Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+136kHz\s+\-\s+this\s+is\s+how\s+badmy\s+system\s+is\!\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Roger Lapthorn <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:28:25 +0000
Well, for the first time in about 5 years I have actually spotted a station on 136kHz. My RX system on that band is a joke, but it got Chris G3XIZ. Thank you Chris. At least my setup is looking in th
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00280.html (9,410 bytes)

2. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Roger Lapthorn <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:42:29 +0000
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00281.html (9,601 bytes)

3. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Martin Evans <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:51:39 +0000
Watching Roger's adventures on 136kHz, I thought I'd go  take a look and I wondered - DCF39 is about 50dB above the noise at 16:44UTC. I'm using a 150ft inverted L, untuned, stuffed directly into an
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00284.html (9,915 bytes)

4. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: "Alan Melia" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:17:00 +0100
Hi Martin, I would estimate the field strength from DCF39 in your area is about 0.5mV/m (from measurements done by PA0SE in the UK) and from your data that gives about 1.5uV at the RX input as the le
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00287.html (10,909 bytes)

5. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Martin Evans <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:06:24 +0000
Alan - thanks for this. Being a bear of very little brain ( I wouldn't recognise a Newton if I tripped over one!) much of your explanation goes over my head, but I understand well enough your conclus
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00289.html (13,088 bytes)

6. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Andy Talbot <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:31:35 +0000
Noise power is proportional to bandwidth At room temperature, a resistor will develop -174dBm of thermal noise or -174dBm/Hz   In a 2.5kHz SSB bandwidth, the total power is therefore -174 + 10.LOG(25
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00290.html (14,306 bytes)

7. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Roger Lapthorn <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 22:59:50 +0000
Hi All, Best DX on 136kHz WSPR RX here earlier was G8HUH (250km) in Somerset. Nothing spotted since teatime, but my setup could not be much worse! Next year I may well try a miniwhip.  Years ago I tr
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00291.html (16,202 bytes)

8. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: "Alan Melia" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 01:33:37 +0100
Hi Martin I think Andy has answered the question for me so I wont confuse your with further facts :-)) In the days when I used to pontificate daily on propagation I tried hard to ensure the sensitivi
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00292.html (14,240 bytes)

9. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Gmail <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:05:15 +0000
Well I am glad I was persuaded to keep trying by Pete! On 136kHz WSPR 4 different stations have been received in the last day despite my totally useless setup. Thank you to everyone for the encourage
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00293.html (16,103 bytes)

10. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Martin Evans <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 09:31:57 +0000
Good morning Alan - Yes, I received Andy's post but frankly it was so far above my pay grade that I read it twice and decided that  further study could be dangerous to my mental health. Look after th
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00295.html (11,410 bytes)

11. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: "Mike Dennison" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 11:47:39 +0100
There is no need to wonder how good your (or anyone's) receive syatem is. By using the databases for Opera and/or WSPR (http://wsprnet.org/drupal/wsprnet/spots) simply compare the reports you are giv
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00296.html (11,979 bytes)

12. Re: LF: 136kHz - this is how badmy system is! (score: 1)
Author: Martin Evans <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:18:48 +0000
Thanks Mike. Yes of course  - silly me - I do remember to upload spots on occasion but it had never occurred to me to compare reports. The obvious solutions are often the best (especially if like me
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2018-01/msg00297.html (13,235 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu