Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13049 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2000 20:06:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 2000 20:06:37 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12gCH4-0001sr-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2000 21:01:06 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12gCH3-0001sm-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2000 21:01:05 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from as24-s15-144-210.cwci.net ([195.44.144.210] helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12gCGp-0002LX-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2000 20:00:52 +0000 Message-ID: <38F76A8E.AAF015DB@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 18:59:26 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: LOC G3WSC/P References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Mike Dennison wrote: > > G3KEV- IO94SH ---------G3WSC/P- IO91XS--------AZ 175, DISTANCE 287.3 Kms > > > > G3KEV- IO94SH -------- MM0ALM- IO87UA--------AZ 340, DISTANCE 320.8 Kms > > > > MM0ALM is 2db stronger > > de G3KEV/SCARBOROUGH. > > So, if both MM0ALM and G3WSC were running 1W ERP, this > completely destroys the argument that higher antennas > always work better for the same ERP! Mike. Speculation again. Do you know exactly the paramaters of each site, and power levels. One site has one tower at over 300 ft and the other, two towers at 130 ft but possible a more elaborate antenna system. I gave the signal levels as received at my QTH but do not have any other details except that it has been suggested in a previous message that G3WSC was running more like 2 w erp. Earth losses, radial systems need some consideration also, in this case the the higher tower might not be optimised. The performance of a 300 ft tower on one site might be totally different for the same tower on another site, because of local environment, coastal or inland, humidity etc. This has all been discussed before and never been been satisfactory resolved. A short tower on a very good site would possibly outperform a larger tower on a poor site. I do not really get your point since neither of us know the facts. I did notice tonight that the decca signal was stronger than the earlier test. I expect the power has been increased but only about 5 db difference. I think they are reaching the diminishing returns situation where the power would need to be increased significantly to be really noticeable. Their signal in no way matches DFC considering how close they are to me. When I get time I must make some measurements on the analyser for comparison purposes. 73 G3KEV > > > Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm