Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp16483igc; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 18:54:34 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.105.199 with SMTP id go7mr56533wib.53.1388717673538; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 18:54:33 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id cx3si94417wib.1.2014.01.02.18.54.33 for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 18:54:33 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Vyuao-0008RH-KQ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 02:34:34 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Vyuan-0008R8-Ls for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 02:34:33 +0000 Received: from blu0-omc1-s5.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.16]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Vyuak-0003Ny-5L for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 02:34:32 +0000 Received: from BLU177-W45 ([65.55.116.8]) by blu0-omc1-s5.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 2 Jan 2014 18:34:28 -0800 X-TMN: [w+10/mEluxSBuWuXh0NH7RKyV0Momc7e] X-Originating-Email: [hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com] Message-ID: From: Laurence KL7 L To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:34:27 -0900 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <006301cf0829$c324bd80$6401a8c0@JAYDELL> References: ,<006301cf0829$c324bd80$6401a8c0@JAYDELL> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2014 02:34:28.0217 (UTC) FILETIME=[530FEE90:01CF082C] X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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: Bob - Jay - thanks - Yes its the same here in the NDB world - it was always amusing to work with (or against mostly) a certain government agency who phoned me up time and time again, mostly in the Winter and advised me that one of Blow torch NDBs needed a tweak up or down a dB or two/three to maintain field levels - which typically was indicative of the soil becoming frozen to some depth between them (Railton) and one of my sites. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [65.55.116.16 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (hellozerohellozero[at]hotmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 8510f05d8a40511a400b4282b102727d Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_f75668ef-80fb-4eb7-bfa7-4cb4254442a7_" Subject: RE: LF: Coast to Coast on 74kHz ground wave ? 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,TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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 --_f75668ef-80fb-4eb7-bfa7-4cb4254442a7_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bob - Jay - thanks - Yes its the same here in the NDB world - it was alway= s amusing to work with (or against mostly) a certain government agency who = phoned me up time and time again=2C mostly in the Winter and advised me tha= t one of Blow torch NDBs needed a tweak up or down a dB or two/three to mai= ntain field levels - which typically was indicative of the soil becoming f= rozen to some depth between them (Railton) and one of my sites.=20 They stopped calling me when I asked how there weather was- and Yes a hooge= difference in propagation between 60k in winter and summer - same for over= the Pole stuff too where in Summer (when its light :-) I can just see DHO= 38 but in winter peaks 30-40dB over noise - I see its off at the moment. I see a number of papers around using various forms of ground penetrating r= adar to improve the conductivity/permittivity measurement for radio and non= radio means (and as Bob says seasonal dependent measurements) - the commen= ts about the old maps were similar to Bobs "Dont mean stink=2C well ok as a= generalisation...it still looks like a Peanut to me" :-) Yep Bob its needs a signal=20 Laurence KL7 L From: jrusgrove@comcast.net To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu=2C 2 Jan 2014 21:16:07 -0500 Subject: Re: LF: Coast to Coast on 74kHz ground wave ? =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= Laurence=2C Bob=0A= =0A= I cherry picked the winter and summer SNR levels of =0A= WWVB at different US locations ... see =0A= =0A= http://www.w1vd.com/WWVB20wintersummer.jpg . =0A= =0A= =0A= The daytime path from Boulder to Cutler =0A= ME is about 7 dB better SNR in the winter and fairly flat from 1600 - 2000Z= . The =0A= daytime path from Boulder to San Diego is a bit more 'peaky' with best SNR = at =0A= about 1800 Z but is only a few dB better in winter vs. summer. =0A= =0A= While this doesn't shed a lot of light on what =0A= to expect coast to coast it does confirm the advantage of wintertime condit= ions =0A= at 60 kHz. I don't have information as to whether the SNR differences are = =0A= due to changes in ground conductivity=2C lower background noise=2C or some = =0A= combination of both. =0A= =0A= Jay W1VD WD2XNS WE2XGR/2 =0A= WG2XRS/2 =0A= =0A= ----- Original Message ----- =0A= From: =0A= Bob Raide =0A= =0A= To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org =0A= =0A= Sent: Thursday=2C January 02=2C 2014 8:09 =0A= PM=0A= Subject: RE: LF: Coast to Coast on 74kHz =0A= ground wave ?=0A= =20 =0A= Laurence=3B It would be easy to determine coverage of radio =0A= signals of longer wavelengths using the soil map. However=2C =0A= the "soil map" is only an estimate and changes DRASTICALLY from =0A= season to season. When the ground freezes the conductivity in my area = =0A= goes from about a 3 [soil map shows I'm in 4] to over 12-14 and the colde= r it =0A= gets the higher it goes! I have been and still am in =0A= the broadcast business building my first AM station licensed to Penn =0A= Yan NY in 1980. Transmitter site just west of where I am =0A= sitting right now. I found 850 kHz fit here perfectly for a KW =0A= daytimer. My consulting engineer Harold Munn in Michigan =0A= said "no so fast". You see=2C measurements takes precedence over =0A= the soil map. It happens that I was up against the =0A= Cornell University 870 5KW station and clearance was somewhat close but = =0A= signals did not overlap. I rented a calibrated field set [FIM41] =0A= and took the measurements in March. Broadcast engineers and =0A= communications attorneys want to see cold weather measurements not those = taken =0A= in 100 degree July heat! My council tendered my app along with my =0A= measurements. This measurement program was not to end here! Before =0A= it was over with Cornell's engineers and council 3 sets of measurements w= ere =0A= taken and finally joint measurements were agreed upon in October of the = =0A= following year! I have since built or modified and owned 4 other =0A= AMs-all requiring measurements to show the allocations or =0A= modifications fit for one reason or another. Needless to say for an =0A= attempt at west coast groundwave I would also look at as close to 68 kHz = =0A= as I could find clear! Lower the freq the further the groundwave per mete= r of =0A= signal strength. This is why I made the statement that a signal must =0A= be put on the air to determine coverage! I would only attempt such a =0A= feat as hitting the west coast groundwave in dead cold frozen ground of = =0A= Winter!!! Frozen ground is cheating a bit and engineers taking =0A= measurements would never agree to such measurements unless they could be = =0A= averaged with mid summer measurements and the average taken for the =0A= allocation.=20 The soil map? In the world of broadcast engineering =0A= "don't mean stink". =20 =0A= =0A= =0A= From: hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com To: =0A= rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu=2C 2 Jan 2014 15:20:00 =0A= -0900 Subject: LF: Coast to Coast on 74kHz ground wave ? =0A= =0A= =0A= Hi Chaps - I saw the discussion on the modes and losses and =0A= wanted to add a bit -=20 =20 When looking at WWVB 60Khz (close to =0A= 74?) contours for daytime I notice more of a Vertical peanut shape in the= =0A= fiedlstrength favoring North South=2C with highest losses over Mountaineo= us =0A= terrain and likely the lowest ground conductivity=2C say between 0.5 and = 2 =0A= milliseimens - something we see (in general) afforded by ground to the We= st of =0A= Ft Collins (especially NW) and to the Eastern mountain ranges=2C and its = not too =0A= Bright on most bearings from here in Alaska as we have a lot of the point= y =0A= high snow covered thingies up here too. I see they plonked WWVB there = =0A= due to having local high Alkalinity of the soil - high =0A= conductance. =20 Whether given the height of the mountains even =0A= at 60kHz we loose a bit more than flat Earth Id say a whopping Yes=2C tha= t and =0A= some of the oddities that ground waves going over glaciers can have all a= dd up =0A= to further attenuation. =20 Have a looksee at http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/m3-map-effective-ground-c= onductivity-united-states-wall-sized-map-am-broadcast-stations =20 If =0A= I look at how /4 gets up here - it would in reality have to be a fairly h= igh =0A= angle reflection=2C as Im close in to the Chugach and Talkeetna Mountains= and =0A= those mountain ranges extends hundered of miles on the /4 bearing. - =0A= I see no signal at all (ok I wasnt using OPds) and even with a reasonable= =0A= antennae and good s/n its a sky wave opening only - well=2C at any reason= ably =0A= power that we can generate. Whereas he was strong in CA last night he was= only =0A= just detectable up here - though I blame the Auroral ovaly stuff too for = =0A= that. =20 Interestingly enough and with the limited amount of data - =0A= if Bob was to generate another 3dB he would have probably been visisble a= t dot =0A= 60 every night to date over the 5000Kms path or so =2C ie a lot less vari= ation =0A= on a day to day than I see at 137. =20 On groundwave on 137 I did =0A= some reasonable tests and with my 3W ERP (ish) in the main loop on a quie= t =0A= iono day in Autumn maintaining a CW just read level of some 1000Kms down = to =0A= Corpus Christi from the OKie/Kansas Border and but out West was =0A= considerably poorer - we had poor conductivity to the West of us for a = =0A= while.... =20 I saw with interest on the NIST web site the scalloped =0A= nature of signal reception at night at 60KHz at some times of the =0A= night. =20 http://tf.nist.gov/images/radiostations/wwvb-large/0800utc.jpg =20 Cheers =0A= from a soggy snowyish =0A= Anchorage. =20 =20 =20 =20 = --_f75668ef-80fb-4eb7-bfa7-4cb4254442a7_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bob - Jay - thanks - Yes its the= same here in the NDB world - =3B it was always amusing to work with (o= r against mostly) a certain government agency who phoned me up time and tim= e again=2C mostly in the Winter and advised me that one of Blow torch NDBs = needed a tweak up or down a dB or two/three to maintain field levels = =3B - which typically was indicative of the soil becoming frozen to some de= pth between them (Railton) and one of my sites.

They stopped callin= g me when I asked how there weather was- and Yes a hooge difference in prop= agation between 60k in winter and summer - same for over the Pole stuff too= where in =3B Summer (when its light :-) I can just see DHO38 but in wi= nter peaks 30-40dB over noise - I see its off at the moment.

I see a= number of papers around using various forms of ground penetrating radar to= improve the conductivity/permittivity measurement for radio and non radio = means (and as Bob says seasonal dependent measurements) - the comments abou= t the old maps were similar to Bobs "Dont mean stink=2C well ok as a genera= lisation...it still looks like a Peanut to me" :-)

Yep Bob its needs= a signal

Laurence KL7 L

From: = jrusgrove@comcast.net
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Thu=2C 2= Jan 2014 21:16:07 -0500
Subject: Re: LF: Coast to Coast on 74kHz ground= wave ?

=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A=
Laurence=2C Bob
=0A=
 =3B
=0A=
I cherry picked the winter and summer = SNR levels of =0A= WWVB at different US locations ... =3B see
=0A=
 =3B
=0A= =0A=
 =3B
=0A=
The =3Bdaytime path =3Bfrom Bo= ulder to Cutler =0A= ME is about 7 dB better SNR in the winter and fairly flat from 1600 - 2000Z= . The =0A= daytime path from Boulder to San Diego is a bit more 'peaky' with best SNR = at =0A= about 1800 Z but is only a few dB better in winter vs. summer. =0A=
 =3B
=0A=
While this doesn't shed a lot of light= on =3Bwhat =0A= to expect coast to coast it does confirm the advantage of wintertime condit= ions =0A= at 60 kHz. I don't have information as to =3Bwhether the SNR difference= s are =0A= due to changes in ground conductivity=2C lower background noise=2C or some = =0A= combination of both. =3B
=0A=
 =3B
=0A=
Jay W1VD =3B WD2XNS =3B WE2XGR= /2 =3B =0A= WG2XRS/2 =3B =3B
=0A=
=0A=
----- Original Message -----
=0A=
From: =0A= Bob = Raide =0A=
=0A= =0A=
Sent: Thursday=2C January 02=2C = 2014 8:09 =0A= PM
=0A=
Subject: RE: LF: Coast to Coast = on 74kHz =0A= ground wave ?
=0A=

=0A=
Laurence=3B
It would be easy to determine coverage of= radio =0A= signals =3Bof longer wavelengths using the soil map. =3B However= =2C =0A= the =3B"soil map" is only an estimate and changes =3BDRASTICALLY = from =0A= season to season. =3B When the ground freezes the conductivity in my = area =0A= goes from about a 3 [soil map shows I'm in 4] to over 12-14 and the colde= r it =0A= gets the higher it goes! =3B I have been and still am =3Bin =0A= the =3Bbroadcast business building =3Bmy first AM station license= d to Penn =0A= Yan NY =3Bin 1980. =3B Transmitter site just west of =3Bwhere= I am =0A= sitting right now. =3B I found 850 kHz fit here perfectly for a KW = =0A= daytimer. =3B My =3Bconsulting engineer Harold Munn =3Bin&nbs= p=3BMichigan =0A= said "no so fast". =3B You see=2C measurements takes precedence = =3Bover =0A= the =3Bsoil map. =3B It happens that I was up against the =0A= Cornell =3BUniversity 870 5KW station and clearance was somewhat clos= e but =0A= signals did not overlap. =3B =3BI rented a calibrated field set [= FIM41] =0A= and took the measurements in March. =3B Broadcast engineers and =0A= communications attorneys want to see cold weather measurements not those = taken =0A= in 100 degree July heat! =3B =3BMy council tendered my app along = with my =0A= measurements. =3B This measurement program was not to end here! = =3B Before =0A= it was over with Cornell's engineers and council 3 sets of measurements w= ere =0A= taken and finally joint measurements were agreed =3Bupon in October o= f the =0A= following year!
I have since built or modified and owned =3B4 othe= r =0A= AMs-all requiring measurements to =3Bshow the allocations or =0A= modifications =3Bfit for one reason or another.
Needless to say fo= r an =0A= attempt at west coast groundwave I would also =3Blook at as close to = 68 kHz =0A= as I could find clear! Lower the freq the further the groundwave per mete= r of =0A= signal strength.
This is why I made the statement =3Bthat a signal= must =0A= be put on the air to determine coverage! =3B I would only attempt suc= h a =0A= feat as hitting the west coast groundwave in dead cold frozen ground of = =0A= Winter!!! =3B Frozen ground is cheating a bit and engineers taking = =0A= measurements would never agree to such measurements unless they could be = =0A= averaged with mid summer measurements and the average taken for the =0A= allocation. =3B
The soil map? =3B In the world of broadcast en= gineering =0A= "don't mean stink".
 =3B
=0A=
=0A=
=0A= From: hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com
To: =0A= rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Thu=2C 2 Jan 2014 15:20:00 =0A= -0900
Subject: LF: Coast to Coast on 74kHz ground wave ?

=0A= =0A= =0A=
Hi Chaps - I =3Bsaw the discussion on the modes and = losses and =0A= wanted to add a bit -
 =3B
When looking at WWVB 60Khz =3B = (close to =0A= 74?) contours for daytime I notice more of a Vertical peanut shape in the= =0A= fiedlstrength favoring North South=2C with highest losses over Mountaineo= us =0A= terrain and likely the lowest ground conductivity=2C say between 0.5 and = 2 =0A= milliseimens - something we see (in general) afforded by ground to the We= st of =0A= Ft Collins (especially NW) and to the Eastern mountain ranges=2C and its = not too =0A= Bright on most bearings from here in Alaska as we have a lot of the point= y =0A= high snow covered thingies up here too. =3B I see they plonked WWVB t= here =0A= due to having local high Alkalinity of the soil - high =0A= conductance.
 =3B
 =3BWhether given the height of the mount= ains even =0A= at 60kHz we loose a bit more than flat Earth Id say a whopping Yes=2C tha= t and =0A= some of the oddities that ground waves going over glaciers can have all a= dd up =0A= to further attenuation.
 =3B
Have a looksee at http://www.fcc.g= ov/encyclopedia/m3-map-effective-ground-conductivity-united-states-wall-siz= ed-map-am-broadcast-stations
 =3B
If =0A= I look at how /4 gets up here - it would in reality have to be a fairly h= igh =0A= angle reflection=2C as Im close in to the Chugach and Talkeetna Mountains= and =0A= those mountain ranges extends hundered of miles on the /4 =3Bbearing.=  =3B- =0A= I see no signal at all (ok I wasnt using OPds) and even with =3Ba rea= sonable =0A= antennae and good s/n its a sky wave opening only - well=2C at any reason= ably =0A= power that we can generate. Whereas he was strong in CA last night he was= only =0A= just detectable up here - though I blame the Auroral ovaly stuff too for = =0A= that.
 =3B
Interestingly enough and with the limited amount of = data - =0A= if Bob was to generate another 3dB he would have probably been visisble a= t dot =0A= 60 every night to date over the 5000Kms path or so =2C ie a lot less vari= ation =0A= on a day to day than I see at 137.
 =3B
On groundwave on 137 I = did =0A= some reasonable tests and with my 3W ERP (ish) in the main loop on a quie= t =0A= iono day in Autumn maintaining a CW just read level of some 1000Kms down = to =0A= Corpus Christi from the OKie/Kansas Border and =3B but out West = =3B was =0A= considerably poorer - we had poor conductivity to the West of us for a = =0A= while....
 =3B
I saw with interest on the NIST web site the sca= lloped =0A= nature of signal reception at night =3B at 60KHz at some times of the= =0A= night.
 =3B
http://tf.nist.gov/images/radiost= ations/wwvb-large/0800utc.jpg
 =3B
Cheers =0A= from a soggy snowyish =0A= Anchorage.
 =3B
 =3B
 =3B
 =3B
= --_f75668ef-80fb-4eb7-bfa7-4cb4254442a7_--