Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
Message-ID: <000f01c6e6e9$455bf260$0100a8c0@HOST>
From: "chastant" <chastant@smart.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <45220984.5050008@telus.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 08:41:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: LF: Re: miniwhip miniresults...?
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

Scott..I have had similiar results as mentioned by KC3OL..
My miniwhip has performed very good even as good as my LF loop that I used 
for a couple of years..
I have not noted any intermod problems and it seems to perform well into HF 
although I pretty much use it exclusively on LF.
Get nice signal from 60KHz and 75Khz and down into the VLF--18 and 20Khz.
Mine is up about 35 feet in the trees behind the house 50-75 ft from the 
house.
Rx is the TS870.
de Lloyd W3NF
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Tilley" <sthed475@telus.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; "LowFER at LW Cafe" <lowfer@lwcafe.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 2:56 AM
Subject: LF: miniwhip miniresults...?


> Dear Miniwhipper-snappers
>
> I'm looking for some insight.
>
> I built a miniwhip exactly as described in PA0RDT's article and set it up 
> on a 20' nonmetallic pole way up in the air on the corner of my house 
> (about 40' up).  At first it was overwhelmed with intermod from every 
> local AM braodcaster around, but some creative grounding solved most of 
> that.  However, it appears to perform much below the rave reviews I've 
> read on the reflectors from others.
>
> It does hear on LF but very poorly.  An S9 (S0 noise floor) signal on my 
> active loop from WD2XSH/20 (N6LF) on 506KHz is barely detectable on the 
> miniwhip.  On 2200m it makes a great light dimmer detector and works well 
> as my noise antenna for my noise canceler but that's about it.   It 
> doesn't even come close to touching my active loop or high Q vertical on 
> RX.
>
> I do agree with Roelof's findings about an E-field antenna making a better 
> urban antenna then a loop as my big vertical always has a lower local 
> noise level then the loop and hears way better (I'm a believer Mal!)
>
> On HF it seems fine with a good SNR and pleasant reception of anything I 
> care to compare with my other HF antennas. It does seem to perform better 
> on the higher end of its rated range.
>
> So guys what's the deal?  What am I doing wrong to bring this little 
> miniwhip to life or is it all hype?
>
> 73 Scott
>
>