to that which we saw transmitted between Jan 2000 and its switch off in May. It now looks more like the signal I saw in the first half of 1999 before it was switched off at the end of August. So far so good......now for the real excitement!! By chance at 1449z today I noticed that there was an FSK signal visible on FFTDSP4 on exactly 137.00 +/_42.5 Hz shift FSK. I dont know when it appeared first but by 1459z is had faded into the noise at this location. This looks very much like flare activity that has been reported before by Larry I think. Does anyone have the solar information. I suspect I missed anything up to 20 to 30 minutes of the event, which would put the particle cloud arrival at about 1420z to 1430, probably timing the event on the sun to sometime Wednesday. Ironically the only station heard on the band was G8RW pumping away unanswered CQs. Now that CFH is back it looks as though we might have a warning signal of these events if we can get reports of the likely flares posted to the reflector in time. Cheers de Alan G3NYK JO02PB Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7656 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 20:53:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 20:53:52 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135aKU-0001PH-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:45:34 +0100 Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au ([203.26.10.16]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135aKS-0001PC-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 21:45:33 +0100 Received: from steve (ppp149.dyn154.pacific.net.au [210.23.154.149]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA19726 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 06:45:26 +1000 Message-ID: <009f01bfdd54$8e6c0b20$0301a8c0@steve> From: "Steve Olney" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <394F7643.7AC83ACF@club-internet.fr> Subject: LF: Re: CFA Antenna: miraculous? Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 06:49:36 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: G'day All, Here in Sydney Australia we have (had) a CFA installation in commercial use. I have done relative FS measurements (single point) at a distance of 60Km and can report that the CFA antenna is NOT working as the inventors say it will. The signal (giving all advantage to the CFA) is about 8dB down on similar standard antenna radiating stations. The facts (and these are not disputed by anyone - only ignored) are: - that the antenna was designed, constructed, tuned and re-tuned by one of the inventors. (No faulty installation one would have to assume). - the station power had to be reduced from its allowed 400W to 200W due to it interfering with nearby services. (CFA is supposed to be an antenna with little near-field interaction). - the station owners reconfigured the antenna to be fed as a standard short fat monopole because they obtained an increased FS with configuration as against the "superior" CFA. - the station is in the expensive process of moving their transmitting site elsewhere to use a standard antenna and is offering the CFA antenna to any sucker - sorry, buyer. CFA - miraculous? Certainly, unfortunately I don't believe in miracles - only repeatable measurements :-) 73s Steve Olney (VK2ZTO/AXSO - QF56IK : Lat -33 34 07, Long +150 44 40) ============================================= HomePage URLs: http://www.qsl.net/vk2zto http://www.zeta.org.au/~ollaneg Containing:- Laser Comms DX LF Experimentation Amateur Radio Astronomy ============================================= From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25018 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 21:51:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 21:51:37 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135bFH-0001YR-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 22:44:15 +0100 Received: from mail2.wwisp.com ([207.98.230.22] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135bFF-0001YM-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 22:44:14 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from les (adsl-209.wwisp.net [207.98.240.109]) by mail2.wwisp.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id QAA03930; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:44:02 -0500 (CDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: les@highnoonfilm.com Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20000623164605.007b0370@highnoonfilm.com> X-Sender: les@highnoonfilm.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:46:05 -0500 To: lowfer@qth.net Subject: LF: LFCC Award Proposal Cc: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH A LOW FREQUENCY CENTURY CLUB AWARD (LFCC) By Les Rayburn, KT4OZ June 23, 2000 Objective: To outline a set of suggested guidelines for the establishment of an award targeted at the users of the Low Frequency (Below 500Khz) spectrum. This award would encourage more activity on LF, and spur users to pursue multiple endorsements. Governing Body: Ideally, an LF organization like the Longwave Club of America. Failing that alternate bodies might include AMRAD, RGSB, or ARRL. Award: Certificate, with endorsement stickers. Program Brief: This award would be open to amateur radio operators, lowfers, longwave listeners, and maritime operators. Operators would be required to submit QSL cards, or other verification proof to the governing body to be checked for completeness and accuracy. The decision of the governing body would be final and not available for review. Certificates would be numbered beginning with LFCC #1 (* See Note Below) Certificates to be awarded according to the guidelines below: 0-100Khz (VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify reception of stations in 25 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 25 stations. 76Khz (Amateur VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify two way contacts with or reception of stations in 10 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 10 grid squares. Amateurs who operate in the 76Khz range would be required to provide proof of either reception of their station, other stations, or two way contacts to qualify. No contacts with non amateur stations can count towards this endorsement. LF Listeners would receive the Amateur VLF DX Endorsement. 136Khz (Amateur LF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify two way contacts with or reception of stations in 25 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 25 grid squares. Amateurs who operate in the 136Khz range would be required to provide proof of either reception of their station, other stations, or two way contacts to qualify. No contacts with non amateur stations can count towards this endorsement. LF Listeners would receive the Amateur LF DX Endorsement. 160-190Khz (Lowfer Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who can verify reception of their LF beacon in at least 10 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 5 grid squares. LF Listeners (including beacon operators) could also receive the Lowfer DX Endorsement for reception of lowfer beacons in at least 5 grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 5 grid squares. 100Khz-500Khz (LF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify reception of stations in at least 100 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 50 grid squares. This stations could include any combination of NDB, TWIB, Maritime stations, broadcasting, etc. Basic Rules: Verification could be in the form of a QSL card, verification letter, or other supporting documentation. The governing body would appoint a chairman to inspect and return these verifications. Any operator submitting false or suspect documentation will have those cards marked by the Chairman and their application of LFCC returned. There is no appeal. Operators must resubmit application without those documents judged to be false or suspect. Basic costs would be covered in the application fee (Suggestion $10-$20). Contacts and receptions must have occurred on or before 1980 (I doubt that reliable frequency listings exist much before this date.) Comments: Many LF operators would already qualify for this award. In the case of veteran NDB dx'ers they might even qualify for several endorsement stickers! But for many of us, it would represent a goal that was realistic and achievable...but difficult enough to encourage effort. There are many out there who object to "paper-chasing" of any kind on the low frequencies, and this is understandable. However, if we hope to see amateur allocations grow and foster in this band, activity is what we need. Also many of us Lowfers do not have even a single serious LF listener within the normal range of our stations, growth is important in these areas too. I would further suggest that honorary LFCC's be granted to recognize those pioneers of the band who are no longer living or inactive. For example, Ken Cornell, or Vince Pinto. Comments are welcome. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21472 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 22:23:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 22:23:17 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135bmD-0001fD-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 23:18:17 +0100 Received: from front2.grolier.fr ([194.158.96.52]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135bmB-0001f8-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 23:18:16 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from club-internet.fr (ppp-44-28-20.wmar.club-internet.fr [213.44.28.20]) by front2.grolier.fr (8.9.3/No_Relay+No_Spam_MGC990224) with ESMTP id AAA03118 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:18:10 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <3953E1E3.8FFB68D@club-internet.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 00:17:13 +0200 From: "M & S" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: fr,fr,es-ES MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: LFCC Award Proposal References: <3.0.3.32.20000623165020.007e79d0@highnoonfilm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Les, Your proposal is very interesting. However, the French edition of CQ magazine has already proposed the LFCC and the award is supposed to be available diring autumn this year... The brand "LFCC" is now a trademark (yes, we are 'commercial' guys... 73, Mark, F6JSZ P.S. We formerly did a survey on this mailing list, and response was quite positive. les@highnoonfilm.com a *crit : > > > > PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH A LOW FREQUENCY CENTURY CLUB AWARD (LFCC) > By Les Rayburn, KT4OZ > June 23, 2000 > > Objective: To outline a set of suggested guidelines for the establishment > of an award > targeted at the users of the Low Frequency (Below 500Khz) spectrum. This > award would > encourage more activity on LF, and spur users to pursue multiple endorsements. > > Governing Body: Ideally, an LF organization like the Longwave Club of > America. Failing that > alternate bodies might include AMRAD, RGSB, or ARRL. > > Award: Certificate, with endorsement stickers. > > Program Brief: This award would be open to amateur radio operators, > lowfers, longwave listeners, > and maritime operators. Operators would be required to submit QSL cards, or > other verification proof to the governing body to be checked for > completeness and accuracy. > The decision of the governing body would be final and not available for > review. > > Certificates would be numbered beginning with LFCC #1 (* See Note Below) > > Certificates to be awarded according to the guidelines below: > > 0-100Khz (VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who > could verify > reception of stations in 25 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each > additional 25 stations. > > 73Khz (Amateur VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators > who could verify two way contacts with or > reception of stations in 10 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each > additional 10 grid squares. > > Amateurs who operate in the 73Khz range would be required to provide proof > of either reception of their > station, other stations, or two way contacts to qualify. No contacts with > non amateur stations can count towards > this endorsement. LF Listeners would receive the Amateur VLF DX Endorsement. > > 136Khz (Amateur LF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators > who could verify two way contacts with or > reception of stations in 25 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each > additional 25 grid squares. > > Amateurs who operate in the 136Khz range would be required to provide proof > of either reception of their > station, other stations, or two way contacts to qualify. No contacts with > non amateur stations can count towards > this endorsement. LF Listeners would receive the Amateur LF DX Endorsement. > > 160-190Khz (Lowfer Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators > who can verify reception of their > LF beacon in at least 10 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each > additional 5 grid squares. > > LF Listeners (including beacon operators) could also receive the Lowfer DX > Endorsement for reception of lowfer > beacons in at least 5 grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 5 grid > squares. > > 100Khz-500Khz (LF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators > who could verify reception of stations in > at least 100 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 50 > grid squares. > > This stations could include any combination of NDB, TWIB, Maritime > stations, broadcasting, etc. > > Basic Rules: Verification could be in the form of a QSL card, verification > letter, or other supporting documentation. The > governing body would appoint a chairman to inspect and return these > verifications. Any operator submitting > false or suspect documentation will have those cards marked by the Chairman > and their application of LFCC > returned. There is no appeal. Operators must resubmit application without > those documents judged to be > false or suspect. > > Basic costs would be covered in the application fee (Suggestion $10-$20). > > Contacts and receptions must have occurred on or before 1980 (I doubt that > reliable frequency listings > exist much before this date.) > > Comments: Many LF operators would already qualify for this award. In the > case of veteran NDB dx'ers > they might even qualify for several endorsement stickers! But for many of > us, it would represent > a goal that was realistic and achievable...but difficult enough to > encourage effort. > > There are many out there who object to "paper-chasing" of any kind on the > low frequencies, and this > is understandable. However, if we hope to see amateur allocations grow and > foster in this band, > activity is what we need. Also many of us Lowfers do not have even a single > serious LF listener > within the normal range of our stations, growth is important in these areas > too. > > I would further suggest that honorary LFCC's be granted to recognize those > pioneers > of the band who are no longer living or inactive. For example, Ken Cornell, > or Vince Pinto. > > Comments are welcome. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19901 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 22:47:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 22:47:43 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135cAC-0001iE-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 23:43:04 +0100 Received: from smtp13.bellglobal.com ([204.101.251.52]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135cAB-0001i9-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 23:43:03 +0100 Received: from server1 (Kingston-ppp64656.sympatico.ca [216.208.85.37]) by smtp13.bellglobal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA18751 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 18:46:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <004101bfdd63$4d8eacc0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: CFH and solar event?? Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 18:30:57 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Alan and LF group: >now for the real excitement!! By chance at 1449z today >I noticed that there was an FSK signal visible on FFTDSP4 on exactly 137.00 >+/_42.5 Hz shift FSK. I dont know when it appeared first but by 1459z is had >faded into the noise at this location. This looks very much like flare >activity that has been reported before by Larry I think. Does anyone have >the solar information. Yes! from the IPS message IPS FLARE ALERT - PART B ESTIMATED END TIME OF FLARE ISSUE TIME: Sat Jun 24 00:45:48 EST 2000 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Current X-ray Flux : 1.79e-05 (M1.8) Maximum X-ray Flux of 2.89e-05 (M2.9) at 14:29 UT Estimated Flare End (below M1.0 level) at 14:55 UT Further Information Will Be Issued At the End of the Event ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ And yes, CFH is back on, loud here of course. There was also an event earlier in the day, see following IPS FLARE ALERT - PART C PRELIMINARY FLARE DETAILS AT END OF FLARE ISSUE TIME: Fri Jun 23 14:20:38 EST 2000 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Approximate Flare Start : 23-06-2000 0359 UT Approximate Flare Maximum: 23-06-2000 0409 UT at Flux M 2.3 Approximate Flare End : 23-06-2000 0419 UT ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ So we might think that it took some 10 hours for the faster material to get here, or was it the real fast stuff the occured as you heard the signal? Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19900 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2000 10:20:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 24 Jun 2000 10:20:39 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135mqv-00036X-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:07:53 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135mqu-00036S-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:07:53 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from central.zetnet.co.uk (central.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.20]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id LAA08582 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:07:51 +0100 X-ZSender: g3ldo@zetnet.co.uk Message-ID: <2000062410122668199@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 10:12:26 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Peter Dodd" X-Mailer: ZIMACS Version 1.20c 10000836 Subject: LF: Re: Sleep mode antenna Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Steve Olney said > Here in Sydney Australia we have (had) a CFA installation in commercial use. > I have done relative FS measurements (single point) at a distance of 60Km > and can report that the CFA antenna is NOT working as the inventors say it will. In my early days of Ham radio I visited a radio ham who used one of those old metal spring double beds as an antenna. The bed was connected to the hot end of the ATU and the other to the water pipe of a sink that was also in the room. As I recall he seemed to work around the UK on 80m using it. I called it the Sleep Mode Antenna (SMA). The Electronics World and Wireless World articles referring tothe CFA antenna (I think G4JNT asked) are: Maxwell's Equations and the Crossed Field Antenna, March 1989 The Crossed Field Antenna in Practice, Nov 1989 CFA Experiments, March 1990 CFA Working Assumption, Dec 1990 CFA-RIP, May 1993 The last article is a documented project, part of a final year Electronic and Electrical Engineering degree course project, by Colin Davis to test the CFA antenna. His conclusion disputes the hypothesis behind the CFA antenna and cast doubts on its performance claims. -- Regards, Peter, G3LDO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1573 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2000 10:32:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 24 Jun 2000 10:32:46 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135n3J-00038O-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:20:41 +0100 Received: from mail1.isys.net ([193.96.224.45]) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135n3I-00038J-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:20:40 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from k [195.64.97.124] by mail1.isys.net with esmtp (Exim 1.73 #1) id 135nAt-0006Em-00; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 12:28:32 +0200 From: "Klaus von der Heide" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 12:23:09 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Re: Shrinking sounds - fiasco In-reply-to: References: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CD9@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: From: Paul Keinanen To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: Shrinking sounds - fiasco Date sent: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:48:12 +0300 Send reply to: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:27:59 +0100, Talbot Andrew > wrote: > > > >1) Take the off air signal recording at (say) 8000 Hz sampling rate > > >2) Digitally mix down to some arbitrarily low frequency > > >3) Filter to the necessary sub-Hz bandwidth centred on the signal > > >4) Decimate this filtered data to a much lower sampling rate by > >just taking one sample out of every (say) 256 . > > >For anyone contemplating writing software to do this, note that stages > >3) and 4) can be taken together - if using an FIR filter, the filtering > >process needs to be done for each decimated sample only - this saves > >considerable processing overhead for the long filter tap lengths > >necessary > > > If you plan to combine steps 3) and 4) by doing first decimating and > then narrow band (sub-Hz) filtering, shouldn't you low pass filter the > signal produced by the mixdown at 2) to have a bandwidth less than 15 > Hz for the final 31.25 Hz sample rate to meet the Nyquist criteria ? > > Paul OH3LWR > Yes, a decimation must be preceded by a decimation filter. The output of this filter is only needed at the decimated rate. So, you will compute the FIR algorithm at the decimated rate. But the input buffer is at the full sample rate. And this full rate is the design rate of the filter. Since the pass band and the stop band are very narrow only very few coefficients are necessary. Usually halfband filters are used with less than 10 non vanishing coefficients. Interpolation filters have to run at the up-sampled output rate. If the alias-suppression must be the same as with the decimation then the interpolation is the most costly operation of the filter. I made a universal multirate filter for adjustable bandwidth 0.01 Hz ... 3kHz at -130 dB and adjustable input and output frequencies running on the DSP56002EVM in real time. This filter uses a very efficient bandpass decimation and interpolation with halfband filters. It is available on request. If you have MATLAB (Student Edition or full, Ver. 5.0 or higher) an interactive DSP-Lecture including multirate filter design (Chapter 13) is available on request. 73 de Klaus, DJ5HG From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11740 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2000 11:10:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 24 Jun 2000 11:10:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135nlP-0003Ek-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 12:06:15 +0100 Received: from ds-img-rel-3.compuserve.com ([149.174.206.154] helo=spdmraac.compuserve.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135nlN-0003Ef-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 12:06:14 +0100 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by spdmraac.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-REL-1.3) id HAA23743 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 07:05:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dave (mfs-pci-bqe-vty73.as.wcom.net [212.211.0.73]) by spdmraac.compuserve.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SUN-REL-1.3) with SMTP id HAA23712 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 07:05:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <002a01bfddcc$143ef380$4900d3d4@dave> From: "Dave Sergeant" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000e01bfdd27$ee3866c0$a258063e@default> Subject: LF: Re: CFH and solar event?? Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:52:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >From Dave G3YMC For your information, CFH was audible at S5 on Thursday 22nd June at 0600z, some 2 hours after local sunrise. This would be before the recent storms, so it may indicate that CFH can be heard at all sorts of unexpected times. Perhaps their recent engineering work has increased their signal? Cheers Dave dsergeant@iee.org http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/sergeantd From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1353 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2000 22:00:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 24 Jun 2000 22:00:56 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135xqE-0004Uv-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 22:51:54 +0100 Received: from post.interalpha.co.uk ([195.26.224.18] helo=post.interalpha.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135xqD-0004Uq-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 22:51:53 +0100 Received: from g4jnt (sot-mod17.interalpha.net [195.26.225.17]) by post.interalpha.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA03799 for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 23:00:12 +0100 Message-ID: <004201bfde26$9cc2d140$11e11ac3@g4jnt> From: "Andy Talbot" To: "LF Group" Subject: LF: SMT Hell Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 22:53:19 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: For information, I am transmitting a 2.5 Hz wide SMT Hell signal continuously on 137.6kHz with pixel duration 2s. Use Spectran at 0.031 Hz resolution and about 40 - 50% speed, averaging off. Power output is 5 Watts RF to the antenna, about -33dBW ERP. However, there may be a short break sometime tomorrow (Sunday) while I re-route the coax feed to the antenna. Andy G4JNT From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12442 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 09:49:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 09:49:12 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1368rX-00062A-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:37:59 +0100 Received: from smtp01.wxs.nl ([195.121.6.61]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1368rW-000625-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:37:58 +0100 Received: from nl9222tvtref.nl ([195.121.219.64]) by smtp01.wxs.nl (Netscape Messaging Server 3.61) with ESMTP id AAA6E40 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 11:37:26 +0200 From: "Ko Versteeg" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: SMT Hell Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 11:35:32 +0200 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <7736882DE8D.AAA6E40@smtp01.wxs.nl> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Andy.. Using SpectroGram here, any idea what the best value for the time scale in msec is. Running it at 3000Msec now but traces are very weak. 73 de Ko, NL9222 ---------- > From: Andy Talbot > To: LF Group > Subject: LF: SMT Hell > Date: Saturday, June 24, 2000 11:53 PM > > For information, I am transmitting a 2.5 Hz wide SMT Hell signal > continuously on 137.6kHz with pixel duration 2s. Use Spectran at 0.031 Hz > resolution and about 40 - 50% speed, averaging off. Power output is 5 > Watts RF to the antenna, about -33dBW ERP. > > However, there may be a short break sometime tomorrow (Sunday) while I > re-route the coax feed to the antenna. > > Andy G4JNT > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6862 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 13:07:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 13:07:18 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136C2l-0006bQ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:01:47 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from outpost.ietc.ca ([24.226.220.15] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136C2j-0006aX-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:01:45 +0100 Received: from ppp8.ietc.ca (ppp8.ietc.ca [24.226.220.138]) by outpost.ietc.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA17807; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 08:16:29 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <200006251216.IAA17807@outpost.ietc.ca> X-Sender: bill@ietc.ca X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 09:01:22 -0400 To: dsp-weak-signal@qth.net, rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Bill de Carle" Subject: LF: Raw audio on my web page Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: If anybody's interested, I just posted an audio file to my web page. It was recorded yesterday morning while I was listening to VA3LK on 137.71 Khz. Sample rate is 8000 samples per second, each sample consists of one 8-bit *signed* byte - i.e. the range is -128 to 127. The signal is relatively strong but there is a lot of noise - I'd be very interested to know how the spectrogram-type programs handle this kind of data. It's nearly 2 megabytes long, so will take a while to download. I don't know how long I can leave it up there. You can download the file called SATRAW.ZIP from my web page at: www.ietc.ca/home/bill/bbs.htm Bill VE2IQ From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15603 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 16:03:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 16:03:06 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136Ekv-0006xo-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:55:33 +0100 Received: from smtp-rt-4.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.19.156] helo=areca.wanadoo.fr) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136Eku-0006xj-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:55:32 +0100 Received: from antholoma.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.153) by areca.wanadoo.fr; 25 Jun 2000 17:55:30 +0200 Received: from pii-350 (193.252.19.20) by antholoma.wanadoo.fr; 25 Jun 2000 17:55:29 +0200 Message-ID: <000d01bfdebd$c95158c0$b5cf8aa4@pii-350> From: "f1tay" To: "lfgroup" Subject: LF: GRIMETON Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 15:54:33 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
 
In english (bad) after
 
Quel est l'adresse du sit web de la station musée SAQ (Grimeton  Suéde) car apparemment le site serait inactif ? Le but est d'avoir la fréquence exacte et les heures de la transmission du 2 juillet.
73 de Daniel  F1TAY
 
Adress of web site of museum radio station SAQ (Grimeton, Sweden) ? Exact QRG and QTR of SAQ  2 july transmission ? Excused my very bad english.
73 of Daniel  F1TAY
 
From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17142 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 17:25:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 17:25:24 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136G6B-0007CU-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:21:35 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.10]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136G6A-0007CP-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:21:34 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id l.27.74b7ad9 (3970) for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:20:57 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <27.74b7ad9.26879978@aol.com> Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:20:56 EDT Subject: Re: LF: GRIMETON To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 107 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Daniel F1TAY a *crit : >Quel est l'adresse du sit web de la station musée SAQ (Grimeton Suéde) car >apparemment le site serait inactif ? Le but est d'avoir la fréquence exacte et les >heures de la transmission du 2 juillet. http://www.telemuseum.se/grimeton/jubilee.html They have changed the home page addresses this year. The English index page is now: http://www.telemuseum.se/Grimeton/defaulte.html 73, John From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24670 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 17:30:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 17:30:05 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136G7U-0007Cf-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:22:56 +0100 Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136G7O-0007Ca-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:22:51 +0100 Received: from oemcomputer (man-127.dialup.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.40.162]) by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id SAA03969 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:22:38 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: irwell.zetnet.co.uk: Host man-127.dialup.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.40.162] claimed to be oemcomputer Message-ID: <001a01bfdeca$22aa2800$a228f7c2@oemcomputer> From: "John Rabson" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Fw: Radiostation Grimeton Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:23:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------050701040700050504050002" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050701040700050504050002 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Radiostationen Grimeton
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 7:52 PM
Subject: LF: Radiostation Grimeton

From the website:
RADIOSTATIONEN GRIMETON
THE STATION
BEVARANDEPRESERVATION
Vad nyttWHAT'S GOING ON?
JUBILEUMJUBILEE
BESOKVISITORS INFO

The radio station Grimeton celebrates 75year anniversary on July 2nd, 2000.

H M King Gustaf V performed the official inauguration of the Swedish transmitting station for wireless telegraphy to America in July 1925. The 75years anniversary of the royal opening ceremony will be celebrated at an open house event at the second of July 2000.

The great radio station with callsign SAQ at Grimeton, has a alternating-current generator (alternator) as transmitter. It was constructed by a Swede, Ernst F W Alexanderson, and was built in USA by General Electric. The alternator produce still 200 kW to the six antennas at 17,2 kHz. The Grimeton radio station is the only one left in the whole world.

The open house event take place 8am - 2pm (GMT) Sunday the second of July 2000.

The transmitter will go on air at 8.30 and 8.45am. 0.30 and 0.45pm (GMT)

During the jubilee the callsign SA6Q will be QRV on two stations for listening reports.

  Frequency Mod
Station 1 3515 +- 5 kHz CW
  3740 +- 5 kHz SSB
  7015 +- 5 kHz CW
  7050 +- 5 kHz SSB
Station 2 14035 +- 5kHz CW
  14215 +- 5 kHz SSB
  21030 +- 5kHz CW
  21205 +- 5 kHz SSB
  28030 +- 5 kHz CW
  28415 +- 5 kHz SSB


e-mail: grimeton-radio@telia.se
Fax: 0340-67 41 95, Phone: 0340-67 42 51

2000-03-25 grimeton-radio@telia.se

Thanks Christer, SM6PXJ, for the hint!

73,  Dick, PA0SE

--------------050701040700050504050002 Content-Type: image/gif; name="prick.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="prick.gif" R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAP///wAAACwAAAAAAQABAAACAkQBADs= --------------050701040700050504050002 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="griheade.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="griheade.jpg" /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgEASABIAAD/7QjCUGhvdG9zaG9wIDMuMAA4QklNA+kAAAAAAHgADwAA AEgASAAAAAADIAIw//H/7wM5AkFjAgV4A94BAAAAAWgBaAAAAAAPoArwAAEBAABkAAEAAAAB AAIAAAABJw8AAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMAAAEAAAAAAAABAA/7X/qxAdC0UAIAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAGQE4QklNA+0AAAAAABAASAAAAAEAAgBIAAAAAQACOEJJTQQNAAAAAAAEAAAAeDhC SU0D8wAAAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAOEJJTQQKAAAAAAABAAA4QklNJxAAAAAAAAoAAQAAAAAAAAAC OEJJTQP1AAAAAABIAC9mZgABAGxmZgAGAAAAAAABAC9mZgABAKGZmgAGAAAAAAABADIAAAAB AFoAAAAGAAAAAAABADUAAAABAC0AAAAGAAAAAAABOEJJTQP4AAAAAABwAAD///////////// ////////////////A+gAAAAA/////////////////////////////wPoAAAAAP////////// //////////////////8D6AAAAAD/////////////////////////////A+gAADhCSU0ECAAA AAAAEAAAAAEAAAJAAAACQAAAAAA4QklNBBQAAAAAAAQAAAADOEJJTQQMAAAAAAatAAAAAQAA AHAAAAASAAABUAAAF6AAAAaRABgAAf/Y/+AAEEpGSUYAAQIBAEgASAAA//4AJkZpbGUgd3Jp dHRlbiBieSBBZG9iZSBQaG90b3Nob3CoIDUuMP/uAA5BZG9iZQBkgAAAAAH/2wCEAAwICAgJ CAwJCQwRCwoLERUPDAwPFRgTExUTExgRDAwMDAwMEQwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwBDQsLDQ4NEA4OEBQODg4UFA4ODg4UEQwMDAwMEREMDAwMDAwRDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDP/AABEIABIAcAMBIgACEQEDEQH/3QAEAAf/xAE/AAABBQEBAQEB AQAAAAAAAAADAAECBAUGBwgJCgsBAAEFAQEBAQEBAAAAAAAAAAEAAgMEBQYHCAkKCxAAAQQB AwIEAgUHBggFAwwzAQACEQMEIRIxBUFRYRMicYEyBhSRobFCIyQVUsFiMzRygtFDByWSU/Dh 8WNzNRaisoMmRJNUZEXCo3Q2F9JV4mXys4TD03Xj80YnlKSFtJXE1OT0pbXF1eX1VmZ2hpam tsbW5vY3R1dnd4eXp7fH1+f3EQACAgECBAQDBAUGBwcGBTUBAAIRAyExEgRBUWFxIhMFMoGR FKGxQiPBUtHwMyRi4XKCkkNTFWNzNPElBhaisoMHJjXC0kSTVKMXZEVVNnRl4vKzhMPTdePz RpSkhbSVxNTk9KW1xdXl9VZmdoaWprbG1ub2JzdHV2d3h5ent8f/2gAMAwEAAhEDEQA/APUb LQwSeyxrvrVi19RPTWtccnUNL2ltRIqbmvY3I+jvrxLWXv3+nX/wnqLWycc2sIa6D58Lk+of Viy7Kycjbey3LrNGQ6pzRvqNbMb0PdXZ+j2UstZ/osn9Mz6fpqbFGB+YrJmQ2Tf8+KjRVlsD nY9zLLQ9tTyGV0vbRkW5TR+mx66bLat/6Oz9G/1f5tO/6901vtrfUfUx3WNyA1j3+mKXejdk Xenu24bbT7b279/6T9F+jsWSfqvYA+mqi+iqz1A+ipxFbm3ChmRS5z225PoX/Y6PUa3J9T+e /S+nag2/Vt4fcX121HJc83hrtge2x3qPxnNa3+ib/wCbrr2XMZZbV9o9O1WRixH93wYjOen/ ADnfP1zLcg4px3WZDa3WurpabIY1xq3btzW++1rq6/8A0X+jT1/Xei0UelRY5+Wx1mMz0yHv Y1vqb217vb67Q77I2x/6x6dn82sev6t51ttV+yxxpcX1GBsDnBzH2Rt37n1v2P22+jZ+i9Wm z0a1Kn6pXUvofWy4vxBS3HLnfQFG7027WhtVnrepZ9q9Wuz1fU/RfZ0pYsA7faoSyeP2OrT9 e8K2qu0VWbb2GzHHpu32t9RmI30KWmx77Lcm5lVNfs/wtlnpVVqFv19xKpL2kFtZtdW5j22A Nt+x3VOrd/2qx8j+kY/+h/Wa/VpVHE+p9ldVFYrtAxazTQ/eA9g9VuYy9tm3+lVXsb6dm30v S/Q20Xb0+T9UqrGPquZafV2l7twdYbGWWZX2r1Cx361bZkX13WbPS+y2fZq6aUzgw8XQjzTe Th8XXt+tGQ3KGHXiutyDG9tbXWMra57qGW5d42V49L7K7dn07NlVlvpekq1H17x7avVNbmtk CDW4Oh1d+TXY1s+6m2nCyvTf9P1KfTsqr9RBf9XbcjNZmXVPbfXZXc3bAa99Nn2nGFtdjbPb Ra6z07KXY+T6F1+N9o9C3Yql31R9HE+yNZe2ovNnte2TY6q3Dtu3ek79Lfj5Gy//AEj6ca7/ AE32hCGLao79/tUTPcE9en+K7D/rv01rGvhxD8T9oDa0u/V52a/u5O/1P1X/AIK33p7PrpiV 2upfi5IsaxtpHph3tfY3Fp9P0bLvWtuy3/ZKqqd/6x/3X/WFzV31eyC19foWtbabi7aeftGw XsZ7PbX+i301/QrssyP9Kj/sLJ3B91NocKW0NcNtUNZb9upuq+z10spyaMr31WVM9H/B/Zvp +o44MVbj7Ue5O+v2O/8A89OnMDjaHNLK77X17SLG/Zf6Zj2V/wDczH/nfs/+Ex/1im2ytbtF 7bt4Ah1bi1w51C4z/mtVmV3NvbeBkA+s9rmh7rHWfaX5bn+ls+2Pf+h9RlfofYv1SvH9NdZ0 +mxgse8AGw7oGgmSTCgywgBpuyQMiTb/AP/Q9U7p18qpJKfqpM7jt818rJJKfqpJfKqSSn6q SXyqkkp+qkl8qpJKfqpJfKqSSn6qSXyqkkp//9kAOEJJTQQGAAAAAAAHAAIAAAABAQD/4gxY SUNDX1BST0ZJTEUAAQEAAAxITGlubwIQAABtbnRyUkdCIFhZWiAHzgACAAkABgAxAABhY3Nw TVNGVAAAAABJRUMgc1JHQgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA9tYAAQAAAADTLUhQICAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABFjcHJ0AAABUAAAADNkZXNj AAABhAAAAGx3dHB0AAAB8AAAABRia3B0AAACBAAAABRyWFlaAAACGAAAABRnWFlaAAACLAAA ABRiWFlaAAACQAAAABRkbW5kAAACVAAAAHBkbWRkAAACxAAAAIh2dWVkAAADTAAAAIZ2aWV3 AAAD1AAAACRsdW1pAAAD+AAAABRtZWFzAAAEDAAAACR0ZWNoAAAEMAAAAAxyVFJDAAAEPAAA CAxnVFJDAAAEPAAACAxiVFJDAAAEPAAACAx0ZXh0AAAAAENvcHlyaWdodCAoYykgMTk5OCBI ZXdsZXR0LVBhY2thcmQgQ29tcGFueQAAZGVzYwAAAAAAAAASc1JHQiBJRUM2MTk2Ni0yLjEA AAAAAAAAAAAAABJzUkdCIElFQzYxOTY2LTIuMQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWFlaIAAAAAAAAPNRAAEAAAABFsxYWVogAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAFhZWiAAAAAAAABvogAAOPUAAAOQWFlaIAAAAAAAAGKZAAC3hQAAGNpYWVog AAAAAAAAJKAAAA+EAAC2z2Rlc2MAAAAAAAAAFklFQyBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmllYy5jaAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAFklFQyBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmllYy5jaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABkZXNjAAAAAAAAAC5JRUMgNjE5NjYtMi4xIERlZmF1bHQg UkdCIGNvbG91ciBzcGFjZSAtIHNSR0IAAAAAAAAAAAAAAC5JRUMgNjE5NjYtMi4xIERlZmF1 bHQgUkdCIGNvbG91ciBzcGFjZSAtIHNSR0IAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZGVzYwAA AAAAAAAsUmVmZXJlbmNlIFZpZXdpbmcgQ29uZGl0aW9uIGluIElFQzYxOTY2LTIuMQAAAAAA AAAAAAAALFJlZmVyZW5jZSBWaWV3aW5nIENvbmRpdGlvbiBpbiBJRUM2MTk2Ni0yLjEAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHZpZXcAAAAAABOk/gAUXy4AEM8UAAPtzAAEEwsAA1ye AAAAAVhZWiAAAAAAAEwJVgBQAAAAVx/nbWVhcwAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Ao8AAAACc2lnIAAAAABDUlQgY3VydgAAAAAAAAQAAAAABQAKAA8AFAAZAB4AIwAoAC0AMgA3 ADsAQABFAEoATwBUAFkAXgBjAGgAbQByAHcAfACBAIYAiwCQAJUAmgCfAKQAqQCuALIAtwC8 AMEAxgDLANAA1QDbAOAA5QDrAPAA9gD7AQEBBwENARMBGQEfASUBKwEyATgBPgFFAUwBUgFZ AWABZwFuAXUBfAGDAYsBkgGaAaEBqQGxAbkBwQHJAdEB2QHhAekB8gH6AgMCDAIUAh0CJgIv AjgCQQJLAlQCXQJnAnECegKEAo4CmAKiAqwCtgLBAssC1QLgAusC9QMAAwsDFgMhAy0DOAND A08DWgNmA3IDfgOKA5YDogOuA7oDxwPTA+AD7AP5BAYEEwQgBC0EOwRIBFUEYwRxBH4EjASa BKgEtgTEBNME4QTwBP4FDQUcBSsFOgVJBVgFZwV3BYYFlgWmBbUFxQXVBeUF9gYGBhYGJwY3 BkgGWQZqBnsGjAadBq8GwAbRBuMG9QcHBxkHKwc9B08HYQd0B4YHmQesB78H0gflB/gICwgf CDIIRghaCG4IggiWCKoIvgjSCOcI+wkQCSUJOglPCWQJeQmPCaQJugnPCeUJ+woRCicKPQpU CmoKgQqYCq4KxQrcCvMLCwsiCzkLUQtpC4ALmAuwC8gL4Qv5DBIMKgxDDFwMdQyODKcMwAzZ DPMNDQ0mDUANWg10DY4NqQ3DDd4N+A4TDi4OSQ5kDn8Omw62DtIO7g8JDyUPQQ9eD3oPlg+z D88P7BAJECYQQxBhEH4QmxC5ENcQ9RETETERTxFtEYwRqhHJEegSBxImEkUSZBKEEqMSwxLj EwMTIxNDE2MTgxOkE8UT5RQGFCcUSRRqFIsUrRTOFPAVEhU0FVYVeBWbFb0V4BYDFiYWSRZs Fo8WshbWFvoXHRdBF2UXiReuF9IX9xgbGEAYZRiKGK8Y1Rj6GSAZRRlrGZEZtxndGgQaKhpR GncanhrFGuwbFBs7G2MbihuyG9ocAhwqHFIcexyjHMwc9R0eHUcdcB2ZHcMd7B4WHkAeah6U Hr4e6R8THz4faR+UH78f6iAVIEEgbCCYIMQg8CEcIUghdSGhIc4h+yInIlUigiKvIt0jCiM4 I2YjlCPCI/AkHyRNJHwkqyTaJQklOCVoJZclxyX3JicmVyaHJrcm6CcYJ0kneierJ9woDSg/ KHEooijUKQYpOClrKZ0p0CoCKjUqaCqbKs8rAis2K2krnSvRLAUsOSxuLKIs1y0MLUEtdi2r LeEuFi5MLoIuty7uLyQvWi+RL8cv/jA1MGwwpDDbMRIxSjGCMbox8jIqMmMymzLUMw0zRjN/ M7gz8TQrNGU0njTYNRM1TTWHNcI1/TY3NnI2rjbpNyQ3YDecN9c4FDhQOIw4yDkFOUI5fzm8 Ofk6Njp0OrI67zstO2s7qjvoPCc8ZTykPOM9Ij1hPaE94D4gPmA+oD7gPyE/YT+iP+JAI0Bk QKZA50EpQWpBrEHuQjBCckK1QvdDOkN9Q8BEA0RHRIpEzkUSRVVFmkXeRiJGZ0arRvBHNUd7 R8BIBUhLSJFI10kdSWNJqUnwSjdKfUrESwxLU0uaS+JMKkxyTLpNAk1KTZNN3E4lTm5Ot08A T0lPk0/dUCdQcVC7UQZRUFGbUeZSMVJ8UsdTE1NfU6pT9lRCVI9U21UoVXVVwlYPVlxWqVb3 V0RXklfgWC9YfVjLWRpZaVm4WgdaVlqmWvVbRVuVW+VcNVyGXNZdJ114XcleGl5sXr1fD19h X7NgBWBXYKpg/GFPYaJh9WJJYpxi8GNDY5dj62RAZJRk6WU9ZZJl52Y9ZpJm6Gc9Z5Nn6Wg/ aJZo7GlDaZpp8WpIap9q92tPa6dr/2xXbK9tCG1gbbluEm5rbsRvHm94b9FwK3CGcOBxOnGV cfByS3KmcwFzXXO4dBR0cHTMdSh1hXXhdj52m3b4d1Z3s3gReG54zHkqeYl553pGeqV7BHtj e8J8IXyBfOF9QX2hfgF+Yn7CfyN/hH/lgEeAqIEKgWuBzYIwgpKC9INXg7qEHYSAhOOFR4Wr hg6GcobXhzuHn4gEiGmIzokziZmJ/opkisqLMIuWi/yMY4zKjTGNmI3/jmaOzo82j56QBpBu kNaRP5GokhGSepLjk02TtpQglIqU9JVflcmWNJaflwqXdZfgmEyYuJkkmZCZ/JpomtWbQpuv nByciZz3nWSd0p5Anq6fHZ+Ln/qgaaDYoUehtqImopajBqN2o+akVqTHpTilqaYapoum/adu p+CoUqjEqTepqaocqo+rAqt1q+msXKzQrUStuK4trqGvFq+LsACwdbDqsWCx1rJLssKzOLOu tCW0nLUTtYq2AbZ5tvC3aLfguFm40blKucK6O7q1uy67p7whvJu9Fb2Pvgq+hL7/v3q/9cBw wOzBZ8Hjwl/C28NYw9TEUcTOxUvFyMZGxsPHQce/yD3IvMk6ybnKOMq3yzbLtsw1zLXNNc21 zjbOts83z7jQOdC60TzRvtI/0sHTRNPG1EnUy9VO1dHWVdbY11zX4Nhk2OjZbNnx2nba+9uA 3AXcit0Q3ZbeHN6i3ynfr+A24L3hROHM4lPi2+Nj4+vkc+T85YTmDeaW5x/nqegy6LzpRunQ 6lvq5etw6/vshu0R7ZzuKO6070DvzPBY8OXxcvH/8ozzGfOn9DT0wvVQ9d72bfb794r4Gfio +Tj5x/pX+uf7d/wH/Jj9Kf26/kv+3P9t/////gAmRmlsZSB3cml0dGVuIGJ5IEFkb2JlIFBo b3Rvc2hvcKggNS4w/+4ADkFkb2JlAGSAAAAAAf/bAIQACAYGBgYGCAYGCAwIBwgMDgoICAoO EA0NDg0NEBEMDAwMDAwRDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAEJCAgJCgkLCQkL DgsNCw4RDg4ODhERDAwMDAwREQwMDAwMDBEMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM /8AAEQgAWQIrAwEiAAIRAQMRAf/dAAQAI//EAaIAAAAHAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAQFAwIGAQAH CAkKCwEAAgIDAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAQACAwQFBgcICQoLEAACAQMDAgQCBgcDBAIGAnMBAgMR BAAFIRIxQVEGE2EicYEUMpGhBxWxQiPBUtHhMxZi8CRygvElQzRTkqKyY3PCNUQnk6OzNhdU ZHTD0uIIJoMJChgZhJRFRqS0VtNVKBry4/PE1OT0ZXWFlaW1xdXl9WZ2hpamtsbW5vY3R1dn d4eXp7fH1+f3OEhYaHiImKi4yNjo+Ck5SVlpeYmZqbnJ2en5KjpKWmp6ipqqusra6voRAAIC AQIDBQUEBQYECAMDbQEAAhEDBCESMUEFURNhIgZxgZEyobHwFMHR4SNCFVJicvEzJDRDghaS UyWiY7LCB3PSNeJEgxdUkwgJChgZJjZFGidkdFU38qOzwygp0+PzhJSktMTU5PRldYWVpbXF 1eX1RlZmdoaWprbG1ub2R1dnd4eXp7fH1+f3OEhYaHiImKi4yNjo+DlJWWl5iZmpucnZ6fkq OkpaanqKmqq6ytrq+v/aAAwDAQACEQMRAD8A7/mzZsVdmyicquKrs2M5ZXPDSqmbE/VGX6q4 0VX5sTMyjvjGuUXvjRVXzYAe9Ud8Z9fHjkvDki0yrmwrOoDxyxqA8cfDktpnmwvGoL44ot6h 74OCXcm0ZmwOLqM98v61H44OE9yq+bA5u4x3xhvU8cPDLuVF5sBC+TxxwvU8ceCXctovNgT6 6njm+uJ448Eu5UXmwKLxPHHC6Q98eE9yojNiP1hPHMbhPHBwnuVWzYGa6Qd8Z9bWvXDwlUZm wMLpD3x4nQ98HCe5VbNifrL45vVXxxoqqZsQa4Qd8Z9bTxx4T3Kis2BfrieOX9bTxw8J7lRO bA4uoz3x4uIz3wcJ7lVc2JeunjjDdIO+PCe5URmwIb1B3xv1+Pxw8Eu5bRubAX1+PxyxfR+O PBLuW0ZmwMLyM98v60njg4T3KiM2IC5Q98eJkPfGiqpmxvqL45ua+OClXZsZ6i+Ob1V8cNFV +bGeovjl818cFKuzY3mvjm5r440q7Njea+OUZVHfGiq/NiXrJ45YmU98NFVTNjQ6nLqMCt5s 2bFXZs2bFXZs2bFX/9DvxONJzHKJwq4nGk5icTZsICuZ8SeWmNkfAkstMsjFCs9xTviD3ZHf Oa69581vTNaudNht7eSOJwsdUk5kMAy9JKcvi/lwJJ588wWci/pbS1iRuilJYGI70Mpev/A5 lx0k6B23FjdxjqsYJBvY0dnpzXx8cRe8J74RWOqwanaR3tqSY5B0PVSOqt7g429v1tLWe6fd YUaQitK8RWn04Rh3qt23jFcV7VabtdEnrjTcHxzn1n55mu9Qt7c2yQwSuEdixZhy2G9EH2vb JgZTkzhMdiGEMsZgmJutkcbk+Ob60fHOe6t5v1Ww1O4soooHSNqJVX5EEArWj+/hiMfnjUoX Av7JOJ7LzjNPbmXyf5c1dBrOqxgkEkUaOz0f623jli9Yd8j2nava6pB69q1abPG2zKfBhgDz Frd3pMEM1qsbl3KMJAx7VFOLL4YBhs1TYcsRHjuxz2ZkL9h3y/0i3jkT0PVp9S09bq4CrIWZ SIwQKA/5RbCzVfOUVpK1vZRi4kU0aQmiA+Apu2P5ezVIOeAiJk0DyZ/9fbxxpvW8c5pH521S FlN5aJ6Z6cQ8Zp7Fy+SjTtXttUtxcWzbdHQ7MreDYnBXMIhnhM1E79x2ZD9dPjjhft44SGff A15qkNhbvc3BIROw6knooweCD0bDKhZ2AZKL1vHHi9PjnMG87arK5+p2aemOoYPI1PcqUw6t PMF5daLPqKwqLqIsqRAMwLCn7I+LvhOnI6BrjqYSJAJ2BPLuZwLxvHHC8I75y6Xzf5nt4/Vm sI4o9vjeGZV36bl6ZcHnHzNdIXtrCOZAeJaOGZhXrSqufHH8sfL5sfzWO69V+56kL4+OUb8+ ORbSdQvrqwjn1CIQXDFuUQVkoAxA+FyWGwyO6j56mguJra1tlPpOyCV2JDcTSvFQv/E8iNPZ oDkzlnhGIlI0Jcu96Qb4nvm+ue+RpNRMtgt5HuXi9VQKncrypQb5FW82+Z44zK+nosaipdoZ goHueeEae+VLPPGFXZvfYW9RF4R0OPF83jnKrfzn5kuuX1Wyin4U5+nFK9K1pXi58Mkejarq 15YXFxqFuLa4QsIUKOgIChgSrtyI5HBLTUN6RDURmajfy2ZsL8065jft45zfy95u1LVtRFpd RwpGUZqxq4aq9PtOww61jzHa6NEHnrJK/wDdQKfib3P8q++ROmIPDW7KOeEoGd0B1LK2vSe+ JG7PjnMD581mQtLBZRegv2qrI9B7urKv/C4daJ5wttWlFrOn1a5P2BWqOfBTtRv8nJHTEC6Y x1OOR4QdzysVbMzdt44w3rDvkT8za5d6PbQz2ixuZJODCUMRShO3Fk8MQ8ueZX1kSw3QSO6j +JVjqFZOlQGLH4T9rEYPTxVsk5o8fh3uzQXzeOPGoP45EfMer3WkWCXVoiO5lVGEgJHEqxr8 LJ+0FxfQtSuNS0yG9uVVZJS+0dQtFYp0Ysf2cThFcVbcmXijj4OoF/BlP19j3ymvGPfCtZMT vb+2sLZ7q6kEcSDcn8AB3JyHhi9gyMqFkpm143jiDXjA9c5/dee7iWThp1mCP2TLVmP+wSn/ ABLFNJ8y6te6lBZ3lskSS8qsEdTRUZhTkx7rlw05AsgNI1OMyEQSbNctmeC9fxx63jeORnXd RudM057y2CM6MoIkBIox4/slfHI5B5v8w3CM1tYxzBPtvHFKwHz4vtiMNiwAmeeMJcMrur2F vTheP448XreOQXQvOC6lcCyu4hBO1fTZSSrEfs0O6thlr+rXOl6a95ahGkRlHGQErRjx/ZZc gcBvhI3LIZoGBmDYHNli3hp1xVLxq9chXlbX7vWreeW7SNGicKoiDAUIrvyZ8Ib7z5rNpfXN qkNsVglkiUlJKkIxUE/vB4YPyxJMQBYYnUQEYzN1Lls9aF6w75f15vHIzomrfpXTLa9NA8i/ vVXoHU8XArU/aGBvM2vPommm6gCPcO6xwpJUrU7sSFKt9gN+1lXgerhre6bDkAhx3tV/Bl5v Ce+N+ttXrnM/L/njVtV1e3sLmK3WGbnyaNXDfDGzihaRh1X+XDjzX5gvtEtYLmySJ/Uk9NxK GI+yWFOLJ/LkjpiJCBAssRqIGByC6jsWbC8NOuWL4+Ocng86+bbqMS22mxzRk0DxwTstR13W QjDNPMvmH9CzXktgE1BJ1jjgMMoBjIB5cOXqfzfFy44TpSOdc65oGpgeXFyvk9EN6fHK+vnx zk1z5481WihrvT4oFY0UywzICfAcpBlw+cfNtwizW+mJLG1eLxwTspoaGjK5HUYfyh57fNj+ bx3Xqv3PVzft44w3rHvkNu/NMelaXa3OppS+uI1f6mgKtyIq1Q9TGq/5WRs/mBrchaW3sYvq 6/aqsj0+bqyr/wALgjpSeQZT1OOOxO/OgN/i9V+tt44oLsjvkF8v+dbXV5RaXEf1W7b7C15I /srbUb/JOL+bPMF7odpBcWSROZJPTcShiB8JYU4MnhgOA8QgRRLLx4cByA2B3M3S998EJeV7 5zvyn5sfXPWgvFjiu4/jVY6hWj6VAZnNVb7W+D/NOv3uhaYl7YpHJIZljcTAlQrK5rRWQ15K uQlpzxcFbqM0TDxAbDO1uwcUFwD3yHeWNZu9Y0eDUbxUSWYv8MQIWiuyDZmc/s/zYepL75VP Dwkg8wabIzEoiQ5EWnSScsUwBbSE4OHTKJCizbzZs2RV/9HvZxpOPIxNskFWMcRd8e5wNIcn EIU5HwFK+LyNgGZuuXwDEvJfNTqvnSaRiAqy25LHYACOLc4a+ddc027sFsraZLmZpFflGQyo FrvyFRU144TeakWXzbcRv9l3gVqeBjjGJXFrD5f18LcxCaz5ck5jl+7bow8Wj/41zZxiCMZ6 xiKDrDKQOYCuGU6JPTcsn8owzWujD1gV9aRpY1PUIQqj/guPLE/N176GlGAH47lgn+xHxN+r jhwsgkUPGeSMAVI6EHoRkI8zzyahq6WNupkMAEaoO7t8Tf8AGq/7HBEXOz72/KfDwcI3scI+ KG1HT2stL0u8UcZJAxkbvVj6kX/C5PLG+F5ZQXSn+9QMR4GnxD6GyH6nL5gvLEwXWnpHbxUf kitVQg93b9nBvlC9D2stkx+KFuaD/Ibr9zf8SyUhcbPQsMMhHLwgECURzFbxSrXGr5nc/wDF kH/EI8nN3b297A0FygeNhuD2PiPA5BNZ/wCUlf8A4yQ/8RTJzLKkSNJKwRF3ZmNABgkPp9zL BXFmvlxH9LCNJkl0jXzacqo0ht3/AMoE/Afv44b+bm5adF/xnX/iD4SQN+kvMYmhBKGf1Qf8 hDWp/wCBw582f8c6L/jOv/EHyZ+od7VD+5ygfSCaUdPumtfKk0qGjguqkdQXYJX/AIbEPKVp C8k15KoZoqLFXsTuzfPFtNtmu/LM0CCrMXKjxZTyUfeuBPLF7HBLLaStwMtDGTt8Q2K/TjW0 vekfXg4uXDt/WZZdxQ3sD21woZHFPl4Ee4yIeWriSz1Zrbl8MoZHHYlKsD+DZJb27js4Hnla gUbDuT2UZF/L8Tzag103SMMxb/Kfan4tiBsWeb+9xV9V7/1WamUnCjzDby3unFYQWeNxJwHU gAgj/hsGgk44sqCrMFrsKmm+Cqb5ASiYnqKY15f16HT4zZ3S8YyxYSqK0J/nHXJfFcJKgkiY Oj7qymoOEGsaNbXUUlytIp0UsXGwagr8f/NWF/lW6lE01qSTFw9QDsGBA2/1q4mIO4aISnjl HFOiD9JCc+aZOWkOP8tP14l5Pk4aZKP+L2/4gmV5lNdKf/XT9eJeVDTT5f8AjM3/ABBMa9Ne aT/jI/qshvbwWtpNct0jQsB4mmw+k5BbSwa50jUL5hydWUoT/knlKf8AgWw381XvC1js1O8z cn/1V/q2ArR9dt7D6nFYq0Dq1WZTVg/Wvxjx8MYih7ywzSEsnCQSIxPIX6pJx5WvvW0wW7H4 7dilP8k/Ev6yMG621dJu/wDjGcivly4az1NrWYFPWrGyns6n4a/8MuSjWh/uIu/+MZwEVL3l ninxYDfOMSD8Eo8kNQ33v6X/ADMyZB9shfkrre0/4q/5mZL1ORyD1Fnpv7mPx+9gfk801lT/ AMVv/DNf11fzQ1vKTwM4g+SRni1PubK8o/8AHYX/AIxv/DL1MPo/mT62VPD1RcL/AJSsavT6 ea5M/Ue+nEH9zG/p8Td6JAkcESwwqEjQcVRRQADID5us49O1aK6sx6XrKJaLtxkVt2Xw/ZbJ zb3ENzCtxbuHicVVx0pkD8zXg1bVo7az/eiICFCu4Z2Pxcfb9nK8YPF97k6rh8Id9jhr9Cb+ bJ/rPl+xuf8Af0kUlP8AWidv44QmGfRv0drNrXhKoLDtzGzofaRcPfNsQt9Cs7cdIZY4wfZY nXBFjZR6n5bgtn2Dx0Rv5XUni3/BDJRNRHdZa5wM8sh/EIAg/wBILPM9zHfeXo7qFqxu8bjx 3qKfME4P8qH/AHA2g/4yf8nXyE/WpbfTbzRrqqskivGp7MrcXX6ft5NvKi/7gLQ/8ZP+Tr4J ioV/SZYZ8ebi6+Hv7wU7VshHny8drm1sgaRqhmI7FmJQf8DwP/BZNGNMhvnaykf0NRUVVR6M h8N+SH5btkMYHGC2am/ClXlfuT7RtNt9N0+ERqBK6BppabsWHI7/AMvhg+tOuEul3tvr+iNY eqI7r0vRlB3YUHH1AtRyU5F30v8ARPmKys/V9ak0Dc+PH7TjtVskI2TZ3CDl4IwMI3E0LuqL LPNG+g3f/PP/AJOphN5Q1CysbK6N3cJCTICFZgGI4/sr9pvow680rTQLs/8AGP8A5OpkMstJ +u6Nd3sQJuLV1PEd46fHt4j7WGABgQe9rzSlHOJRFkQ5fNEWfLVPM4ubJCsf1j1yaUoityZm p05/8bZK/NJroF3/AM8/+TqYB8nXdrLZtapGsd1EaycRQyL+y58afZwd5q/44N3/AM8/+TqY yPriOVEBljiBgnK74xIn5ckF5B/3ju/+Mq/8RwjFj+kdb1u2ArJ/pLxePNJQy0/1qccOfIrU tLv/AIyD/iOBPLVD5n1Bz1AnI+ZlUfxx3EpnyawBLHgieRJR3kC//c3Wnsd0YTR/Jvhf7iF/ 4LA/nGZ9U1qy0eE7JQN7PKdyf9WMK2A4D+g/NxX7MEzlR2HCbdfoV6f8Di/l3/cnr15q8m6x kmOvYvVU/wCBjU48NSOTyse8pBJxxwHnx8J/qx3Q+kxR2vnT0YRSOOWcIPAenJQYd+e5OWkQ D/l5X/k3JhFbOY/ObP0rPL18GVh/HDTzo/LTIR/xev8AxB8JHrgfILH+4zD+kf0LfLHmHStN 0pLW7uPTlDuxXg7bE7bqrDJTY6taalC09lJ6kauYyxUr8QAbowB/ayHeXdG0u+05Z7uD1JS7 AtzddgdtlYDJRY2dpp0Bgso/SjZi5Wpb4iAK1Ysf2chkjGzV3fwbcBycMb4eGtqviSPz4/Oz tPaVv+I4Z+UmpoFmPD1P+Tr4TedjW1tf+Mh/4jhn5WamhWn/AD0/5OvhI/dgeaI/41P+p+pj N+DrXm020zH0zOLf5JGeLBf+BbOnQRxW8SwQoI4kHFEUUAAzl+qF9G8z/XCpKGUXK/5SuavT 6ea50e3u4LuBLi3kDxOKq46UyOYbRrlS6auLLf1cW/uYB5ys49N1iK7sv3PrKJgE24yq27L4 fst/rYbecbk3fluwuT/u6WGX/g4Xb+OEvmq9GsazHbWX70RAQRldw0jN8XE+G/HDnzjCLby/ ZWy7iGWKMH/Uidf4ZOv7q+bVt/hHD9P6UhMNxoP6K16zrwlRS4rtzGzxn/JlT/jfJV5vu4tR 8rR3lu1YnkjkXx35LT/WUnfNp1jFq/la3s5Ng8VEY/supPFv+CGQ/wCuzWuk3+gXlVeOVZIl PZlbjIn0/bXBXFIHrCX+xU/u4Efw5IWPKdfpei+SHp5ZsR/xl/5PSZKI3ORXySK+W7L/AJ6/ 8npMk8QIOYmYeuXvLm4f7uH9Ufcmto24w1Q1GE1saEYbxHbMLIN24KmbNmypL//S78RiTLi2 URhBVByKcCSDDN0rgWWHLIyQUrlwFKMM5YjvgKVMyIFiXneseVNSvdek1SOSBYWkjYKzPzpG qr04EV+D+bBvmLQxrFsoQqlzEaxO3Sh+0rUrsclckWB2hrmUMp9P9Hk0eDCpivrNliWi6drO m2721w8M0YBNvRnqrfymqD4K/wDA4D0jy1f2ep/pG/kikPxsOBYkyP3PJV/mbJoYcY0W1Mn4 p35br4MfTzPBy3QLxh1KsKqQQR7HIrp3lvU9O1FbqGWEwBipUs3Ixk9D8FOX7XX7WTMx0xoT fCJ1fms8cZGJPOJsMN1byxqF/qM13DJCqSceIZnDfCoXeiH+XAv+E9VlIW5u4yg78nenyDBc nhixpiyQylgdNjJJN7mzukGmaLb6Wp9OskzCjyt1p4AfsjG67ptxqdrHb27IrLIHJkJAoFYb cQ382HxhINcb6WPHvbPw48HBVDySPRNOuNOtGt7gozcyymMkihA/mC9xgTVPLUV5Ibi2cQSt u6kVRj47fZOSgw4wxHDx72g4oGAgRYHJhK+Vr6Rx9auV4L0KlnNPbkFw9tdOhs4hBAtFG5J3 JPicORDXL+r4fERDDCBuI37yl6xEYG1LTjqFo1sH9Mkhg1OXT2qMOfQp2zehg42ZiCCDyOzC D5X1L+7+soYfCr/8QpTDrTNHi02Mqp5yPT1JCKVp2A7DD0W5x4tvbE5GEMEImwN/NItW06bU LJreAqrllILkgbH2DY3RNKudNtXguCjM0hcFCSKFVXeoX+XJGLY+GKC29sHidGXhjj4+tUwq /wDL2oahqP1mR4hb8lUJVuQjB6U405df2skfpdvwwy+rHwy/q/tgORMcYiZEc5GywnU/LV5c agb2xkjjB4v8ZYEOvccVbww6vLS4u9MltjwWeWPiTU8OXfenLj/scOTAfDMYPbHxLryQMURx Vfr5sZ8u6Nd6Sbj6w0bCbhx9MsSOPLryVf5sP+JoadabV6Ystua9MWWA+GCU7NphAQiIx5Bh mieWNR03UoruaSFolDBwjOW+JSBSqKPtYf6polrq0HpTgq67xyr9pT/zT/MuHCwGvTFRAfDI yykm73RHDCMTACwe9523knVYy0UF5H6LfaqXSvzRQy/8Nh3ovlS30phcSv691SgelFWv8q+P +Vkr+r+2WIKdsBzEirRHT44niA3HKzdMX8xaNdatZx21q0aMsgkYyEgUCsu3FW/mwTpFhNYa bBZ3BVpYgQxSpXdiRSoU9Dh+YPbG+h7YPF2pn4YEzPqRTCtf8qz6ncrdWTRxuV4zCQkAkfZY cVbem2HehafcabpcNjclGkiL1aMkrRnL/tBf5sOxBTtjTHhOUkcPQIjhjGZmBueaEKVOMlto 5o2hlQPG44sjCoIPjg4xjGmPwyPEzphF75FBkM2m3PpCtRFJU8f9WRfi/wCFxOy8mavHfQXl zdRMYZEkqGd2PA8qfEq+GT5Ya4qIKZLx5VVtP5bFd1XXY7JFrumz6lpc1lbFFkl4UMhIX4XV /wBkMf2cA+W9DutHtp4bto3Mrhh6ZJFKU35KuSoxHwxhhPhkRkNcPTm2HFEzGTqBTA28panZ 6mb3R54o4w3KNZCwIB+1GQqMCnbDzWNPu9S0mSzT00uJQnKrMUBVlc0bjy/Z/kw+MVMTZKZP xCSD3MRhhESiLAlzHvYr5c0W80dblLp42EpQp6ZY0py5V5KviuB9I0K+07U5r6d4jHKrjihY t8TBh9pV8MljRnEXjOS4yb8+aBhiBEC/RuPixnX9Dl1a4hngdI2RSkheu4rVaUB8WwXoumfo i0aAuJJHcuzgU7AAfhhoUIOMYHJcW1dEjFETOStyxkaJerrZ1P1IzF6pfjybnxO1Ps06f5WD NdsLjU7WOCBkUrIHJckCgVl/ZDfzYbmM9caEOS4uR7keFHhlHepGyxKHQdegX04L1Yk68Ull Ufcq4faFY31jHML6YTSSMCrB2egA6fGBhiI+4xVYzjKVhEMMYkEXt5pR5g0m51eCGO2dFaNy zGQkChFNuKtgvRrKfTtOhs5yrPHyqUJIPJi3cL/NhgFxQIaZAy2rozGOImcnUiku1PSbXV4B DcAqy7xyr9pT/TxXI4fJWqoWigvI/Qb7VS6V+aKGX/hsmwTHqpwCZHIsZ4YTNyG/eNkj0Lyv a6TILmR/rF2BRXpRUr14L4/5WCPMujXetWUVtaNGjJKJGMpYCgVl24q/82HSR98EImVnIeLi uyyGKHAcYFA9yV6Hp0+naZb2dyUaWIMGMZJXdiRTkFPQ+GE/mXyfcaxdpe2DxRSMvG4EpZQS PsMOCv8AFT4WyZrFXFVhyHikS4hzTLFGUBAjYV9iU+WdNudJ0mCwuijyQl/ijJK0Z2fqwU/t fy4fRrjEjOCY48pnKySeu7ZGIiBEcgKV4BuMNYemF8KbjDGMUGY2QswqZs2bKkv/0+/1zZqZ XTFW8aVBx2bFUNLAGGF89qfDDnE2jDZOMyEUx17Y+GItbHwyRtbKe2JGzHhlwzI4WOtbHwxJ rY+GSQ2QPbKNgp7ZIZwjhYu1sfDE/q58MlZ05fDGHTF8MkNQF4WL+gfDK+rnwyT/AKMHhjl0 xfDD+YC8LFzakjpjPqhHbJb+jU8MY+mDsMRqQvCxM258Mr6sckzaZ7Yi2nkdsmM470cKQC3p jvQ9sODZEdstbMnth8Ud60k/1avbHC0J7ZIItPr1GCk05e4yB1AC8LGFsm8MUWzPhkpFgg7Z f1FPDIHUp4WMCzPhjvqh8Mkv1FPDGGyXwwfmF4WPfVfbMbQ+GH/1IDtliyHhj468LHfqZ8Mv 6mfDJH9SHhm+pL4Y+OvCx0WZ8MUWz9sPvqY8MeLQeGA508KRrZnwx4sj4Yei2Xwx/oL4ZE51 4Ug+qHwxptT4ZIDbr4Ym1svhiMy8KRG3I7YmYadsPGtfbEjae2SGVaSYxe2N9CvbDoWVe2KL Yjww+MAjhSH6sSOmYWhr0yRCyXwy/qa+GDx08KQrbEdsUFuT2w4NoPDHJajwwHMvCk/1Qntl Gzbww/ECjtlmBD2yPjFeFjD2jeGItbHwyUvaqe2BpLIeGTjnXhY01vib2p8MkJsvbL+oV7ZZ 44RwsWe0J7YibRvDJcdNB7Y06WPDJDUhHCxI2p8MabU9hkqbS/bKGl79Ml+ZHevCxhbRq9MV Fo3hkoTSh4YqNLXwyJ1IXhYmLRh2xQWx8Mk50seGJtptO2D8wCvCx0Wx8MUW2Phh0bAjtjhZ HwxOYd68KUrAR2xZIMNVsvbFksvbIHME0lqQnFBFhmLQDL+rAdsrOQJpALF7YskeCRBTFEip kTNNLYoqYKAoMpVpjsqJtLs2bNgV/9Tv+UcvKOKtjNlDLxV2bNmxV2bNmxV1BmzZsVdmzZsV dQZs2bFXZs2bFWuIxpjU9sfmw7qoG3U9soW6jtgjNkvUqxUAx+bNkCrs2bNirs2bNirqZqZs 2KuzZs2KuzZs2KuzZs2KuzZs2KtUGVxGOzYq1xGXTNmxV2bNmxV2bNmxV2bNmxV2VQHLzYqt 4DL4jLzY7q1xGagy82KreIzcB4Y7Nh3Vqgy82bArqZVAcvNiqwxqc3prj82HdVoUDHUGbNgV 2ambNirXEZqZebFXZs2bFXZs2bFX/9k= --------------050701040700050504050002 Content-Type: image/gif; name="abubblu.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="abubblu.gif" R0lGODlhHgAeAMT/AP///5mZzGZm/2ZmzDMz/wAA/7u7uwAAAP//zP//mf//Zv//M///AP/M ///MzP/MmcDAwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ACH5BAEAABAALAAAAAAeAB4AQAWBICSOZGmeKFQUBmSs49q+RVoOa67rg+3/wKAwMCAQVsZj wTgIBFfOAEwEhUhrwqx2e8KteiRvAfw7gqcqLI6wRaOF1XQMew1eCWTRPc/t+/99AYIngk5B XogjiF9AblhyVI82VzuVcVmOgJlad0pJSEqGPpuQpZNIl3eXgKytrq0hADs= --------------050701040700050504050002-- From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21518 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 21:41:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 21:41:17 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136Jue-0007lL-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 22:25:56 +0100 Received: from tantalum.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.80] helo=tantalum) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136Jud-0007lG-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 22:25:55 +0100 Received: from [213.1.157.24] (helo=default) by tantalum with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 136JuZ-0000wA-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 22:25:52 +0100 Message-ID: <001401bfdeeb$9c1b9f40$189d01d5@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: DX Cluster spots for June 24/25th at GB7DXM Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 22:19:14 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi All, first the return of CFH is confirmed by Larry. It seems to be visible between about 2400z and 0600z here, reaching the same sort of strength I saw it in the winter. Unfortunately our man-on-the-spot Jean-Marc has moved west now so we have no way of confiming that it is still radiating the same power it was before the TX change. The enhanced daytime trace that I reported on Friday (1449-1459z) seems to correlate with an M2 X-ray burst (Thanks to Larry for that gen). I only saw the estimated last 10 minutes of what was probably a 30 minute event, and the peak strength was certainly within about 6dB of the peak night-time strength. Did anyone see enhancement from the delayed particle streams, maybe Sunday? Stations heard here on what seemed like a fairly low activity weekend G8RW,PA0SE,PA0BWL,DJ9IE,G3XDV, all at good strength, and a call I have not heard before G0VXG who was 559 here on Sat at 1803z on an unanswered CQ. Good copy from Andy's 2.5Hz 5watt SMT-Hell after a bit of playing with the parameters on Spectran. He would have been an easy 'O' signal on Spectrogram (0.7Hz) on QRS CW. Which just goes to show how far 5 watts will travel ! There were two stations on Sunday morning with DFCW, I suspect at one stage Markus DF6NM may have been working Valerio. I did decode the name but was running 'gram too slowly to get an full decode easily on a weakish signal. If it was Valerio IK1ZPV I did not copy his signal at that time. Was there a bust of 5Hz Hell in the transmission Markus? Spots from the cluster follow, no G stations logged :- 136.7 DL3FDO 25-Jun-2000 0952Z cq 136.5 DK6NI 25-Jun-2000 0925Z cq 136.8 OK1DTN 25-Jun-2000 0909Z cq 136.8 OK1DTN 25-Jun-2000 0903Z 136.9 DJ2EY 25-Jun-2000 0804Z 559 cq 136.7 DJ2EY 25-Jun-2000 0713Z 136.8 OK1DTN 25-Jun-2000 0653Z 539 in JN58AU 136.7 OK1DTN 25-Jun-2000 0647Z 559 cq 136.5 OK1DTN 18-Jun-2000 1848Z now-like ever-vy gd G3NYK de GB7DXM 25-Jun 1900Z > 73 de Alan G3NYK JO02PB Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 253 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 07:21:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 07:21:54 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136T5O-0000V7-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:13:38 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mail.sci.fi ([195.74.0.53] helo=pefletti.saunalahti.fi ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136T5N-0000V2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:13:37 +0100 Received: from default (DCLXVI.tdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.80.166]) by pefletti.saunalahti.fi (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA08229 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:13:32 +0300 (EET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20000626101413.008008e0@pop.saunalahti.fi> X-Sender: vaiski1@pop.saunalahti.fi (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:14:13 +0300 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?V=E4in=F6_Lehtoranta?= Subject: LF: Signal Strength Measurements by OH2LX, 26 June 2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Signal strength measurements of various LF stations by OH2LX: VLF NAV system "Alpha" has been back since the 20th June... ------------------------------------------------------------------ Day ------------------ 19Jun 20Jun 21Jun 22Jun 23Jun 24Jun 25Jun MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN Time, UTC ------------ 2055- 2110- 2050- 2055- 2045- 2050- 2050- ------------------------------------------------------------------ kHz Stn d,km AZI Indicated ESH2 input, dBmW ------------------------------------------------------------------ 68.9 DHJ58? 1115, 242 -103 -103 -105 Nil Nil Nil Nil ------------------------------------------------------------------ 73.3 Rugby, 1825, 252, -105c -104c -104c -106c -105c -106 -105 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 75.0 HBG, 1992, 226, -107 -102 -105 -109 -107 -111 -109 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 77.5 DCF77, 1543, 228, -91 -85 -90 -89 -91 -91 -92 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 128.9 DCF49, 1544, 228, -93 -87 -103 -96 -95 -93 -97 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 138.8 DBF39, 1221, 226, -89 -91 -93 -89 -91 -90 -95 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 135.8 SXV, 2490, 182, -101 -109 -115 -110 -107 -109 -110 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 137.0 CFH, 5750, 295, Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil ------------------------------------------------------------------ (R&S ESH2/---- 10m coax----/1:10/-----15m wire-----): Noise level with antenna: with 200Hz IF BandWidth: -24..-20 dB(uV), -131..-127dBmW (varies with frq, qrm, qrn etc) ------------------------------------------------------------------ 73.3: - c = carrier not identified, assumed to be Rugby ------------------------------------------------------------------ End of message of 26th June 2000, 0800 UTC, from OH2LX ------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------- V.K.Lehtoranta, OH2LX, POBox 50, FIN-05401 Jokela, Finland ------ Tel: +358-9-4173965 ---- Fax: +358-9-4173961 ------ E-mail: vaiski@dlc.fi - alias: oh2lx@dlc.fi & oh2lx@sral.fi From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3332 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 07:26:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 07:26:55 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136TB5-0000WB-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:19:31 +0100 Received: from kerberos.telecom.cz ([194.228.2.35] helo=mail.core.telecom.cz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136TB4-0000W6-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:19:30 +0100 Received: from dell1.cz.gmc.net ([194.228.225.18]) by mail.core.telecom.cz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA20788 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:19:27 +0200 Received: from p (p.maly.cz.gmc.net [192.168.1.35]) by dell1.cz.gmc.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id NVDNQ8AZ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:22:18 +0200 Message-ID: <01b801bfdf3f$42dee1e0$2301a8c0@maly.cz.gmc.net> From: "Petr Maly" To: "136 group" Subject: LF: New Spectrogram - "EasyGram" Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:22:18 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Hello LowFers
 
I have made my own user interface for Spectrum.dll (by R.S.Horne). My interface provides the same functionality as Spectrogram, but it has a more user-friendly access. Main differences:
1. All the settings can be done while scanning runs (like Spectran)
2. The picture moves in a separate window. This enables to change the size and position of the window (don't do it with mouse but by entering numbers in configuration). Also, the scanning window can be maximized accross the whole screen.
3. All the settings can be saved to a "profile". Once the profile is defined, you can select all the settings at once by selecting the profile - item in a combo box. This includes also position and size of the scanning window.
4. Vertical (waterfall) scanning is possible.
 
I created it during weekend so that it is not fully finished yet and therefore it is an Alpha version. Also, help is missing and "about box" with thanks to the author of Spectrum.dll.
Download the file from:
 
73, Petr OK1FIG
 
 
 
 
From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10989 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 08:46:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 08:46:08 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136URu-0000lJ-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:40:58 +0100 Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136URt-0000lE-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:40:58 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id KAA64486 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:40:55 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20000626103601.2c7f79f2@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:36:01 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: LFCC Award Proposal In-reply-to: <3.0.3.32.20000623164605.007b0370@highnoonfilm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH A LOW FREQUENCY CENTURY CLUB AWARD (LFCC) >By Les Rayburn, KT4OZ > > ... > >0-100Khz (VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who >could verify reception of stations in 25 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements >for each additional 25 stations. > >76Khz (Amateur VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators >who could verify two way contacts with or reception of stations in 10 >Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 10 grid squares. > > ... > >136Khz (Amateur LF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators >who could verify two way contacts with or reception of stations in 25 >Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 25 grid squares. > Good idea, but is does not agree with the 'official ranges' : VLF = 3 to 30kHz LF = 30 to 300 kHz So the 75kHz UK allocation is actually LF, not VLF 73, Rik ON7YD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13028 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 08:48:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 08:48:31 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136UQh-0000ke-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:39:43 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136UQd-0000kZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:39:39 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id JAA08030; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:44:03 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 14883 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 09:33:49 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 09:33:49 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id JAA16986; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:32:23 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma016789; Mon, 26 Jun 00 09:31:41 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:45:40 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:37:52 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CDF@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: Re: SMT Hell Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:37:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: No, the version of Spectrogram I use does not have the time delay function. Use Spectran instead. For this 2.5Hz mode Gram will not go narrow enough I suspect. even if you do get the delay right. Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: Ko Versteeg[SMTP:nl9222tv@tref.nl] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-25 10:35 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: LF: Re: SMT Hell > > Andy.. > Using SpectroGram here, any idea what the best value > for the time scale in msec is. > Running it at 3000Msec now but traces are very weak. > > 73 de Ko, NL9222 > > ---------- > > From: Andy Talbot > > To: LF Group > > Subject: LF: SMT Hell > > Date: Saturday, June 24, 2000 11:53 PM > > > > For information, I am transmitting a 2.5 Hz wide SMT Hell signal > > continuously on 137.6kHz with pixel duration 2s. Use Spectran at > 0.031 > Hz > > resolution and about 40 - 50% speed, averaging off. Power output > is 5 > > Watts RF to the antenna, about -33dBW ERP. > > > > However, there may be a short break sometime tomorrow (Sunday) while > I > > re-route the coax feed to the antenna. > > > > Andy G4JNT > > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25116 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 14:08:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 14:08:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 30871 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 13:24:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cask.force9.net) (195.166.128.29) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 13:24:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 23730 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 11:40:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by cask.force9.net with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 11:40:31 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136XCJ-0001Hn-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:37:03 +0100 Received: from mserv1d.u-net.net ([195.102.240.96]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136XCH-0001Hi-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:37:02 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1d.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #36) id 136XF0-0006bD-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:39:50 +0100 Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:20:00 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:19:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Re: CFH and solar event?? In-reply-to: <004101bfdd63$4d8eacc0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > So we might think that it took some 10 hours for the faster material to > get here, or was it the real fast stuff the occured as you heard the > signal? The only time I have recorded an enhancement of the reception of CFH coincided exactly with a major flare so the suggestion is "the real fast stuff". If true, this is bad news as we really need some warning if we are to make the best of a short enhancement. Interestingly this occasion was the day after some other flares, so perhaps it needs both. See http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/mike/cfh.htm Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10647 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 14:16:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO magnus.force9.net) (195.166.128.27) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 14:16:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 31745 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2000 12:48:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnus.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 26 Jun 2000 12:48:21 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136XCS-0001Hu-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:37:12 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mserv1d.u-net.net ([195.102.240.96]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136XCQ-0001Hp-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:37:11 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1d.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #36) id 136XF9-0006bQ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:39:59 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:30:59 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:30:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Re: Sleep mode antenna In-reply-to: <2000062410122668199@zetnet.co.uk> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > > Here in Sydney Australia we have (had) a CFA installation in commercial > > use. I have done relative FS measurements (single point) at a distance > > of 60Km and can report that the CFA antenna is NOT working as the > > inventors say it will. > > In my early days of Ham radio I visited a radio ham who used one of > those old metal spring double beds as an antenna. The bed was > connected to the hot end of the ATU and the other to the water pipe > of a sink that was also in the room. As I recall he seemed to work > around the UK on 80m using it. I called it the Sleep Mode Antenna (SMA). Many years ago, RadCom (actually it was the RSGB BUlletin in those days) ran a superb April spoof. It described an antenna comprising two circular plates joined by vertical bars like a cage. The clever bit was that the bars were spaced logarithmically from each other. More complex calculation went into where to attach the feedpoint - a single wire - off centre of the lower plate. This was all fascinating and believable until you got to the final sentence whch said that for best results the single wire feeder should be vertical and at least a quarter wavelength, tuned against a good ground. This was probably aimed at a popular short loaded antenna of the day called a Joystick, but which was also called the VFA (variable frequency antenna). Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14554 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2000 11:36:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 27 Jun 2000 11:36:57 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136tVv-0004pf-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:26:47 +0100 Received: from mta02-svc.ntlworld.com ([62.253.162.42] helo=mta02-svc.server.ntlworld.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136tVt-0004pa-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:26:46 +0100 Received: from compaq ([62.253.85.169]) by mta02-svc.server.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with SMTP id <20000627122608.WRSZ10065.mta02-svc.server.ntlworld.com@compaq> for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:26:08 +0000 Message-ID: <003301bfe02a$8fd34860$a955fd3e@compaq> From: "tracey.gardner" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: VON DER LEY 18m fiberglass masts Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:26:37 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I intend ordering either one or two of the 18m fiberglass masts produced in Germany by VON DER LEY and wondered if anyone else in the UK would be interested in ordering one at the same time, to cut down on the transport costs. The last time I checked the masts cost about 160 pounds including transport from Germany. 73s Tracey G5VU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7198 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2000 14:43:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 27 Jun 2000 14:43:15 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136wUR-0005LL-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 15:37:27 +0100 Received: from tomts1.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.139] helo=tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 136wUP-0005LG-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 15:37:26 +0100 Received: from r980913 ([216.208.118.15]) by tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20000627143722.PPTN23113.tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net@r980913> for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:37:22 -0400 Message-ID: <000e01bfe045$69f08980$0f76d0d8@r980913> From: "Dave Goodwin VE2ZP/VE9CB" To: "137kHz" Subject: LF: VA3LK Beacon Heard by VE2ZP Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:38:47 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: This morning, Tuesday 27 June, from 0600-0620z (2am local), I copied Larry VA3LK's beacon on 137.71kHz. VA3LK sounded about s4, compared to CFH which was s8 from 1200km away. At 1430z (10.30am local), VA3LK was slightly weaker. Larry's signal was certainly strong enough for a conventional CW contact. It is quite an adjustment to copy morse at 0.4wpm. Larry's location is less than 200km from here (near Ottawa), so this is no great DX, but this is the first Amateur LF signal I have heard to date. Larry is probably the only Canadian Amateur transmitting on LF at present. 73, Dave VE2ZP From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1002 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2000 19:44:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 27 Jun 2000 19:44:24 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 13719d-00064d-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 20:36:17 +0100 Received: from tantalum.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.80] helo=tantalum) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 13719c-00064Y-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 20:36:16 +0100 Received: from [62.7.13.63] (helo=default) by tantalum with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 13719a-0005oe-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 20:36:14 +0100 Message-ID: <000501bfe06e$a0abc7e0$3f0d073e@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: Petr's Easygram Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 20:32:45 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi all. Petr has done a nice job of front-ending Robert's software. The major advantage is to be able to adjust the parameters without losing, and having to restart, the display. It will be interesting to see if those who have trouble with Robert's original version, find they can access the 5000 samples/s facility via Petr's menu. There are yet some interesting parts.....I am trying to work out how to use a bandwidth of -10Hz, before he removes it from the menu! I'm afraid I may have messed up the LF DX as I have already posted him a substantial 'Wish List' !! Petr doesn't say so (unless its in the 'manual'....and nobody reads those .......do they!) but I assume it will require Win95/98/2000 as does the original. Nice piece of work Petr, thanks for your efforts. 73 de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13233 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2000 20:55:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 27 Jun 2000 20:55:40 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1372GF-0006FW-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:47:11 +0100 Received: from anchor-post-31.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.89]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 1372GE-0006FR-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:47:10 +0100 Received: from boxernet.demon.co.uk ([194.222.47.214] helo=boxernet) by anchor-post-31.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 1372GD-000NWe-0V for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 21:47:09 +0100 From: "Michael Probert" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: VON DER LEY 18m fiberglass masts Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:55:59 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-reply-to: <003301bfe02a$8fd34860$a955fd3e@compaq> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: -----Original Message----- From: majordom@post.thorcom.com [mailto:majordom@post.thorcom.com]On Behalf Of tracey.gardner Sent: 27 June 2000 12:27 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: VON DER LEY 18m fiberglass masts I intend ordering either one or two of the 18m fiberglass masts produced in Germany by VON DER LEY and wondered if anyone else in the UK would be interested in ordering one at the same time, to cut down on the transport costs. The last time I checked the masts cost about 160 pounds including transport from Germany. 73s Tracey G5VU njdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjnvnvnvn vnvnvvmmmvmvvnbvhffufuyryurrririririrryryryrggdyututut From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23802 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 10:22:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 10:22:15 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Et3-000895-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:16:05 +0100 Received: from tomts2.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.140] helo=tomts2-srv.bellnexxia.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Et2-00088O-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:16:04 +0100 Received: from server1 ([206.172.245.112]) by tomts2-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20000628101600.XMJU19472.tomts2-srv.bellnexxia.net@server1> for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:16:00 -0400 Message-ID: <003601bfe0e8$bae186c0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Wire, for LF Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 06:06:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Greetings: Preparations continue for TransAtlantic II, the test transmissions from here in Eastern Ontario on 137.710 kHz are now heard widely in the USA and Canada. Moving forward through the lists of things and issues to be worked on, the subject of WIRE for LF antennas comes up. The objective of this email is to have a discussion with active LF amateurs that will ensure for me at the end of the day that the best alternatives have been discovered and considered for use here. The current antenna here for the test transmissions is made from what we here call common antenna wire, 7 strands of semi hard copper wire, commonly known as 7/24. For LF the type of wire is marginal, when used for long spans it stretches and anneals, becomes eventually very brittle and fails. A lousy wire solution for long spans associated with LF antennas. The LF test antenna here is far from optimum because I simply do not dare to stretch the wire harder with the rope that pulls the antenna away from the supporting tower. The alternative selections available here are very limited. There is a reasonable quantity of semi hard drawn solid copper wire #12, commonly used by the Broadcast Station industry. I use this for MF/HF antennas but it is also subject to annealing and stretching. We have available an insulated wire known variously as "FlexWeave", similar to Litz wire but without the shellac to hold the wire together. This is around 75 and 150 strands in the two sizes that are usually available. The issue here again is strength, 150 Meter spans do not last very long. The last is the good old copper clad steel wire, not much copper any more but usually pretty good for long spans. Sources of this product are limited, a good source here in Canada would be a help. What are the other alternatives that you are using in your setup? Why are they good? What is the usual cost in your area? If you were looking at spans of up to 300 Meters what would you use for an antenna wire? Not a glorious subject, but one which is important to the LF community. Your comments are solicited. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14593 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 11:34:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 11:34:53 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Fxc-0008LV-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:24:52 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from nurn-ip.esoterica.pt ([209.198.242.60] helo=nurn.esoterica.pt) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Fxa-0008LQ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:24:51 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from ea.esoterica.pt (ea.esoterica.pt [195.22.0.204]) by nurn.esoterica.pt (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e5SCOaw17632 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:24:36 GMT Received: from por215.esoterica.pt (por215.esoterica.pt [195.22.5.215]) by ea.esoterica.pt (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA06001 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:24:36 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Authentication-Warning: ea.esoterica.pt: por215.esoterica.pt [195.22.5.215] didn't use HELO protocol Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20000628112441.008a8d20@pop3.esoterica.pt> X-Sender: brian@pop3.esoterica.pt X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:24:41 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Brian Rogerson" Subject: Re: LF: Wire, for LF Antennas In-reply-to: <003601bfe0e8$bae186c0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Aluminium? Much lighter so you can use larger diameters. I use it extensively now, without problem to date but can only claim a 40m span folded dipole with 2.5mm diameter wire. Brian, CT1DRP At 06:06 28/06/00 -0400, you wrote: >Greetings: > >Preparations continue for TransAtlantic II, the test transmissions from here >in Eastern Ontario on 137.710 kHz are now heard widely in the USA and >Canada. > >Moving forward through the lists of things and issues to be worked on, the >subject of WIRE for LF antennas comes up. The objective of this email is to >have a discussion with active LF amateurs that will ensure for me at the end >of the day that the best alternatives have been discovered and considered >for use here. > >The current antenna here for the test transmissions is made from what we >here call common antenna wire, 7 strands of semi hard copper wire, commonly >known as 7/24. For LF the type of wire is marginal, when used for long >spans it stretches and anneals, becomes eventually very brittle and fails. >A lousy wire solution for long spans associated with LF antennas. The LF >test antenna here is far from optimum because I simply do not dare to >stretch the wire harder with the rope that pulls the antenna away from the >supporting tower. > >The alternative selections available here are very limited. There is a >reasonable quantity of semi hard drawn solid copper wire #12, commonly used >by the Broadcast Station industry. I use this for MF/HF antennas but it is >also subject to annealing and stretching. > >We have available an insulated wire known variously as "FlexWeave", similar >to Litz wire but without the shellac to hold the wire together. This is >around 75 and 150 strands in the two sizes that are usually available. The >issue here again is strength, 150 Meter spans do not last very long. > >The last is the good old copper clad steel wire, not much copper any more >but usually pretty good for long spans. Sources of this product are >limited, a good source here in Canada would be a help. > >What are the other alternatives that you are using in your setup? Why are >they good? What is the usual cost in your area? If you were looking at >spans of up to 300 Meters what would you use for an antenna wire? > >Not a glorious subject, but one which is important to the LF community. >Your comments are solicited. > >Larry >VA3LK > > > > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 82 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 12:37:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 12:37:57 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137GyS-00000F-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:29:48 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from finch-post-10.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.38]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137GyR-00000A-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:29:48 +0100 Received: from telemetry.demon.co.uk ([194.222.19.114]) by finch-post-10.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 137GyM-00018t-0A for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:29:42 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:15:47 +0100 To: "RSGB LF Group" From: "Tom Boucher" Subject: LF: Antenna Wire MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 3.03a Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Larry & all My 1100 ft horizontal long wire is made from 32 X 0.2mm thin wall PVC covered, 10 amp plain annealed copper wire, Arrow Stock No: 438095B, cost 30.42 pounds per 500m reel. Maximum length between halyards was about 200 feet or so and this stayed up without trouble for 8 months. However, I foolishly disposed of one halyard which resulted in a run of around 400 feet which did not last, and with the winds of late, have been unable to keep it up in the air. Current plan is to replace halyards, limiting maximum span to 200 ft and stick with the same wire which seems to be relatively strong and light weight. If that doesn't work, perhaps try a thicker wire - Arrow have 21 X 0.3mm at GBP46/500m or 28 X 0.3 at GBP54/500m - unless someone comes up with a better idea. Brian, where did you obtain your alumin(i)um wire? 73, Tom G3OLB. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1889 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 12:38:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 12:38:12 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Gud-0008W6-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:25:51 +0100 Received: from mserv1e.u-net.net ([195.102.240.97]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Gub-0008W1-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:25:49 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1e.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #37) id 137GuV-0000lN-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:25:44 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:19:14 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:19:13 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Petr's Easygram In-reply-to: <000501bfe06e$a0abc7e0$3f0d073e@default> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: G3NYK wrote: >I am trying to work out how to use a bandwidth of -10Hz, before > he removes it from the menu! Don't remove this one. It should give better than infinite signal to noise ratio. You should be able to light a small city with the output from a signal that you just thought might be on the air. Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2344 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 12:53:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 12:53:46 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137H6s-00002j-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:38:30 +0100 Received: from helios.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.200.2]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137H6r-00002e-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:38:29 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [147.197.200.44] (helo=gemini) by helios.herts.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.11 #1) id 137H6j-00021d-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:38:21 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <21464.200006281238@gemini> From: "James Moritz" Organization: University of Hertfordshire To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:45:50 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: Antenna wire X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dear LF Group, I believe most LF amateurs favour string for their antennas - preferably well soaked in brine to maximise conductivity... But seriously, I have found 24/0.2 or 32/0.2 stranded PVC insulated wire suprisingly robust - it has put up with winter gales and so on in spans up to 40m, even though the trees it is attached to wave about a lot in the wind. It seems to put up with flexing a lot better than solid wire, and the sheathing prevents corrosion. I don't suppose it is very useful as a mechanical support, though, and if you are lucky enough to have room for longer spans, it might not be up to the job. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25101 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 12:56:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 12:56:29 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137HHe-00006B-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:49:38 +0100 Received: from mserv1e.u-net.net ([195.102.240.97]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137HHd-000066-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:49:37 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1e.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #37) id 137HHV-0001rB-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:49:31 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:39:02 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 13:39:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Wire, for LF Antennas In-reply-to: <003601bfe0e8$bae186c0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > Preparations continue for TransAtlantic II, the test transmissions from > here in Eastern Ontario on 137.710 kHz are now heard widely in the USA and > Canada. Larry, It would help if you could give an idea of the sort of distances being covered and what you believe your erp is now. Nothing seen at my end at 0200UTC last night even though CFH was S9. 73 Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9778 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 16:54:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 16:54:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137KuT-0000sp-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:41:57 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r13.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.67]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137KuR-0000sh-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:41:55 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-r13.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id l.f9.5ca1c4 (10052) for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:41:16 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:41:16 EDT Subject: Re: LF: Petr's Easygram To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 70 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >>I am trying to work out how to use a bandwidth of -10Hz, before >> he removes it from the menu! >Don't remove this one. It should give better than infinite signal to >noise ratio. You should be able to light a small city with the output >from a signal that you just thought might be on the air. Actually, I suspect it would take a bandwidth closer to -30Hz to achieve that much output. But I'm having a little trouble with the maths necessary to prove it. This dividing by zero business is harder than I thought.... 73, John KD4IDY From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20223 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 18:30:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 18:30:39 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137MU2-00018Y-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:22:46 +0100 Received: from cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk ([195.92.195.173]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137MU1-00018T-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:22:45 +0100 Received: from modem-101.angrim.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.113.101] helo=robing) by cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.13 #0) id 137MTy-0007Mx-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 19:22:43 +0100 Message-ID: <001101bfe125$c0b6aca0$6571883e@robing> From: robin@g3lba.freeserve.co.uk To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: Subject: Re: LF: Petr's Easygram Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 18:24:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dividing by Zero is easy.... My Windows PC tries it all the time!! Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 5:41 PM Subject: Re: LF: Petr's Easygram > >>I am trying to work out how to use a bandwidth of -10Hz, before > >> he removes it from the menu! > > >Don't remove this one. It should give better than infinite signal to > >noise ratio. You should be able to light a small city with the output > >from a signal that you just thought might be on the air. > > Actually, I suspect it would take a bandwidth closer to -30Hz to achieve that > much output. But I'm having a little trouble with the maths necessary to > prove it. This dividing by zero business is harder than I thought.... > > 73, > John KD4IDY > > > From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4498 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 22:27:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 22:27:19 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Q9q-0001hE-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 23:18:10 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.10]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137Q9p-0001h9-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 23:18:09 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id l.34.70fc24e (16789) for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 18:17:31 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: <34.70fc24e.268bd37b@aol.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 18:17:31 EDT Subject: Re: LF: Petr's Easygram To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 107 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In a message dated 6/28/00 2:27:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, robin@g3lba.freeserve.co.uk writes: << Dividing by Zero is easy.... My Windows PC tries it all the time!! >> If it succeeds, please advise soonest. Will make generous offer. :) From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14482 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2000 22:51:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 28 Jun 2000 22:51:01 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137QYn-0001k3-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 23:43:57 +0100 Received: from neodymium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.83] helo=neodymium) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137QYm-0001jy-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 23:43:56 +0100 Received: from [213.1.188.34] (helo=default) by neodymium with smtp (Exim 3.03 #16) id 137QYk-00072V-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 23:43:55 +0100 Message-ID: <000201bfe152$05be7900$22bc01d5@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: Antenna wire materials Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 20:26:24 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi Larry, I will fly this through the reflector so it can generate some Flak. It occurs to me that you are having separate TX and RX sites......so presumably separate aerials. I would not think that you want to transmit into a very long wire (though several do quite successfully) but that your main interest in this would be in receive as a Beverage format. My reason for saying this is that I suspect that wire resistance is not quite so much an issue on a receive aerial, so you could probably use a steel/copper stranded mix for a long span. You do not want to put a lot of effort into the erection of many support masts for such a short period. I am aware that a good TX antenna is usually a good RX antenna, but the reverse is not necessarily true (e.g. small loop) Now, at the risk of creating a furore, in the case on an 'L' or a 'T' antenna for TX, the current flowing in the vertical section is all important so this needs to be thick and low resistance, but when it gets up into the top section it doesn't matter so much as this is all 'top loading' so several smaller lighter wires would do. You could even use telephone 'drop-wire' (steel/copper stranded mix, you can see my upbringing, but I don't know whether your telcos have a different name for it ) the current in these wires is supposed to be lost to radiation so what matter if a bit is lost in resistance?. That is a challenge to the modellers to calculate how many tenths of a dB you will loose with resistive top wires. I am assuming you will not want to transit on a low horizontal dipole, because too much of the power would be lost straight up in the air. On top of these you will need to consider the kind of wire for kite use (I think you said you had found a kite specialist) Dave and Mike are better sources on that topic. Hopefully my misconceptions can be corrected with experimental experience, but I do like to look at problems from strange angles, if not quite laterally. Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 742 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2000 12:41:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 29 Jun 2000 12:41:56 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137dTW-0003tF-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:31:22 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from imo-r14.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.68]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137dTV-0003t9-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:31:21 +0100 Received: from G0MRF@aol.com by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id l.c3.6eb3a9f (4218) for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 08:30:44 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: G0MRF@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 08:30:44 EDT Subject: LF: Wire for LF Antennas To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 32 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In a message dated 6/28/00 11:21:39 AM GMT Daylight Time, kayser@sympatico.ca writes: << Moving forward through the lists of things and issues to be worked on, the subject of WIRE for LF antennas comes up. The objective of this email is to have a discussion with active LF amateurs that will ensure for me at the end of the day that the best alternatives have been discovered and considered for use here. >> Hi All. I've tried various insulated stranded copper 'equipment' wire which is OK in short runs, or for a short time. The Whitton club antenna, and the /P antenna used at Hastings is standard hard drawn copper in UK 16 gauge ( apx. 1.7mm dia ) The clubs 234 foot has been in place for 2 years without problem but the extra tension to raise 300m would be considerable. Price here is £15 per 100m. The resistive losses in the antenna should be minor compared to the losses in the coil / ground system. How about a thin steel cable under a lot of tension, used to support a lower loss copper radiator. As in power distribution between pylons? 73 David G0MRF From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5601 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2000 13:04:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 29 Jun 2000 13:04:07 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137dtz-0003yi-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:58:43 +0100 Received: from tomts1.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.139] helo=tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137dty-0003yd-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:58:43 +0100 Received: from server1 ([206.172.245.75]) by tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20000629125839.DIJO5881.tomts1-srv.bellnexxia.net@server1> for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 08:58:39 -0400 Message-ID: <001c01bfe1c8$9d8ff7b0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> From: "Larry Kayser" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Louis, G5RV, Silent Key Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 08:50:23 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I have just had a short email on the FOC reflector saying that Louis, G5RV has passed away at noon UK time yesterday. Larry VA3LK From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16648 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2000 17:23:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 29 Jun 2000 17:23:10 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137htC-0004sA-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:14:10 +0100 Received: from mserv1a.u-net.net ([195.102.240.34]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137htB-0004s5-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:14:09 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1a.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 137ht9-0006iV-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:14:08 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:00:14 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 18:00:11 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Louis, G5RV, Silent Key In-reply-to: <001c01bfe1c8$9d8ff7b0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > I have just had a short email on the FOC reflector saying that Louis, G5RV > has passed away at noon UK time yesterday. See the rsgb web site for more info. Mike Dennison, G3XDV Publications Manager * RadCom * Ham Radio Today * GB2RS News * * RSGB Books and CDs * Radio Society of Great Britain Lambda House, Cranborne Road Potters Bar, Herts UK, EN6 3JE Tel: +44 (0) 1707 659015; Fax: +44 (0) 1707 645105 RSGB - UK AMATEUR RADIO From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13915 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2000 07:03:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 30 Jun 2000 07:03:51 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137uen-0007Bh-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 07:52:09 +0100 Received: from mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz ([203.96.92.15]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137uel-0007Bc-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 07:52:08 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [202.27.181.181] by mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20000630065132.BZPB20783102.mta4-rme.xtra.co.nz@[202.27.181.181]> for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:51:32 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <395C423B.6102@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:46:19 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Wire, for LF Antennas References: <003601bfe0e8$bae186c0$0a00a8c0@server1.ThreeLakes.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Larry, Mentioned for completeness, at the Quartz Hill ZL6QH DX station, of which I am a member, we decided to use high tensile 12 gauge galvanised steel wire for replacement of any of the long Vee antennas. Legs are typically 250 to 300 metres long. We modelled the situation and found that losses were only fractional compared to using hard drawn copper. Some have been installed for over a year, and Wellington has a reputation for being "Windy Wellington". The 12 gauge high tensile galvanised steel wire is in regular use for fences on New Zealand farms, so is cheap and available. The ZL6QH Vees are all fairly high (surge) impedance wires at the MF/HF bands and that is why a few more ohms of surface resistance does not give rise to a significant loss factor. An LF antenna may well be a low resistance affair where series resistance in the "top loading" is significant, at least for transmitting efficiency. I think another reply on the reflector mentioned using copper for an "upwire" and galvanised steel for the top loading. In terms of "bang for buck" it could pay to concentrate on a higher upwire than wider top loading. 73, Bob From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4512 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2000 07:44:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 30 Jun 2000 07:44:07 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137vOH-0007KM-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:39:09 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137vOG-0007KH-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:39:08 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id IAA24196; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:43:41 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 6230 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2000 08:33:13 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 30 Jun 2000 08:33:13 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id IAA16961; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:31:28 GMT Received: from unknown(10.71.64.31) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma016889; Fri, 30 Jun 00 08:30:53 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:45:30 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:37:32 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CE6@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: RE: LF: Wire, for LF Antennas Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:37:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: There is also the issue of reduced skin depth and extra losses when using steel wire, or any other magnetic material for that matter. Skin depth reduces as the square root of relative permeability, which for steel wire is several thousand. Did the modelling of the MF atnennas take this magnetic wire effect into account, although at those frequencies much of the current will be concentrated in the zinc galvanising so reducing the Ur losses. As you say, the high impedance of these antenna will not show up the losses in the wire nearly as much as using steel wire at LF where skin depth is 0.2mm or so. Andy G4JNT > ---------- > From: vernall[SMTP:vernall@xtra.co.nz] > Reply To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: 2000-06-30 07:46 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: Wire, for LF Antennas > > Larry, > > Mentioned for completeness, at the Quartz Hill ZL6QH DX station, of > which I am a member, we decided to use high tensile 12 gauge > galvanised > steel wire for replacement of any of the long Vee antennas. Legs are > typically 250 to 300 metres long. We modelled the situation and found > that losses were only fractional compared to using hard drawn copper. > Some have been installed for over a year, and Wellington has a > reputation for being "Windy Wellington". The 12 gauge high tensile > galvanised steel wire is in regular use for fences on New Zealand > farms, > so is cheap and available. > > The ZL6QH Vees are all fairly high (surge) impedance wires at the > MF/HF > bands and that is why a few more ohms of surface resistance does not > give rise to a significant loss factor. > > An LF antenna may well be a low resistance affair where series > resistance in the "top loading" is significant, at least for > transmitting efficiency. I think another reply on the reflector > mentioned using copper for an "upwire" and galvanised steel for the > top > loading. In terms of "bang for buck" it could pay to concentrate on a > higher upwire than wider top loading. > > 73, Bob > > -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful. From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 770 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2000 10:26:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 30 Jun 2000 10:26:15 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137xto-0007nn-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:19:52 +0100 Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 137xtl-0007nh-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:19:49 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id MAA37638 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:19:47 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20000630121447.2e57a176@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:14:47 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: RE: LF: Wire, for LF Antennas In-reply-to: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8CE6@pdw-mercury-1.der a.gov.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: At 08:37 30/06/00 +0100, G4JNT wrote: >There is also the issue of reduced skin depth and extra losses when >using steel wire, or any other magnetic material for that matter. Skin >depth reduces as the square root of relative permeability, which for >steel wire is several thousand. Following might be interesting : Aluminium has a lower conductivity compared to Copper (1.76 lower) but has a higher skin-depth (on 136kHz : .18mm for Cu, 0.24 for Al). The result is that for wires with a diameter of more than 1mm Al is only 32% worse than Cu. Or otherwise, a 1.3mm Al wire will have the same losses as a 1mm Cu wire while the weight of 1.3mm Al wire is only half of 1mm Cu wire. 73, Rik ON7YD From rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29744 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2000 21:55:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2000 21:55:53 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135bJF-0001ZY-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 22:48:21 +0100 Received: from mail2.wwisp.com ([207.98.230.22] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 135bJD-0001ZT-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 22:48:19 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from les (adsl-209.wwisp.net [207.98.240.109]) by mail2.wwisp.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id QAA04477; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:48:15 -0500 (CDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: les@highnoonfilm.com Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20000623165020.007e79d0@highnoonfilm.com> X-Sender: les@highnoonfilm.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:50:20 -0500 To: lowfer@qth.net Subject: LF: LFCC Award Proposal Cc: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH A LOW FREQUENCY CENTURY CLUB AWARD (LFCC) By Les Rayburn, KT4OZ June 23, 2000 Objective: To outline a set of suggested guidelines for the establishment of an award targeted at the users of the Low Frequency (Below 500Khz) spectrum. This award would encourage more activity on LF, and spur users to pursue multiple endorsements. Governing Body: Ideally, an LF organization like the Longwave Club of America. Failing that alternate bodies might include AMRAD, RGSB, or ARRL. Award: Certificate, with endorsement stickers. Program Brief: This award would be open to amateur radio operators, lowfers, longwave listeners, and maritime operators. Operators would be required to submit QSL cards, or other verification proof to the governing body to be checked for completeness and accuracy. The decision of the governing body would be final and not available for review. Certificates would be numbered beginning with LFCC #1 (* See Note Below) Certificates to be awarded according to the guidelines below: 0-100Khz (VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify reception of stations in 25 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 25 stations. 73Khz (Amateur VLF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify two way contacts with or reception of stations in 10 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 10 grid squares. Amateurs who operate in the 73Khz range would be required to provide proof of either reception of their station, other stations, or two way contacts to qualify. No contacts with non amateur stations can count towards this endorsement. LF Listeners would receive the Amateur VLF DX Endorsement. 136Khz (Amateur LF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify two way contacts with or reception of stations in 25 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 25 grid squares. Amateurs who operate in the 136Khz range would be required to provide proof of either reception of their station, other stations, or two way contacts to qualify. No contacts with non amateur stations can count towards this endorsement. LF Listeners would receive the Amateur LF DX Endorsement. 160-190Khz (Lowfer Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who can verify reception of their LF beacon in at least 10 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 5 grid squares. LF Listeners (including beacon operators) could also receive the Lowfer DX Endorsement for reception of lowfer beacons in at least 5 grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 5 grid squares. 100Khz-500Khz (LF Endorsement): Award would be granted to those operators who could verify reception of stations in at least 100 Maidenhead grid squares. Endorsements for each additional 50 grid squares. This stations could include any combination of NDB, TWIB, Maritime stations, broadcasting, etc. Basic Rules: Verification could be in the form of a QSL card, verification letter, or other supporting documentation. The governing body would appoint a chairman to inspect and return these verifications. Any operator submitting false or suspect documentation will have those cards marked by the Chairman and their application of LFCC returned. There is no appeal. Operators must resubmit application without those documents judged to be false or suspect. Basic costs would be covered in the application fee (Suggestion $10-$20). Contacts and receptions must have occurred on or before 1980 (I doubt that reliable frequency listings exist much before this date.) Comments: Many LF operators would already qualify for this award. In the case of veteran NDB dx'ers they might even qualify for several endorsement stickers! But for many of us, it would represent a goal that was realistic and achievable...but difficult enough to encourage effort. There are many out there who object to "paper-chasing" of any kind on the low frequencies, and this is understandable. However, if we hope to see amateur allocations grow and foster in this band, activity is what we need. Also many of us Lowfers do not have even a single serious LF listener within the normal range of our stations, growth is important in these areas too. I would further suggest that honorary LFCC's be granted to recognize those pioneers of the band who are no longer living or inactive. For example, Ken Cornell, or Vince Pinto. Comments are welcome.