From: DL4YHF@aol.com
Message-ID: <144.dbb8686.29ff137d@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 17:22:05 EDT
Subject: Re: Re: LF: LF activity today.
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hello Giulio and group,
<BR>
<BR>Giulio wrote:
<BR>&gt; Well with I station all the three location are the same, but for the DX
<BR>station there is big difference, for example with NM and WD in Hell,
<BR>yesterday not a wisp from my home qth
<BR>&lt;
<BR>
<BR>Well, your TX signal from the "big" antenna has absolutely no problem to cross the Alps, I could *hear* your signal sometimes during last weekend. We already had a 'solid copy' QRSS qso (I think while we were waiting for RU6), with a bit of luck even a normal CW QSO could be possible.
<BR>
<BR>Did you consider to build a loop with adjustable 'elevation' ? A system of two orthogonal loops may be helpful in an experiment to find the elevation. 
<BR>Markus (NM) has a very interesting RX system for azimuth detection on a waterfall which may be modified to detect the elevation of a signal. I am planning to build such a system based on his plans (and software) as soon as possible.
<BR>
<BR>Good luck,
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;Wolf &nbsp;DL4YHF / DF0WD (JO42fd).
<BR>
<BR>P.S.: About the crude Hell letters from DF0WD which looked a bit like "Lego blocks":
<BR>I used a simple 'sequential single-tone' Hell signal, while Markus transmitted in Chirped Multi-Tone hell which gives a nicer spectrum and allows narrower bandwidth without smearing. But you need a quite linear TX for it, otherwise the important amplitude shape gets lost.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>