I didn't have a lot of time to listen this morning, but I did note that
reception conditions were markedly different. A fair number of
carriers, but not on the regular TP channels, so I suspect they were
more DU. Other than 1548 they weren't really the TPs I'd expect
though. For example 1107 was a stronger carrier than 1116, which wasn't
at all impressive. Down lower, 702 was only a fair carrier, with 756
and 765 both stronger.
73,
Nigel Pimblett
Dunmore, Alberta
Nick Hall-Patch wrote:
A big difference from yesterday; the geomagnetic conditions were finally making
themselves felt...presumably because I had a few more minutes to DX.
Listened this morning for a few minutes around 1420 to 1450UT. Most of the
Asian regulars were subdued, though 828 did make a reasonable appearance
Asian unless otherwise noted:
pretty darn good audio (at least briefly): none
reasonable audios (though often battling w/splash): 828
not so reasonable audio, occasional words in splash or noise: 567...an odd one,
as was definitely not Japanese, but there wasn't much being heard from
Australia either, so it seems strange that Julia Creek would be holding forth
when others like 612 weren't doing as well.
Burbles in the splatter: 612, 738 DU, 747, 756 DU, 774 (2 stations), 783 DU,
954
Strongish het, no audio (either undermodulated or ravaged by splatter): 864,
1098 DU
best wishes,
Nick
*****************************
Nick Hall-Patch
Victoria, BC
Canada
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
[email protected]
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original
contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its
editors, publishing staff, or officers
For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
To Post a message: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
[email protected]
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original
contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its
editors, publishing staff, or officers
For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
To Post a message: [email protected]
