SKN
Posted by Roger Magnuson on January 01, 2004 at 00:08:17
Lyle and myself have completed another SKN (straight key night) on LF. Conditions were'nt the best but we completed our annual LF 2-way QSO on CW. LEK on 177.75 and RM on 189.8 Khz. We have been doing this for a few years now, its always fun to keep up the tradition. Thanks Lyle.
Roger
Re: SKN
Posted by Dave Riley on January 01, 2004 at 12:03:32
This is real nostalgic of the early 80s when we had a lot of local activity within 250 miles, and would get on and rag chew. Even from the hsip I was working on at the time WJMV Sea Venture going up and down the coast working VP, TH, and all the New England guys, especially for the short time under the Varazano Narrows bridge in NYC when all the sigs came way up.... Could work 1LM in Plymouth Mass. from the Delaware Capes area...
73s de Dave - 1A
BO on air...
Posted by Dave Riley on January 01, 2004 at 12:10:19
Lit up beacon 'BO' last night... 512.000 khz. CCW 12 WPM .... from FN42pb
VE2IQ DOS CCW pgm into home brew 100mw then Tesla like coil 5' high with giant 'Q' then into 10' copper pipe...
Is this the right forum for 512 activity?
Happy New Year everyone.... de Dave 1A , BO
www.radiocom.net/Fessenden
Fwd: BCY Testing
Posted by John Davis on January 01, 2004 at 23:31:14
Jerry Picou wrote:
BCY is back on , testing at ~186.850 KHz. Now QRSS3 with 12 WPM ID. Currently show about 646 mW
Re: Fwd BCY Testing
Posted by Jerry on January 02, 2004 at 11:57:34
BCY will be intermittent today for adjustments
Jerry
Re: TH copy
Posted by John Andrews on January 02, 2004 at 15:47:15
TH also copied audibly and visually here in MA this morning on 189.360 kHz.
John Andrews, W1TAG
DPC copy in Maryland
Posted by lloyd chastant on January 02, 2004 at 22:49:28
Had a nice capture on DPC hr in Maryland tonite ~10:30PM local ..173.498.17 at QRSS30..Will send Denis a copy of capture.
de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
Re: Fwd BCY Testing
Posted by Jerry Picou on January 03, 2004 at 19:21:31
BCY is sending QRSS30 with 12 WPM ID
Jerry..BCY 186.850 KHz
HiFer's -- who plans on raising power level on Jan 8?
Posted by Tim on January 04, 2004 at 18:42:07
I'm kinda curious as to who plans on raising their power level after January 8. Almost 5mw into a dipole is actually quite a bit of power -- enough to carry on a two way QSO using CW.
I'm haven't decided whether I'm going to modify the transmitter to put out more power or just make the antenna more efficient.
BTW, HiFer RAD was off the air for a bit due to my recent illness. On October 21, 2003 I was admitted to the hospital because of a bad EKG. I'm doing better now but I have some cardiac related problems I'll have to live with for the rest of my life, and it's not due to clogged arteries or eating bad...
Anyway, I got HiFer RAD repaired and back on the air. My apologies to anyone trying to listen for it when it was down.
Tim N2GFT HiFer "RAD" 13.5608 mHz.
Re: HiFer's -- who plans on raising power level on Jan 8?
Posted by John Davis on January 04, 2004 at 20:17:46
In case you wonder what Tim is asking about, check out the news story on the Longwave Home Page (lwca.org). The FCC is raising the permissible field strength in the 13.56 MHz band. The new level corresponds to a power of 4.5 mW into a dipole. The story contains a link to the new Section 15.225 Rules.
John
Litz Wire Question
Posted by Warren WD2XGJ on January 05, 2004 at 11:54:32
Hello,
I have the possibility of obtaining some specialized wire - 24 strands of 22 gauge wire. Each 22 gauge wire is individually insulated and they are in a flattened bundle. Unlike true Litz wire the individual strands run parallel to each other - they are not randomly woven. The total cross sectional area is approximately equivalent to a single 8 gauge wire. This wire was custom made for a high power, high frequency alternator (about 1kHz). I know that this wire is not optimum for 137 kHz, but would I was thinking of using it to either make a transmitting loop or a loading coil for a vertical.
Any thoughts on whether this would be worthwhile?
73 Warren WD2XGJ/K2ORS
Re: HiFer's -- who plans on raising power level on Jan 8?
Posted by k0sm on January 06, 2004 at 11:42:41
I just tuned into the 22m band after learning about hifers. It's 16:40z and I can copy MP, GA, and HI here in Lincoln, NE. HI and MP are strong enough for a normal speed CW QSO. I'm using a D3W rotatable dipole w/o any matching and a TS2000 for RX. Neat stuff.
Andy K0SM EN10rt
WD2XDW QRT
Posted by Laurence KL1X on January 06, 2004 at 15:58:31
Pending station move to Oklahoma/Kansas from Alaska,WD2XDW is off air from 1400Z 6th Jan - KL1X bp41xd continues to receive and down load 135 and 137Khz captures to web till the tower is taken down. http://www.kl1x.com. Happy New Year.
Re: Litz Wire Question
Posted by Alan G3NYK on January 06, 2004 at 19:36:00
Hi Warren, no-one else has stuck their neck out yet, so maybe it has to be this old fool !! My guess is that you will not see significant differences. I imagine that bundles wire could be quite difficult to work with, particularly to tin lots of taps (cos you will probably need them as you refine your aerial coil installation.)
Dave G3YXM did some tests with nifty litz wire and standard household electrical wire on a few aerial coils and the loss difference on his aerial system was only a few percent (less than 10 %) the coil loss is so small at 136 compared with the "ground loss" that you can get away with a lot initially. When you get your ground loss (at 136kHz) below 10 ohms (guffaws from the active Hams !! but we have measured that low at EI0CF and G3AQC) then you might start to see some payback.
Nice stuff though, worth putting away for later projects.
Good Luck Cheers de Alan G3NYK alan.melia@btinternet.com
Waterhole 10 ??11
Posted by lloyd chastant on January 07, 2004 at 08:58:04
Here is an overnite capture for the 185 waterhole..Seems 10 reasonable good signals with maybe a possible at 185.302.29.
There were captures on either side that may have had slightly better copy on certain signals but this is the closest to getting the 10 and maybe that??11..
www.geocities.com/lacwman/waterhole10.jpg
de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
Re: Litz Wire Question
Posted by Warren WD2XGJ on January 07, 2004 at 10:42:58
Thanks Alan, you make a very good point about tapping the coil - I hadn't thought of that! I may use it for a loop antenna which is not so dependent on the ground resistance and doesn't need to be tapped!
73 Warren
Re: Litz Wire Question
Posted by Peter Barick on January 07, 2004 at 12:02:19
Hi Warren,
I say use the wire for the LF coil. While it's true that making the usual taps to Litz can be daunting, there may be a way around it. If the taps are going to be in the lower section (as I imagine) then make that out of common house wire, say 12-solid, the remainder can be the Litz for only one connection between them. The Rac loss should be proportional over the two types of wire with the Litz being the dominant portion and of better quality.
Here's a thought on those taps: I find it hard to do a good mechanical tap on an already wound coil ... so if one first winds sufficient wire on the former then marks places for taps, removes the wire, applies the taps and a good soldering thereof, lastly rewinds the coil.
Cheers,
Peter, LWCA Member
Re: HiFer's -- who plans on raising power level on Jan 8?
Posted by John Davis on January 07, 2004 at 21:12:35
Neat stuff indeed, Andy. Congratulations.
Goes to show that, especially with the current solar flux, HiFERing isn't just a "summer replacement" for LowFERing.
John
2nd nite waterhole10
Posted by lloyd chastant on January 08, 2004 at 09:32:11
I ran an overnite again at the 185 waterhole but ran this in the slow mode..this is the best that shows possibly 10 but several signals were much stronger at other times..
I think the normal mode may..may..have show better results but who knows..may run again tonite again in normal mode...
www.geocities.com/lacwman/waterhole2.jpg
de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
LW Broadcast Hot Tonight
Posted by John Davis on January 08, 2004 at 19:06:28
East Coast US LowFER Dexter McIntyre is reporting elsewhere that the European broadcasters on 153, 162, 177 and 183 kHz are coming in strong tonight.
Increased power on Hifer AZ
Posted by Jim Mandaville on January 08, 2004 at 20:50:54
As of this evening (8Jan04) I've increased the power on Hifer AZ (13.5545 MHz) to the new Part 15 limits. It's now running a calculated 4.52 mW (set by adjusting my new output voltage into a 50-ohm load to 475 mV, measured by an RF millivolter designed for high accuracy at this level). I know my ground plane antenna is very close to 50 ohms. Schedule remains 24/7. Any reception reports welcomed (zygo@dakotacom.net). 73, Jim
Re: LW Broadcast Hot Tonight
Posted by John Davis on January 08, 2004 at 21:16:44
The great conditions across the Atlantic tonight have energized transoceanic attempts by amateur radio operators. In the past hour or so, W1TAG appears to have possibly been receiving G3YXM.
3rd nite Waterhole
Posted by lloyd chastant on January 09, 2004 at 08:11:12
Well this is the 3rd nite in a row for captures at the waterhole..ran this one in normal mode and had eight fairly nice copy of the regular group---missing were TAG and NC which I believe were off doing other testing????UWL and WE0H were both coming through fairly nice..
www.geocities.com/lacwman/waterhole3.jpg
de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH and should note that I have been using a Wellbrook ALA100 loop(with 25ft legs) and the Racal RA6790/GM receiver..
NWNJ and TH
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 09, 2004 at 16:43:51
Hi,
Just before New Year's I turned my loop to peak up on KPH, i.e., peaking at headings of 280 and 100 degrees. I wasn't able to hear KPH on MF (worked K6KPH on 40m), but I left it there to see how well it would do on NWNJ since John's heading from here is approximately 290.
John predicted that the cold weather (and it sure is cold) would help his signal, and so it has. At approximately 1630 local time (2130Z), NWNJ came in here 559, the best level of the season to date. That's about the same strength as I heard TH, but that's not really fair to Carl because TH is now near the null of my loop.
73,
Ray
WD2XFE Experimental License Granted
Posted by Robert Bicking, W9RB on January 10, 2004 at 09:54:32
After almost 5 months, my application for a 137 kHz experimental license was granted. Don't listen for it until sometime in March as we are on vacation in Fla.
Re: WD2XFE Experimental License Granted
Posted by Alan G3NYK on January 10, 2004 at 11:29:01
Hi Robert Congratulations, let us know when the beacon is ready for running and we will be around to listen for you over this side.
Cheers de Alan G3NYK alan.melia@btinternet.com
TLTX now running 4.5mW
Posted by Tony Levstik on January 10, 2004 at 14:32:26
TLTX 13.55983MHz now running 4.5mW also raised my antenna from ~20ft to 30ft.
Tony Levstik
"NWNJ" will be 24/7 for duration of cold-spell
Posted by John Bogath on January 10, 2004 at 17:41:17
I will be running beacon "NWNJ" (189.655 KHz, CW) continuously for the duration of this cold-spell we are now experiencing here in the eastern-USA. As the ground freezes deeper-and-deeper, my ground-system losses are dropping (not to mention the decrease in tree-absorption losses, as well). Receiving conditions are likewise very good. I expect that this situation may remain for at least another week or two. In any event, I will keep the beacon continuous as long as the antenna current remains high (now 200 ma.). All reception, and non-reception reports, will be greatly welcome.
www.vlf.it update
Posted by IK1QFK, Renato Romero on January 11, 2004 at 04:09:55
An ELF signas reception gallery, received with orthogonal earth dipoles and elaborated with RDF software, is on line at vlf.it:
"RDF Earth Dipole RECEPTION GALLERY" by Renato Romero
73, IK1QFK Renato
Re: "NWNJ" will be 24/7 for duration of cold-spell
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 11, 2004 at 09:21:56
With the loop now back in its normal position favoring Europe, I took another listen around 0900 local time (1400Z) today. NWNJ was still 559, but TH was now up to 579. Nothing heard from HS or JJX due to carriers on their frequencies, and still no sign of 2J.
The outdoor temperature here this morning is 5F (-15 C).
73,
Ray
Re: TLTX now running 4.5mW
Posted by lloyd chastant on January 11, 2004 at 14:27:29
Tony took a look this afternoon and had copy on your medfer--I was copying at 13559.845 and there was very rapid qsb ..very diffcult to get complete TLTX but will stiil listen later and see if can get solid capture..
de Lloyd W3NF
HiFer RAD status
Posted by Tim on January 11, 2004 at 19:25:21
HiFer RAD now sports a new low pass filter, and a balanced modulator (home-brew, diode ring, with 6kHz bandwidth limiting filter). The SG-8002 has short-term "chirp" instability but long-term stability is good with it keyed down in DSB or AM mode.
RAD now transmits in DSB and AM (depending on what I'm experimenting with).
Currently, RAD is simulcasting "Liberty 93", our educational Part 15 FM.
I'm curious to see if it can be heard in either DSB or AM mode any kind of distance.
RAD operates on 13.56095 (as measured) and will be using DSB/AM modes until further notice.
First WOLF QSO
Posted by John Andrews on January 11, 2004 at 19:37:47
Lowfers NC (Dex McIntyre) and myself had the first known WOLF QSO this morning on 185.850 kHz over a period of about 3 hours. We are 671 miles apart, and the work was done during the daylight hours.
Details may be found at:
http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/wolfqso.htm
John Andrews, W1TAG
Report, 12 January
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 12, 2004 at 15:20:44
At 1500 local time this afternoon (2000Z), it had warmed up to 34 F (1 C) and there was still about half an inch of snow on the ground.
Under those conditions, and with the loop still favoring Europe (i.e., neither TH nor NWNJ was in the null) TH was 579 and NWNJ 549. Nothing from JJX or HS because of carriers.
73,
Ray
BCY
Posted by Jerry on January 12, 2004 at 20:37:57
BCY on ~186.850 KHz is on air running QRSS10 with 12 WPM ID Jerry
T/A test OM2TW
Posted by Rich OM2TW on January 13, 2004 at 08:33:46
Hi LF-ers...
OM2TW and OM5KM will both be active from site having big mast this weekend (friday 16.jan. starting 1400Z until saturday 17.jan. 1200Z). They will be looking for QRSS and CW contacts and maybe some trans-Atlantic reports.
1400-2130Z - TRX CW mostly, some QRSS/DFCW3
2130-2200Z - TX CQ in DFCW20 on 135.923 (dot 135.922.75) for VO1NA, CT1DRP, etc
2200-2230Z - RX QRSS20 on 137.777 for VO1NA, CT1DRP, etc If no QSO, than this procedure repeat every hour untill morning 0600Z If yes, we will beaconing untill 0600Z.
0600-1200Z - TRX on CW and QRSS/DFCW3
If you want sked with me, please let me know, because we will be QRV only 22 hours maximum.
We will have internet during the trip, look for us via E-mail: om2tw@nextra.sk or via phone +421 903 416609 (SMS).
73 de Rich OM2TW
HP-334a as a receiver
Posted by Bob on January 13, 2004 at 11:12:44
Good day Genglemen,
Do anyone here use or have had use of a HP-334a or equivelent piece of equipment from HP, I recently purchased the 334a model and would like to know any results out there from anyone.
thankyou and happy DXing Bob, N0XJJ
Fwd: eco wire strippers/cutters ( WD2XDW)
Posted by Laurence KL1X on January 13, 2004 at 15:18:11
Tower comes down today/tmw in Anchorage - station is QRT on receive/argo/web
Moose chomped LDF450 feed two days ago hence no rx web signals past period.
Cheers Laurence in W5
Report, 14 January
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 14, 2004 at 08:15:20
Hi,
At 0800 local time (1300Z), TH was 589, about as strong as I've ever heard him. NWNJ was 449, and HS was 339. Nothing from JJX due to a carrier, and I've never been able to hear 2J (at least not yet, anyway). Morning temperature here was 8 F (-13 C).
73,
Ray
Re: Report, 14 January
Posted by John Andrews on January 14, 2004 at 09:09:25
TH was very much armchair copy here this morning (-7 deg F). Using Argo's 3-second screen, I could see a cw-speed signal on NWNJ's frequency, but couldn't resolve it with either Spectran or CoolEdit. Similarly, there was something that looked like CW about 20 Hz lower than JJX's frequency, but nearby carriers would make copy impossible.
Assuming that I did see NWNJ and JJX, they would have been fairly easy copy at a QRSS3 keying rate.
John Andrews, W1TAG
Report, 15 January
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 15, 2004 at 12:17:58
Hi,
Around 1200 local time (1700Z), TH was 569, NWNJ 449. Nothing heard from HS, and JJX's frequency was still buried under a carrier. The temperature was 12 F (-11 C), and we have about 6 inches of snow on the ground. The loop is snow-covered as well, which might be affecting its performance.
73,
Ray
Re: Report, 14 January
Posted by John Bogath on January 15, 2004 at 12:22:23
Thanks Ray and John for your very useful signal reports. Hopefully soon I will have a "back-up" ID-keyer for the beacon that will have slower CW (about 3 - 5 wpm). Perhaps John's ARGO set-up will be able to "resolve" intracharacter spacing better at that speed.
Report, 17 January
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 17, 2004 at 16:17:42
The snow has melted off the loop, so my system is back to normal. At 1600 local time today (2100 Z), TH was 579, NWNJ 449, and JJX 449 (the carrier seems to have moved up a bit, so I could copy JJX again). Nothing heard from HS today. The temperature has warmed up to 33 F (1 C).
73,
Ray
LW voice stations in the US....
Posted by Herb on January 17, 2004 at 21:00:19
Seems TUK on 164 and 381 has been gone for awhile. Are there any other voice stations in the US that may be audible on the east coast? (hope I didn't get those call letters anf freqs wrong, going from memory...)
My first post here....awesome site. I hope to report some TA's soon, with a larger antenna soon. I'm in the Hudson Valley, NY.
Primarily using a Drake R8A and 70' random wire at about 30'. Waiting on some 'stealthwire' from the Wireman...then should go to about 180'. I also have some boat anchors..none of which cover LW.
Re: LW voice stations in the US....
Posted by Lyle Koehler on January 17, 2004 at 22:20:39
Following the links on the LWCA home page, I came up with this listing of voice weather broadcasts on longwave at:
http://www.iprimus.ca/~hepburnw/dx/twb.htm
We still have quite a few of the voice weather stations here in MN, although I don't believe all of the stations on the list are still active.
Re: LW voice stations in the US....
Posted by Herb on January 18, 2004 at 04:29:16
Thanks, Lyle....I should have picked up on that, haven't browsed the whole site yet. I will start trying for some of these, although I will be looking for faint carriers in most cases. I can't seem to find voice transmissions anymore.
I do believe that you are correct that the list may not be completely up to date. I used to hear the Boston station on 380, (drifting up a few khz at times)...fairly consistently, but not in the last two years. It's listed, but without call letters.
Thanks again. Even though I am not a pilot, I still get a kick out of any voice transmission on Longwave!
'BO' is qsy to 1624.150
Posted by Dave Riley on January 18, 2004 at 15:47:59
Had almost nil results on 512 kcs..
Have 'BO' on 12 wpm CCW @ 1624.150 now through tonight...
QRU tnx
HI (13.558 MHz) heard in AZ
Posted by Frank Cathell on January 18, 2004 at 17:52:56
I copied Hifer HI Q5 at 6:30AM local MST this morning (Jan. 18) in Tucson, AZ. Receiver was a Lowe HF-225 with a 135' off-center fed Windom antenna. Quiet conditions with some QSB. AZ also heard (ground wave).
Frank
Re: 'BO' is qsy to 1624.150
Posted by John Andrews on January 18, 2004 at 18:28:07
Dave,
Nothing audible/visible here, same as when you were on 512. Unless you're just looking for local reports, you might want to slow the keying down.
John Andrews
Hifer UWL and WC2XSR/11 in Maryland
Posted by lloyd chastant on January 19, 2004 at 22:35:37
Hifer UWL 13555.450 was fairly good cw copy tonite(first 1/2 hr) and his QRSS3 mode(2nd 1/2 hr) also nice capture hr in Maryland.
Also took a look at 166.5 (QRSS30) and had captures of "long dashes" which I think were Bob's WC2XSR/11
de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
HiFERs using standard speed Morse?
Posted by Robert on January 19, 2004 at 23:07:18
The IC703 is now on the air again, with an indoor loop antenna. Which HiFER beacons run standard speed Morse that I can copy without a computer?
Have any of you had a two-way real time QSO with your HiFER stations?
When I hear someone, I will keep you posted!
73 Robert
Re: HiFERs using standard speed Morse?
Posted by John Davis on January 20, 2004 at 00:26:13
>>> Which HiFER beacons run standard speed Morse that I can copy without a computer?
As shown in our HiFER list... available from the LowFER/MedFER link at the top of the home page... the only beacon presently using conventional CW as its primary mode is AZ.
If one has time to spare, QRSS3 is not that hard to copy by ear. Or perhaps you might have an old reel-to-reel tape recorder in a closet somewhere with multiple speeds. :-)
There have been a handful of QSOs at 22m, but the stations involved do not spring to mind at the moment. HiFERing still seems to be regarded as something of a secondary activity to which people don't devote a lot of personal attention. If operators would like to schedule QSOs, though, we'd be glad to have that information in the list. You might contact some of the more active ops (as evidenced by the most recent listing update dates) via e-mail, and see if they'd like to set up a sked.
John
Crucial week for Isle of Man longwave project
Posted by Mike Terry on January 20, 2004 at 07:21:44
Four days of hearings have commenced on the Isle of Man which could determine the future of the much-delayed longwave broadcasting project. On Monday island resident Nick Cussons launched a petition of Doleance challenging the Communications Commission's decision to award a licence to Isle of Man International Broadcasting PLC (IMIB) in 1999. Cussons maintains that IMIB didn't meet the conditions set down in the provisional licence,
and wants it revoked. Advocate Paul Morris, representing Mr Cussons, told the court his client lived just over 2 kilometres from the initial proposed site of the radio mast on land at Cranstal in Bride. After the site was turned down, IMIB now want to place the mast 4 kilometres off the coast of Cranstal. The hearing continues.
(Source: Manx Radio)
(Media Network 20 Jan)
Re: HiFERs using standard speed Morse?
Posted by John Andrews on January 20, 2004 at 08:56:04
Robert,
Mitch Powell (MP) and I (RY) had a QRSS3 QSO a couple of years ago. Our signals were copyable at regular CW speeds at times, but having the QRSS3 signal visible on the screen was a big help with the fades. In both cases, this was hand-sent code, which is pretty frustrating.
A number of the beacons have dual-speed ID's, so you may catch the CW version if you don't fall asleep during the slow stuff. But as John Davis points out, you CAN copy QRSS3 aurally without a computer.
John Andrews
Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by Robert on January 20, 2004 at 23:27:34
I did see the excellent success of the 678 mile W1TAG QSO, and wonder if low/med/hifer experimenters closer together could run CW, PSK31, SSB or other real-time modes for two-way comms in real time...say for traffic nets, or emergency communications? In the near field, I could imagine "base stations" that normally hear other LOWFERs hundreds of miles distant should easily copy a local with a makeshift antenna and poorer ground system set up Field Day style. Or, during the daytime, when mediumwave commercial powerhouses in the AM MW broadcast band are not skipping in via skywave, set up portable MEDFER stations with ten-foot antennas, and simple grounds. Set it up in a park, and spread the word! I'm thinking along the lines of a MEDFER transverter for a ham or even 11M CB SSB capable rig.
I'm still brainstorming...how far distant could you hear a 13560 kHz four milliwatt signal line-of-sight?
Conversely, are modes like WOLF or QRSS allowed on the ham bands? If I cannot put up a suitable LF or MF antenna, I still want to experiment with these modes, at least with local hams on HF bands -- say 80M for groundwave, or 10M for line-of-sight comms.
I am proposing this to help hams with limited space and low power still be able to "get out" with more alternatives than CW or PSK31.
If you have had such real-time LOWFER/MEDFER QSO's, please let me know!
73 Robert
Re: Crucial week for Isle of Man longwave project
Posted by Mike Terry on January 21, 2004 at 06:53:24
Long wave radio petition hearing continues
The Chief Executive of the Communications Commission has given evidence at a hearing investigating whether a long wave radio station can be set up in the north of the Island.
Anthony Hewitt was speaking in Douglas Courthouse at the hearing of the Petition of Doleance challenging the commissions decision to award a substantive long wave broadcasting license to Isle of Man International Broadcasting PLC.
Bride Resident, Nick Cussons, claims the granting of the license was perverse and should be revoked, and believes the commission didn't have enough information to grant it two years ago.
Despite claims from Mr. Cussons advocate, Mr. Hewitt said the granting of the license met all the relevant conditions and a license had not merely been awarded to IMIB simply because they obtained the Long wave frequency for the Isle of Man.
Mr. Hewitt said he was up to speed with the process when appointed Chief Executive in two-thousand and one and had vast experience having drafted six-hundred TV and Radio licenses throughout his career.
IMIB wants to site a radio mast four kilometres off the coast at Cranstal in Bride, where Mr. Cussons lives.
Around 40 jobs would be created and the station would be based in Ramsey.
www.manxradio.com
Report, 21 January
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 21, 2004 at 08:32:15
Hi,
At 0815 local time (1315Z):
TH 579 NWNJ 449 JJX 449 HS 339
Outdoor temperature was 14F (-10 C).
73,
Ray
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by John Andrews on January 21, 2004 at 09:25:38
Robert,
Most of what you describe would be better done on the ham bands, particularly the emergency communications stuff. The 1700 kHz Medfer and 13.55 MHz Hifer frequencies are very near 160 and 20 meters respectively, and you have much more flexibility in the ham bands. The only advantage to the Part 15 operation is that you are free from regulation about unattended operation, ID's and signal format. If you want to get the public interested in something, push amateur radio.
John Andrews, W1TAG
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by Warren K2ORS on January 21, 2004 at 10:01:33
Robert,
Your enthusiasm is so apparent and I hate to dampen it, but I don't think this idea is practical at all. The Lowfer/Medfer/Hifer restrictions are so tough that it takes the BEST possible antenna and band conditions and even then the signals are marginal. A compromise antenna (say a Lowfer/Medfer vertical without an extensive ground) is likely to have a range measured in feet not miles!
Your other point about using the modes like WOLF and JASON on the ham bands is well taken. Legally I believe that this would be ok as long as you id the station with a conventional mode such as cw. Remember that these specialized modes are optimized for longwave where fading is very slow. Rapid fading present on the hf bands might make them less useful there.
73 Warren K2ORS/WD2XGJ
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by John Davis on January 21, 2004 at 16:44:04
Robert,
Just to add my two cents' worth to the excellent comments John A. and Warren have offered, I'd agree that ham radio gives you more flexibility for demonstrating the potential of practical applications of radio. LowFER and MedFER setups require a lot of attention to the antenna and ground systems to achieve their effectiveness, at both the transmit and receive ends.
HiFERs are a slight exception. With a decent receiver, and in the absence of industrial, scientific or medical interference, line of sight reception with standard CW is feasible over whatever distance you can literally obtain line of sight. Probably SSB too, though I've not tried that option myself.
On the ham bands, QRSS at 3 second dot lengths or longer are very likely to be disrupted by fading as Warren notes. But it may be worth experimenting with 1 second dot lengths. Detecting the signal with Argo gives you some narrowband advantage even at that speed.
WOLF, on the other hand, is not inherently a low speed transmission mode. It may take a while for the received information to accumulate a clear, unambiguous result over multiple repetitions of the signal. But if you are fortunate enough to have higher power available, as in the ham bands, the data throughput can be appreciably faster with no change in the transmitted rate.
Just some thoughts for your possible further experimentation.
John D
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by Robert on January 21, 2004 at 20:09:11
I saw a number of articles in QST and WorldRadio about 160M QRP ops looking for overseas DX. In an apartment, that's not quite what I had in mind! I'm looking for optimizing an 80M or 40M antenna for indoors QRP ops, and for working local hams in the Phoenix area -- not DX, mainly so I have regular signals to calibrate my equipment. For me, for now, CW and my ears are my exotic mode and decoder...but I would like to try those modes you write so eloquently about.
To narrow it down a bit, what LOWFER modes would work for -- to start with -- 80M groundwave? I'm all set to go with CW/SSB and AM, and would like to try those exotic software modes if I can locate some local hams to listen for me. With the alphabet soup of modes, CQSS, WOLF, and others, what are suitable for the flutter and fading of the lower HF bands? I do have an older Morse Machine keyer that should go down to 3 WPM via the keyboard, repeating a letter or two as a sort of beacon, in between normal ID's...a fast type of CQSS.
I'm intrigued with daytime reception of 80M, then later, 160M signals with marginal antennas. No one around locally uses these signals when the sun rises, but groundwave should always be "open". Also, I checked in with hams working with NVIS, but they said they never went QRP, so had no idea how low you can go, sending your signal straight up, then down. A lot of hams have the equipment, but resign themselves to "knowing" that 160 and 80M need big antennas, high power, and if you are not working the next state -- or cracking a DX pileup, there's something "wrong" with your equipment.
If you are all sending your LF signals across the continent, or overseas with milliwatts ERP, I'm sure the lower HF bands -- with correspondingly smaller antennas, should work over more moderate distances with these exotic transmission modes.
73 Robert
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by Warren WD2XGJ/K2ORS on January 21, 2004 at 20:57:45
Robert,
Sounds like an excellent idea. There are good introductions to QRSS, WOLF, etc on the web. Try ON7YD's web site:
http://www.qsl.net/on7yd/136narro.htm
Also Lyle has a great introduction to WOLF at his web site:
http://www.computerpro.com/~lyle/
On a personal note, I have had good sucess with PSK31 for weak signal use on hf. You can receive perfect copy with signals that you can barely hear. There are already a lot of hams equipped for PSK31 which makes it relatively easy to get into. All you need is a pc w/ a sound card and a program - I use MIXW but there are many other programs out there.
www.mixw.net
73 Warren K2ORS/WD2XGJ
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by Robert on January 21, 2004 at 23:13:32
PSK31 sounds like a good addition to my indoor QRP setup. Have any of you used PSK31 for LOWFER/MEDFER QSO's, or would that work?
I appreciate your answers to my LF two-way questions, as I enjoy radio modes that allow me to find local hams with similar interests. The "buddy system" would work a long way towards low-data rate LF/HF weak-signal modes, as a number of former LOWFER experimenters told me. One MEDFER op in the late 1980's told me I was the ONLY ham in Phoenix to report his 1641 kHz beacon, despite his own monitoring proving he was "getting out" over many miles. He approached a number of hams with suitable space for antennas, and the tech know-how to build SSB/CW equipment for MEDFER experiments -- but each told him they wanted to wait for other hams to make the first move. So, after some months, he pulled the plug, thanking me for showing interest. Then, I lived at my parent's house -- and they are not radio fans.
So, I will start with QRP CW on 80M-30M, looking for hams within line-of-sight or groundwave range, then see if I can find those with PSK31 capabilities.
I appreciate you putting up with my off-topic posts -- but this falls outside of typical QRP groups, or the HFPack or NVIS groups. I thank you for your interest and information!
73 Robert
Re: 'BO' is qsy to 1624.150
Posted by Dave Riley on January 22, 2004 at 07:47:32
Hi, John...
Looks like poor eirp... Willreturn with better set-up...
Tnx
TRY 261 kHz- new beacon?
Posted by Cliff at the Shack on January 22, 2004 at 10:32:11
Since January 16, I've been hearing TRY on about 261 kHz here in southeast Texas.
I say "about 261" because that's where it's best audible under LB on 263 (Lake Jackson, Texas).
I hear it at midday, so it's probably no be more than a few hundred miles away.
Searches on Airnav, Google, news groups, Yahoo clubs, etc. haven't produced a listing.
Maybe it's on a movable platform in the Gulf of Mexico or, as Kevin Carey suggested, a new ID for an existing beacon.
Can anybody (especially in Texas or Louisiana) hear TRY?
---------------------------
Registered Monitor BR549 The Shack on the Bayou www.ghg.net/cliffwatts/
Drake R8, Sony ICF-SW100, Heathkit GR-64 (retired)
Realistic Pro-2006, Bearcat BC-245XLT
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by Lyle Koehler on January 22, 2004 at 12:38:25
An inexpensive way to get started in 80 meter QRP using PSK31 is with the "Warbler" kit from http://www.smallwonderlabs.com/ I bought mine when it was originally offered by the New Jersey QRP Club, and my first QSO turned out to be an old-time LowFER from Illinois. The second QSO was with a guy in Utah who had also finished his Warbler kit that day. Transmitter output is about 2 watts, which is plenty with a full-size dipole antenna.
Indoor antennas on 80 meters present more of a challenge because the efficiency is likely to be less than 10 per cent. On 160 it's much worse. There's also a problem with noise pickup from all the junk in the house, such as the TV set, light dimmers, switching power supplies, etc.
Some of the guys in California have been talking about trying PSK31 QSOs on LF, but I don't know if they have tried it yet. Most LowFERs are using simple transmitters that don't have SSB capability, so you can't simply feed in the sound card audio from a PSK31 program on your computer as you would do on an HF ham transceiver.
I believe the Digimode terminal in DL4YHF's Spectrum Lab software lets you put out either a PSK31-format data signal on the serial port or an on-off keyed signal that you can detect and use to drive a simple exclusive-or gate modulator. But I haven't actually tried those features in Spectrum Lab -- still learning all the others!
Re: Two-way QSO questions...
Posted by Robert on January 22, 2004 at 20:26:37
I thank you for the information! If you can tell from our website, , which does have an LWCA link under "Robert's Favorite Links", Thom, N7RPZ, and I enjoy monitoring or transceiving from LF through the upper RF limits. I like working local hams on unusual frequencies or modes, especially if a number of operators already have the mode in place -- and just do not know it.
I also like monitoring "outdated" systems or modes -- searching for CW on the HF bands, or capturing the VHF simplex frequency for a local government service, despite claims that all will go to 800MHz digital trunking.
In my collection are QSL cards for now defunct Coast Guard NDB's, MEDFER stations I logged with minimal equipment -- a stock Radio Shack Uniden-designed DX400 and a homemade junkbox LF antenna, TIS/HAR stations I logged from many miles away via groundwave, remote broadcast feeders in the 26 MHz band, and other strange non-broadcast QSL's with notes from the operators stating disbelief I heard them from so far away with modest equipment.
As I mentioned, the "buddy system" brings radio experimenters out of the ether. We pick an odd mode or frequency, then just use it to talk across town. Other ops hear we are on the air, and drop in. Whether it's a MEDFER beacon we put up for a week with an old tube-type phono oscillator in December, 1989 -- AM mode, ID "Six Echo", or putting the Arizona Science Center on 29 MHz AM or FM simplex -- and creating pileups and ragchews, or simply driving up to a mountain park and calling CQ on 146.520 MHz FM simplex...I enjoy local contacts, and actually meeting the hams in person at the next convenient hamfest, or at the local radio store.
Even if I never set up a LOWFER station, or hear no one in the 13.560 MHz ISM HiFer band...I appreciate reading about all of you that do.
73 Robert
Re: Crucial week for Isle of Man longwave project
Posted by Mike Terry on January 23, 2004 at 18:35:28
Wed 21st Jan 2004
A hearing to get a petition to stop a long wave broadcasting licence for the north of the Island has concluded today in the High Court.
Bride resident Nick Cussons lodged the petition and claimed the Communications Commission didn't have enough information to grant a substantive licence two years ago
He believes Isle of Man International Broadcasting PLC, who want the Long wave license, hadn't met the conditions set down in the provisional licence,
which was awarded in nineteen ninety-nine.
The aim of the petition is to get the licence revoked, although Paul Rusling, chief executive of IMIB, remains hopeful he can progress with his plans for a long-wave radio station in the north of the Island.
After a two and a half-day hearing, Acting Deemster Roger Kaye will now consider his verdict which is expected to be made known between four to eight weeks.
(manxradio.com)
166.5
Posted by Roger Magnuson on January 23, 2004 at 21:24:25
Bob,
I see your test signal on 166.5 FB here in Duluth, MN. I saw you come on the air a while ago and I also saw you on a few days ago. Good sig and good luck, I'll be watching.
Roger, beacon (RM) 189.8
PSK31
Posted by Roger Magnuson on January 23, 2004 at 22:16:02
Lyle's PSK31 signal on 184.7 is coming in 100% here in Duluth, MN tonight. Very nice copy!!
Roger
Phoenix, AZ area NDB DX?
Posted by Robert on January 24, 2004 at 01:12:24
Since I do live in an apartment, and can't put up a LOWFER station, I can "adopt" some established beacons.
Please let me know if you copy the following:
GEU-215 Glendale, AZ SDL-224 Scottsdale, AZ FFZ-281 Mesa Falcon Field, AZ CHD-407 Chandler, AZ
All are groundwave copy here. Let me know if you can hear them, or detect them with your software. If I can't set up a LOWFER, maybe I can just experiment with listening to NDB's.
Please tell me if you hear them easily, if they suffer QRM from where you are, and when they first fade in after dark, and when they fade out in the morning.
I would like to find them, and photograph them for our website.
If you can copy LOWFERs with your setup at much lower power, and lower frequencies, these might be easy copy in comparison.
Good DX!
Robert
Report, 25 January
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 25, 2004 at 08:40:21
Hi,
At 0830 EST (1330Z) today:
TH 579 NWNJ 339 HS no copy JJX carrier on frequency
I've never yet heard anything from 2J. The outdoor temperature was 5 F (-15 C), with packed snow on the ground but not on the loop. Perhaps the snow covering has something to do with the greater-than-normal disparity between TH and NWNJ, since John's signal has to get over several ranges of hills to get here, while the terrain from here to TH is basically flat.
73,
Ray
Re: Report, 25 January
Posted by John Bogath on January 25, 2004 at 11:38:58
Thanks for the reports, Ray. They are always helpful in figuring out what your signal is doing in the far-field. I too have not heard anything at all from "2J"; on the air or otherwise. I may go back to my FRI.-MON. schedule this week, if the WX warms up. That would give me a chance to do some serious listening and further experiment with some new LW projects.
Re: TRY 261 kHz- new beacon?
Posted by Michael Oexner on January 27, 2004 at 05:43:21
Hi Cliff,
The still unidentified NDB TRY has been heard by DXers located in AZ, SC, and FL per Andy Robins' list ("NDBs REPORTED IN NORTH AMERICA 2002-2004").
The observed carrier frequency is 263 kHz, and the NDB uses 1005 Hz modulation.
vy 73 + gd DX,
Michael
LW 189 kHz transmitter on Iceland
Posted by Mike Terry on January 27, 2004 at 10:13:35
To make the (your?!) EMWG guide more complete, I can add the coordinates for the LW 189 kHz transmitter on Iceland.
Last June I stayed on Iceland, and while visiting the peninsula of Snaefellsnes(s), we stumbled across the 189 kHz LW transmitter. What is mentioned in EMWG as the Gufuskalar site is close to the village of Hellissandur. The small transmitter building is marked with the 189 kHz frequency.
A friend took a reading on his portable GPS, which gave the coordinates: N 64 degrees 54.182 minutes, W 23 degrees, 55.624 minutes.
I read on http://www.northernstar.no/longwave.htm that the transmitter is an old Loran C transmitter. Part of the text reads: "This was successfully done at the new 300 kW Gufuskálar site in Iceland (189 kHz) where the 412 meters mast of another navigational system, Loran C, 100 kHz, was converted to broadcast use."
I am not sure if the length is still at 412 meter, which is slightly more than the quarter wavelength of 397 m. The mast seemed to have a capacitive top loading with cables returning down from the top, to create additional length. It had also a short pole (reflector?) to the west, which might beam more energy to the east. Indeed, the site is one of the most western point of Iceland. Only a few fjords in the North are slightly more to the West.
Kind regards, Peter Reusens
(emwg)
TRY 261 kHz
Posted by Cliff at the Shack on January 27, 2004 at 18:18:15
Thanks, Michael
I wasn't aware of that resource.
http://www.beaconworld.org.uk/info.htm
Longdistance Communication
Posted by Anthony Peiris on January 28, 2004 at 10:19:48
Is there a way to create a radio device that can communicate out through a 3hr time difference distance. In this case, from california to Montreal?
Re: Longdistance Communication
Posted by John Andrews on January 28, 2004 at 11:17:35
Anthony,
What type of communication (voice, data, video), and for what purpose?
For non-commercial hobby use, there are many possibilites at medium and high frequencies for amateur (ham) radio operators.
John Andrews
LF site at Black Canyon City, Arizona?
Posted by Robert on January 28, 2004 at 23:51:45
Just off of I-17, there are eight 300ft towers with center loading and capacity tophats, painted neutral gray rather than standard red and white. Some look passive, while a few of the towers have transmitter shacks at the bases. It's enormous, yet the people that live in the town say no one is told a straight story what these gigantic towers are for. My friend, a broadcast engineer, said they look way too tall for the AM broadcast band, and the extra loading coils and tophats would lower their resonance even more. There's a station, KUET on 710AM with towers on the other side of the freeway, but those are tiny compared to these towers, and they are painted standard red and white.
If we get a chance to photograph them, Thom and I will let you know.
73 Robert Re: LF site at Black Canyon City, Arizona?
Sounds intriguing. I hope someone will be able to shed some light. Three hundred feet is not too tall for an AM tower, by any means. It would only be a quarter of a wavelength at 820kHz. However, eight of them would be far more costly than most broadcasters are willing to pay for, and the use of center loading and tophats is certainly not typical of modern broadcast installations. Are the towers insulated at the base? John
Re: LF site at Black Canyon City, Arizona?
Robert, I believe that the AM station you mentioned is now KMIA (maybe KUET was an old call sign). The FCC database says that they have six 1/4 wave towers at 710 kHz. A quarter wavelength at that frequency is 346 feet. So your estimate of the height of the "gray" towers may be off a bit if you consider them to be taller. John Andrews
Test tones on 261 kHz
I heard transmitter test tones 261 kHz this morning for several minutes until closing abruptly at 1210 UTC. No IDs heard, but I wonder if it might have been the German 50kW Burg transmitter testing ? 73s Dave Kenny, Caversham, UK Information may only be reproduced if full credit is given to the original source, contributor AND to the British DX Club (BDXC-UK).
New HiFer Beacon LP On The Air.
I have setup Hifer beacon LP on 13.554.980 MHz. sending a sawtooth wave.Antenna is a 17.45' vertical wire and the transmitter is an HP synthesizer with about 2mW output. Thanks for any reports! 73 Larry WB3ANQ Pasadena, MD FM19rc
Re: LF site at Black Canyon City, Arizona?
I did not recall if they were insulated at the base. The array was located in a valley just off the freeway on a working ranch. The part that threw us off were the center loading coils -- if that's what they were -- and the tophats, which suggested that they were for low frequencies. That is the strange part, tophats, eight towers, and plain gray coloration. And, the two towers for KMIA/KUET across the freeway were still up and lit. On a side note, how tall were the former groundwave emergency net towers, and where were they? And, how big are the inland differential GPS sites?
Photographing, finding NDB/HAR/TIS...
In relation to the airports they serve, where are most nondirectional low-frequency beacons located? Even if I have too much static here at my apartment for DX, I'm still intrigued by LF, and can always collect more information for the future if things change. We also have a few Travelers Information Stations around here, and I have been surprised in the past to hear them come up unannounced. So far, if I have written, the operators have sent QSL's 100%, provided I can find an address. They are often good DX, as some are on the air only for special events or road repairs, so once they are gone, they are gone.
Daytime MEDFER normal range?
Before the AM broadcast band from 1610-1700 fills up a night with powerful signals, what distance can you achieve during the day using AM, SSB, CW, PSK31, or CQSS, JASON, or WOLF? In the late 1980's I received some excellent QSL cards from MEDFERS using standard speed CW. I could log a MEDFER locally from about five miles distant 24/7, and could hear stations in California up to 500 miles distant almost every night and morning, still running 100mW to the ten foot antenna, under Part 15. My friend and I have been considering MEDFER experimenting, and now he has a quiet place up in northern Arizona with a large yard for antennas, and no manmade static to bother him. We want to try a "buddy system" approach, with him working with local hams and experimenters with stations just across town, so there is always a signal on the air, without having to wait for a favorable ionosphere. How far apart do you think two MEDFER stations could be during the day, and still detect each other, in the various modes I mentioned? Do trees affect mediumwave frequencies? Does it matter if you are in a valley or on a mountaintop?
Re: Daytime MEDFER normal range?
Daytime ranges for MedFERs are so dependent on local ground conductivity that I doubt whether it's possible to make good predictions. On the other hand, that means there's lots of room for experimenting to find out. My CW MedFER at the high end of the band used to give me a daytime range of 8-11 miles in different directions with the best portable receiving setup I could manage. That might mean that I have better soil conductivity, or was able to find quieter locations, considering the 5 mile range you obtained. In AM mode, good listenable range was a couple hundred feet, with just-barely-recognizable range between 1/4 and 3/4 of a mile. Notice that not only is the range smaller when dealing with wider bandwidth, but the effect of various soil conductivities in different directions seems to be even greater. Like I say, there's lots of room for experimenting. John
Re: Photographing, finding NDB/HAR/TIS...
>>> In relation to the airports they serve, where are most nondirectional low-frequency beacons located? >>> Most are on the airport property, several yards off to the side of the runway. But not always. I've heard of a few instances where there wasn't room to locate the antenna safely at the airport, and it ended up a mile or more away. You can find a series of articles, "The Art of NDB DXing," on this site that may help in your quest. A couple of recent articles by Andy and Russ Robins in The LOWDOWN deal with hunting and shooting NDBs, including the (excess) concerns some folks have about people nosing around these low-tech bastions of the past in the wake of 9/11. John
Re: LF site at Black Canyon City, Arizona?
The plain gray coloration is becoming increasingly common. Towers no longer have to be painted international orange and white if they have high-intensity strobe lighting. Could you detect such lighting? Some of the new strobe systems are quite neighbor-friendly, and are not particularly visible from the ground. The GWEN towers, as I recall, were not particularly tall...somewhere in the 300 foot vicinity. There was one per site, and they were accompanied by very good quality ground systems. I don't have a complete list of locations handy, but many of the inland DGPS stations are converted GWEN stations with the same antenna retuned for their new frequency. John
Upconverter
To upconverter builders has anyone experienced an problems with the SBL-3 mixer. The oscillator portion of the circuit works fine but when I connected to the SBL-3 it loads and distorts the signal to the point that there is no output from the SBL-3 (IF output)pins 3&4. I've checked multiple times to be sure that the circuit is wired correctly but not working yet. Calling Mini Circuits Labs doesn't look like its going to work just the run around.
Re: Upconverter
Charles, The oscillator circuit must be able to deliver +7 dBm into 50 ohms (0.5 vrms, 1.4 vp-p). The usual practice is to design the oscillator/buffer to provide that voltage as a nice sine wave across a 50 ohm resistor. Then remove the resistor and connect the mixer. The waveform will probably be distorted, but the mixer should work. Another approach is to create a higher level output from the oscillator/buffer and feed it through a 3 or even 6 dB 50 ohm pad so that the +7 dBm level into the load is maintained. That has the virtue of making the impedance looking out from the mixer a little less bizarre. But the end result is that you are applying power to switching diodes, and the resulting waveform will stink. But the mixer should be quite happy with it. John Andrews, W1TAG
Re: Upconverter
All I can say, from the info. that you have given, is that both pins 3 and 4 must be connected together for the IF output. The SBL-3 is not rated for use below 250 KHz (RF). Make sure that your oscillator has enough "kick" at 50 ohms to drive the mixer adequately for the amount of RF you are shoving into the RF input. Are all ports seeing a 50 ohm load ?
Re: Upconverter
Thank you for the information, the unloaded conditions are 5 volts p-p centered around ground, 1.50 v p-p into a 47 ohm resistor, both situations nice sine wave at 4 MHZ. Loaded into Mixer distorts but have 2 volts p-p. Pins 3 & 4 connected together. What should the output of 3 & 4 be with no LF input. I've been a digital engineer for 20 + years and have forgotten most of the RF stuff. I thought I would get the 4MHZ out of the mixer (3&4). Charles Weaver
Re: Upconverter
Charles, If the mixer is doing its job, there should be no output on pins 3+4 with no LF input. This is a doubly balanced mixer, and it is supposed to minimize the feedthrough of the oscillator to the output. If you were to feed a 100 kHz signal into the mixer input, you should see outputs at 3900 and 4100 kHz. If the input signal is coming from an antenna or preamp, the levels will be too low to see with a scope. You would need to connect your HF receiver to the mixer output circuitry. Regarding John Bogath's comment: I have used these mixers with good results down to 50 kHz or below. I have been able to copy SAQ from Sweden on 17.2 kHz when they have done their CW tests. My regular receiver only goes down to 30 kHz, and I drag out the old converter (with an SBL-3) when I need to tune down there. John Andrews
Re: Upconverter
Just a thought, are you using the IF port for the low- jim
Re: Upconverter
It sounds to me like you are doing everything correctly, Charles. Even the voltage difference when you go from the 47 ohm resistor to the LO-port is in line with the manufacturer's VSWR specs. for that port, at that freq., and at that power level. John Andrews is right about matching the ports. It is fairly standard in the industry to place a 50 ohm, 3 dB attenuation-pad at the port to facilitate a match. However, with a nominal 1.3:1 VSWR expected under the conditions you have, it should not be necessary. You have been unable to see the LO at pins 3&4 because the isolation between the two is in excess of 70 dB at 4 MHz. As a last resort, try a 50 ohm, 3 dB pad at the pins 3&4 IF-output. Other than that, and within the limits of the information I now have, I can only believe that your mixer is defective.
Re: Upconverter
Charles, With your reference to "the oscillator portion of the circuit", I assume you are referring to my '96 article? :-) BTW, my RF Designer's Handbook from MiniCircuits ('92-93) says the SBL-3 *is* rated down to 25 kHz ("0.025 MHz"), not 250 kHz.
Re: Upconverter
Sorry Charles; Tim is right. In a rush I read the minimum freq. spec. as 250 KHz, not as the correct 25 KHz minimum.
Report, 31 January
John, N2BE/NWNJ, suggested that I try listening in the afternoon, when the sun would be in a different position in the sky than in the morning. At 1430 local time today (1930Z): TH 569 NWNJ 339 JJX carrier on frequency HS no copy It's sunny outside, with a temperature of 25 F (-4 C). 73, Ray
HiFER HI
"It's 0030Z, completely dark here in Tennessee, and I can *still* Still have not gotten solid copy on NW or AZ audibly or capture. Tom KA4RKT" www.lwca.org
potrzebie
Posted by John Davis on January 29, 2004 at 02:22:08
Posted by John Andrews on January 29, 2004 at 12:50:55
Posted by Mike Terry on January 29, 2004 at 17:19:20
Posted by Larry Putman on January 29, 2004 at 19:48:37
Posted by Robert on January 29, 2004 at 20:15:37
Posted by Robert on January 29, 2004 at 20:26:02
Posted by Robert on January 29, 2004 at 20:39:42
Posted by John Davis on January 29, 2004 at 21:42:51
Posted by John Davis on January 29, 2004 at 21:52:49
Posted by John Davis on January 29, 2004 at 22:18:23
Posted by Charles Weaver on January 30, 2004 at 12:21:30
Posted by John Andrews on January 30, 2004 at 12:49:25
Posted by John Bogath on January 30, 2004 at 12:57:05
Posted by Charles Weaver on January 30, 2004 at 14:46:37
KB1JHB
Posted by John Andrews on January 30, 2004 at 15:24:29
Posted by jim on January 30, 2004 at 15:55:42
frequency and the RF and LO for the high frequency?
Posted by John Bogath on January 30, 2004 at 17:21:01
Posted by Tim Brannon on January 31, 2004 at 00:06:24
What is your test setup for the converter? Signal generator? What's the frequency of the test input signal to the mixer input, and at what level? Also, how are you measuring the output signal?
Posted by John Bogath on January 31, 2004 at 13:45:12
Posted by Ray, W2RS on January 31, 2004 at 14:36:25
Posted by Tom Norris on January 31, 2004 at 22:42:34
audibly pull "HI" out with only slight fading on 13.558, no software needed. I'd really like to know just where the site is for that beacon, I might want to put up mine the same way.... :-)