Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Summits | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

7118 & cw

Morning folks.

Three Sotas have appeared on 7118 this morning and each time Morse station has fired up.
Sounds like repeated CQ CQ any oen else id it as me Morse is very shabby.


My CW is even worse, but I can tell you it wasn’t CQ!

1 Like

I heard a station just sending numbers in CW on 7093 last night - I presume it was some traning course as it was very slow. Strange to hear morse that high up the band though - normally it’s below 7050, but I think there was some contest on last night, so that’s why it moved into the “all-mode” section of the band I suppose.

At 1111z

CQ DE TM32UFT Op Dan, with replies from French stations


Or it was one of those “numbers stations” sending code groups for some unknown purpose…

TM32UFT is issued for the 32nd annual meeting of the UNION FRANÇAISE des TELEGRAPHISTES (UFT).

16 operators will activate the callsign from april 10th to 24th in CW on HF and VHF bands.

All contacts will be confirmed via REF bureau and LOTW

Direct QSL via F6ICG, GĂ©rard.

But why they would use 7118 kHz is beyond me!
Walt (G3NYY)

Hi Walt & all,

A transmission I heard earlier & most likely what Karl commented on was 5 figure groups with professional / governent style punctuation.

I far prefer that to the wide band OTH radar or digital signals that appear & block large parts of our spectrum for days on end.

And don’t get me started on the rubbish allowed on the market that the public put in their homes!

For those that can read Morse I’d recommenced grabbing a pencil & seeing how much you can write down, after all, that traffic is sent to be manually copied.

Basically, nothing to see here, move along.

73, Mark G0VOF

1 Like

PLT, VDSL2 etc etc

EMnC ( n = NOT ! )

Oh and aren’t these LED bulbs brilliant…

Solution buy a house in the middle of nowhere.

I think you need to buy 220-240 LED bulbs not the universal voltage range ones.

Getting off topic guys but here goes…

I have replaced almost all my light bulbs in my house with the LED types, fitted external LED security lighting and so far cannot detect any interference from them on HF. The background noise floor on HF is much stronger for me now having recently moved from a rural situation of 17 years to a more suburban residential spot. Fortunately the ADSL / VDSL2 comes in underground locally and not on overheads so it could be a lot worse. I can knock out my own VDSL2 on 5 and 7 MHz usually once a day until it learns to avoid those frequencies on my line for that day… that is using 100 watts, ferrites everywhere, screened CAT6 in the shack to the router and the latest BT faceplate for VDSL2. All internal phone sockets in the house have been disconnected other than the main BT point and that made the VDSL2 more immune to my signals than any other measure.

The mystery S9 hetrodyne I get every 16 KHz throughout HF is really annoying though, it comes on for 20-30 minutes at a time then goes off for a similar time before returning. One day I will attempt to DF it.

73 Phil

Nope they are all pretty terrible rgr EMC which use switchers in the base. Passive capacitive divider
bulbs are OK. I have recently completed a case study in work on bayonet bulbs and the effects on DAB radio reception.

Especially bad on radiated emissions. Conducted not so terrible…

I know this isn’t the place to discuss this major topic, but I feel sorry for you Phil knowing how established your previous QTH station was. Going rural is a must now for serious HF enthusiasts.

Highly desirable, I suppose, but often not possible.

I got a couple of LED bulbs from Poundland expecting them to be rubbish. In fact they were good, no noise and so far have lasted longer than I would expect from the cheap incandescents bulbs from the same place.

I’d never heard of those, but it sounds good - I’m guessing they might end up very cheap to produce with a low component count…

In last time we have many problems with not amateur QRM on our bands. Near 7.090 working FAX who transmitting weather maps but near 7.118 tranmitting CW.
The most damaging is the systematic DATA transmission of QRG 7.030-7.035
I receiving it verry strong so I think it is military stations from east.
Both the signal strength and the nature of their work confirm this.
What’s the crap about this CQ on 7.118? These are typical military diagrams.
It does not make sense to pay attention; They not listened on the same QRG. This should be reported to the relevant institutions.

vy 73 de Mariusz sp9amh /always QRP/

LEDs got mine from ÂŁ land
No problems with RF at all got house full of them LED Bulbs :slight_smile:

Go go LED bulbs then !!!

Try your VHF FM receiver near one Karl, you might be in for a surprise.

OSRAM CLASSIC A, Radiated emissions measurement with 0.74m mains cable length. 3m away from wide band log periodic. Failing EN55022B just below 90 MHz.

If you think LED bulbs are good news to the hobby your completely deluded. Notice the noise peak at the lower end of the spectral plot, which incidentally the Rx antennas gain drops below 70 MHz. So in reality in the HF region this would likely be higher in amplitude level.

Apologies for the drift off topic, next reply I will start a new one.

Jonathon, you have made the classic mistake of assuming that all LEDs will behave the same way as Osram Classic A - they don’t! The first thing I did when I put one into use was to put a quarter wave whip (2 metres) on my 817 and hold it up to the bulb. There was no increase in the noise level on 144.300 SSB until the antenna nearly touched the bulb. I got similar results on 70cms and only slightly worse on 6 metres. In fact the noise levels were less than I had from the fluorescent bulb that was there before. The logical conclusion is that there are some bad ones and some good ones, so check them when you get them.

Oh, by the way, the mercury lighting in my street was replaced with LEDs a few years ago, and I get no increase in noise when they come on of an evening. My only complaint is tyhat they are too bright!


Who said I have just tested the one bulb brand and type…

Now that is assuming :wink:

The discrepancy is with the switching technology in the base of the bulb. Most 230-240V bulbs I have came across use this from of voltage reduction technique. Larger LED arrays may use ballast techniques which are probably fine. The sad fact is, large supermarkets are selling the switching bulbs, over time this will continue to increase noise levels.

There is plenty of literature supporting the concern, you only have to read last months RadCom to be aware of the issue.

All sorts of variables effect their emission levels, mainly the mains cable length which will change between installations. The bulb itself does not radiate, its the feed to them.


1 Like

That’s where they just ride the i/p waveform with a current limit? Do you suppose that technique will displace switching in the longer term as it’s surely cheaper? And probably longer lasting.

That’s what you would think Simon, but it hasn’t really gone down that route it seems. I haven’t tested the GU10 series of bulbs yet, due to not owning the correct holder to support them.

I suppose its a challenge to get capacitors with good ESR as well so they don’t dissipate power. The ballast designs seem rather large as well, unsurprisingly.