Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31030 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2003 09:44:22 -0000 Received: from warrior.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.227) by mailstore with SMTP; 9 Jan 2003 09:44:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 19044 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2003 09:45:22 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by warrior.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 9 Jan 2003 09:45:22 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-SQ: A X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.12) id 18WZEJ-0004Ni-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2003 09:44:03 +0000 Received: from [212.35.226.183] (helo=k2.pncl.co.uk) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18WZEI-0004NZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2003 09:44:03 +0000 Received: from k7t.pncl.co.uk (70.234.35.212.in-addr.arpa.ip-pool.cix.co.uk [212.35.234.70]) by k2.pncl.co.uk (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) with ESMTP id h099i0DW012852 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:44:01 GMT Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030109085759.00a04cd0@mail.pncl.co.uk> X-Sender: blanch@mail.pncl.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 09:44:46 +0000 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Walter Blanchard" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: LF: Noise Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------000102030208000409060807" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=6.0tests=SPAM_PHRASE_01_02version=2.43 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000102030208000409060807 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Re the 520/1010 discussion. Wilsons' main objection to the 520 appears to be that it suffers from a great deal of local noise pickup, which actually would be expected from ANY vertically-polarised E-field antenna. An H-field antenna; e.g. a loop, does not so suffer but this is a fundamental physical fact and should not be attributed to the 520 as if it were something wrong with that antenna itself. These little active verticals are very handy for restricted spaces; e.g. on boats, where there simply isn't the space to put up a loop; but mounting them on a grounded metal mast is ESSENTIAL - if they're put up on a fibreglass pole they will have far less pickup. I had one on my boat top of the mast and it could pick up 10w 300 kHz DGPS stations 800 kms away in daylight - no local noise there, of course (at least, when the engine was off!). Apart from that, can anyone tell me why local noise IS a vertically-polarised E-field problem? I can intuitively (I think) understand that it would be E-field since it is primarily a high-impedance phenomenon; but why VERTICALLY-polarised? If it's radiated from local house wiring etc surely it should be randomly-polarised and just as evident on horizontally-polarised antennas? I have a 30 m vertical I occasionally use on 80m and a horizontal dipole for 80m near it. VERY often there is so much noise on the vertical I can't even hear my local net; on the horizontal at the same time there is only the faintest trace of noise and everyone is easily audible. Same on 160m. All the texbooks agree local noise is vertically-polarised but not one of them explains why. Incidentally for 80m reception my horizontal dipole out-performs not only the vertical but also a 1m dia loop quite easily both in terms of s/n ratio and absolute pickup. I suspect the same would be true of 136 kHz if anyone ever had the space to put up a 136 kHz horizontal dipole at a reasonable height! Now THERE's a challenge for G3KEV. And a Happy New Year to all!!! Walter G3JKV. --------------000102030208000409060807 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; name="ATT12402.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="ATT12402.txt" --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 06/12/02 --------------000102030208000409060807--