Return-Path: Received: from rly-dc09.mx.aol.com (rly-dc09.mail.aol.com [172.19.136.38]) by air-dc02.mail.aol.com (v123.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDC023-b404a1abb6b35c; Mon, 25 May 2009 11:38:43 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-dc09.mx.aol.com (v123.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDC094-b404a1abb6b35c; Mon, 25 May 2009 11:38:20 -0400 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1M8cFE-0004nA-0Z for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 25 May 2009 16:37:44 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1M8cFD-0004n1-EN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 25 May 2009 16:37:43 +0100 Received: from imo-m12.mx.aol.com ([64.12.143.100] helo=imo-m12.mail.aol.com) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1M8cFA-0007Pm-H1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 25 May 2009 16:37:42 +0100 Received: from imo-ma01.mx.aol.com (imo-ma01.mx.aol.com [64.12.78.136]) by imo-m12.mail.aol.com (v107.10) with ESMTP id RELAYIN2-34a1abb3a328; Mon, 25 May 2009 11:37:30 -0400 Received: from G0MRF@aol.com by imo-ma01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v40_r1.5.) id l.d56.290b427d (42807) for ; Mon, 25 May 2009 11:37:24 -0400 (EDT) From: G0MRF@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 11:37:24 EDT To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 630 X-Spam-Flag:NO X-Karma: unknown: X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,NO_REAL_NAME=0.55 Subject: Re: LF: G0MRF QRV Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1243265844" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME 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 X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 -------------------------------1243265844 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all. Firstly, thank you to Jim and Chris for the QSOs yesterday and for the many useful reports and comments on the relector. Some detail. THE OBJECTIVE: To test the very good theory that horizontal antennas don't work at LF. The idea being that by operating on very poor ground you are actually many 10s of metres above 'radio ground' and therefore the antenna is much higher electrically than you may first imagine. This technique is used by the US military in underground nuclear command centres to avoid EMP. The location in East Sussex is at the top of a hill 170m above sea level. The ground goes down rapidly in two directions which I hoped would also aid the propagation of the 500k signals. We started off with a reference antenna - A 9m vertical with a 5m top section and intended to use reports and the grabber at G3YXM to evaluate the radiated signal by comparison to the 100mW ERP 137.7 beacon. This was a big mistake as the poor ground made it very inefficient, with 100 W from the transmitter generating an unimpressive 125mA of antenna current. However, it did allow a couple of QSOs. We then added a large amount of wire to the top section to make the antenna self resonant. To my surprise, and I'm not sure if this has been done before, it worked. Total wire used 128 metres. Series tuning inductance....zero. Compared to the wavelength of 596m this represents 85% of a quarterwave, which was rather more than I had anticipated. I expected the 'shortening effect' to be much greater. Perhaps this was a good indication that as I suspected the 'ground' under the antenna was either a considerable distance from the surface or, operating from a hilltop had an advantage. Antenna current was now 1A. Still not very good but this was due to us using the quaterwave against a few radials and a single ground rod. I notice that Rik reports a signal increase between the two different antenna types, but this could be explained by higher current in the vertical rather than any radiation from the horizontal section. Just when things were looking good, it all went, to use a local term, 'pear shaped' It began to get dark. The static level wiped out the grabber so we could not see our own signal and our final plan to turn the whole thing into a single horizontal dipole mounted along the ridge of a hilltop had to be abandoned as one of the 2 fields suddenly acquired a large flock of sheep. So, unfortunately a nice day in the countryside but only a little knowledge gained and the transmitter never turned up beyond 100W. Next time...I'll take a VNA and start with a dipole! At least the local manager at Homebase wont have to worry where all his 2 m bamboo canes are going anymore. My garage is full of them! Finally, to answer Dave's question about the callsign. I have probably misread my NOV but I was under the impression that just like the old 73k licence, /P was not allowed. Hence a letter to OFCOM a week in advance changed my 'station address' to East Sussex for the weekend. - So although I was working from a field....they knew where to find me. As for 10 W ERP. - We probably made about 2% of that. Sorry Mal. Oh well. To be continued..? David G0MRF In a message dated 25/05/2009 08:34:52 GMT Standard Time, dave@davesergeant.com writes: On 24 May 2009 at 18:24, James Moritz wrote: > Dear LF Group, > > Just worked G0MRF at 1705utc. Signal was 549 - apparently they are still > working on the antenna, so might improve yet... Got a good report from > them, so obviously receiving OK. Good luck for the rest of the > operation, David and Garo. > > Cheers, Jim Moritz > 73 de M0BMU > > I listened on and off to David's signal yesterday evening between other jobs. Some observations.... G0MRF (/P but not sending /P, which I thought was a bit confusing) was 569 here in Bracknell, later peaking 579 but the static was intolerable from around 9pm making copy very hard. I did give David a couple of calls after he finished his QSO with Chris G3XIZ but obviously he didn't hear, hardly surprising with my setup and in any case I found the tuning had gone off and I had a bad SWR, a problem with sharply tuned short verticals. -------------------------------1243265844 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all.
 
Firstly, thank you to Jim and Chris for the QSOs yesterday and for= the=20 many useful reports and comments on the relector.
 
Some detail.
 
THE OBJECTIVE:  To  test the very good theory that horizontal= =20 antennas don't work at LF. The idea being that by operating on very poor gro= und=20 you are actually many 10s of metres above 'radio ground' and therefore the=20 antenna is much higher electrically than you may first imagine. This techniq= ue=20 is used by the US military in underground nuclear command centres to av= oid=20 EMP.
 
The location in East Sussex is at the top of a hill 170m above sea leve= l.=20 The ground goes down rapidly in two directions which I hoped would also aid=20= the=20 propagation of the 500k signals.
 
We started off with a reference antenna - A 9m vertical with a 5m top=20 section and intended to use reports and the grabber at G3YXM to evaluate the= =20 radiated signal by comparison to the 100mW ERP 137.7 beacon. This was a big=20 mistake as the poor ground made it very inefficient, with 100 W from the=20 transmitter generating an unimpressive 125mA of antenna current. However, it= did=20 allow a couple of QSOs.
 
We then added a large amount of wire to the top section to make th= e=20 antenna self resonant. To my surprise, and I'm not sure if this has been don= e=20 before, it worked. Total wire used 128 metres. Series tuning=20 inductance....zero.   Compared to the wavelength of 596m this=20 represents 85% of a quarterwave, which was rather more than I had anticipate= d. I=20 expected the 'shortening effect' to be much greater. Perhaps this was a good= =20 indication that as I suspected the 'ground' under the antenna was either a=20 considerable distance from the surface or, operating from a hilltop had an=20 advantage. Antenna current was now 1A. Still not very good but this was due=20= to=20 us using the quaterwave against a few radials and a single ground rod. = I=20 notice that Rik reports a signal increase between the two different antenna=20 types, but this could be explained by higher current in the vertical rather=20= than=20 any radiation from the horizontal section.
 
Just when things were looking good, it all went, to use a local term, '= pear=20 shaped'
It began to get dark.  The static level wiped out the grabber so w= e=20 could not see our own signal and our final plan to turn the whole thing into= a=20 single horizontal dipole mounted along the ridge of a hilltop had to be=20 abandoned as one of the 2 fields suddenly acquired a large flock of=20 sheep.
 
So, unfortunately a nice day in the countryside but only a=20 little knowledge gained and the transmitter never turned up beyond=20 100W.
 
Next time...I'll take a VNA and start with a dipole!  At least the= =20 local manager at Homebase wont have to worry where all his 2 m bamboo canes=20= are=20 going anymore. My garage is full of them!
 
Finally, to answer Dave's question about the callsign. I  have=20 probably misread my NOV but I was under the impression that just like the ol= d=20 73k licence, /P was not allowed.  Hence a letter to OFCOM a week i= n=20 advance changed my 'station address' to East Sussex for the weekend. - So=20 although I was working from a field....they knew where to find me.
 
As for 10 W ERP.  - We probably made about 2% of that.  Sorry= =20 Mal.  Oh well.
 
To be continued..?
 
David  G0MRF
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 25/05/2009 08:34:52 GMT Standard Time,=20 dave@davesergeant.com writes:
On 24=20 May 2009 at 18:24, James Moritz wrote:

> Dear LF Group,
>=20
> Just worked G0MRF at 1705utc. Signal was 549 - apparently they ar= e=20 still
> working on the antenna, so might improve yet... Got a good=20 report from
> them, so obviously receiving OK. Good luck for the res= t of=20 the
> operation, David and Garo.
>
> Cheers, Jim=20 Moritz
> 73 de M0BMU
>
>

I listened on and off= to=20 David's signal yesterday evening between other
jobs.

Some=20 observations....

G0MRF (/P but not sending /P, which I thought was=20= a=20 bit confusing) was
569 here in Bracknell, later peaking 579 but the st= atic=20 was intolerable
from around 9pm making copy very hard.

I did gi= ve=20 David a couple of calls after he finished his QSO with Chris
G3XIZ but= =20 obviously he didn't hear, hardly surprising with my setup and
in any c= ase=20 I found the tuning had gone off and I had a bad SWR, a
problem with=20 sharply tuned short verticals.
 
-------------------------------1243265844--