Message-ID: <38F4C6F6.61D3EDD7@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:56:54 +0000
From: "g3kev" <g3kev@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Organization: Netscape Online member
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: Tuesday evening
References: <1645.200004121251@gemini>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>


James Moritz wrote:

> Dear Derek & Lech (I don't know if Lech has an E-mail address)
>
> Thanks for an interesting evening at Puckeridge - It was good to
> meet up with yourselves and Mike, and also to play around with a
> 'real man's antenna'! I'm sure the weekend will go quite smoothly,
> now the preliminary debugging has been done.
>
> I don't think you have too much to worry about G3KEV's
> comments; the signal seemed pretty clean

Seemed pretty clean!!!!!!!!!!!. Was it or was it not? With my real size
antenna it WAS NOT.
If there seems to any controversy in the future then an opinion from a
third party would be useful like the RIS.

> on my measuring
> receiver a few hundred yards away.
>
> I dried out one of those small variometers and tested it at 100kHz
> on an HP4275 LCR meter at the university - L is variable between
> 82 and 356uH, the equivalent series resistance stays pretty
> constant at around 0.6ohms. So it's just right for fine tuning a
> 136kHz loading coil.
>
> i spoke to Dave Lauder about your BT data line problem; he said
> he measured some rather large noise levels, and is going to E-mail
> you about his findings
>
> I'll be in touch again before Friday - I'm still thinking about setting
> up a smaller antenna for comparisons.
> Cheers, Jim Moritz
> 73 de M0BMU