Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.237.98 with SMTP id vb2csp41011igc; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:17:55 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.207.229 with SMTP id lz5mr3701886wic.1.1391296674716; Sat, 01 Feb 2014 15:17:54 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id wp2si7579998wjc.153.2014.02.01.15.17.54 for ; Sat, 01 Feb 2014 15:17:54 -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 1W9j6G-00038F-1F for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2014 22:31:44 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1W9j6F-000386-Gd for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2014 22:31:43 +0000 Received: from blu0-omc1-s27.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.38]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1W9j6D-0003ZF-Bb for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2014 22:31:42 +0000 Received: from BLU177-W25 ([65.55.116.8]) by blu0-omc1-s27.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 1 Feb 2014 14:31:40 -0800 X-TMN: [kX8g1O5S8c+0l0vGuclEPDcNgjSUFMXa] X-Originating-Email: [hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com] Message-ID: From: Laurence KL7 L To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 13:31:39 -0900 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: <672974DB1A094C33A1AF31AF8CB687FA@gnat> , MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Feb 2014 22:31:40.0572 (UTC) FILETIME=[607635C0:01CF1F9D] 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: Opps wrong reply to wrong group :-( - apologies Laurence KL7L From: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 13:25:15 -0900 To: Re: LF: Ant current What about the D layer acting as a reflective Medium even at MF...be interesting to see if isig max occured at near max Solar illumination at midpoint,,, (per Alan in the past :-)) Laurence On Feb 1, 2014, at 1:13 PM, "Bob Raide" wrote: [...] 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 [65.55.116.38 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: cbf9d9751ac5f32708197d03fa6d8d74 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_64b9e0da-00a2-4ca6-b499-061d6d219a7f_" Subject: RE: LF: Ant current X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD,HTML_20_30, 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 --_64b9e0da-00a2-4ca6-b499-061d6d219a7f_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Opps wrong reply to wrong group :-( - apologies Laurence KL7L From: hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com Date: Sat=2C 1 Feb 2014 13:25:15 -0900 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org CC: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Ant current What about the D layer acting as a reflective Medium even at MF...be intere= sting to see if isig max occured at near max Solar illumination at midpoint= =2C=2C=2C (per Alan in the past :-)) Laurence On Feb 1=2C 2014=2C at 1:13 PM=2C "Bob Raide" wrote: =0A= =0A= =0A= Alan=3B >From my broadcast experience and taking field strength measurements-frozen = ground can over double the normal warmer weather conductivity which would n= ot be even close to the salt water conductivity of 5000 mmohs per meter of = salt water-Bob=20 =20 > From: alan.melia@btinternet.com > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Date: Sat=2C 1 Feb 2014 20:08:58 +0000 > Subject: Re: LF: Ant current >=20 > Why? > I think its possible that frozen ground increases the efficincy of a give= n=20 > system=2C but that same antenna conguration would probably work even bett= er=20 > still over salt water?? >=20 > Alan > G3NYK > ----- Original Message -----=20 > From: "C. Groeger" > To: > Sent: Saturday=2C February 01=2C 2014 3:18 PM > Subject: Re: LF: Ant current >=20 >=20 > > Thanks for quick reply=2C Wolf! > > > > But then propagation from a mf tx on a ship on sea should be worse then= =20 > > from land? > > > > Christian Groeger > > > > wolf_dl4yhf schrieb: > > > >>Hi Chris=2C > >> > >>By coincidence=2C I just had to re-adjust the antenna for exactly that= =20 > >>reason: > >> > >>The conductivity of water is better=2C but the 'tangens delta' (loss > >>factor) of water as dielectric is much worse than that of ice. > >>So the water "robs" energy in presence of an E-field=2C which the ice d= oes > >>not. > >>Thus the losses around the antenna go up. Depends a lot of the greenery > >>around the antenna. > >> > >>Cheers=2C > >> Wolf DL4YHF . > >> > >>Am 01.02.2014 15:51=2C schrieb C. Groeger: > >>> Hi all > >>> How can one explain that ant current rises when soil is frozen? > >>> > >>> Conductivity of water should be much higher than that of ice. > >>> > >>> So earth resistance would be higher and the current should drop when= =20 > >>> soil is frozen... > >>> > >>> 73=2C df5qg > >>> > >>> > >>> Christian Groeger > >> > >> > >=20 >=20 >=20 =0A= = --_64b9e0da-00a2-4ca6-b499-061d6d219a7f_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Opps wrong reply to wrong group = :-( - apologies =3B Laurence KL7L

F= rom: hellozerohellozero@hotmail.com
Date: Sat=2C 1 Feb 2014 13:25:15 -09= 00
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
CC: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org<= br>Subject: Re: LF: Ant current

What about the D layer acting a= s a reflective Medium even at MF...be interesting to see if isig max occure= d at near max Solar illumination at midpoint=2C=2C=2C (per Alan in the past= :-))

Laurence

On Feb 1=2C 2014=2C a= t 1:13 PM=2C "Bob Raide" <=3Brjrai= de@hotmail.com>=3B wrote:

=0A= =0A= =0A=
Alan=3B
From my broadcast experience and taking field s= trength measurements-frozen ground can over double the normal warmer weathe= r conductivity which would not be even close to the salt water conductivity= of 5000 mmohs per meter of salt water-Bob
 =3B
>=3B From= : alan.melia@btinternet.com
>=3B To: rsgb_lf_gro= up@blacksheep.org
>=3B Date: Sat=2C 1 Feb 2014 20:08:58 +0000
&= gt=3B Subject: Re: LF: Ant current
>=3B
>=3B Why?
>=3B I th= ink its possible that frozen ground increases the efficincy of a given
= >=3B system=2C but that same antenna conguration would probably work even= better
>=3B still over salt water??
>=3B
>=3B Alan
>= =3B G3NYK
>=3B ----- Original Message -----
>=3B From: "C. Groeg= er" <=3Baot.aot@gmx.de>=3B
>= =3B To: <=3Brsgb_lf_group= @blacksheep.org>=3B
>=3B Sent: Saturday=2C February 01=2C 2014 3= :18 PM
>=3B Subject: Re: LF: Ant current
>=3B
>=3B
>= =3B >=3B Thanks for quick reply=2C Wolf!
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >= =3B But then propagation from a mf tx on a ship on sea should be worse then=
>=3B >=3B from land?
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B Christian G= roeger
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B wolf_dl4yhf <=3Bdl4yhf@freenet.de>=3B schrieb:
>=3B >=3B<= br>>=3B >=3B>=3BHi Chris=2C
>=3B >=3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B&g= t=3BBy coincidence=2C I just had to re-adjust the antenna for exactly that =
>=3B >=3B>=3Breason:
>=3B >=3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B>= =3BThe conductivity of water is better=2C but the 'tangens delta' (loss
= >=3B >=3B>=3Bfactor) of water as dielectric is much worse than that o= f ice.
>=3B >=3B>=3BSo the water "robs" energy in presence of an E= -field=2C which the ice does
>=3B >=3B>=3Bnot.
>=3B >=3B>= =3BThus the losses around the antenna go up. Depends a lot of the greenery<= br>>=3B >=3B>=3Baround the antenna.
>=3B >=3B>=3B
>=3B = >=3B>=3BCheers=2C
>=3B >=3B>=3B Wolf DL4YHF .
>=3B >= =3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B>=3BAm 01.02.2014 15:51=2C schrieb C. Groeger:<= br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B Hi all
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B How can on= e explain that ant current rises when soil is frozen?
>=3B >=3B>= =3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B Conductivity of water should be much= higher than that of ice.
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B>= =3B>=3B So earth resistance would be higher and the current should drop w= hen
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B soil is frozen...
>=3B >=3B>=3B&= gt=3B
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B 73=2C df5qg
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B=
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B Christian Groege= r
>=3B >=3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B>=3B
>=3B >=3B
>=3B=
>=3B
=0A=
= --_64b9e0da-00a2-4ca6-b499-061d6d219a7f_--