File Attachment 1: MLS09jan.jpg
Re: LowFERs MIA?
Hello again LF enthusiasts. Will be on 2200m wspr2 again from Jan1st at 0100utc until 1600utc. Just keeping the worms warm, last night Laurence KL7L (XPQ) decoded my very weak wspr signal at 2148km. Also had detections from W7IUV at 315km and other western Washington stations.
Dial 136.000 kHz USB for wspr2
wspr data from my station is on 137.495 kHz on the tens
73 and Happy New Year Re: HiFERs Friday & Saturday
John / VE7BDQ
Posted by John Davis on January 01, 2017 at 02:09:29.
In reply to HiFERs Friday & Saturday posted by John Davis on December 31, 2016
Early afternoon wasn't too impressive (just RY and EH, as I mentioned) so I let the computer do captures while I tended to other things. At 1:43 PM CST, someone turned on the ionosphere in the direction of USC. A minute later, someone cranked it up to "11"! There were three minutes of radical dogbones.
About 2 o'clock, codar picked up. Since I had AGC set to Fast at the time, it modulated the visible signals with 2 Hz sidebands that had me momentarily thinking a bifurcation event might be in progress; but the effect was too consistent in terms of sideband spacing and it appeared on all carriers of similar strength.
EH started showing lots of random noise intermittently about 2:30. From 3:00 to 3:10, USC vanished, then returned until a quick and more permanent fade around 3:21.
EH took a substantial fade by 4:21 and lingered faintly until 4:40. During the same time, RY became 100% solid copy, visually and aurally, then disappeared completely at 4:38 PM, right after an ID.
About 5 o'clock I tuned around a bit. Caught a few clear IDs from AZ before it faded to visual-only. Then I tuned to the other end of the band and saw a hint of keyed carrier from FRC; and maybe from RQ, although codar was so strong there I couldn't be sure.
John
Another Rogue?
Posted by Ed Holland on January 03, 2017 at 18:34:13.
Hi folks,
I found time for some listening yesterday, and conditions were interesting around 2-3pm PST.
AZ was audible low in the band and AA0RQ the top most detected signal. At the Watering Hole, I need to analyse a little more closelym but a possible SIW at 13,555.400, and EH similarly in the right place but hard to read.
But what of the rogue signal, I hear you ask? This was heard on 13,557.200, strong and well audible at times. It took the form of two dashes (M?) every 5 sec or so, with a notable downward chirp at "key down" when listening in USB mode.
Cheers and happy new year,
Ed
Re: Coil winder
Posted by Ed Holland on January 03, 2017 at 18:40:55.
In reply to Re: Coil winder posted by Ed Holland on December 12, 2016
Progress,
Yesterday I took advantage of a cold and wet holiday to get the transformer primary wound. With a little learning under my belt, the no. 35 wire was handled without breakage and only a few "back-ups" to correct cross-overs in the 17 layers. 3000 turns down :-). To keep track of progress, I kept a check sheet, and labelled each of the separator papers before starting work. Resistance came in at 396 Ohms compared to the 400 stated on the schematic.
The secondary will be a bit easier with larger wire!
Cheers
Ed
PVC
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 03, 2017 at 23:34:37.
Jan 3 2330 utc very nice copy and I like the fast ID really stands out
Re: Another Rogue?
Posted by John, W1TAG on January 04, 2017 at 01:11:50.
In reply to Another Rogue? posted by Ed Holland on January 03, 2017
Ed,
Most of the "intelligent sounding" stuff up there is a result of industrial processes, such as dielectric heating, or possibly medical procedures. Has nothing to do with communications, just application of high power RF under controlled conditions. We are just taking advantage of the loose field strength regulations for such operation.
John
Re: Another Rogue?
Posted by ed holland on January 04, 2017 at 03:32:24.
In reply to Re: Another Rogue? posted by John, W1TAG on January 04, 2017
Yes. There's lots of it here in Silicon Valley. Plasma etching, deposition and related kit. Also I think some cable or telecomms systems use it. Wandering our trails, I have heard obviously localised things in spots where few ground waves from industrial gear could penetrate, but there are homes nearby, and utility poles.
The reason I flagged this signal was that it faded in and out, and was quite Hifer-like, suggesting it had come from further afield.
Re: Another Rogue?
Posted by John Davis on January 04, 2017 at 05:20:12.
In reply to Re: Another Rogue? posted by ed holland on January 04, 2017
>>> it faded in and out, and was quite Hifer-like, suggesting it had come from further afield.
Not an uncommon situation. Some of those Part 18 industrial, scientific, and medical devices manage to radiate a bit more than they should. When I first began HiFERing from my current location, I figured the cacophony right at the center of the band was mostly coming from the three largest towns that lie about 40 miles from here in different directions; but watching Argo displays of the multiple carriers over time showed them to be susceptible to the same sort of QSB as distant HiFERs, as well as diurnal effects and solar flare blackouts.
It's also worth noting that a few of the ISM devices sometimes neglect to observe the band limits as tightly as they should, too.
Some of the ISM devices pulse RF on and off at rates similar to normal CW occasionally. Several times when listening for PVC or SZX or other CW beacons, I've gotten my hopes up for a while, only to realize that the pulse duty cycles are wrong and/or that the apparent "characters" never repeat and/or that some of them contain way too many elements to be letters and numerals but don't match normal punctuation or prosigns, either.
Keeps us on our toes. :)
John D.
John
Re: Another Rogue?
Posted by Ed Holland on January 04, 2017 at 23:11:29.
In reply to Re: Another Rogue? posted by John Davis on January 04, 2017
I have certainly hear things that cut in and out - teasingly Morse-like, but irregular. Of course we want to hear beacons, but it is easy to be tricked.
I know PVC is rather close to the band centre and the industrial stuff. I do have some other crystals, and have considered trying to move. At first, with the system stability unknown, I didn't want to be too close to others. Drift seems manageable with the transmitter in a pretty temperature stable environment, so I would be more confident in/near a busier part of the spectrum. The "exciter" has a variable cap to pull the frequency, but the range is very limited. I would need to learn more and experiment with caps to get much further on that front.
Re: Another Rogue?
Posted by John Davis on January 05, 2017 at 05:16:13.
In reply to Re: Another Rogue? posted by Ed Holland on January 04, 2017
>>> I know PVC is rather close to the band centre and the industrial stuff. I do have some other crystals, and have considered trying to move.
No hurry. If you were a few hundred Hz higher it might be a problem, but at least for those of us outside high population densities, your spot is reasonably quiet.
I qualify that with "reasonably" because one may encounter wanderers anywhere within the band at any time. On the low side of center, there'll also be the occasional Cuban fishing boat SSB signal, for instance; or above center there'll be SWBC sideband splatter at certain seasons. And, until the FCC acts on Docket 15-99, there's no incentive for codar to move to assigned bands, so that'll be with us for some years to come, too.
John
Re: PVC
Posted by Ed Holland on January 05, 2017 at 14:36:55.
In reply to PVC posted by Bill Hensel on January 03, 2017
Thanks Bill. Great to know we are still getting out!
AA0RQ made it to CA on Monday afternoon, seen but not heard due to nearby carriers a little below. Would have been audible otherwise.
Re: HiFERs MIA? (FL is active)
Posted by Dave on January 06, 2017 at 15:36:18.
In reply to Re: HiFERs MIA? (FL is active) posted by Dave on December 20, 2016
FL has a masculine signal on 13555.465 KHz and it's on all the time.
A screenshot of 13555.000 KHz Jan 2 2017 shows FL on 13555.465 KHz with a 6 Hz FSKCW4 signal, EH, SIW (in slant mode), RY, lastly SIW in WSPR mode.
I present the first LWCA Haiku:
Lines and zig-zags on my screen
Demands much patience
I dream of sunspots
Dave 162khz opportunity
Posted by Mike Terry on January 07, 2017 at 18:18:31.
Amateur Radio Newsline's Jeremy Boot G4NJH reports:
If you're a licensed amateur in France and eager to get on the air at 162 kHz, you have until January 16th to let the CSA, the French Superior Council of Audio-visual, know you support its use as an amateur frequency.
Radio France, the public radio broadcaster, ceased operations on the frequency at the end of 2016 and the CSA is seeking expressions of interest for another radio service there. The frequency had been in use by France Inter, one of the public broadcaster's channels. The discontinued service had been announced as a cost-saving measure.
Their departure from the frequency created an opportunity for hams and the CSA will be seeking input during the first half of January about amateur use. Again, you have until January 16th to let them know.
Visit the authority's website at www.csa.fr where there is a link to download details about expressing interest.
Amateur Radio Newsline Report 2045 for January 06, 2017 Re: 162khz opportunity
Posted by Mike Terry on January 08, 2017 at 09:35:12.
In reply to 162khz opportunity posted by Mike Terry on January 07, 2017
The intention is to possibly reuse the facility as a broadcast operation, no mention of amateur radio as yet. The time signal continues to be broadcast on the frequency.
Mike
Re: 162khz opportunity
Posted by John Davis on January 08, 2017 at 16:26:10.
In reply to Re: 162khz opportunity posted by Mike Terry on January 08, 2017
Thanks for the follow-up, Mike. I'd been wondering about the time signal. It seemed as if it might still be on, but it was always a hard one to decode because of other nearby carriers here in the central United States, so I couldn't be sure. And as for amateurs...surely, not even France would try to reallocate an international broadcast channel unilaterally, would they?
OBL on 315??
Posted by John ferro on January 09, 2017 at 02:23:44.
Copied OBL beacon on 315 khz 9:21 PM EST. No mention of this beacon on RNA signals. Has anyone heard this signal?? Happy new Year to all.
John Ki4UCW
Re: OBL on 315??
Posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 09, 2017 at 13:31:17.
In reply to OBL on 315?? posted by John ferro on January 09, 2017
I don't know where this NDB is either but I also heard it well a couple hours before local sunrise. It was gone by sunrise. It sends in the style of Canadian beacons, i.e. with about 400 Hz USB tone offset, but with no DAID and the LSB tone is also comparable in strength and offset. The cycle time is 8.12 seconds.
There is a VOR-DME source on 133.2 MHz in Obleon, Haiti with callsign OBN. It's possible that the same facility just started up an LF NDB. But not likely because at the time OBL was copied the powerhouse NDB GPI on 309 kHz in Columbia had already faded into the noise. More likely OBL is located much closer somewhere in the US.
73, Garry, K3SIW, EN52ta, Elgin, IL
Internet World-Wide Streaming Radio Broadcasts
Posted by Frank Lotito on January 10, 2017 at 20:16:55.
ref: Section D, Business, Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Jan 10, 2017, pages D1 and D2, "Get Lost In New Radio Website," by Ced Kurtz
Try the following web site http://www.radio.garden (.garden being one of the new domain names) for an interesting venture into world-wide broadcast radio. Zillions of streaming audio broadcast stations from all over the world. Just left-press-drag the pointer to somewhere on the globe, click on a green dot, wait a few minutes for access and loading, and voila! Streaming audio from a station near at the green dot you clicked.
This web site works great on my Acer Chrome Book which uses the Google operating system. I have yet to try this site on a Windows computer. Enjoy
73 Frank Lotito K3DZ / WH2XHA
Re: Internet World-Wide Streaming Radio Broadcasts
Posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 10, 2017 at 21:11:08.
In reply to Internet World-Wide Streaming Radio Broadcasts posted by Frank Lotito on January 10, 2017
Frank, thanks for pointing this out, but no thanks. It works fine on Windows 7 but I prefer to do things myself. No lists, no repeaters, no internet. I want to receive and transmit with equipment I design and build myself and do it via the ether, not wires.
73, Garry, K3SIW
MLS etc.
Posted by John Davis on January 11, 2017 at 04:32:57.
With the new year already in progress, I'm going back through 1750 Meters and spending entire nights concentrating on a single target. On Saturday, I tried for JAM, with no apparent success. There were slight surpluses of RF around the right spot once in a while, but nothing definite. That was the third unsuccessful all-night attempt for that one this season.
On Monday evening, I decided to target MLS. To my surprise, I started seeing keyed carrier at 186.204 shortly before sunset, and a recognizable ID by about 5:45 PM CST. It gradually got better during the evening, becoming quite solid for about an hour centered on midnight. It diminished somewhat then, disappearing entirely from about 1:45 to 3:10 AM, but returned to solid copy from 3:25 to 5:10 AM (see attached). It then began a gradual, erratic fade, disappearing finally at 6:40 AM, about an hour before sunrise.
It was quite a challenge keeping the powerful clusters of PLCs (one 46 Hz above and one 96 Hz below) from excessively de-sensing the receiver, but the dual passband tuning helped considerably.
I'm trying tonight for a similar all-night capture of EAR, but the thunderstorms in Indiana earlier may have put a big hole in that plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: MLS09jan.jpg
EAR
As I suspected yesterday evening, the noise levels varied considerably during the all-night attempt on EAR. The storms moving east through the Midwest began abating around midnight, Kansas time. The QRN decrease does not account for all the improvement seen during the attached captures; it amounted to only half an S-unit, whereas the improvement in visibility is closer to 8 dB, according to Argo. But, since both of those varied during the course of the night at times when I was dozing, or the time when I returned to town to do email, the all-night sequence of EAR is not as clear an indicator of propagation variance as the previous night's captures of MLS were.
Attached are captures at both QRSS30 Slow and 60 Slow.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: EAR10-11jan.jpg
File Attachment 2: EAR10-11jan60.jpg
Re: MLS etc.
Thanks for the signal report
We have possible thunder storms tonight. I may have to secure the beacon for a few hours till they pass through. TNX. Mark
Puzzle
Posted by John Davis on January 12, 2017 at 15:54:11.
Like solving puzzles? Here's one for you: just what sort of signal is this?
The only clue I'm going to give you is that I was tuned to the 1750 m watering hole. Answer will be found here Friday!
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: 11jan-mystery.jpg
Watering hole screenshot
A screenshot of the relative positions of FL, EH, RY, and SIW is in the link below:
http://lwca.org/mbarchiv/pix/2017/FL.jpg
Dave
Re: Internet World-Wide Streaming Radio Broadcasts
Posted by Mike Terry on January 13, 2017 at 15:22:32.
In reply to Internet World-Wide Streaming Radio Broadcasts posted by Frank Lotito on January 10, 2017
Amazing! Thank you Frank.
Re: 162khz opportunity
Posted by Mike Terry on January 13, 2017 at 15:44:53.
In reply to Re: 162khz opportunity posted by John Davis on January 08, 2017
I think it's very unlikely to be made available to amateurs John but some live in hope!
Re: Puzzle
Posted by John Davis on January 14, 2017 at 11:54:44.
In reply to Puzzle posted by John Davis on January 12, 2017
Sorry to take so long posting the answer. I had a 24-hour monitoring session underway of XND's WSPR2 transmission on 2200 m Thursday night and Friday, while simultaneously dealing with our slow but relentlessly ongoing ice storm.
The mystery signal is SIW's WSPR15 transmission on 1750 meters, but chopped up almost to the point of being unrecognizable. Garry K3SIW explains what happened, which is followed by a graphic I put together that shows it visually, and then I present some decodes of the signal that border on miraculous, given how much information is missing:
First, the recent heavy rain caused a GFI to trip, putting it briefly off the air. It was quickly brought back online but without a clock correction and that's why the mode-switching time is way off. WSPR of course requires a very accurate clock and it has that via GPS. But the clock that runs the mode sequence is a separate free-running item. There is battery backup but it only saves the schedule and doesn't keep the clock running.A second problem surfaced after today's switch from QRSS on 185.2993 kHz to WSPR-15 on 185.185 kHz - the transmitter is keying the latter as if it's still in QRSS mode. There is a relay to apply the proper keying for each mode. When sending QRSS it should apply a K1EL keyer signal and when sending WSPR-15 it should apply a constant 5V since that should always be transmitting. When the weather clears Bob, NK9M will investigate this problem and correct the clock.
Interestingly, despite only sending about half the time, wspr15 messages can still decode so the forward error correction is impressive.
Impressive indeed! Over the next dozen hours, enough of the WSPR header fell during the "on" keyed intervals to enable these nine further decodes:
170112 0745 5 -34 -0.6 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 8110 4 170112 0800 8 -32 -0.6 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 9034 0 170112 0815 9 -31 -0.6 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 48 0 170112 0900 8 -31 -0.6 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 4038 1 170112 0915 7 -32 -0.2 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 1141 0 170112 1100 7 -33 -0.6 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 8970 -13 170112 1115 8 -31 -0.9 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 9781 -15 170112 1230 7 -34 -0.9 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 4791 21 170112 1415 4 -36 -0.6 0.185185 K3SIW EN51 0 0 3128 0
John
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: 11jan-myst-composite.jpg
Re: MLS etc.
I am hearing, and seeing MLS on the ARGO. Good solid lines. 16JAN2017 5 PM est. Marietta Ohio
Lowfer SIW
Posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 17, 2017 at 22:30:41.
Lowfer SIW is off the air for repairs. Bob, NK9M took it inside his shack as the outdoor weather is definitely not conducive to repair work. Correcting the clock for mode switching is trivial but whatever is causing wspr15 to key rather than stay on continuously may not be so simple to fix. Time will tell.
73, Garry, K3SIW, EN52ta, Elgin, IL
Jan 14 & 15 Quiet
Posted by Ed Holland on January 18, 2017 at 01:08:26.
Hi folks,
Not much to report, but I have been listening a little at weekends - the usual mid-late afternoon spot. Things have been rather quiet at 22 m, and also from my favourite (and still just there) Radio Australia. Barely a carrier audible at the 17 and 15 MHz frequencies. Even WWV was weak to inaudible on 15 MHz.
I spent time tinkering with the Philco restoration whilst recording rather lifeless spectrograms. Hoping to finish the first transformer rewind very soon. Lots of technique learned meanwhile!
Cheers
Ed
Lowfer Beacon WM
Posted by Mike N8OOU on January 18, 2017 at 14:53:39.
All
WM Lowfer will be intermittently on and off the air over the next few days. If you don't see it I likely have it powered down. Yesterday I got caught in a downpour with the helix can opened up. HiFER Wednesday
--
73 de N8OOU - Mike Meek
Posted by John Davis on January 18, 2017 at 18:20:33.
A quick first look at the band this morning: All four of my watering hole regulars were present; even NC was apparently warm enough to drift down into the passband today, joining a strong USC, the EH white noise machine, and RY.
The attached capture is not actually the best reception of the morning. A few minutes earlier, before codar became so obnoxious, I was getting distinctly cleaner traces and all four carriers were discernible by ear...but I neglected to snap that screen in time. Up the band were MTI for the first time in a couple of weeks, and FRC. I sat on the frequencies of PVC, RQ, SZX, GNK, and AZ for a few minutes each (several for RQ) but no luck.
All the ones that did come in this morning were susceptible to quite a bit of QSB over the course of several minutes. I'm currently monitoring WH2XND in WSPR2 down on 137.527 kHz (carrier freq), which is also nicely audible. However, just after noon his time I will switch back to 22 meters and watch for effects from today's forecast G1 magnetic activity.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: 18jan01.jpg
Re: HiFER Wednesday
Nothing remarkable on the geomagnetic front. The Watering Hole Four looked better by mid-afternoon, thanks to a diminution if Codar and a generally cleaner output from EH. However, nobody else came through anywhere on the band. By 5 o'clock CST, only RY was left.
Re: HiFER Wednesday
Posted by Paul on January 19, 2017 at 07:25:45.
In reply to HiFER Wednesday posted by John Davis on January 18, 2017
Thank you for the signal report, John.
It's been blowing nearly 100 MPH at the FRC beacon site. I cannot log in to the tower cam, but pretty sure the HiFer antenna is moving around a bit.
My main dipole for listening to 22m appears to have become slightly waterlogged as the SWR has been fluctuating. It's supported between two self supporting towers, and I suspect it has also stretched a little because it doesn't look as "flat" as it did before we had these huge winds. So, been listening on a couple other antennas that aren't optimized for 22m like the south dipole is, and I can barely hear FRC, let alone anyone else.
Re: HiFER Wednesday
Posted by Ed Holland on January 19, 2017 at 22:08:01.
In reply to HiFER Wednesday posted by John Davis on January 18, 2017
The antennas here survived last night's onslaught, but its probably a good idea to check tuning of PVC.
Re: HiFER Wednesday
Posted by Paul on January 20, 2017 at 02:37:02.
In reply to Re: HiFER Wednesday posted by Paul on January 19, 2017
Between storms here now.
Hearing FRC at the same strength as usual now. So, it obviously survived OK.
Not hearing any other HiFers.
73, Re: Lowfer SIW
Posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 21, 2017 at 18:17:25.
In reply to Lowfer SIW posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 17, 2017
Lowfer SIW is again QRV.
73, Garry, K3SIW, EN52ta, Elgin, IL
Re: Lowfer SIW
Posted by John Davis on January 21, 2017 at 20:09:22.
In reply to Re: Lowfer SIW posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 21, 2017
I caught what was just recognizable as a QRSS60 "SIW" while watching in 30 Slow mode from 12:10 to nearly 12:35 CST, then a QRSS30 version of the full ID, also requiring some strain of the imagination to make out. It looked as if a QRSS60 "S" started on schedule, but then I lost it after the second dit (capture excerpt attached).
No particular QRN today and no QRM, so I'm not sure why it appeared weaker than usual. I've tuned down and found XND doing well, so I'll watch there a while and check back on SIW later.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: 21jan03.jpg
Re: Lowfer SIW
Accidentally took a lot longer nap than planned, so that when I got back to the farm it was already raining and there were thunderstorms about 50 miles away. Therefore, no further sightings of SIW were possible today. I could just barely see XND, for that matter, and could no longer decode it under the S9+ static.
Will try again tomorrow if the rain moves out before leaving us too muddy.
John
Re: HiFER Wednesday
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 22, 2017 at 15:39:54.
In reply to Re: HiFER Wednesday posted by Paul on January 20, 2017
Heard it loud and clear here in Pine,Colorado on Jan 21...only beacon heard, it again was the Big Dog.
Re: HiFER Wednesday
Posted by Paul on January 22, 2017 at 19:22:08.
In reply to Re: HiFER Wednesday posted by Bill Hensel on January 22, 2017
Well, thanks again!
It was blowing really hard again last night. Winds between 60 and 70 MPH at my home QTH all night. I got up a few times to check and see if all the towers were still up and antennas still working. All good so far. Only trouble noted was apparently the south HyPower OCF dipole has some water in it now. Its SWR is bouncing all over the place. The other antennas are all stable.
Even the cheap OCF dipole I bought on ebay many years ago is still working perfectly and still doing fine. I fully expected that one to fail by now. 2200m
Posted by JohnG on January 23, 2017 at 00:20:25.
VE7BDQ will be TXing on 2200m with WSPR2 this
evening. QRG 137.495 Dial 136.000kHz
Temporary MEDFER GLD
Posted by Robert M6GLD on January 23, 2017 at 03:12:02.
Greetings to all. I am on a business trip here in Tucson, AZ and have set up a temporary MEDFER beacon with the callsign GLD. It is running on 1634 khz at a site about a mile from the city. I've had good daytime reception upto about half a mile on the portable. I'm not really expecting any distance reports but thought I'd let you guys know. Keyed at a steady 6 wpm with a short message for verification. It's a little drifty with the temperature swings but I use a trimmer to reset it once a day.
Regards, Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD
Robert B.
Posted by Frank Cathell on January 23, 2017 at 19:16:19.
In reply to Temporary MEDFER GLD posted by Robert M6GLD on January 23, 2017
Hearing temporary Medfer GLD on 1633.4 kHz on 1/23/17 at 1900 UTC. Q4, steady signal. QTH: West Tucson. Alinco DX-R8 receiver with 175' impedance matched end-fed wire.
Frank Hifer listening today from Pine, Colorado
K3YAZ
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 23, 2017 at 22:38:33.
I started hearing GNK at 2230utc it was very weak and I had to use head phones to dig it out however around 2233 utc it got strong enough to hear it via the radio speaker. K6FRC was good copy around the same time as GNK...FRC cw speed seemed faster then usual.. QRS and QRSS Memory Keyer
Posted by Frank Lotito on January 24, 2017 at 20:38:40.
ref: http://www.kent-engineers.com/codespeed.htm
I am looking for a few Internet references on home brewed circuits, or kits which are designed for sending CW at QRSS speeds, e.g., 1,3,10,etc seconds per dot.
I do own the Unified Microsystems XT-4B CW Beacon Keyer and MFJ 452 keyboard keyer. They are both definitely suitable and reliable for beacon keying at speeds of 5 WPM and greater. For my QRSS sending interests I use a very old Windows XP laptop running ON7YD's QRS program. The XT-4B and MFJ-452 manufacturers indicate that there is no practical way to S-L-O-W D-O-W-N their products to QRSS speeds.
To streamline my system, I'd like to replace the laptop with a keying device suitable for QRSS speeds, whose memory is reprogrammable, but non-volatile when the power is turned off, and will auto-start when power is turned back on.
Besides a computer running ON7YD's program (and similar QRSS programs) what else might be available? Going back to my college years when digital logic circuits were still made from discrete components using mostly "hollow-state" devices, I vaguely recall something called a "ring counter" where you could trap a message. I believe the incremental circuits were RST flip-flops...? That's obscured by the fog of time -
Thanks and 73 Frank K3DZ / WH2XHA
Re: QRS and QRSS Memory Keyer
Posted by John Davis on January 24, 2017 at 22:03:18.
In reply to QRS and QRSS Memory Keyer posted by Frank Lotito on January 24, 2017
QRSS speeds, reprogrammability, and reasonable cost seem to be one of those "you can have any two out of the three" deals.
Probably the easiest approach is the K-ID2 chip from K1EL systems. It's a PIC microcomputer that's custom programmed to output up to seven different user-selectable messages, which can include a mix of QRSS at various speeds, Morse, and/or pauses and keydown intervals. Plug it into an 8-pin DIP socket, set the trigger pins high or low according to which message you want to play, and power it up...logic-level keying instantly materializes at the output. And at a cost of $8 each, that's the next best thing to reprogrammable!
Info at: www.hamcrafters2.com/KID2.html including a link to a PDF of the user manual.
SIW Changeover Today
Posted by John Davis on January 24, 2017 at 22:36:06.
My first time in the field since the last big rain, and SIW seemed to be doing a little better than Saturday, although the noise was the same or maybe a couple dB higher today. As seen in the attachment, the switchover was promptly at noon CST/1800 UTC.
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: 24janSIW.jpg
KH beacon
I was "recruited" into numerous Pole Barn and Roof Installs most of 2016 up till a few weeks ago. I am attempting to throw up a T antenna over edge of horse pasture and thought of using bottom high tensile wire around 3 acre area as ground radial along with its 4 ground rods.
Re: Hifer listening today from Pine, Colorado
Posted by Paul on January 25, 2017 at 03:13:47.
In reply to Hifer listening today from Pine, Colorado posted by Bill Hensel on January 23, 2017
Thanks, Bill!
Just tuned in FRC... Sounds normal to me.
I wish I had the kind of ears you do on the HiFer band. I can't hear diddly squat!
Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD
Posted by Robert M6GLD on January 25, 2017 at 05:10:26.
In reply to Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD posted by Frank Cathell on January 23, 2017
Many many thanks for the report Frank. Transmitter located in Tucson Park West and will be on the air until the 15th of February.
Robert
Re: Hifer listening today from Pine, Colorado
Posted by John Davis on January 25, 2017 at 05:27:22.
In reply to Re: Hifer listening today from Pine, Colorado posted by Paul on January 25, 2017
Paul wrote:
Just tuned in FRC... Sounds normal to me.
Looked normal to me here in Kansas, too. It was visible but just flirting with audibility here about 1:50 PM CST. Same with WV.
The watering hole regulars were visible, but with QSB taking out pieces of RY and making EH and USC less than ideal. Up at 13555.65, NC was rather loud and would have been easily readable in CW.
John
Re: Hifer listening today from Pine, Colorado
Posted by Paul on January 25, 2017 at 08:06:43.
In reply to Re: Hifer listening today from Pine, Colorado posted by John Davis on January 25, 2017
Thanks, John.
Was actually able to copy a couple unusual LW beacons tonight and WH2XXP while tuning around. Hopefully, conditions on the HiFer band improve soon.
Beacon mystery
Posted by Paul on January 25, 2017 at 08:11:53.
While locked on to WH2XXP frequency of 475.6 kHz. tonight, I also copied "WI2XBY". Couldn't find anything on this. Anyone know about it?
Re: Beacon mystery
Posted by Garry, MK3SIW on January 25, 2017 at 13:27:46.
In reply to Beacon mystery posted by Paul on January 25, 2017
The wspr software is good, but not perfect. WI2XBY is a bogus decode, probably caused by IM from other strong stations. A look at the overnight map (say with a 12 hour period) for wspr reports at http://www.wsprnet.org/drupal/wsprnet/map always shows a number of such false decodes. They usually have implausible power levels or path lengths, but not always. Here, WH2WSX often decodes from EN80. Nice, but not true.
73, Garry, K3SIW, EN52ta, Elgin, IL
Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD
Posted by Robert M6GLD on January 25, 2017 at 14:31:34.
In reply to Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD posted by Robert M6GLD on January 25, 2017
Distance between us about 3.5 miles.
Re: Beacon mystery
Posted by Paul on January 25, 2017 at 15:57:44.
In reply to Re: Beacon mystery posted by Garry, MK3SIW on January 25, 2017
I was not decoding with software. I was waiting for the regular CW ID and copying by ear. I am absolutely certain of the callsigns copied.
A real mystery.
Thanks, OM! Re: Beacon mystery
Posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 25, 2017 at 17:02:17.
In reply to Re: Beacon mystery posted by Paul on January 25, 2017
Not likely a mystery at all. Intermodulation creates bogus "signals" that appear real, not just to software but to your ears too. Unfortunately just hearing a CW ID doesn't prove it's real. The FCC lists no such callsign at http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchLicense.jsp nor has anyone reported it at http://www.wsprnet.org/olddb?mode=html&band=2190&limit=200&findcall=WI2XBY&findreporter=&sort=date. If the source is a pirate sending CW only you could identify it and potential IM issues by running a waterfall program like argo, spectrum laboratory, or even the wspr software.
Garry, K3SIW
Re: Beacon mystery
Posted by John Davis on January 25, 2017 at 18:50:03.
In reply to Re: Beacon mystery posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 25, 2017
Garry, it might be worth testing that FCC license search page. It may not be working. I've tried it with several calls that I know to be authentic, and it reports "no matches found" for them as well.
John
Re: Beacon mystery
Posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 25, 2017 at 20:49:19.
In reply to Re: Beacon mystery posted by John Davis on January 25, 2017
Good point JD. Since experimental licenses are issued by OET a better URL to check is https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/CallsignSearch.cfm. Searching there for "WI2XBY" does indeed yield a current license (renewed 12/02/16). The holder is Randall Gardner in Romulus, MI. Seems the grant involves commercial GPS equipment at L-band so unclear why it would be sending CW IDs at VLF. Interestingly, the response to station ID per rules Section 5.115 is "no".
73, Garry, K3SIW
Antenna improvement
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 26, 2017 at 00:09:06.
I started developing a Top Hat for the vertical antenna...hoping that a little more current jumps off the Top section of my antenna...
Re: KH beacon
Posted by John Davis on January 27, 2017 at 08:04:28.
In reply to KH beacon posted by Ken WB8ZYZ on January 25, 2017
Interesting idea, Ken, and I wish you all the best with it. I would encourage you, though, to supplement or somehow incorporate that fence wire and its ground rods into a system with conventional radials centered beneath the antenna itself.
The reason will become clear if you can visualize the fields around an electrically short vertical antenna. Taking the simplest case first, of just a vertical pole or wire atop an insulator (base loading coil assumed) and a single ground rod, we'll try to picture the voltage, capacitance to ground, and current to ground at only three discrete points along the conductor.
Point A is near the ground, so the separation between "plates" of the effective capacitor formed by the pole and the earth are relatively close there, and the capacitance--if you were able to measure just a small segment at that position by itself--will be comparatively large. The capacitance of an isolated segment at B to ground will be less because the "plates" are more separated; and electrostatically speaking, B doesn't "see" the ground directly below it because it's looking down upon something that's already at the same potential it already is, so it actually gets a little better "view" of the earth off to the side. The same holds for point C, which is even farther away from ground and thus would exhibit a lower capacitance.
Now, because the antenna is electrically short, the voltage at all points on the antenna can be considered the same; by definition, it's not long enough to exhibit transmission line-like traits. Since the capacitance from point A is larger than B, which in turn is larger than from point C, then the relative currents to ground from each point follow the same pattern:
Those currents are subject to I2R power loss from the resistance of the soil. Where current is greatest near the base, the I2 term is a big factor in ground loss, while farther out, I has to traverse a greater distance through the soil to reach the rod. Figure 1 also illustrates how skin effect applies at RF, so heroically deep ground rods may be good for AC power safety, but they offer little benefit for RF radiation (or lightning protection, for that matter) beyond a certain point.
Well then, what happens if you add a few ground rods or a few arbitrary wires at, just below, or just above the surface? Those will indeed intercept some of the return current...but seldom as much of it as one would hope. The fact remains that any soil within or close by the aforementioned cone which can "see" the antenna will intercept some of the RF current, and it will still have to find its way to the nearest rod or ground wire through that resistive soil.
The preferred solution is to have as many good conducting paths as possible available, all leading to a central point, so that the current will have a minimum of lossy soil to traverse on its way "back home" to the source.
That's what we see below in Figure 2, which is still simplified but presents a bit more realistic depiction of current paths, and also includes top loading. The green lines represent buried radial wires as the usual example, but they can be at the surface. Bear in mind that this is only a two-dimensional representation, however, and you would want to think of the radials extending out in all directions around the base.
Here, currents induced into the resistive earth have minimal distance to travel before reaching a metallic conductor that will return them to the source. As for length of radials, they need to be long enough to capture the most significant current flow. For symmetrical top loading, a good rule of thumb is to make them at least as long as the vertical run plus the radius of the top hat. A few percent longer to account for fringing effects is OK, but extra-long runs are almost never helpful. The old-time LowFERs discovered long ago that if compromise is necessary because wire or other resources are limited, more short radials are distinctly better than a few long ones.
If the top loading is not symmetrical, as with a T- or an L-top, the rule of thumb for radial length can be modified in a way that may be slightly helpful in your situation. In these cases, the current that needs to be returned will be greatest along the axis of the horizontal run; that is, under the T or L wires themselves. The minimum radial length in other directions only needs to be equal to the height of the vertical run plus a few percent. Under the T or L section, and for adjacent radials roughly ±45° either side, they should be near the combined length of vertical and horizontal runs.
Figure 3 is an "aerial view" (pun intended) example of a possible radial layout for a T-loaded antenna having a horizontal run of about half the vertical height, the latter value being represented by the blue circle, and the long axis running under the top loading element
Of course, I realize those two words "horse pasture" in your post may render some of the suggestions above difficult to implement. Hooves, mud, and buried wires are not a good mix! However, the main point is that if you can get some radials in the ground somewhere, somehow, it will be better than just relying on the fence wire alone, because most of that three acre enclosure will lie outside the path of the antenna current that needs to be returned to the source.
73
John
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: ANT-fig3.gif
File Attachment 2: ANT-fig1.gif
File Attachment 3: ANT-fig2.gif
O O P S !
My apologies if you attempted to post a message between late Wednesday night and late Thursday night, and got a "page not found" message.
Due to a minor repair involving a duplicate post on Wednesday, it was necessary to make the Board read-only for just a few minutes. But when I returned the board to service, an extraneous space crept into a filename and prevented the posting software from working. I only discovered that tonight when I attempted to post the big ol' reply to Ken about his antenna for KH.
If you ever run into a problem of this sort with the Board yourself, be sure to let us know at the mb at lwca org address. Thanks.
John
Re: Antenna improvement
Posted by Ed Holland on January 27, 2017 at 18:41:04.
In reply to Antenna improvement posted by Bill Hensel on January 26, 2017
Hi Bill,
I'll try and listen out this weekend. It's been a while since the receivers were warmed up, time for a beacon hunt across 22 m :)
Ed
160-190 KHz antenna-top hat
Posted by Frank Lotito on January 27, 2017 at 19:46:27.
ref : 47CFR15.217(b) The total length of the transmission line, antenna, and ground lead (if used) shall not exceed 15 meters.
The above excerpt is from the Part 15 section regarding non-licensed operation in the frequency range of 160-190 KHz.
My question: If the antenna includes a "top hat", be it centered, totally off to one side (eg an Inverted-L), or non-symmetrical (eg 30% to one side of the feed / 70% off to the other side of the feed) how is the top hat figured into the "15 meter" total length?
For years I've heard "Philadelphia Lawyer Curbstone" opinions. But "officially" has the FCC ever put the top hat clarification in writing and published their interpretation?
73 Frank Lotito K3DZ / WH2XHA
Re: 160-190 KHz antenna-top hat
Posted by John Davis on January 27, 2017 at 22:51:51.
In reply to 160-190 KHz antenna-top hat posted by Frank Lotito on January 27, 2017
But "officially" has the FCC ever put the top hat clarification in writing and published their interpretation?
Short answer: no.
...which should not be taken to mean "anything goes," obviously. Nor does it necessarily follow that we would WANT them to clarify it in nitpicking detail, either. The Canadian RSS-210 rules do that in a few cases, and the results are not pretty. Much better, IMO, to make reasonable assumptions in our individual cases and be prepared to explain why we believe our own installation complies with the literal plain-text wording of the rules.
Longer answer: no, not exactly, but we have been given some small instances of guidance; not all of which have been widely accepted.
Some of those "Philly lawyers" of whom you speak like to argue "original intent" of the rules as being garage door openers, and insist that only a single run of wire was ever intended. Well, that's not what the rules SAY, and the FCC has made it abundantly clear (for example, in the 2005 R&O on the earlier proposed amateur LF allocation) that Part 15 exists to facilitate communication and experimentation on a non-interference basis, not to stifle it. So, no, we're not really bad boys getting our thrills from living on the edge of the law here. But that still doesn't clarify 15.217(b) when something other than a simple length of wire or a small-diameter pole is involved.
One of the more popular "translations" of this particular rule, as you may remember, was known as the Ken Cornell interpretation. Ken felt that any antenna which you could fit into a cylinder 50 feet tall and 50 feet diameter ought to be compliant. Personally, I think such could reasonably be argued, given the inherent inefficiencies at 1750 meters in the best of cases, and it certainly would have eliminated any ambiguity over what counted and what didn't. But we know for a fact that the FCC DOES NOT AGREE with that interpretation. In the big Part 15 rewrite of the late 80S/early 90s, LWCA filed comments through the umbrella club organization, ANARC, in support of the Cornell interpretation, and the Commission specifically and very pointedly denied that request. Case closed, for all practical purposes.
At the opposite extreme are a couple of interpretations that were allegedly given to some hams in person by FCC inspectors over the years, to the effect that every single piece of wire in an antenna top hat counts toward "total length." (Now, the rules don't SAY THAT, either, but if an inspector tells you to shut down for any reason, the only thing to do is comply and then hope for someone in DC to give you a reasonable hearing.) Similar answers were given to experimenters in a mediumwave group about a decade ago when they emailed Commission staff (alas, you'll have to trust my memory for that, because all my correspondence and list archives from before the Big Crash of '016 are gone off to the cyber afterlife now); but since the answer also impacted LF loop antennas under Part 15, there were some who simply chose not to believe any of it, so even if I still had that correspondence it might not be too helpful.
Of the more reasonable traditional interpretations, one holds that if individual conductors in a top hat are bonded together into what is effectively a single conductor, they amount to one structure whose radius should be added to the vertical run for determining total length. (Individual wires, such as the top of a T or L, probably must be counted individually.)
Now, there IS one more or less formal bit of guidance from the FCC on antennas that do not consist of a simple run of wire, but are made from large diameter pipes, metal plates, or similar large, non-traditional conductors. It could probably be applied quite reasonably to top loading. Problem is, that document was also among those lost in the Big Crash, so I hope someone else remembers it and can come up with it, because it may help with this question. The essence of it, though, was that "length" in such a case meant the longest diagonal measurement of the surface or structure.
Again, I hope someone will be able to find that example. Bottom line otherwise: you're on your own, but if you can at least tell a reasonable story of why you believe the antenna fits within the plain-language reading of the rules (ie, not a big stretch of logic nor too nitpickey) you're more likely to survive any however-unlikely FCC inspection with your dignity and household finances intact.
Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD
Posted by Frank Cathell on January 28, 2017 at 02:52:55.
In reply to Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD posted by Robert M6GLD on January 25, 2017
I may try to DF your beacon on Saturday, Jan 28 in the afternoon.
Frank
TSN back on the air
Posted by Frank Cathell on January 28, 2017 at 18:27:00.
5 mW HiFer beacon TSN is running again. Off occasionally when listening. Frank/K3YAZ, Tucson, AZ.
Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD
Posted by Frank Cathell on January 28, 2017 at 21:08:38.
In reply to Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD posted by Frank Cathell on January 28, 2017
Rough DFing of signal seems to indicate The Ranch at Star Pass resort off of Shannon Rd.
FC
Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD
Posted by Frank Cathell on January 28, 2017 at 23:47:36.
In reply to Re: Temporary MEDFER GLD posted by Frank Cathell on January 28, 2017
DFed your QTH to 2825 Cara***. CW signal appears to A2 mode.
FC
Message Board Changes & Survey
Posted by Webmaster on January 29, 2017 at 09:13:54.
Time for some more improvements to the Board, but there are complications these days that mean I will need your feedback as I go along, to be sure they actually ARE improvements and not just a source of confusion. Here's a bit of explanation first, then a survey at the end.
The "Browser Wars" of old are back, in a slightly subtler form. Most end users don't realize it yet, but Web developers certainly do, although they've been very passive about it thus far. The browser folks seem to be taking HTML5 and CSS3 as excuses to selectively not implement fundamental parts of the Document Object Model on different HTML elements. That means CSS style sheet selectors don't work on some elements of long established Web pages any more, or that inheritance gets broken on certain properties, or other issues that sound like technical mumbo-jumbo. These things have practical consequences for you, the reader.
You probably noticed some changes right away in the layout of the Message Board lists. This is only a first, temporary compromise toward (I hope) a better solution that will accommodate both mobile devices and desktop and notebook machines without having to run a ton of scripts to adjust the page for every possible browser it has to display in. Apparently, Apple does not think IFRAMEs in a Web page are cool, and omitted certain critical settings for them on their mobile browsers. As a result, the LF and HF chronological lists were all out of kilter on the Message Board for iPad and iPhone users. I never could find a workaround that would let me set two of the frames side by side, so I finally gave up and now the chronological lists are stacked one above the other. I'd appreciate your feedback in the survey below.
On another matter...Google ("We Know More About You Than The NSA Does") Chrome ignores certain style settings within forms, which made the data entry boxes of our Posting Tool for new messages, well, kind of scrambled! I think I've cured that now, but I can't currently test it myself except in IE and Firefox, so please let me know if the Message Posting Tool looks or behaves strangely for you in future.
And just FYI, before the survey: If you switched to a new computer or installed a more modern browser in the past couple of years and thought you saw some differences in the message list, or even bigger formatting differences in the message board archives, you weren't imagining things. Nothing changed in the pages themselves. Elitists and gurus among the Web hoi polloi have long looked down their noses upon such conveniences as the SPAN element and TABLEs and are now actively trying to make them not work adequately any more. Sure, there was once too much dependence on them for page layout, but there are some features that have been built into tables (an indispensable tool for display of some kinds of information) since the days of IE4 that still aren't possible in DIV elements without a boatload of scripting. Now, though, the browser makers have messed with the response of selectors in CSS and inheritance of properties within rows and cells of tables, and a lot of formerly tidy pages now look random. I have no solution for that at this point, so I'm just explaining what happened and, yes, venting about all that past work being ditched, dissed and dismissed so cavalierly. Now...
The Survey:
(Please use the Reply area below. If you use both mobile devices and "regular" computers, please answer as many as apply. Thanks!)
1. Apple mobile users--does the LowFER above/HiFER below layout on the Message Board work OK and give you more or less equal display areas?
2. All mobile device users--does the overall Message Board page come out readable on your display, or is the size too cramped?
3. All mobile device users--for the long term, I need a better sense of what display area your browser offers. If you can find this info, what width-times-height in pixels does your browser do? (Please also mention the make & model of the device.)
4. Non-mobile desktop/notebook users--I also need to get a sense of what most modern monitors are displaying, so what resolution in pixels is your machine set for?
5. Non-mobile desktop/notebook users--is the present temporary layout of the Message Board causing any readability issues on your display?
(This thread will exist only long enough to collect the data and will not be archived. Again, thanks for your help.)
Re: Message Board Changes (PS)
Posted by Webmaster on January 29, 2017 at 09:23:26.
In reply to Message Board Changes & Survey posted by Webmaster on January 29, 2017
I forgot to mention that fixing layout issues is intended as a first step toward a couple of new forum-like features (such as showing a snippet of each message) which should make it easier to identify new messages in the chronological lists.
John
Re: Message Board Changes
Posted by John Bruce McCreath on January 29, 2017 at 15:55:06.
In reply to Re: Message Board Changes posted by Webmaster on January 29, 2017
All seems to work and look just fine on my iMac, running the ancient Snow Leopard OS.
73, J.B., VE3EAR Re: Antenna improvement
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 29, 2017 at 18:57:00.
In reply to Antenna improvement posted by Bill Hensel on January 26, 2017
Today I repaired my radial system...there are currently 26 connected radials after repairs were made. Over 60 percent were broken etc.. I'm hopeful this will improve my signal. The deer that come though every night are to blame...this summer I will replace the thin wire with larger diameter wire.
With the additional top hat maybe someone will here my hifer once again.
Re: Message Board Changes & Survey
Posted by Dave on January 30, 2017 at 01:34:54.
In reply to Message Board Changes & Survey posted by Webmaster on January 29, 2017
All looks fine on Dell Inspiron Laptop using screen resolution of 1164 x 655. Readers may find http://www.whatismyscreenresolution.com/ helpful to give you their screen resolution.
Dave N4EF
Re: Message Board Changes & Survey
Posted by Frank Lotito on January 30, 2017 at 06:08:48.
In reply to Message Board Changes & Survey posted by Webmaster on January 29, 2017
I primarily use an Acer Chromebook, Model C720 with screen resolution 1366 X 768. Whatever the message board updates are they seem A-OK on my end.
I also have a few Windows 10 machines. I will report when I fire them up.
73 Frank K3DZ / WH2XHA Re: Antenna improvement
Posted by John Davis on January 30, 2017 at 04:12:10.
In reply to Re: Antenna improvement posted by Bill Hensel on January 29, 2017
The repaired radials are bound to help, I should think. How tall is the antenna, physically?
Re: Message Board Changes & Survey
Posted by Dave Childs on January 30, 2017 at 06:35:10.
In reply to Message Board Changes & Survey posted by Webmaster on January 29, 2017
I use a desktop computer about 99% of the time &, as of now, 0030 CST, 30 Jan. 17, there are no readability problems. Also, for the record, I use Linux Mint v18.1, Cinnamon edition OS & Vivaldi v1.6.689.46 Browser which uses Google's Chromium rendering engine. Screen resolution is 1366X768. I appreciate all your efforts!
Re: Beacon mystery (deepens)
Posted by John Davis on January 30, 2017 at 07:35:37.
In reply to Re: Beacon mystery posted by Garry, K3SIW on January 25, 2017
I just found out tonight from a third party that Paul tried to reply to this thread Thursday evening while the Board was on the blink. Given what we now know about WI2XBY's authorization, plus an apparent bogus decode of WG2XKA this evening by Tom N8TL (XKA is not licensed for 2200m), I think this excerpt of what Paul was trying to post is potentially rather important:
Paul S wrote:It may be time to get out the direction finders, guys. We might have a pirate on our hands.
Nope. It was not intermod.... I copied at least 2 stations, and heard each ID separately at different times with different CW ID speed and each just slightly off frequency of the others. Trust me, that was a beacon, and that was its ID.
At the very least, it would help if we had some simultaneous reports of both aural and WSPR copy to compare signal strengths at different receiving locations.
John
Re: Lowfer Beacon WM
Posted by Mike N8OOU on January 30, 2017 at 11:31:30.
In reply to Lowfer Beacon WM posted by Mike N8OOU on January 18, 2017
Update - 1/30/2017
The WM Lowfer is operating now using the U3S exciter, along with the other components put into play for this season. Over the past couple weeks I have smoked two Arduino Uno's that were used to generate the graphic transmissions. (Sloppy case mounting on my part)
My testing objectives have not yet been completed so I will still have some intermittent outages as redesigned parts are tried on the antenna. (during the daytime) The Arduino based exciter will be put back on air after replacements are acquired.
Mike.
Re: Message Board Changes & Survey
Posted by Frank Lotito on January 30, 2017 at 15:26:53.
In reply to Re: Message Board Changes & Survey posted by Frank Lotito on January 30, 2017
Using my oldest Win 10 machine (at white box HP h8-1110 desktop, running the Home Version 11, 64 bit, 8 GB RAM ... This machine is a "freebie" update whose life started off as a Win 7 Home machine...Screen resolution is 1600 by 900. The machine has two browsers installed:
IE ver 11, LWCA web page seems OK, but a glitch -
EDGE ver 38.nnnn with 14.nnnn for HTML, Similar glitch when viewing the LWCA web page...
The "glitch" appears when I chose try to close a viewed message. When I attempt to click on the web site's blue colored "CLOSE THIS MESSAGE" a window pops up. The message in the window says "This web page you are viewing is trying to close the tab. Do you want to close the tab?" Two rectangular buttons show up under the message: YES and NO. If I select YES, I go back to the message board lists of postings.
Otherwise, for the little I've scouted around, no other glitches have been uncovered on the revised LWCA web site.
73 Frank K3DZ / WH2XHA Re: Antenna improvement
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 30, 2017 at 12:32:59.
In reply to Re: Antenna improvement posted by John Davis on January 30, 2017
1/4 wave length
Walk in the National Forest Sunday Jan 29
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 30, 2017 at 12:38:25.
22 meter dxing while on my walk in the National Forest.
At 2306 utc MTI was heard on my trusty KA 1103. It has been a while since I heard MTI on the portable...I always smile...up the Band AA0RQ was coming in nicely of course it is located in my own baliwack and up the band a little farther K6FRC was Q5.
MTI made my day dx wise.
Re: Message Board Changes & Survey
Posted by John Davis on January 30, 2017 at 18:02:23.
In reply to Re: Message Board Changes & Survey posted by Frank Lotito on January 30, 2017
>>> The "glitch" appears when I chose try to close a viewed message.
That's a browser-specific thing, and there should be a setting somewhere in IE's Internet Options that controls it. Unfortunately, I haven't found it in version 11.
If you use the "X" in the corner of the tab to close the message directly, that doesn't happen, but the Close This Message link employs the Javascript window.close() method to do the job. That's been a standard function built into all browsers for over 20 years. I can understand a pop-up blocker being concerned about windows that open under script control, but why a browser would fret over a window closing itself when the user clicks a link is beyond me.
Re: Antenna improvement
Posted by Ed Holland on January 30, 2017 at 19:09:22.
In reply to Re: Antenna improvement posted by Bill Hensel on January 29, 2017
Bill, I heard AA0RQ loud and clear yesterday morning (~1745 UTC).
It did seem good and strong. Conditions also brought nearby GNK briefly. Will keep an ear on it when I can. Thanks for the fixes!
Ed
Re: Walk in the National Forest Sunday Jan 29
Posted by Ed Holland on January 30, 2017 at 20:03:31.
In reply to Walk in the National Forest Sunday Jan 29 posted by Bill Hensel on January 30, 2017
Hi Bill,
You might well have got PVC as well - If I'd remembered to turn it back on after listening on Saturday!
This is a persistent problem - I have to suspend PVC transmission whilst listening on 22 m, and am absent minded about starting it up again.
Ed
Re: Antenna improvement
Posted by Bill Hensel on January 30, 2017 at 20:26:10.
In reply to Re: Antenna improvement posted by Ed Holland on January 30, 2017
Ed,
Thanks for the report...I feel a lot better about the antenna system...more improvements as warm days present themselves.
Don't forget to turn PVC on.
Re: Beacon mystery (deepens)
Posted by John Davis on January 31, 2017 at 04:16:04.
In reply to Re: Beacon mystery (deepens) posted by John Davis on January 30, 2017
Tom N8TL has retracted his spot of WG2XKA as being the result of operator error. He switched his radio and WSPR software from 630m to 2200m while a decode was in progress. I still believe whomever Paul heard was not who he was pretending to be, though.
Re: Message Board Changes & Survey
Posted by Frank Lotito on January 31, 2017 at 12:55:42.
In reply to Re: Message Board Changes & Survey posted by John Davis on January 30, 2017
I should have mentioned that prior to whatever the recent LWCA Web site changes are, using the "CLOSE THIS MESSAGE" option worked without issue, including on WIN 10 IE and Microsoft Edge (I don't know how Microsoft Edge works behind the scenes as compared to Microsoft Internet Explorer.) This includes many-many versions of older Windows operating systems, IE versions, and Symantec firewall / antivirus versions.
Who/where is PLM?
Posted by John Davis on January 31, 2017 at 21:12:51.
Heard a new one this morning as I was tuning up the band after unsuccessfully trying for PBJ and MTI. It was hard to hear through the codar, but around 9:10-9:15 AM, after several repeats it was clear that someone was signing PLM on 13,557.745 kHz, +2.5/-0 Hz. Any ideas?
potrzebie
