X-GM-THRID: 1237273523406800751 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.78.172.1 with SMTP id u1cs377329hue; Thu, 24 May 2007 13:08:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.66.243.4 with SMTP id q4mr2349703ugh.1180037336208; Thu, 24 May 2007 13:08:56 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x33si4555775ugc.2007.05.24.13.08.53; Thu, 24 May 2007 13:08:56 -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 1HrJUs-0008Gc-5b for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 May 2007 21:01:18 +0100 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1HrJUr-0008GT-As for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 May 2007 21:01:17 +0100 Received: from smtp802.mail.ird.yahoo.com ([217.146.188.62]) by relay2.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HrJUq-0007iW-5t for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 May 2007 21:01:17 +0100 Received: (qmail 69388 invoked from network); 24 May 2007 20:01:09 -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=G1YXasx1flb7VKh/xh+tIWCVQGxve2VcxeqT5vRFp4q4w4h8YlWxBx4wmxRdSVsYCDrRLKQHsur0wKiu9zp70jlvqMFt1Fg9DIrhA0/4zdarm0t9CXARckXYuOBK4LyPV9iUc3vB/Pr1NKoxknw98qw0YolPtLbRt9NnUx0zQL4= ; Received: from unknown (HELO w4o8m9) (james.moritz@btopenworld.com@81.131.58.148 with login) by smtp802.mail.ird.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 May 2007 20:01:08 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: YLS_3TYVM1mpKX.ZPYeS7_BBkU6hV44lM4Y_3GV5uHoz_T4nU7kB9DKTKbnyzFEUsytPY0xDGA-- Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.5.467 [269.7.7/816]); Thu, 24 May 2007 21:01:22 +0100 Message-ID: <002901c79e3e$4d5f4a40$943a8351@w4o8m9> From: "James Moritz" To: References: Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 21:01:22 +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: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=-0.535 Subject: LF: RE: 500kHz Distance 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: 1554 Dear John, Rik, LF Group, I would agree with Rik's comments. Experimentation on 136k (and 73k) over the last several years has given us a pretty good idea of how to optimise the efficiency of small LF antennas, but it has also shown that, once "best practice" has been employed, one quickly reaches a point of diminishing returns where further improvements have negligible effect on the radiated signal level. Beyond this, significant improvement in antenna performance can only really be achieved by increasing the physical dimensions of the antenna, which is usually not feasible for non-technical reasons. The same is certainly true for 500kHz, although the antennas are effectively a bit better to begin with. So however much one may strive to improve antenna efficiency, and whatever incentives there are, beyond a certain point it just isn't possible without discovery of some revolutionary and unknown new antenna design principle, which one cannot rely on ever happening (I hesitate to mention "Poynting vector synthesis"...). The 1W ERP limit on 136k has given us a fair amount of freedom and flexibility and has led to some interesting technical challenges and solutions (e.g. how to economically generate a lot of TX power and feed it into a tiny antenna without something going up in smoke :-) ) - I don't think the last several years on LF would have been nearly so rewarding if TX power had been limited to 10 or 20 watts as is currently being suggested for 500kHz. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU