Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp637719igc; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 12:11:30 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.48.74 with SMTP id j10mr11247455wjn.41.1388175089906; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 12:11:29 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id yn7si13258458wjc.111.2013.12.27.12.11.29 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 12:11:29 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@comcast.net Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1VwctT-0007K5-Uu for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 19:16:23 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VwctS-0007Jw-VB for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 19:16:22 +0000 Received: from qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.24]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VwctO-0003bj-9x for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 19:16:21 +0000 Received: from omta23.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.90]) by qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 6itH1n0011wfjNsA2jGFsd; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 19:16:15 +0000 Received: from Owner ([166.137.182.216]) by omta23.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 6jFu1n00H4gYbxS8jjG0Du; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 19:16:10 +0000 From: "hvanesce" To: References: <02ca01cf028f$c157cf50$44076df0$@comcast.net> <52BDC10A.20409@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: <52BDC10A.20409@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 12:15:50 -0700 Message-ID: <03b201cf0338$17855660$46900320$@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGG6zKwfArbcCehO8c1EjpWah3feAFlzI3eAXLKPsSa4clf4A== Content-Language: en-us DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1388171775; bh=UKvulPinbmTTwuoWfDrY5OB0O73Sq4RGCv0TXFpnacI=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=bJecs0sIe9AhLzQpXrjDdr6qoPS9JkUcAHCgqGHqBvr+91/ptpn8in/lnVFsFSy3M i9tN4CSyoW0qTxdOL7RN0Ze/V8TohOBWFaPsyOiIEsoU4bNJUOk2yoIS7J6yVuednZ Rr0niYXWvgxBP3QRB4vwzrcb2XaQWZToX3pri5FD7wfYlxpuLanbwQcx1J3vz9RDsz VIuKprx3ASorFyWLobCJBCoaLq9afkjwoDix2KM9AkyAnicSB8fmqE9wy145wOk89n 7GnpsW0taKbUPLmmwmxX6mswTxf2D5t54srFaHc8ZWlClZOo4UJ0wqKba8YhPUXPc9 Jx8Da9TIy0JvQ== X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Stefan, Thank you for the information. I was hoping for input from you and Uwe on ERP and antenna angle, and your information is very helpful. Regarding antenna angle: [...] Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [76.96.30.24 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (hvanesce[at]comcast.net) 1.6 SUBJ_ALL_CAPS Subject is all capitals -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 609894e10e2d71b5adf7e0bb883c7717 Subject: RE: VLF: 8969.99 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03B3_01CF02FD.6B27DDF0" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1777 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_03B3_01CF02FD.6B27DDF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stefan,=20 =20 Thank you for the information. I was hoping for input from you and Uwe = on ERP and antenna angle, and your information is very helpful. =20 Regarding antenna angle: =20 I am hoping to detect T/A VLF signals, and a long integration time is important. Without special integration algorithms, changes in phase of = the received signal limit maximum integration time. Even at T/A distances, = low antenna angles (angles far from vertical) can increase the sensitivity = of phase to day/night transitions and other environmental/ionospheric = factors, and thus limit maximum useful integration time. All of the above is for = a constant non-vertical antenna angle; maximum useful integration time is = even less when the antenna angle varies.=20 =20 I don=92t have solid numbers for phase vs. antenna angle, orientation = and distance yet (the phase variations of interest are of multimodal origin, = so multimodal analysis is required), but the information that you provided = will help very much in converging to an estimate of maximum useful = integration time with conventional integration algorithms. =20 For T/A VLF signal capture planning purposes, do you think that it would = be safe to say that, in the next year or so, most amateur antennas long = enough for potential T/A VLF communication will either be nearly horizontal = (fixed at both ends), or fixed at one end with a variation in angles as in the example that you gave below? If so I will plan for something to assess, manage and possibly improve maximum integration time for the phase variations expectable from such antennas. =20 =20 Thank you for the information that you provided and all of your = remarkable contributions to VLF and LF. =20 73, Jim AA5BW =20 =20 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Stefan = Sch=E4fer Sent: Friday, December 27, 2013 11:04 AM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: VLF: 8969.99 =20 Hello Jim,=20 Am 27.12.2013 00:10, schrieb hvanesce:=20 Would 500W into a 300m antenna imply approximately 10mW < ERP < 50mW = after coil losses, at 9kHz? I assume that question is directed to me? In these experiments i got up to 58mW ERP. A rough calculation of = course. It depends on the angle of the kite, which can vary from 80 deg to 40 deg. = The average on a windy day is something arround 65 deg. But for a 300m vertical you will need a special permission in Germany = and the air traffic control must be informed 48 hours in advance (giving out = a NOTAM). So that was quite an effort. But most exciting! :-) My special permission expired some years ago. Now the signal is 20 dB weaker, or must be 100x slower. But here i have mains power and don't need wind any more.. 73, Stefan/DK7FC =20 Does your antenna orientation and elevation angle vary? (my maximum integration time is dependent on phase rate of change which is dependent = on the antenna angle, even if the antenna angle is constant) =20 I enjoyed seeing the strong signals earlier this week on DK7FC, PA1SDB = and other grabbers, thanks! =20 73, Jim AA5BW =20 =20 =20 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2013 2:53 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: Re: VLF: 8969.99 =20 Hi Stefan and Eddy, thanks for the reports. the equipment here is the same as ever (500W = output into 300m aerial wire). Markus asked for some OPERA OP4H tests. We have to schedule that test. GL=20 Uwe/dj8wx as Tom dj8CAT. =20 _____ =20 Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Gesendet: 26.12.2013 13:55 An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Betreff: Re: VLF: 8969.99 _____ =20 Hi Uwe, Tom, VLF, Best signal ever from Tom, capture attached. Is it due to the = propagation or did it improve your signal? What about some tests in OPDS32 or maybe JT9-30? Unfortunately there is permanent rain here so i have to wait some days longer. 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 26.12.2013 10:58, schrieb g3zjo:=20 Hi All Yes, yesterday was quieter on 8.9KHz with less catastrophic noise = pulses. This meant that although Uwe's signal was less strong than during other tests I was in the catchment area. The low signal level means there are breaks in the line here in both 424uH and 47uHz FFT but I was able to = catch some nice periods when the signal in 47uHz was10dB above the noise = peaks. I can categorically confirm reception. Thanks Uwe and (Tom DL8CAT) for the signal. 73 Eddie G3ZJO http://www.g3zjo.talktalk.net/vlfgrabber.htm ------=_NextPart_000_03B3_01CF02FD.6B27DDF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Stefan,

 

Thank you for the information. I was hoping for input from you and = Uwe on ERP and antenna angle, and your information is very = helpful.

 

Regarding antenna angle:

 

I am hoping to detect T/A VLF signals, and a long integration time is = important. Without special integration algorithms, changes in phase of = the received signal limit maximum integration time. Even at T/A = distances, low antenna angles (angles far from vertical) can increase = the sensitivity of phase to day/night transitions and other = environmental/ionospheric =A0factors, and thus limit maximum useful = integration time. All of the above is for a constant non-vertical = antenna angle; maximum useful integration time is even less when the = antenna angle varies.

 

I don’t have solid numbers for phase vs. antenna angle, = orientation and distance yet (the phase variations of interest are of = multimodal origin, so multimodal analysis is required), but the = information that you provided will help very much in converging to an = estimate of maximum useful integration time with conventional = integration algorithms.

 

For T/A VLF signal capture planning purposes, do you think that it = would be safe to say that, in the next year or so, most amateur antennas = long enough for potential T/A VLF communication will either be nearly = horizontal (fixed at both ends), or fixed at one end with a variation in = angles as in the example that you gave below? If so I will plan for = something to assess, manage and possibly improve maximum integration = time for the phase variations expectable from such antennas. = =A0

 

Thank you for the information that you provided and all of your = remarkable contributions to VLF and LF.

 

73,=A0 Jim AA5BW

=A0=A0=A0

 

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Stefan = Sch=E4fer
Sent: Friday, December 27, 2013 11:04 = AM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: = VLF: 8969.99

 

Hello Jim, =

Am 27.12.2013 00:10, schrieb hvanesce:

Would 500W into a 300m antenna imply approximately 10mW < ERP < = 50mW after coil losses, at 9kHz?

I assume that question is directed to me?
In these = experiments i got up to 58mW ERP. A rough calculation of course. It = depends on the angle of the kite, which can vary from 80 deg to 40 deg. = The average on a windy day is something arround 65 deg.
But for a = 300m vertical you will need a special permission in Germany and the air = traffic control must be informed 48 hours in advance (giving out a = NOTAM). So that was quite an effort. But most exciting! :-) My special = permission expired some years ago.
Now the signal is 20 dB weaker, or = must be 100x slower. But here i have mains power and don't need wind any = more..

73, Stefan/DK7FC


 

Does your antenna orientation and elevation angle vary? (my maximum = integration time is dependent on phase rate of change which is dependent = on the antenna angle, even if the antenna angle is = constant)

 

I enjoyed seeing the strong signals earlier this week on DK7FC, = PA1SDB and other grabbers, thanks!

 

73,  Jim AA5BW

 

 

 

From:= = owner-rsgb_lf_group@bl= acksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_g= roup@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of uwe-jannsen@kabelmail.de
= Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2013 2:53 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Subject: Re: Re: VLF: 8969.99

 

Hi Stefan = and Eddy,

thanks for the reports. the equipment here is the same = as ever (500W output into 300m aerial wire).
Markus asked for some = OPERA OP4H tests. We have to schedule that test.

GL =

Uwe/dj8wx as = Tom dj8CAT.

 =

Von: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Gesendet: 26.12.2013 13:55
An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Betreff: Re: VLF: 8969.99


Hi Uwe, = Tom, VLF,

Best signal ever from Tom, capture attached. Is it due = to the propagation or did it improve your signal?
What about some = tests in OPDS32 or maybe JT9-30? Unfortunately there is permanent rain = here so i have to wait some days longer.

73, = Stefan/DK7FC

Am 26.12.2013 10:58, schrieb g3zjo: =

Hi = All

Yes, yesterday was quieter on 8.9KHz with less catastrophic = noise pulses. This meant that although Uwe's signal was less strong than = during other tests I was in the catchment = area. The low signal level means there are breaks in the line here in = both 424uH and 47uHz FFT but I was able to catch some = nice periods when the signal in 47uHz was10dB above the noise peaks. I = can categorically = confirm reception.

Thanks Uwe and (Tom DL8CAT) for the = signal.

73 Eddie G3ZJO
http://www.g3zjo.ta= lktalk.net/vlfgrabber.htm

------=_NextPart_000_03B3_01CF02FD.6B27DDF0--