Return-Path: Received: (qmail 53137 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2004 18:33:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore01.plus.net) (192.168.71.1) by ptb-mailstore02.plus.net with SMTP; 6 Sep 2004 18:33:52 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1C4OQN-000GKq-Fn for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 06 Sep 2004 19:41:08 +0100 Received: from [192.168.67.3] (helo=ptb-mxcore03.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1C4OQN-000GKn-DB for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 06 Sep 2004 19:41:07 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1C4OJL-0000fl-FT for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 06 Sep 2004 19:33:51 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1C4OJ0-0000N0-LN for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 06 Sep 2004 19:33:30 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1C4OJ0-0000Mr-9f for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 06 Sep 2004 19:33:30 +0100 Received: from ms.genesiswireless.us ([63.171.43.8] helo=ms.genesis-technology.com) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1C4OIw-0002ap-PE for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 06 Sep 2004 19:33:30 +0100 Received: from [192.168.0.100] (rev-65.165.20.192.genesiswireless.us [65.165.20.192]) by ms.genesis-technology.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i86IX6pQ019959 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2004 13:33:06 -0500 Message-ID: <413CADD0.30500@genesiswireless.us> Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 13:34:56 -0500 From: WE0H Mike User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000c01c49078$54a6a860$4ceafc3e@l8p8y6> In-Reply-To: <000c01c49078$54a6a860$4ceafc3e@l8p8y6> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: 63.171.43.8 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of genesiswireless.us X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no,HTML_30_40=0.809,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,HTML_TITLE_EMPTY=0.544 Subject: Re: LF: Static Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TITLE_EMPTY 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 X-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet SpamCORE (v3.00) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Maybe you or Granny next door have some of those noisy lamps in the house? My loops are always quieter than my vertical.

Later,

-- 
Mike
WE0H
WD2XGI

hamilton mal wrote:

The QRN static is still bad on 137khz and 160 metres. Receiving 137 Khz signals on my 80 metre loop suffers just the same as my vertical. Both produce the same level of static. The theory about loop advantage over a vertical is not correct.

A very small loop might be different. I have never used one so do not know. Trying to DX last night on 160 was a problem.

Nothing heard beyond SV2

73 de Mal/G3KEV :-!