Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29668 invoked from network); 29 Mar 2003 07:51:13 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from netmail02.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.221) by mailstore with SMTP; 29 Mar 2003 07:51:13 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 23751 invoked by uid 10001); 29 Mar 2003 07:51:13 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by netmail02.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 29 Mar 2003 07:51:13 -0000 X-SQ: A Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 18zB6u-00081q-1d for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 07:50:40 +0000 Received: from [212.164.44.2] (helo=astral.omskcity.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 18zB6m-00081g-MO for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 07:50:32 +0000 Received: from fitec.omskcity.com (mu04.dialup2.infomsk.ru [212.164.44.116]) by astral.omskcity.com (8.x.x) with SMTP id NAA3e85501b719f for ; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:49:47 +0600 (OS) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:53:03 +0000 (GMT) From: "Alexander S. Yurkov" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org In-reply-to: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: LF: RE: Good News and bad news from GM Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-24.9 required=5.0tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,QUOTE_TWICE_1,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, USER_AGENT_PINEversion=2.51 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.51 (1.174.2.5-2003-03-20-exp) 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 Hi, Bill and Group. On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Ashlock,William wrote: > > >IMHO ground loss itself and enviroment loss yelds opposite effects. > >Whan it is rain ground loss became less while enviroment loss (by trees > >mainly) became more. Thus current improved when trees but not ground > >dries... Is it much trees arround Your antenna, Bill? > > Very solidly populated with trees at this location but I have reports from > others that experience increased loss with increased ground moisture having > no trees. This demands further investigation! Besides it is worth if it is loop or Marconi antenna. For loop seems dry soil should be good. For the Marconi dry soil should be bad. And for both antennas it should be good if trees are dry. What I have wrote in previous letter is for marconi. But any way all of this is speculations only. It requres comprehensive experimental investigation realy. 73 de RA9MB/Alex http://www.qsl.net/ra9mb