Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

[Roger Lapthorn <rogerlapthorn@gmail.com>]

Mal and Pete,

Thankfully I am able to manage the noise here at this (small) QTH, but I know others have a more difficult job. Yes, well sited RX loops and E-field probes help and usually a solution is possible.

BTW, I cannot see many people being happy with a 60 foot vertical appearing next door.

73s

Roger G3XBM

On 18 February 2013 20:14, mal hamilton <g3kevmal@talktalk.net> wrote:

Ken

That seems to be the problem in merry old England. Even if you have the space, neighbours do not want you to put up an antenna and neither does the planing dept. In Scotland and Ireland there is a more laxed approach, more neighbourly.

Put in for planning and see what happens

mal/g3kev

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Ken

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 7:52 PM

Subject: RE: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

Hi Mal.

It would be very nice to have a 60ft vertical, you would not obtain permission where I live, 3m is the max without planning permission.

 

Ken   M0KHW

 

---

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of mal hamilton
Sent: 18 February 2013 18:24
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

 

Graham

It is all inter related. But a few fundamentals are necessary. If it is so bad with for instance a 24 dB disadvantage I would MOVE or pack it in.

Too many excuses are used, the amateur has enough space for a reasonable antenna but says he is concerned about what the neighbours might think. I have heard this so many times. How much space does a 60 ft vertical take up, less than half a sq metre.

Surely when a radio amateur is looking for a property he has antennas in mind and looks for the largest real estate he can afford.

especially if interested in MF or LF.

So wspr is totally dependent on the Receive operator ? and a vy quiet location. I thought the whole idea was to overcome this problem

It is not working, as I said looking at the wspr database, some stns are not even aware that others are active because of lack of signal for what ever reason.

mal/g3kev

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Graham

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 5:01 PM

Subject: Re: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

 

May be , may be not  Mal

 

The system is  reading  the  s/n   at the  Rx   and  not the   field  strength ........  depends on the  local  noise level ,   rst   159  or  599  , carrier  still  S9  ,   1= qrm     5= no  qrm

From: mal hamilton

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:49 PM

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Subject: LF: Re: POOR ANTENNAS

 

Example

I am receiving PA3EGO + 2dB another UK stn is showing -22 at a shorter distance. A difference of 24 dB

and this station says he is an Expert!!

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: mal hamilton

To: rsgb

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:42 PM

Subject: LF: POOR ANTENNAS

 

MF

One thing the wspr DB shows is how poor some Receivers/Antennas are comparing like with like approximately same distances from Transmitter.

 

g3kev

 

--

http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
https://sites.google.com/site/sub9khz/
http://qss2.blogspot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm