[Lowfer] 630m "activity" night

[Mitch Powell]

Ok John: Looking for you - RTTY sporadic so should have no problem. Maybe
QSY up 1 to 7059 if there is a problem. Will check both.
3563 now has VE6AW and sever K7/W7 stations running a cw net, and a K7CW
has been in for past hour on 3563....so  80 is much quieter.
Anyone else around - give me a call on 3063/7058/7059 for the next hour.

and Jay - Thanks for the QSO

Mitch

On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 9:06 PM, John Langridge <kb5njd at gmail.com> wrote:

> Mitch thanks for the report.  No one in the chat room has heard you yet,
> including me.  On 40m, there is a mixture of RTTY and haggard CW on 7058
> from time to time.
>
> I am going to have another listen for you after I complete the current JT9
> session and return to CW.
>
> thanks for being QRV.. I will be calling on 40m..
>
> 73!
>
> John KB5NJD / WG2XIQ..
>
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Mitch Powell <ve3ot.mp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Reasonably active tonight and all replies have been on 3563 - nothing on
> 40
> > meters.  Good signals but QSB noted by report and I even have QSB on the
> 80
> > meter signals. Last night was steady and vey quiet conditions.
> > Got one 599 fm NC - but most in the 559 range - but good enough for
> > crosswind.
> > Just got one in KC - so we're getting that far tonight - East to Mass.
> > Mitch 73
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 8:18 PM, JD <listread at lwca.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Be here until 11PM EST ( 0400Z ) anyway - any other suggestions John ?
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > > No, just making a poor joke about my CW speed, unfortunately.
> > >
> > > I have a rig that does 80 meters OK and the antenna matches it well,
> but
> > > crossband would be the problem.  With only the one antenna, and a
> buffer
> > > amp being necessary to receive LF and MF, there'd be a lot of time lost
> > > when I had to run outside after each transmission to reconnect it to
> the
> > > antenna to hear your reply....
> > > 8>D
> > >
> > > If I ever get the big receive loop up, however, crossband will be
> > do-able.
> > > But for all I know, that may not happen until such time (if any) that
> the
> > > FCC gives us 630 meters anyway.
> > >
> > > John D.
> > > ______________________________________________________________
> > > Lowfer mailing list
> > > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > > Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> > > Post must be less than 50KB total for message plus attachment!
> > >
> > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Lowfer mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> > Post must be less than 50KB total for message plus attachment!
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Lowfer mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Lowfer at mailman.qth.net
> Post must be less than 50KB total for message plus attachment!
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>