Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19990415171459.006741ec@server.italway.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 19:14:59 +0200
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
From: "Yasmin Tour Agenzia Viaggi" <yasmin@italway.it>
Subject: LF: LF receivers
Sender: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Hello Lf guys.

I followed with great interest discussion about deaf receivers, and i would
like to add my point of wiew about the matter.

Situation from my area , central Italy, is rather different compared with
north europe. 
Few Italian stations active  ( 3-6), and all located in ( max) 300 km circle
from me, not difficult to copy.
Nearest DX stations are HB9's( 400 km), not easy to heard cause Alps
mountains wall greatly reduced signals with lot of qsb.
Than next step is G land with  lot of stations  but over 1000 km distance,
and few DL's  and PA's( 700-800 km).
Situation is just a little  better for hams  located in northern Italy.
So you can imagine my wonder, and envy too, when i read  about  hams  with
15-20 stations heard/ contacted in a week-end.

Few hundreds milliwatts ERP, starting from a 10 mt vertical arms connected at 
20-30 metrs long top hat, are enough to make several qsos in a such densely
populated ham region but are rather poor to extablished long range qso.

This means that hams located far away  are often in trouble to heard distant
stations;they need  their correspondents work a suitable ERP, to have a chance .
Infact, except particular conditions, 100-200 mw ERP are'nt enough to cover
a 1000 km path, despite receiver conditions on other end, especially in
conventional cw.


So it's sure right try to improve receiver sistem, but, please, don't forget
to work also on antenna and/or power output !!

73 de Marzio I5MXX