Hi Dave, I have some LF stuff at : http://www.qsl.net/on7yd/136khz.htm I just started with my own webpage, so it's still under heavy construction. 73, Rik ON7YD At 18:52 21/02/00 -0000, you wrote: De
Last night (21 feb.) I noticed very strong QSB on the signal of EI0CF : from 569 to 429 in about 20 minutes. Either Finbar was changed power / antenna or it was propagation. Also some QSB on the sign
Hello Finbar, I got the details about the antenna OK, thanks for the information. The QSB on your signal (21 feb) was extreme, never noticed that strong and relatively fast QSB before. At a certain m
At 21:35 24/02/00 -0000, EI0CF wrote: I will conduct a test transmission on 136.150 khz starting at 0001 utc on the 25th Feb for 1 hour, with a repeating callisign EI0CF. Perhaps there might be someb
At 12:59 25/02/00 +0000, G0MBU wrote: There is therefore a discrepancy of -9.6dB between expected and actual ERP - even greater than the -6.4dB difference that was found for the M0BMU measurements a
I had the same idea as Marco, or was it the first EME (moonbounce) signal heard on 136kHz (.... ..) 73, Rik It turned out to be sending the same data as GM3YXM/P but with a mystery delay timing diffe
There have been some mails about using a (rather big) piece as inductor. Dick (PA0SE) gave us the results of a computer calculation (TRA from N6BV) and that seems quite OK to me, except for the fact
If you calibrate the loop it is not nessecary to use an untuned loop. If you use a tuned loop the output voltage will be much higher (factor Q, can easily be 100 or more). This will allow to measure
The inductance of a coax 'stub' is frequency dependent ! According to the formula for a loss-less cable (given in an earlier mail, should be OK for 136kHz) 70m of RG58 cable should be about 17uH. For
At 09:47 3/03/00 -0000, G3XDV wrote: Not sure how much influence the flares had on the conditions (it's easy to see coincidence as evidence), especially as the good conditions Larry experienced last
Hello Mike (and the others), Since you are 'spoiled' with close to 1000km DX on 73kHz the last days, Belgium maybe 'peanuts'. But I will listen (look) for signals and try some crossband. I will use m
Hi Johan, You probably saw G3YXM, I worked him (x-band) on that frequency few minutes earlier. Give it another try in the morning, when QRN is low, and break the 1000km barrier ! 73, Rik ON7YD I beli
I listened (looked) on 72.8kHz (+/- 100Hz) last night : G3YXM 'O' : worked Dave x-band (first ON - G ?) M0BMU 'O' : worked Jim x-band G3XDV 'M' : missed Mike (want another try in the morning ?) It wa
Hello all, I tried to put my (limited) knowlegde about 136kHz antennas together and put it on my webpage at : http://www.qsl.net/on7yd/136ant.htm It's a kind of an overview of the antennas that can b
At 11:02 7/03/00 -0800, you wrote: If I may I would like to pose a simple question, to which all the experts are invited to reply: If to the top of a vertical an equal vertical descender is added, in
Hello John Thanks for your comments. 1. The reason that the antenna current decreases linearly to zero at the end of the antenna, is because sin(x) = x approx for small values of x, and for most amat
Careful! Surely this assumes perfect ground, doesn't it? Even at HF, I think most amateurs would prefer to use a vertical dipole than a ground-plane antenna. Good point. I have been breaking my mind
At 12:09 9/03/00 -0000, G3XDV wrote: Hmmm. Well I think we do have to take earth losses into account twice. This is because it not only affects the ERP because of the effective resistance in series w
I am very pleased with the discusion about the 'gain' (ahum ... apart from the many dB groundloss) of a short vertical monopole. It is very interesting to read the various points of view. What about
