Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp13674igc; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:39:00 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.182.164 with SMTP id ef4mr40194277wic.35.1388713139562; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 17:38:59 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id ay3si4919wib.25.2014.01.02.17.38.58 for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 17:38:59 -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 1VytGE-00083j-VE for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:09:14 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VytGE-00083a-4Y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:09:14 +0000 Received: from blu0-omc1-s32.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.43]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VytG9-0003BL-Pl for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:09:13 +0000 Received: from BLU180-W52 ([65.55.116.7]) by blu0-omc1-s32.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:09:08 -0800 X-TMN: [RM0RowaRNf6mwj+sDJsUSix0G3id+OEi] X-Originating-Email: [rjraide@hotmail.com] Message-ID: From: Bob Raide To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 20:09:08 -0500 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2014 01:09:08.0674 (UTC) FILETIME=[6793AA20:01CF0820] 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: Laurence; It would be easy to determine coverage of radio signals of longer wavelengths using the soil map. However, the "soil map" is only an estimate and changes DRASTICALLY from season to season. When the ground freezes the conductivity in my area goes from about a 3 [soil map shows I'm in 4] to over 12-14 and the colder it gets the higher it goes! I have been and still am in the broadcast business building my first AM station licensed to Penn Yan NY in 1980. Transmitter site just west of where I am sitting right now. I found 850 kHz fit here perfectly for a KW daytimer. My consulting engineer Harold Munn in Michigan said "no so fast". You see, measurements takes precedence over the soil map. It happens that I was up against the Cornell University 870 5KW station and clearance was somewhat close but signals did not overlap. I rented a calibrated field set [FIM41] and took the measurements in March. Broadcast engineers and communications attorneys want to see cold weather measurements not those taken in 100 degree July heat! My council tendered my app along with my measurements. This measurement program was not to end here! Before it was over with Cornell's engineers and council 3 sets of measurements were taken and finally joint measurements were agreed upon in October of the following year! I have since built or modified and owned 4 other AMs-all requiring measurements to show the allocations or modifications fit for one reason or another. Needless to say for an attempt at west coast groundwave I would also look at as close to 68 kHz as I could find clear! Lower the freq the further the groundwave per meter of signal strength. This is why I made the statement that a signal must be put on the air to determine coverage! I would only attempt such a feat as hitting the west coast groundwave in dead cold frozen ground of Winter!!! Frozen ground is cheating a bit and engineers taking measurements would never agree to such measurements unless they could be averaged with mid summer measurements and the average taken [...] 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 [65.55.116.43 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rjraide[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: 7ee575a0a6578bbbbe5ea7af32688fd5 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_15145b1b-5d88-4da2-9219-c910c81f9a7f_" 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 --_15145b1b-5d88-4da2-9219-c910c81f9a7f_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Laurence=3B It would be easy to determine coverage of radio signals of longer wavelengt= hs using the soil map. However=2C the "soil map" is only an estimate and c= hanges DRASTICALLY from season to season. When the ground freezes the cond= uctivity in my area goes from about a 3 [soil map shows I'm in 4] to over 1= 2-14 and the colder it gets the higher it goes! I have been and still am i= n the broadcast business building my first AM station licensed to Penn Yan = NY in 1980. Transmitter site just west of where I am sitting right now. I= found 850 kHz fit here perfectly for a KW daytimer. My consulting enginee= r Harold Munn in Michigan said "no so fast". You see=2C measurements takes= precedence over the soil map. It happens that I was up against the Cornel= l University 870 5KW station and clearance was somewhat close but signals d= id not overlap. I rented a calibrated field set [FIM41] and took the measu= rements in March. Broadcast engineers and communications attorneys want to= see cold weather measurements not those taken in 100 degree July heat! My= council tendered my app along with my measurements. This measurement prog= ram was not to end here! Before it was over with Cornell's engineers and c= ouncil 3 sets of measurements were taken and finally joint measurements wer= e agreed upon in October of the following year! I have since built or modified and owned 4 other AMs-all requiring measurem= ents to show the allocations or modifications fit for one reason or another= . Needless to say for an attempt at west coast groundwave I would also look a= t as close to 68 kHz as I could find clear! Lower the freq the further the = groundwave per meter of signal strength. This is why I made the statement that a signal must be put on the air to de= termine coverage! I would only attempt such a feat as hitting the west coa= st groundwave in dead cold frozen ground of Winter!!! Frozen ground is che= ating a bit and engineers taking measurements would never agree to such mea= surements unless they could be averaged with mid summer measurements and th= e average taken for the allocation.=20 The soil map? In the world of broadcast engineering "don't mean stink". =20 From: hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu=2C 2 Jan 2014 15:20:00 -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 wanted to add a= bit -=20 =20 When looking at WWVB 60Khz (close to 74?) contours for daytime I notice mo= re of a Vertical peanut shape in the fiedlstrength favoring North South=2C = with highest losses over Mountaineous terrain and likely the lowest ground = conductivity=2C say between 0.5 and 2 milliseimens - something we see (in g= eneral) afforded by ground to the West of Ft Collins (especially NW) and to= the Eastern mountain ranges=2C and its not too Bright on most bearings fro= m here in Alaska as we have a lot of the pointy high snow covered thingies = up here too. I see they plonked WWVB there due to having local high Alkali= nity of the soil - high conductance. =20 Whether given the height of the mountains even at 60kHz we loose a bit mor= e than flat Earth Id say a whopping Yes=2C that and some of the oddities th= at ground waves going over glaciers can have all add up to further attenuat= ion. =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 I look at how /4 gets up here - it would in reality have to be a fairly = high angle reflection=2C as Im close in to the Chugach and Talkeetna Mounta= ins and those mountain ranges extends hundered of miles on the /4 bearing. = - I see no signal at all (ok I wasnt using OPds) and even with a reasonable= antennae and good s/n its a sky wave opening only - well=2C at any reasona= bly power that we can generate. Whereas he was strong in CA last night he w= as only just detectable up here - though I blame the Auroral ovaly stuff to= o for that. =20 Interestingly enough and with the limited amount of data - if Bob was to ge= nerate another 3dB he would have probably been visisble at dot 60 every nig= ht to date over the 5000Kms path or so =2C ie a lot less variation on a day= to day than I see at 137. =20 On groundwave on 137 I did some reasonable tests and with my 3W ERP (ish) i= n the main loop on a quiet iono day in Autumn maintaining a CW just read le= vel of some 1000Kms down to Corpus Christi from the OKie/Kansas Border and = but out West was considerably poorer - we had poor conductivity to the We= st of us for a while.... =20 I saw with interest on the NIST web site the scalloped nature of signal rec= eption at night at 60KHz at some times of the night. =20 http://tf.nist.gov/images/radiostations/wwvb-large/0800utc.jpg =20 Cheers from a soggy snowyish Anchorage. =20 =20 =20 =20 = --_15145b1b-5d88-4da2-9219-c910c81f9a7f_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Laurence=3B
It would be easy = to determine coverage of radio signals =3Bof longer wavelengths using t= he soil map. =3B However=2C the =3B"soil map" is only an estimate a= nd changes =3BDRASTICALLY from season to season. =3B When the groun= d freezes the conductivity in my area goes from about a 3 [soil map shows I= 'm in 4] to over 12-14 and the colder it gets the higher it goes! =3B I= have been and still am =3Bin the =3Bbroadcast business building&nb= sp=3Bmy first AM station licensed to Penn Yan NY =3Bin 1980. =3B Tr= ansmitter site just west of =3Bwhere I am sitting right now. =3B I = found 850 kHz fit here perfectly for a KW daytimer. =3B My =3Bconsu= lting engineer Harold Munn =3Bin =3BMichigan said "no so fast".&nbs= p=3B You see=2C measurements takes precedence =3Bover the =3Bsoil m= ap. =3B It happens that I was up against the Cornell =3BUniversity = 870 5KW station and clearance was somewhat close but signals did not overla= p. =3B =3BI rented a calibrated field set [FIM41] and took the meas= urements in March. =3B Broadcast engineers and communications attorneys= want to see cold weather measurements not those taken in 100 degree July h= eat! =3B =3BMy council tendered my app along with my measurements.&= nbsp=3B This measurement program was not to end here! =3B Before it was= over with Cornell's engineers and council 3 sets of measurements were take= n and finally joint measurements were agreed =3Bupon in October of the = following year!
I have since built or modified and owned =3B4 other = AMs-all requiring measurements to =3Bshow the allocations or modificati= ons =3Bfit for one reason or another.
Needless to say for an attempt= at west coast groundwave I would also =3Blook at as close to 68 kHz as= I could find clear! Lower the freq the further the groundwave per meter of= signal strength.
This is why I made the statement =3Bthat a signal = must be put on the air to determine coverage! =3B I would only attempt = such a feat as hitting the west coast groundwave in dead cold frozen ground= of Winter!!! =3B Frozen ground is cheating a bit and engineers taking = measurements would never agree to such measurements unless they could be av= eraged with mid summer measurements and the average taken for the allocatio= n. =3B
The soil map? =3B In the world of broadcast engineering "= don't mean stink".
 =3B
From: hello= zerohellozero@hotmail.com
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Thu= =2C 2 Jan 2014 15:20:00 -0900
Subject: LF: Coast to Coast on 74kHz groun= d wave ?

=0A= =0A= =0A=
Hi Chaps - I =3Bsaw the discussion on the modes and lo= sses and wanted to add a bit -
 =3B
When looking at WWVB 60Khz&n= bsp=3B (close to 74?) contours for daytime I notice more of a Vertical pean= ut shape in the fiedlstrength favoring North South=2C with highest losses o= ver Mountaineous terrain and likely the lowest ground conductivity=2C say b= etween 0.5 and 2 milliseimens - something we see (in general) afforded by g= round to the West of Ft Collins (especially NW) and to the Eastern mountain= ranges=2C and its not too Bright on most bearings from here in Alaska as w= e have a lot of the pointy high snow covered thingies up here too. =3B = I see they plonked WWVB there due to having local high Alkalinity of the so= il - high conductance.
 =3B
 =3BWhether given the height of t= he mountains even at 60kHz we loose a bit more than flat Earth Id say a who= pping Yes=2C that and some of the oddities that ground waves going over gla= ciers can have all add up to further attenuation.
 =3B
Have a loo= ksee at http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/m3-map-effective-ground-conductivit= y-united-states-wall-sized-map-am-broadcast-stations
 =3B
If = I look at how /4 gets up here - it would in reality have to be a fairly hig= h angle reflection=2C as Im close in to the Chugach and Talkeetna Mountains= and those mountain ranges extends hundered of miles on the /4 =3Bbeari= ng. =3B- I see no signal at all (ok I wasnt using OPds) and even with&n= bsp=3Ba reasonable antennae and good s/n its a sky wave opening only - well= =2C at any reasonably power that we can generate. Whereas he was strong in = CA last night he was only just detectable up here - though I blame the Auro= ral ovaly stuff too for that.
 =3B
Interestingly enough and with = the limited amount of data - if Bob was to generate another 3dB he would ha= ve probably been visisble at dot 60 every night to date over the 5000Kms pa= th or so =2C ie a lot less variation on a day to day than I see at 137.
=  =3B
On groundwave on 137 I did some reasonable tests and with my 3W= ERP (ish) in the main loop on a quiet iono day in Autumn maintaining a CW = just read level of some 1000Kms down to Corpus Christi from the OKie/Kansas= Border and =3B but out West =3B was considerably poorer - we had p= oor conductivity to the West of us for a while....
 =3B
I saw wit= h interest on the NIST web site the scalloped nature of signal reception at= night =3B at 60KHz at some times of the night.
 =3B
http://tf.nist.gov/images/radiostations/wwvb-large/0800utc.jpg<= /a>
 =3B
Cheers from a soggy snowyish Anchorage.
 =3B
&= nbsp=3B
 =3B
 =3B
= --_15145b1b-5d88-4da2-9219-c910c81f9a7f_--