Ham Radio Operators Tracked the Eclipse - Here's What They Found

Added: 2026-05-10

[00:00:01]All right, everyone. It is time to keep going. So, please return to your seats.

[00:00:06]And next up, we are going to have Dr. Caldep Pandy talking about Solar Eclipse through ham radio, what the bands revealed. So, please return to your seats.

[00:00:19]All right. I hope everyone has been enjoying the continuous coffee that we have today. I know that is very important to this crowd. So uh I think a major uh advancement in the Hamsai project was when we started having post-doal research associates actually work on the project. And I think this is really neat because now all of a sudden we have people that are being paid dedicated full-time like their entire job is doing nothing but looking at our ham radio data. And that is really neat.

[00:00:51]And these are people who are very highly trained you know have PhDs in this and they are really making great contributions. So one of our invited speakers today um is I think really our our first hamai postdoal research associate uh Dr. Caldep Pandy. He is working at the New Jersey Institute of Technology and his uh direct supervisor is Gareth Perry KD KD2 SAK who um unfortunately both fortunately and unfortunately could not be here today.

[00:01:23]And the reason I say fortunately is the reason he couldn't be here is great news. His wife just had a new their second child, a baby boy last week. So, uh, he's on, uh, family leave right now and we offer him the best congratulations and his wife and, um, their older brother the best congratulations with that. So, that I'd like to welcome Dr. Kep Pandy uh, solar eclipse through ham radio, what the bands revealed. Dr. Pandy Thank you Nathaniel and everyone at Hamsai for this opportunity and I had the ionospheric background but since last two years I have been learning from all of you about the ham data and how to utilize it. So I will share some of the results which we have from the solar eclipses which could be 2017, 2023, 2024 QSO parties and it is uh uh okay so as Nathaniel said this is my day job and I'm really thankful to everyone which is listed here and there are many more who are not here on the on the list. So big thanks to all of you who participated in the SEQP events which resulted in humongous data which we can utilize and study how radio propagation responded to the solar eclipses and how we can infer the ionospheric properties from it or say test which of the ionospheric physics based models or empirical models perform better which of them are are slightly below the performance. So this is the overall theme of my presentation and to start with we had the solar eclipses 2017 23 and 2024 and you can see from here the the contiguous US which is the box which I which I saw here is the is the grid or the latitude longitude region which I chose and at this uh geographical location we have RBN network, Whisperet and PSK reporter data sets which generate huge amount of data say about 2 million spots were recorded in 2020 2017 about 45 million in 2023 and very high number of about 6 56 million records in 2024 eclipse. So huge round of applause to all of you who participated in the 2024 eclipse to generate so much of ham radio observations which we can use to infer the radio propagation.

[00:04:13]Now, even though 2024 had the maximum spots over the contiguous US, the maximum spots were or links were reported in 2023 solar eclipse and I just put it as a fun part why it could be. Now first we need to understand the ham radio observations comes from hams or the or the enthusiast or those who are really into operating radio and communicating. So a big thanks to every one of them once again. And here is the answer also why 2023 solar eclipse could have had more spots even more than 2024 solar eclipse even though there was a big advertisement. Now if you have guessed it from the date and day number that's awesome because there was a slight difference of Saturday and Monday. To students who don't know why what it can create you can ask to anyone sitting next to you.

[00:05:26]Nathaniel told me when I joined the Hamsai group, be aware of the weekends and weekdays because that can also affect some of your observations or number of spots. Okay.

[00:05:39]So, okay. Uh one more thing. So, that's why we have the stars at the hams or over our hams because these stars really provide the data or the observations through which we can analyze.

[00:05:55]Now as I said there are two main solar eclipses 2024 and 2020 2017 which crossed through contiguous US and in terms of UT times they were about nearly same say between 17 to 20 UT although the local time difference was slightly one was in the early in the morning to noon time and another one somewhere around noon to the evening time but they all were In the daytime definitely solar eclipses can happen only in the daytime. Now if we go for how the spot densities looked like by the spot density I mean we have the radio links. We have the coordinates of the transmitter receive locations and we also know the great circle distance between the transmitter and receiver pair. Calculate for all of them. See how many spots or links were reported from say about a transmitter to within 100 kilometer within 200 km 200 to 300 km and bin it in terms of time also. So being in binning in time and binning in range grid circle distance this is what the y-axis is grid circle distance between the transmitter receiver pair or multiple pairs. There are there are about 2,700 N85 transmitter and about 1,500 more than 1500 receivers on 2017 Eclipse. So all of them they contribute to say you can multiply the two numbers almost and then multiply by 24 maybe so it will come to millions and this is where we get the spot density data. Uh Nathaniel has a really good GRL paper which talked about how the eclipse responded in terms of the solar uh in terms of the radio propagation and how the one of the physics based model called Samitri performed and that GRL paper which is a very great or good journal in the scientific community peerreed this was this utilized RBN network data which was about you can say here it is 7% % if you can highlight it. Okay, 7% of the data set and we have about 2 million records. So what I give here is all these spot densities from 2 million records. So that's that 7% give us a great insight on how eclipses can reduce or affect the uh radio propagation. But we can have much more if we include other spots also say other networks also whisper net or PSK reporter. Now what extra it gave to me is it increased my resolution or reduced the bin size. So now I uh the plots which I'm giving you is at each 10 each 100 km resolution in the great circle distance which is just one degree and the time interval or the bin size has improved to 5 minutes. So larger the data I can go for the more finer structures and these more finer structures allow me to uh you will see in the future slides allow me to differentiate between small tiny differences which models have because models now are good enough to almost reproduce ionospheric variabilities in a broader trend.

[00:09:30]Finding the differences between the two models needs finer resolution or high grid data. So this is where the 100 km range or great circle distance and 5 minute resolution will help. Now in this solar eclipse or in the others also you will see or you might have experienced uh enhanced propagation conditions especially at lower frequencies say 1.8 or 7 or 10 MHz which are in the bottom side. So throughout my presentation I have one strategy. Lower most columns or lowermost uh rows are the lowermost frequency highest wavelength and the top rows are highest frequency lowest wavelength. So you will see in the bottom side the 1.8 8 3.5 or 7 MHz have a symmetric response or uh so a increase in the range of communication which indicates that the lower side of the ionosphere from which they bend back or reflect back responds almost instantly to the solar eclipse whereas if you see uh and and it also says the enhanced propagations are conditions are there so D region is depleted or say less intense and that's where you will see the signal strength also going up. So lower altitudes DE and DEF1 regions respond in sync that's why you see in sync increase in the spot density ranges whereas the higher frequencies they have the in this figure they don't show a clear u outcome. Now if we see the same thing what happens for the 2024 eclipse once again the same story lower frequencies which means bottom three panels bottom three rows they s increase in the range of communication lower ionospheric regions D and F1 respond that's in sync this is the inference which we can draw from here now if you see the Okay, there is something wrong because my left hand right hand figures are not exactly same. Okay, fine. But uh the right hand ones are definitely correct. So if you see the solar eclipse 2024 uh the eclipse obscuration which is in the in the white you can see there is slight increase in the in the range of communication even at around say 28 MHz or 21 MHz or 14 MHz this is not so clear from here. So what we can do is to bring out the eclipse responses rather than plotting the data in terms of UT we can align everything in terms of solar eclipse uh timing.

[00:12:24]So that's called epoch analysis. So I will annot density data with respect to the from what time of the totality before or after that spot was and it gives a better picture to understand the eclipse behavior. So here I give 2020 2017 and 2024 epoch analysis data for different frequencies.

[00:12:52]And now the transmit receive locations are as per the frequency. So you can see at 1.8 8 MHz in 2017 to 2024 3.5 on the left hand side right hand side one thing which is very clear because of the active involvement of all the ham operators and also from the citizen science point of view the number of transmitter receive locations have kind of increased or there is good coverage over the contiguous US as compared to what we already had in 2017.

[00:13:30]So thanks to all of you. Now once again uh I'm repeating something that the lower frequencies 1.8 to 10 MHz bottom four rows saw an increase but 14 MHz and 21 MHz responded differently in 2017 and 2024. 14 MHz.

[00:13:52]This one there was a bite out or sudden drop in the spot density or number of links. In 2021 there was there were very few contacts.

[00:14:04]Now this bite out is not seen in the 2024 eclipse and in the 24 eclipse there is much more activity. They are continuously connected and there is increase in the range of contact. Other than that they they both look same but at much higher frequencies 14 and 21 there is slight difference. Why could it be?

[00:14:28]Now this is what I kind of summarized here. 21 to 28 MHz bite out and symmetric response in 2017 increased range but delayed response in 24 but lower frequencies responded in sync. Now one of the uh figures let's say here highlights how the tracks of the 24 and 2017 eclipses were and there was one point here say about 37° north and 89° west where they both had the common totality. Now if we look at this uh point observations from the ionospheric point of view this might give some clues why the differences could be. Now if we plot the total electron content data which is the number of electrons all along a column say from ground to GPS receiver essentially in the daytime there are daytime uh ionospheric t uh number of electrons. So TC and in in the top panel the data is for 2017 in the bottom panel it is for 2024 and therefore the same location which is this white star and this black color is the eclipse obscuration level. It goes to totality recovers again goes to totality around 19 and comes back again. Now the top panel and bottom panel TC Y-axis are kept same intentionally even though it kills the variabilities you you might not see in the top panel but the point I want to convey here is that in 2017 TEC was very low just 10 tech units whereas 2024 it was very high say about 30 to 40 at the same location. Now this data is from the metrical database and not only only at that at that common location over the whole contiguous US this was the scenario. So the TEC labels or inosphere was less dense in 2017 and it was more dense in 2024. Well it is not a surprise if you look at the solar cycle progression.

[00:16:45]So we know that sun sun spots on sun go have a 11 year solar cycle and as uh the same is for the f.7 and f10.7 or the or the luminosity of the sun drives the photo ionization. So higher solar cycles have more denser ionosphere because of more photoionization than lower. So that's why we have in 2017 a very low solar activity or sunspot here because of W 2024 which was very high solar activity or sunspot here. So we had very denser ionosphere. If the ionosphere is dense it will bend the radio waves more and if it is dense enough it will bend even 14 to 28 MHz say much higher frequencies. So that's why in 17 we see they escaped to this to this space but in 24 they came back so you had ground to ground contacts.

[00:17:45]So this is what we can conclude as point number one that lower frequencies respond in sync which say that lower altitudes of the ionosphere DE and F1 regions say up to 200 km 180 km they respond almost instantly to the solar eclipse obscuration level. Whereas 14 and 28 MHz which are very high frequencies they will bend back when the ionosphere is tense enough otherwise they will escape to the space and this is one of the reasons we had slight differences.

[00:18:19]Okay. Now as I said we can with with the with the amount of data which we have we can test how the rate tracing of the ionosphere performs and by that if we it will it will be as good as the ionosphere we supply to it. So if you supply the ionosphere from different models and do the rate tracing compare the results with the data or the observations we might say something about how the models perform in terms of capturing the solar eclipse transition or overall electron densities in the ionosphere. So I will jump to the total solar eclipse now uh I mean dedicately and let's see how the rate tracing model uh can give some clues on which of the which of the models are are better than the other. I use two models which is samit3 and vex samit 3. So essentially ionosphere is driven by the sami3 model and thermosphere in the sami3 is msis but in the samitri vex is vex. So ionospheric model is same but the background thermosphere is different. So that's why one is called syit3 standalone or standard model other is called the samitri coupled with veamx oneway coupling only. Now in the left hand side I give some of the possibilities through which a transmitter and receiver can be coupled or can be linked which you already know it can it can come from say here in all three panels from top to bottom my transmitter and receiver locations are fixed. So I I we we launch the rays from the transmitter at different elevation angles and look for the ray which has hit to the receiver or hit near the receiver say around 50 km plus minus range and it can happen from the direct going to the ionosphere and coming back which called one hop. It can bounce in between and then connect to the receiver called two hop or it can bounce two times and then connect to the receiver. It is called three hops. Now if I want to give you a movie uh come on. Okay.

[00:20:56]how this one hop, two hop or three hop race changed the path because this is the track of the of the HF link goes up say somewhere around 150 km comes down or it can go up to 250 200 km come down depending upon the ionospheric uh ionospheric density. Now if we run it through before eclipse, around eclipse and after eclipse you can see there will be slight changes which will happen to the radio propagations or radio link which is from a transmitter to receiver.

[00:21:31]So you will see right now they went up in the altitude because the ionosphere got rarer. So the bending was less. So they went up higher and then got connected even with the same hops.

[00:21:54]So uh E region uh bending will be less. It will jump to F region or F_sub_2 region. So rays will be still connected or transmit receiver will be still connected or they might lose contact from one hop. They might be connected through one hop instead of two hop instead of one hop or or these variabilities can kick in. Now all of these possibilities can happen. A transmitter receiver pair can be connected through one hop. It can be connected at the same time through two hop at the same time to three hop.

[00:22:29]But depending upon number of if we increase the number of hops it will go through ionosphere more times. So if we also know that the the ionosphere because of collisions with the neutral and and plasma it will have definite absorption on the HF links. So more the number of hops the signal strength will become weaker. So if one hop and two hop will come simultaneously we will have stronger signal from the one weaker signal from the two.

[00:23:01]Now let's go back to the slides.

[00:23:09]So when we when we do this kind of calculation we consider a grid of transmitter receiver or continuous US and this is the grid which I use for this simulation which I will show in the next three slides.

[00:23:21]Now what I said about the links or the propagation in terms of the array apogee being sifted from E to F to F2 region.

[00:23:33]This is what I meant. So all of these panels can be clubed together and this could be the reality or individual one of these panels could be linking the transmitter receiver and what is the what are these panels. These are since it is a model result. So I can decide or I can I can know from what height the radio wave bounced back. Did it bounce back from E region say below 150 km or F_sub_1 region 150 to 200 or F_sub_2 region that's why from bottom to top I differentiate between what is the opposing and from left to right I say what is the possibility of them connected through one hop or two hop or three hop or four hops now why I categorize between the 150 km and 150 to 200 and 200 is because E region in the ionosphere is predominantly photochemistry. So production and loss transport is almost negligible you can say although everything happens in all the regions but E region and F_sub_1 E region is mostly production and loss. F_sub_1 is predominantly production and loss some of transport but F_sub_2 region has more transport and because the reason is E region lifetimes are less so they can ionize faster they can they can deplete faster F_sub_1 is in between F_sub_2 they the lifetimes are in hours so recombinations will take some time to respond in the F_sub_2 region so E region and F_sub_2 region even if the eclipse comes F_sub_2 will take some time to respond on there will be ionosphere still lingering whereas these guys in the E region will respond quickly and this is the reason our 3 MHz or 1.8 8 MHz respond very fast or in sync with the solar eclipse and much higher frequencies 14 or 28 or 21 they were somewhat delayed.

[00:25:36]Now as I said there are two models which we test the we do we do the rate tracing. One is Samitri standalone and another is summit3 coupled through WMX and uh now figures will look tiny but essentially they are same from bottom to top E f_sub_1 and f_sub_2 region. So higher apogee from left to right one hop to four hop contents. Now if you look at these two figures, it is hard to say which one performed better actually. So at okay one minute why does it not go up?

[00:26:15]How can I remove this?

[00:26:20]Can I remove this uh bar somewhere from here?

[00:26:32]Uh, okay.

[00:26:35]>> You just >> Okay. Oh, sorry.

[00:26:47]>> This one.

[00:26:48]>> Ah, thank you. Okay. The reason I wanted that top bar is maybe we missed it in the first one.

[00:26:58]that result was 3.5 MHz and this one is 7 MHz. So changing frequency. Now both the results or both left and right hand side outputs are based on two different models and they look nearly same. So both performed pretty good.

[00:27:16]If we if you look more carefully the one on the left which is summit 3 and has slightly delayed response as compared to the one which is on the right. So you see those circles. This is where I highlight those tiny differences. So this one is more symmetric. This one is slightly delayed. If you look at 14 MHz once again broadly they give the same result.

[00:27:46]21 MHz there are slight differences but broadly they are similar. Now at 21 MHz what's the tiny difference? If you look at these two hop F region links F2 region links there is a disconnect here say around ranges which are more than 3,000 km but these these radio contacts are still continuously or transmit receiver locations even at great circle distances of about more than 3,000 they are connected there is a range increase but they are connected there is no bite out how does it comp how all of these say 7 14 or 21 MHz compare with the data so on the left hand side we have the ham radio data and on the right hand side I just summarize what those model outputs were.

[00:28:31]So in general we were not able to differentiate between the left hand side and right hand side panels. So both the models do pretty good job but if you look at 7 MHz it appeared more symmetric in the vex seam 3 which is more or less like how the ham radio data is they are symmetric in response to the solar eclipse. So yeah, VMX wins. Veamax Same3s slightly 21 MHz more than 3,000 km uh uh great circle distances which is say around here we saw that SA3 there was a disconnect in the F2 links they were the links were not possible but in the vex sami3 they were still connected there was increase in the range of range of communication which is what more closer to the to the observations increase in the range of contacts but they are not disconnected. So, VECMX SA3 performs better than the SMI3 as far as the contiguous US ham radio observations are. So, this was all in terms of the contiguous US observations.

[00:29:39]But story continues so we can add something more to it. We know that solar eclipse 24 did not end in the contiguous US. It went somewhere in the in the Atlantic.

[00:29:52]So it will also affect the the worldwide or say continuous to Europe links or transatlantic links.

[00:30:02]Now here what on the right hand side I show you is once again the same figure which you have been seeing bottom panel lowest frequency top panel highest frequency but now I include all the data from worldwide but worldwide is really contiguous US and Europe this is because this is where you know our maximum hamstrations are so this is the the axis on the right y-axis is changed earlier it was from 0 to 5,000 Now it is 0 to 10,000. Now you see a uh there are spot densities continuously present but there is a thin line these these gaps they're throughout present and this says that uh as I said contiguous US stations because of the land say this geographic location the contacts from here to here have great circle distance maximum of about 4,000 or 5,000 km and then there is a gap known stations and then we have Europe.

[00:31:06]So these links have larger great circle distances. These links have lesser. So the higher ones which are say 4,000 to 10,000 links kilometer they are mostly from the transatlantic communications and the lower ones are from the contiguous US. Now contiguous US we already discussed in in depth. So what I can switch to is only transat transatlantic links now. So now my y-axis from now onwards will be 4,000 to 10,000 km the higher side of it. Now there are bunch of things which are written on the left hand side which is 1.8 and 3 MHz very low frequencies very high wavelength they did not connect or there were very few contacts because the range is huge. So from the model it says you need to have much more hops to connect.

[00:32:00]increase the number of hops you lose the signal strength because of the absorption. So theoretically they might be reaching but they will be too weak to listen to or connect to 7 MHz does show some activity. So this bar highlights the intervals on the left hand side and right at the same at the same interval where the totality is and the 7 MHz has earlier opening as compared to a quiet day which is on the left hand side but then it kind of disconnects and then appears again. So please remember this one. I will I will keep on highlighting this one. 7 MHz has earlier opening. It kind of dis say bite out or lesser contacts and then comes up again. 21 MHz has uh a range of range increase but lesser contacts. And both of these things happen much late in the much later phase of the solar eclipse which is say around 1930.

[00:33:02]Remember this whole panel is when the total solar eclipse is and we we are seeing this things in the later half. It is kind of fine because the links which are from US to Europe they will see the eclipse effect only in the later half.

[00:33:20]So that's okay.

[00:33:22]But two things which I highlighted is there is a delayed increase in the range of contacts and more interestingly 7 MHz is kind of comes up goes down comes up again.

[00:33:39]So let's see why it was first doubt which comes to anyone's mind is 2024 eclipse was was a huge community effort from the ham radio. So many ham participants joined in on that day which were not operating maybe on the other days. So a obvious doubt which comes to mind is is it because of the number of participants coming in dropping out and then coming in again. So to remove that possibility or doubt what we can do is let's plot the spot density data using only the transmit receive stations which were continuously operated throughout this window say from 15 to 21 and even in this one you can see this 7 MHz it opens up fades and then opens again 21 MHz that same feature is present of range increase and they bite out. So it was not a user behavior or hams coming in and dropping out. It was something happening in the ionosphere, something related to the eclipse or something else.

[00:34:53]Now once again with the epoch analysis features come out better. So in the epoch analysis you can see the feature comes out much better.

[00:35:03]The eclipse produces this earlier opening in the in the 7 MHz band but then it fades and then opens again.

[00:35:14]So this part is because of the eclipse. I don't know what happened here.

[00:35:21]What we can do is test with the models because we have the ionosphere.

[00:35:26]We have the theoretical things. We can run the model with the eclipse for the same day, same time. take out the eclipse part that freedom is allowed in the models but in reality we cannot take out the eclipse so what changes from one mod one kind of simulations or results which I was showing you earlier it was contiguous US stations but now I have transatlantic communications so transmitters from US are being received at Europe and eur European transmitter are received in the US there are only cross talks within contiguous US you are not allowed to talk within Europe you're not allowed to talk in this simulation so only transatlantic communications now I gave I give you just snapshot of uh best picture which can which can give you uh a hint of what was happening so this is samit 3 on the left hand side this is samitri veamx and uh believe me that below So, so here I give you three hops and four hops below this three hop and two four hop one hop and two hop contacts were not possible they were not able to reach up to Europe so that's why three hop and four hop and now in this four hop what you see is there is a increase definitely because of the eclipse then it kind of disconnects here lesser activity but if you see the vex there is a definite Eclipse impact and then there is a fading.

[00:37:05]So eclipse impact and then the fading.

[00:37:07]So WMX driven Sam3 once again performs better than the Somitri alone.

[00:37:14]That's part is fine. But why at all it was happening. So if you look at the later phase much later around say 1930 UT this was our totality and this was the day and nightight condition. So around this time the the channel of the total eclipse shadow and the sunset terminator they were kind of merging. So first eclipse effect kick in then eclipse goes out but there is a lingering impact. The density is trying to recover but it has not recovered enough. So that that depletion happened because of eclipse came that that range or window opened up then eclipse goes away. We have the lingering impact from the previous shadow and the evening and then night takes over. So we have eclipse then s sunset and eclipse combined which give the dropout and then the evening part night comes over. So this is what transatlantic links tell us. Now some thoughts on why I have been telling the VMX performs better than the Sami 3 alone.

[00:38:23]1 minute or 2 minute. Okay. So what it could be one of the possibilities is remember in the beginning I said Si3 is the ionospheric model and it it it is for the it it needs some thermosphere to generate the ionosphere. So thermosphere in the Si3 is given by the empirical model called Msis. Empirical means it trains on data had some fitting and then generates the output. Whereas vex sumit it it it takes this thermosphere from veamx which is a physics based numerical model. So an an empirical model or databased data trained model will be as good as the data you provide to it. Now summit 3 being empirical it it although it takes huge amount of data the maximum of it is the quiet days or disturbed days but these are not eclipses transient events.

[00:39:21]So it will be more inclined towards broader trends rather than capturing the fast trends of the eclipse. Whereas VMX which is physics based you can solve the equation for faster changes or slower changes. It will not have that kind of a bias. So wackam extreme in sami 3 performs better than the si3 alone.

[00:39:42]These are this could be the possibility of why it is happening. So this is my overall summary. First we went through contiguous US 2017 and 24 eclipse. We saw similarities in the lower band differences in the higher frequencies.

[00:39:58]That difference was because of much longer solar cycle difference say about 11 years. Then we went through the continuous US rate tracing. We found that WKEAX SAM3 performs better. We went to transatlantic links and we saw that once again WAMAX SA3 performs better.

[00:40:16]And also we came to know that around say 7 MHz which is neither too high nor too low somewhere uh where the ionospheric maximum frequency is we see the eclipse impact then eclipse terminator effect also. So these are the kind of outputs outcomes which can have from the from the data and these are my results and thanks to all of you those who have participated in the SAQ piece and from whom I have been learning. Thanks a lot.

[00:40:53]>> Okay. So one thing which I want to u say or say is in the previous essence we we came across different new ways the ham community is coming in say for the time of flight or the or the or the time interval.

[00:41:13]those will be helpful to to validate models to come up more realistically or improve the data model comparison or utilize more the ham radio signals. There is one more thing which I kind of um find if it can be done we can have the receiver capacity or capability which can give us the angle of arrival.

[00:41:35]If it can give me angle of arrival, I can tell from which E, F or F_sub_2 region it was coming from. The elevation enough elevation itself is enough. But if you can give me asimit also that's awesome. So time is great timing the pulses angle of arrivals and then definitely many other things. Thank you.

[00:42:00]Thank you so much Kep. That's just a wonderful analysis and so nice to see our really huge solar eclipse QSO party and all of the uh onair participation that people gave us. It's actually so nice to see that really be turned into real science. And so as our tradition here uh we I have a certificate to present our invited speaker that says uh Hamai thanks Dr. Kaldep Pandy for presenting this talk. So thank you.

[00:42:27]Thank you so much and thanks to you.

[00:42:31]Hey,