Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | <[email protected]> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | LF: Re: Separate Receiving Antenna? |
| From: | "James Moritz" <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Sat, 15 Jan 2011 22:40:56 -0000 |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btopenworld.com; s=s1024; t=1295131257; bh=z3vw/Bj5TbKuRNvnELbrHVAqcqA9S/bQp/6HBjbk60g=; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=s5eTak0xCzEX7v5zo1lUfIkjzXhbXPvNxYK9cFb1c6YvnV3dz/76vB+wK+RJFLFH0tMuRj7lTnjnYDtIBcK71oyZyUC+0wIMeDN7dcloPnCrr1KHbolKxRPX4es08I87618fgEk8ZTuQ6PvuXhFbIRE9uMF6/dKfRvu65l3hp4s= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com; h=DKIM-Signature:Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=RtoW7PjA1v/oPcUExZAG9qKQJ2UK6c+tUqZ+Bk5pE2MSHji2/RcFjqhzF/5zqibvZa6NRWlSn/cXilRhNxfi898MBvE9BNu4p2ogqp+npJBVTXvi7PrEBQxT3NmiS2yqGBwqidIR9Z6y32pW692gvtIu6uQaCwAaQTmSAxVGJsw= ; |
| Domainkey-status: | good (testing) |
| In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
| References: | <[email protected]> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
Dear Toni, LF Group,You may find that the big mast works well as a receiving antenna, if it is well seperated from sources of QRM from mains power etc. When using the 100m mast at the Puckeridge ex-Decca Navigator site some years ago, it was an excellent receiving vertical, used with a 40dB attenuator between antenna and RX. The inductance of the antenna loading coil will be much smaller than for amateur-type verticals, making it less effective as a preselector, so additional filtering may be needed at the RX input. Another source of QRM is nearby broadcast or utility transmitters, which can induce rather large voltages and currents in such a big antenna, and may cause overloading of an RX without good preselection. They may also give rise to "rusty bolt" external intermods which cannot be eliminated by the receiver, and the big antenna can pick up local QRM just like any other antenna. Transmitter sites tend to have "industrial" type electrical noise sources. So a small portable RX antenna would be a good precaution, together with a long piece of coax to connect it to the receiver. Good luck with your project - it is always fun for amateurs to try a "real" LF antenna - especially the luxury of seeing the antenna ammeter needle rapidly rising with only a few TX watts! Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: LF: Re: Why do blown FETs always go Drain-Gate short?, John Rabson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | LF: Re: Separate Receiving Antenna?, Alan Melia |
| Previous by Thread: | LF: Separate Receiving Antenna?, Anton Bärtschi |
| Next by Thread: | LF: Re: Separate Receiving Antenna?, Alan Melia |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |