MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <001c01cc5149$c192d630$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
References: <001601cc5147$61942b50$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
	<CAMFjj70bR2-tV4JjkVDAG4HbQsr-0JAvnuhQpRGNAVQO-AnqSQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<001c01cc5149$c192d630$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:33:15 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJStiw5Xf+PbkbiktLJoTSzid2+zOQnNjjZ6UY+RBKzey_b0Vw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gary - G4WGT <g4wgt@tiscali.co.uk>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: Poor antennas
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5c22c4e03e904a98ba815
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  
X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m021.2 ; domain : gmail.com DKIM : fail  
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d4ad24e385f611374
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none


--001636c5c22c4e03e904a98ba815
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Mal,

Most grabbers do not use the main antenna, I have only one main antenna for
LF & MF so the grabber uses an active antenna which has got to be better
than none, therefore no grabber.

73

Gary - G4WGT.


On 2 August 2011 20:24, mal hamilton <g3kevmal@talktalk.net> wrote:

> Warren
> I do not have a problem. I can see es hear them all but I am disappointed
> how weak my signal looks on some of the EU grabbers compared to yester
> years
> and some cannot hear me when I call for a QSO. Likewise they cannot
> hear/see
> each other except they are vy local to one another.
> BUT I do not use Probes OR Small loops. I use what one would call normal
> LF/MF antennas.
>
> de Mal/G3KEV
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Warren Ziegler" <wd2xgj@gmail.com>
> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:13 PM
> Subject: Re: LF: Poor antennas
>
>
> Mal,
>
>  Don't discount the increased interference from switching power
> supplies, plasma televisions, PLTs and the like.
> Everyone is battling a higher noise floor these days.
>
> My suggestion: get a sail boat and operate from it!
>
>
> --
> 73 Warren K2ORS
> WD2XGJ
> WD2XSH/23
> WE2XEB/2
> WE2XGR/1
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM, mal hamilton <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
> wrote:
> > LF
> > It now takes hundreds of watts to be observed or heard around EU on 137
> Khz
> > whereas some years back less than 200 watts achieved a good result like a
> > QSO on CW. The 130 watt Ropex used by many resulted in many CW QSO'S,
> > In those days most Amateurs were using normal antennas like loaded inv L
> > systems or some sort of vertical for both RX es TX.
> > At present the trend seems to be probe or small loop antennas and these
> do
> > not seem to produce enough signal capture to the RX.
> > The DX that I have worked in the past all had large antenna systems.
> > These are my observations, maybe others have another theory.
> > de mal/g3kev
> >
>
>
>
>

--001636c5c22c4e03e904a98ba815
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Mal,<div><br></div><div>Most grabbers do not use the main antenna, I have o=
nly one main antenna for LF &amp; MF so the grabber uses an active antenna =
which has got to be better than none, therefore no grabber.</div><div><br>
</div><div>73</div><div><br></div><div>Gary - G4WGT.</div><div><br><br><div=
 class=3D"gmail_quote">On 2 August 2011 20:24, mal hamilton <span dir=3D"lt=
r">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:g3kevmal@talktalk.net">g3kevmal@talktalk.net</a>&g=
t;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Warren<br>
I do not have a problem. I can see es hear them all but I am disappointed<b=
r>
how weak my signal looks on some of the EU grabbers compared to yester year=
s<br>
and some cannot hear me when I call for a QSO. Likewise they cannot hear/se=
e<br>
each other except they are vy local to one another.<br>
BUT I do not use Probes OR Small loops. I use what one would call normal<br=
>
LF/MF antennas.<br>
<br>
de Mal/G3KEV<br>
<div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: &quot;Warren Ziegler&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:wd2xgj@gmail.com">wd=
2xgj@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
To: &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org">rsgb_lf_group@black=
sheep.org</a>&gt;<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:13 PM<br>
Subject: Re: LF: Poor antennas<br>
<br>
<br>
Mal,<br>
<br>
 =A0Don&#39;t discount the increased interference from switching power<br>
supplies, plasma televisions, PLTs and the like.<br>
Everyone is battling a higher noise floor these days.<br>
<br>
My suggestion: get a sail boat and operate from it!<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
73 Warren K2ORS<br>
WD2XGJ<br>
WD2XSH/23<br>
WE2XEB/2<br>
WE2XGR/1<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM, mal hamilton &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:g3kevmal=
@talktalk.net">g3kevmal@talktalk.net</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; LF<br>
&gt; It now takes hundreds of watts to be observed or heard around EU on 13=
7<br>
Khz<br>
&gt; whereas some years back less than 200 watts achieved a good result lik=
e a<br>
&gt; QSO on CW. The 130 watt Ropex used by many resulted in many CW QSO&#39=
;S,<br>
&gt; In those days most Amateurs were using normal antennas like loaded inv=
 L<br>
&gt; systems or some sort of vertical for both RX es TX.<br>
&gt; At present the trend seems to be probe or small loop antennas and thes=
e do<br>
&gt; not seem to produce enough signal capture to the RX.<br>
&gt; The DX that I have worked in the past all had large antenna systems.<b=
r>
&gt; These are my observations, maybe others have another theory.<br>
&gt; de mal/g3kev<br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001636c5c22c4e03e904a98ba815--