Return-Path: Received: from mtain-dl09.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-dl09.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.74.215]) by air-md02.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMD023-8b7a4d39e24d11e; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:45:17 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dl09.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 6C27E3800095B; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:45:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1PgMuG-0006Qb-T9 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:44:24 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1PgMuF-0006QS-Ui for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:44:23 +0000 Received: from outbound02.telus.net ([199.185.220.221] helo=defout.telus.net) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PgMuC-0008AH-TR for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:44:23 +0000 Received: from edtncm03 ([199.185.220.240]) by priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.8.01.03.00 201-2260-125-20100507) with ESMTP id <20110121194417.YHLS5658.priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net@edtncm03> for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 12:44:17 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.74] ([75.157.178.185]) by edtncm03 with bizsmtp id yKjo1f01n40Pa3v01Kjo89; Fri, 21 Jan 2011 12:43:49 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=Tglj3SbMqROlfDyvVc7TD9PDxkci69eaHzai74q1iqc= c=1 sm=1 a=QP5vzE+AzmS6AFgdvZKvxg==:17 a=2j7RKGFWsVPUC6sBHyQA:9 a=zbxdED_RVrTbJONea7YA:7 a=apcCVDlvVdSa4i1tcjd_F1UoZEsA:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=SIaHR30oBzVKiQTnXxwA:9 a=qQaM3gnnlMko_KYX184A:7 a=eu9JbE7dre5s85VktJRkccNgTHsA:4 a=QP5vzE+AzmS6AFgdvZKvxg==:117 Message-ID: <4D39E210.302@telus.net> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:44:16 -0800 From: Scott Tilley User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <004a01cbb99f$182a38f0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> In-Reply-To: <004a01cbb99f$182a38f0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,RATWARE_GECKO_BUILD=1.426 Subject: Re: LF: Alpha benchmark Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040801030007070708090306" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,HTML_20_30, HTML_MESSAGE 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-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d4ad74d39e24b370d X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) --------------040801030007070708090306 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Mal I find the Alphas vary in strength throughout the day. Are you saying that at your location they're fairly stable and do not have diurnal variation ? I guess this may be due to the distances involved if you see fairly stable signals... Would be curious to know if you have made a long term observation... 73 Scott VE7TIL On 1/21/2011 11:12 AM, mal hamilton wrote: > vlf > As a guide for those interested in VLF 9 Khz it would be useful if > each station could use the Alpha station on 11905 Khz as a benchmark > for quality of reception. > and let us all know hown efficient their RX system is. > In my case using an inv L 150 metres total length not resonated the > report is minus 60 dB with a sig over noise of 25 dB. This seems an > acceptable system for 9 Khz reception. > I can do better by resonating the antenna, or using my 136 antenna > system re-resonated for 9 Khz > I get the impression that at some locations receiving is a problem, > for various reasons including noise from being in the middle of a > Urban environment. > Can we have some data. > de mal/g3kev --------------040801030007070708090306 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Mal

I find the Alphas vary in strength throughout the day.  Are you saying that at your location they're fairly stable and do not have diurnal variation ?

I guess this may be due to the distances involved if you see fairly stable signals...

Would be curious to know if you have made a long term observation...

73 Scott
VE7TIL

On 1/21/2011 11:12 AM, mal hamilton wrote:
vlf
As a guide for those interested in VLF 9 Khz it would be useful if each station could use the Alpha station on 11905 Khz as a benchmark for quality of reception.
and let us all know hown efficient their RX system is.
In my case using an inv L 150 metres total length not resonated the report is minus 60 dB with a sig over noise of 25 dB. This seems an acceptable system for 9 Khz reception.
I can do better by resonating the antenna,  or using my 136 antenna system re-resonated for 9 Khz
I get the impression that at some locations receiving is a problem, for various reasons including noise from being in the middle of a Urban environment.
Can we have some data.
de mal/g3kev
 
 

--------------040801030007070708090306--