X-GM-THRID: 1234548235468190978 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.35.22.8 with SMTP id z8cs266794pyi; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 05:32:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.67.100.4 with SMTP id c4mr555759ugm.1177417946961; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 05:32:26 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y7si518036ugc.2007.04.24.05.32.23; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 05:32:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) DomainKey-Status: bad (test mode) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1HgK8K-0004Ul-NY for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:28:36 +0100 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1HgK8J-0004Uc-7L for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:28:35 +0100 Received: from smtp810.mail.ird.yahoo.com ([217.146.188.70]) by relay3.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HgK8I-0004jo-93 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:28:35 +0100 Received: (qmail 59139 invoked from network); 24 Apr 2007 12:28:28 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=1u+TcMSiBfMR1CGalutv4L9DlBQ8+xFx6q7sn+jnW6x/WgF+n/1RWMlUL38lUQKvRJABtJHPATAqNQu1+kZxoVF2rJ+i2otYQqZglGYooeMhNWXekAF68+zKOiXTvkd/6Noin52FDZpzio1NhyZnTVrfLNq2/EtNhaoJ6k3BCqE= ; Received: from unknown (HELO w4o8m9) (james.moritz@btopenworld.com@213.122.65.43 with login) by smtp810.mail.ird.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Apr 2007 12:28:27 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: 6T1htdsVM1khes.wOSe.Va0xvEfO0UE83B9UwthVuSW6IkachnNiDAInRjboJGb7dKM0PFyPNg-- Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.5.463 [269.5.10/774]); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:29:02 +0100 Message-ID: <002f01c7866c$23fb2500$2b417ad5@w4o8m9> From: "James Moritz" To: References: <000a01c785dd$456ebba0$79e8fc3e@g3kev> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:29:01 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 DomainKey-Status: good (testing) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: 500 EASY START Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2957 Dear Alan, LF group. As far as antennas for LF/MF are concerned, the "lots of wire as high as possible" principle applies, with height being the factor that has by far the biggest effect on efficiency. Your 15m high antenna is pretty big by most amateur standards, so should have relatively high efficiency - you shouldn't need more than a few watts from the TX output to reach 0.1W ERP. The "high voltages" will only be in the hundreds of volts at most. The presence of the tower will have an effect on the current distribution in the antenna, and so the antenna current required to obtain a particular ERP. The radiated power depends on the mean current in the vertical part of the antenna; if the horizontal section is much longer than the vertical section, the vertical current distribution will be nearly uniform, less current will be capacitively coupled into the tower, and the effect of the tower and/or loading coil will be minimal. If the horizontal top-loading section is shorter, adding an elevated loading coil as you describe will have more beneficial effect. This rather depends on whether your inverted L is cut for operation on the 160m band, or is 160m long. The effect also depends on the spacing between the downlead and the tower. Personally I am using a loop antenna for receive, as at my QTH it gives lower noise. On 500kHz, the local noise on my TX antenna is mostly splatter which appears to be intermod products from the Brookmans Park MF broadcast site about 500 metres from my QTH. The intermods appear to be generated by the antenna itself - even though it is resonanted at 500kHz, an antenna current of about 40mA flows, mostly from the 909kHz Radio 5 signal, and I suspect the ground rods introduce some non-linearity due to electrolytic effects. But most QTHs don't have 400kW of assorted broadcast transmitters across the road - many people seem to be using their TX antenna successfully for receive. Potential benefits of seperate RX antennas depend a lot on the local QRM conditions - I have found loop antennas on LF and MF make good mains cable locators, but when well sited can give reduced noise, and useful directional nulls.. I think from Ofcom's point of view, restricting power to an ERP limit makes a lot of sense. ERP is defined by field strength at some distance from the TX, or vice-versa. If Ofcom want to know what ERP you are using, they just have to measure the field strength of your signal, rather than gain access to your shack to measure the TX output. Also, the ERP defines the field strength that potential "victims" of breakthrough, interference or overload are subjected to as a result of amateur signals, which is one of Ofcom's major concerns as spectrum regulators. From the amateur's perspective, it is quite an egalitarian arrangement, since the station with a small antenna can achieve the same results as the big boys on transmit just by running a bit more TX power, which for 500kHz is quite low anyway. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU