Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dd02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id EB61A38000093; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 11:49:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SgHi1-0006tk-Jo for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:48:13 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SgHi0-0006ta-R3 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:48:12 +0100 Received: from blu0-omc1-s34.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.45]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SgHhy-0007TV-65 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:48:11 +0100 Received: from BLU153-W57 ([65.55.116.9]) by blu0-omc1-s34.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 17 Jun 2012 08:48:08 -0700 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [67.61.82.17] From: Laurence KL7UK To: Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 07:48:08 -0800 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <004201cd4c9d$97c6ff70$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> References: <4FDDE3C9.8080505@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <360DB78560C94BDDB6ED8173E08935E7@gnat>,<004201cd4c9d$97c6ff70$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jun 2012 15:48:08.0646 (UTC) FILETIME=[97A7FE60:01CD4CA0] X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Ive found 160/600m dx and even ground wave coverage very different dependent on Geographic and Geomagnetic latitudes, topography etc. Even the Iono QRN affects from lightning has a different "taste" It may be the same with Mal in the UK but my personal view is it hasnt played out that way in a number of places Ive operated in/on globally. Vivre la/le difference! (apologies!) Laurence KL1X enroute to AK (yipee) [...] Content analysis details: (-0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [65.55.116.45 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (hellozerohellozero[at]hotmail.com) -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 46d617994b9fba079dc3ad7182acba54 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_5050e0d7-84f0-4f74-b936-e9435ecb1ce0_" Subject: LF: re: Further MF impressions 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=FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD, 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-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:493357472:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d408e4fddfc7445a3 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --_5050e0d7-84f0-4f74-b936-e9435ecb1ce0_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ive found 160/600m dx and even ground wave coverage very different dependen= t on Geographic and Geomagnetic latitudes=2C topography etc. Even the Iono = QRN affects from lightning has a different "taste" It may be the same with Mal in the UK but my personal view is it hasnt play= ed out that way in a number of places Ive operated in/on globally. Vivre la= /le difference! (apologies!) Laurence KL1X enroute to AK (yipee) > From: g3kevmal@talktalk.net > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > CC: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Date: Sun=2C 17 Jun 2012 15:26:39 +0000 > Subject: LF: Re: Re: Further MF impressions >=20 > Alan > I work both 160 metres and 600 metres and find both similar. Daytime rang= e > and night time similar. > but you must compare like with like power and antenna wise. > I use a 1/4 wave inv L on each band up at 100 ft vertical=2C but naturall= y the > 600 metre antenna is less efficient than the 160 metre therefore one has = to > adjust the power on 160 to get the same erp for comparison purposes. In m= y > case 10w erp on each band > For those fiddling about with 400w pep on 160 and a variety of antennas a= nd > unknown erp and those with a few watts on 600 metres and often very small > antennas you cannot draw any rational comparison > I can work over the same distances daytime on 160 or 600 and after dark t= he > same applies to dx locations. >=20 > de mal/g3kev >=20 >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alan Melia" > To: > Sent: Sunday=2C June 17=2C 2012 2:54 PM > Subject: LF: Re: Further MF impressions >=20 >=20 > > Stefan=2C the groundwave does not change=2C but what you have is varyin= g > amounts > > of skywave and daytime "fading" The wavelength is only a quarter of tha= t > at > > 136kHz so it only tales a quarter of the change in (apparent) reflectio= n > > height to give the same sort of constrctive and destructive interferenc= e. > > 500kHz does not travel over land so well as the surface "roughness" is > > bigger wrt a wavelength ( but even rough seas are generally less "rough= " > > than land ) Yes 500k is an interesting frequency and quite different to > both > > 136 and top-band. There are times of the day when the fading can be > vicious > > at relatively short range Also with the shorter wavelength most antenn= a > > height limited stations can have up to 16 times more ERP than at 136kHz > > > > Enjoy the new "playground" :-)) > > > > Alan G3NYK > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Stefan Sch=E4fer" > > To: > > Sent: Sunday=2C June 17=2C 2012 3:03 PM > > Subject: LF: Further MF impressions > > > > > > > MF=2C > > > > > > I just thought my receiver isn't working correctly. I thought the xta= l > > > does not start to oscillate due to the higher ambient temperatures in > the > > > afternoon. But later i found that the band noise on MF is significant= ly > > > lower than in the evening=2C at least 20 dB. So now i see that the ba= nd > > > noise is about 5 dB above my soundcard noise with the current setup. > > > > > > What do others know about the ground wave range in summer and in the > > > afternoon? When does the band open? Similar to LF? > > > > > > BTW thanks to DF6NM for the grabber. Nice tool to get some experience= in > > > these first days... > > > > > > 73=2C Stefan/DK7FC > > > > > > > >=20 >=20 = --_5050e0d7-84f0-4f74-b936-e9435ecb1ce0_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ive found 160/600m dx and even ground wave coverage very different =3Bd= ependent =3Bon Geographic and Geomagnetic latitudes=2C topography etc. = Even the Iono QRN affects from lightning has a different "taste"

It may be the same with= Mal in the UK but my personal view is it hasnt played out that way in a nu= mber of places Ive operated in/on globally. Vivre la/le difference! (apolog= ies!)

Laurence KL1X enroute to AK (yipee)



>=3B From: g3kevmal@talktalk.net
>=3B To: rsgb_lf_group@blackshe= ep.org
>=3B CC: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>=3B Date: Sun=2C 17= Jun 2012 15:26:39 +0000
>=3B Subject: LF: Re: Re: Further MF impressi= ons
>=3B
>=3B Alan
>=3B I work both 160 metres and 600 metr= es and find both similar. Daytime range
>=3B and night time similar.>=3B but you must compare like with like power and antenna wise.
>= =3B I use a 1/4 wave inv L on each band up at 100 ft vertical=2C but natura= lly the
>=3B 600 metre antenna is less efficient than the 160 metre th= erefore one has to
>=3B adjust the power on 160 to get the same erp fo= r comparison purposes. In my
>=3B case 10w erp on each band
>=3B = For those fiddling about with 400w pep on 160 and a variety of antennas and=
>=3B unknown erp and those with a few watts on 600 metres and often v= ery small
>=3B antennas you cannot draw any rational comparison
>= =3B I can work over the same distances daytime on 160 or 600 and after dark= the
>=3B same applies to dx locations.
>=3B
>=3B de mal/g3= kev
>=3B
>=3B
>=3B ----- Original Message -----
>=3B = From: "Alan Melia" <=3Balan.melia@btinternet.com>=3B
>=3B To: <= =3Brsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>=3B
>=3B Sent: Sunday=2C June 17=2C = 2012 2:54 PM
>=3B Subject: LF: Re: Further MF impressions
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B Stefan=2C the groundwave does not change=2C but = what you have is varying
>=3B amounts
>=3B >=3B of skywave and = daytime "fading" The wavelength is only a quarter of that
>=3B at
&= gt=3B >=3B 136kHz so it only tales a quarter of the change in (apparent) = reflection
>=3B >=3B height to give the same sort of constrctive and= destructive interference.
>=3B >=3B 500kHz does not travel over lan= d so well as the surface "roughness" is
>=3B >=3B bigger wrt a wavel= ength ( but even rough seas are generally less "rough"
>=3B >=3B tha= n land ) Yes 500k is an interesting frequency and quite different to
>= =3B both
>=3B >=3B 136 and top-band. There are times of the day when= the fading can be
>=3B vicious
>=3B >=3B at relatively short r= ange Also with the shorter wavelength most antenna
>=3B >=3B height= limited stations can have up to 16 times more ERP than at 136kHz
>=3B= >=3B
>=3B >=3B Enjoy the new "playground" :-))
>=3B >=3B<= br>>=3B >=3B Alan G3NYK
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B ----- Origina= l Message -----
>=3B >=3B From: "Stefan Sch=E4fer" <=3BStefan.Scha= efer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>=3B
>=3B >=3B To: <=3Brsgb_lf_group@b= lacksheep.org>=3B
>=3B >=3B Sent: Sunday=2C June 17=2C 2012 3:03 P= M
>=3B >=3B Subject: LF: Further MF impressions
>=3B >=3B
= >=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B >=3B MF=2C
>=3B >=3B >=3B
>= =3B >=3B >=3B I just thought my receiver isn't working correctly. I tho= ught the xtal
>=3B >=3B >=3B does not start to oscillate due to th= e higher ambient temperatures in
>=3B the
>=3B >=3B >=3B afte= rnoon. But later i found that the band noise on MF is significantly
>= =3B >=3B >=3B lower than in the evening=2C at least 20 dB. So now i see= that the band
>=3B >=3B >=3B noise is about 5 dB above my soundca= rd noise with the current setup.
>=3B >=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B &= gt=3B What do others know about the ground wave range in summer and in the<= br>>=3B >=3B >=3B afternoon? When does the band open? Similar to LF?<= br>>=3B >=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B >=3B BTW thanks to DF6NM for the= grabber. Nice tool to get some experience in
>=3B >=3B >=3B these= first days...
>=3B >=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B >=3B 73=2C Stefan= /DK7FC
>=3B >=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B
>=3B =
>=3B
= --_5050e0d7-84f0-4f74-b936-e9435ecb1ce0_--