Seen my 1st 22 meter QRSS signal HIFer
Posted by Stan on February 01, 2002 at 10:09:03
The last two days I have heard a couple of beacons on 22 meters just before dusk. Yesterday I actually seen ARGO try to do it's thing. My background noise was -120 db and the signal was -97 db If I understand what I am seeing on the CRT. Was not able to get ID, but it was decoding. The frequency was 13.557 plus or minus 50 hz if I am reading my FT1000MP MK V correctly. I heard one other station but was not able to get it decoded. Anyway progress. Using a 140 ft long wire with off center single wire feed as the antenna.
It was almost as much fun as my first QSO in 1954. hi Brings back the mystery of radio.
I get a couple of solid traces on the ARGO display also which appears to be something in my computer (laptop) Anyway they are always the same frequency offset and does not move when I tune the receiver. I do not see them when I got to zoom mode.
Still on the learning curve.
I should have the crystal for my own 22 meter unit in the next few days. I am going to put the entire transmitter in the center conductor of the dipole and use the feed line as the keying/power line. Plan to use those little EPSON SG8002 as the signal source.
I will use "ALF" as my ID.
de Stan AK0B ak0b@swbell.net
Recievers- - Wanted
Posted by Paul Nell on February 01, 2002 at 18:02:04
Looking for military recievers models SRR-11,12 or 13; FRR-21,22, or 23. These recievers are from the 50's., and use the subminiature or pencil type tubes. These recievers also use the projection type of frequency display. If you have any of these recievers for sale, or know of someone who does, please e-mail or call 570-758-6349. Thank you.
Paul
RAL temporarily QRT
Posted by Paul Stroud on February 01, 2002 at 19:18:16
I noticed the bottom on my vertical section was flapping in the breeze today. RAL will be off the air till I can climb on the roof and resecure the feedpoint connection. 73, Paul AA4XX
NC xmitting JASON on 177.700 / Received by KØLR for best DX, 1035 miles
Posted by Dexter McIntyre, W4DEX on February 02, 2002 at 09:59:05
Last night NC on 177.700 kHz received reports from two additional stations, Lyle KØLR and Steve W3EEE. Lyle's reprot is the best DX to date for NC in this mode. NC in JASON mode has now been reveived by W3NF, WB4ANQ, W1VLF, WS4S, W1VD, W1TAG, KØLR and W3EEE.
Dexter
Current NC beacon status at:
http://www.gostanly.com/w4dex/
Re: NC xmitting JASON on 177.700 / Received by KØLR for best DX, 1035 miles
Posted by Mitch on February 02, 2002 at 13:09:31
Hey Dex - please include me in the list - nice captures on Jan 22nd. Screen capture on http://technology.fanshawec.on.ca/tele354
By the way - just finished winding loading coil per your pictures - got 2.7 mH and Q just over 400.
Tnx Mitch
Re: NC xmitting JASON on 177.700 / Received by KØLR for best DX, 1035 miles
Posted by Dexter on February 02, 2002 at 14:40:18
Sorry to have miss you on the list Mitch. I was giving you credit on last night's message. I have uploaded some JASON reception screen shots that I have received. Several other had their screen shots on a temp page so I could't add them to the list. You can view these JASON captures from the index at:
http://www.gostanly.com/w4dex/JASON/
Dex
Lyle Koehler / Best DX and Best Copy of NC JASON transmission!
Posted by Dexter McIntyre on February 02, 2002 at 16:32:10
Lyle's early morning reception of NC's JASON signal was near perfect copy for a whole screen. Check out his reception on the updated Low Frequency page at:
http://www.gostanly.com/w4dex/
Dexter, W4DEX
Re: Lyle Koehler / Best DX and Best Copy of NC JASON transmission!
Posted by Larry Putman on February 02, 2002 at 18:01:32
Dex,
Who is this new guy WB4ANQ?
Larry WB3ANQ
Re: Lyle Koehler / Best DX and Best Copy of NC JASON transmission!
Posted by Dexter on February 02, 2002 at 20:54:25
Sorry about that Larry. My poof reader failed again.
Dex
WA and NC in EN36us, BRO listening.
Posted by Bryce Ofstie, KI0LE on February 02, 2002 at 21:33:02
Last night and tonight I decided to listen for a while. I saw WA last night until about 2:25 CST. This morning I was looking for XM, got a line and what looks like XM but just to faint to tell for sure, I'll continue tonight. I just finished sending Dex a screen save of his NC message I grabbed with Jason. I'll report more if I see them and probably put BRO back on the air tomorrow.
-- Bryce R Ofstie, KI0LE LF Beacon BRO - 182.200 kHz Duluth, Minnesota EN36us
NEW BEACON
Posted by AL SZIRISKI on February 02, 2002 at 21:41:01
HI
I'VE REBUILT AN OLD BEACON AND WILL BE RUNNING IT FRI EVES TILL MONDAY MORNINGS. ITS ID IS Y T N AND FOR NOW IT RUNS IN CW.
PLEASE EMAIL ME WITH ANY REPORTS.
MY LOCATION IS IN CENTRAL FLA
THANKS
AL K2SSE
k2sse@gdi.net
XM in EN36us as well.
Posted by Bryce Ofstie on February 02, 2002 at 22:28:57
I'm seeing XM strong and clean in MN.
Beacon AZ 13.5545 copy
Posted by Tony Levstik on February 02, 2002 at 23:40:08
FYI I was able to copy beacon AZ 13.5545MHZ from 4:29 UTC -- 4:31 UTC before the signal was too weak to be heard.
Tony Levstik
Re: Beacon AZ 13.5545 copy
Posted by Tony Levstik on February 03, 2002 at 00:57:32
I forgot to put my location in first message Sherman Texas.
Tony L.
Re: NEW BEACON Central Florida
Posted by Don Burns on February 03, 2002 at 11:20:33
Al,
How about a frequency? Where are you located?
Don Burns Ft Lauderdale
TAG Gets Bigger
Posted by John Andrews, W1TAG on February 03, 2002 at 15:53:31
For those whose receivers would otherwise feel lonely during the Super Bowl, the new and improved TAG can keep them company, starting with an 1830 EST (2330 Z) kickoff. The frequency will be 185.302, just 2 Hz above fellow Pats' fan, WA. The format will be DFCW60, with the dash characters 0.2 Hz higher than the dots. The ID will be "TAG".
The improvement should come from a new antenna, nicknamed the "LLL." This is an antenna of Ashlockian derivation (as opposed to A Shlock Loop). It would even be called "environmentally friendly," were it not for the many yards of monofilament line still dangling from the trees.
As always, reports will be welcomed.
John Andrews, W1TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
DGPS outside USA and Canada
Posted by Art Peterson on February 03, 2002 at 23:54:35
I have found websites for US and Canada that give listings of DGPS facilities, but I have been totally frustrated in obtaining any information about DGPS facilities in any other country. Can anyone direct me to website for other countries, especially in the Americas? Thanks. Art Peterson
Transmission mode of Russian "Beta" transmitters
Posted by Harald on February 04, 2002 at 05:53:33
The russian time signal stations RJH63, RJH66, RJH69, RJH77, RJH99 and RAB99 ("Beta" - transmitters) have -in great difference to other time signal station as DCF77 and MSF- no continous operation, instead they work in a complicate transmission schedule on 20.5 kHz, 23 kHz, 25 kHz, 25.1 kHz, 25.5 kHz.
Why do they transmit in such a manner? Why is on 20.5 kHz (except of RJH63) and on 23 kHz only A0 - transmission?
Why do not other time signal stations work in such a scheme?
In my opinion it would be very sensitive to run this stations continuously as DCF77 and MSF, because they could cover large parts of the world with their powerful signals?
Are directional aerials with the usage of CFAs possible?
Posted by Udo Maier on February 04, 2002 at 05:58:10
Are directional aerials for long- ans mediumwave possible in the following manner:
1.) one aerial is conventional, another one a CFA
2.) all aerials are CFAs?
Why are there no transportable CFAs for emergency use?
(Although its effiency is surely worse then that of a conventional aerial, it could be used as emergency aerial during maintenance of the main aerial or when it was destroyed)
Re: Are directional aerials with the usage of CFAs possible?
Posted by John Davis on February 04, 2002 at 11:05:28
There is no theoretical reason why a directional array couldn't be implemented by either method. However, there are big practical concerns. A directional pattern depends on the ability to control the power balance between individual radiators and the relative phasing of the radiated fields. These requirements would be greatly complicated by inclusion of CFAs in an array: the power split, because of the unpredictable efficiency of the CFA; and the phasing, because each CFA itself contains two phasing networks, multiplying the possibility of phase errors within the whole array.
As for transportable CFAs, such antennas are still rather bulky at mediumwave. Since it is usually possible to construct other temporary radiators having efficiency at least as good as the CFA with locally available materials--and since the inventors claim to be the only ones who know how to tune a CFA properly, whereas any competent engineer can tune an improvised longwire, T, or other conventional antenna--I perceive that there is little demand among broadcasters to pay a premium price for use of an unproven antenna.
John
Re: Transmission mode of Russian "Beta" transmitters
Posted by John Davis on February 04, 2002 at 11:37:55
It is tempting to jest that no one understands why the Russians do anything in a particular way. :-)
The AØ emissions are all that are needed for frequency measurement purposes. As for not operating full-time, there are probably two factors at work: cost of continuous transmission, and the fact that the intended users (mostly the military) are expected to perform time checks at regularly scheduled intervals anyway.
This was true for the US Navy as well. Although the Naval Observatory Master Clock is available to the public continuously by telephone, the Internet, and even sometimes by satellite, the Navy's radio time signals were transmitted only on a scheduled basis. That was deemed sufficient for the needs of the intended users.
Although the Russians could conceivably operate one or more of those transmitters full-time to provide wider coverage, there is very little need for such additional service outside their own borders; it makes little economic sense for them to attempt an external time service for the relatively small number of potential users. Internally, most civilian and scientific users receive adequate service from Russia's HF time signals, many of which already operate continuously.
John
TAG in QRSS30
Posted by John Andrews on February 04, 2002 at 20:45:51
To allow for easier comparison with WA, I am running in plain old QRSS30 mode on 185.302, using the TAG id.
John Andrews, W1TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
TAG in North Carolina!
Posted by Dexter McIntyre, W4DEX on February 04, 2002 at 22:07:00
I just received a solid "TAG" on 185.302 kc from John's new loop. Congratulations John!
Dex
Screen shot posted at:
Posted by Dexter McIntyre on February 04, 2002 at 22:18:16
http://www.gostanly.com/w4dex/TAG/First_TAG_05feb02.jpg
Re: Beacon AZ 13.5545 copy
Posted by Jim Mandaville on February 05, 2002 at 14:24:08
Thanks much for your report, Tony. I do keep AZ going 24/7 except for some very brief listening/test periods. I recently developed means to measure the transmitter power very accurately and now have things set to produce a field equivalent to 1.8 mW from a dipole (after allowing for my 0.2 dB transmission line loss, my antenna gain (0.3 dB below a dipole), and assuming an antenna radiation efficiency of 95 percent).
Jim
TAG received in mechanicsburg, PA.
Posted by Dick Goodman - WA3USG on February 05, 2002 at 15:03:26
Very nice reception of TAG here in Mechanicsburg! Started coming in at about 2200 local and seen all night73 Dick
Re: did ever a similiar system in the Western hemisphere exist
Posted by Harald on February 05, 2002 at 15:41:11
Did ever a system like the Russian time signal system "Beta" exist in the Western hemisphere? If yes, where?
And why do the Russian also run time - signal transmitters on higher frequencies?
ONE CONTINUOUSLY OPERATING time signal system on frequencies around 25 kHz would require ALL DEMANDS ON EARTH for time synchronisation - civil demands and military demands!
How to build an online VLF - receiver
Posted by Hans Mueller on February 05, 2002 at 15:52:14
How can I build an online VLF - receiver?
I do not want to write my own analysis software, I want to take existing analysis software as "Spectran", "Spectrogram" or "SpecPlus".
At periodic intervals screenshots should be taken (very easy with "SpecPlus") and be then presented at the WWW
(and saved simultaneously as file on the server. If a life input in the www is impossible, the last jpg - file which was written on disk should be online presented).
Which software is therefore necessary?
(Note: the used computer should be remote operated because of the VLF radiation from the monitor)
Re: How to build an online VLF - receiver
Posted by John Andrews on February 05, 2002 at 16:23:25
Hans,
One possibility is a utility program called "Snag-It." This is a commercial program (not freeware), but there is a 30 day trial version. You can find it at:
http://www.techsmith.com/products/snagit/features60.asp
The program can be set up to do screen captures to a file, or both to a file and the Web. You will need FTP access to some storage area, obviously.
I have been using this program to do Argo and Spectran screen captures to the web, and it has been mostly trouble free. The few problems that I have had appear to trace to slowness with my ISP.
John Andrews
W1JHJ added to NC's JASON list!
Posted by Dexter McIntyre, W4DEX on February 06, 2002 at 09:00:14
Jon,
Thanks for the report. I have uploaded your copy to the JASON directory at:
http://www.gostanly.com/w4dex/JASON/
If there is anyone who sent me a JASON capture that I have failed to add to this directory please let me know.
73,
Dex
Marconi Transatlantic
Posted by Harry, VE3GRO on February 06, 2002 at 20:42:33
I see the debate continues: Did Marconi really get a signal across the Atlantic, on LF, back in 1900 using the equipment he had? From what I've read, the signal was pretty broad and the receiver was untuned. Although most of the energy from Marconi's transmitter was probably concentrated where he thought it was--in the LF range--I suspect his transmitter also have put out a few watts in the HF range, perhaps even the upper HF range. If so, perhaps that's what made it across. I've thought of this before but never seen this possibility discussed. What say, people? Cheers es 73 from London, Ontario. Harry, VE3GRO
VLF OTH
Posted by Paul Cianciolo on February 06, 2002 at 20:44:09
Hello folks, just want to let anyone who has the capability know that the antenna for "VLF" is pointed NE/SW. Please listen, if you can. Transmitting a 185.301 KHz and QRSS60. Thank you.
Re: Marconi Transatlantic
Posted by Jim Mandaville on February 06, 2002 at 21:39:29
I think I've seen this possibility discussed, but I can't exactly remember where. I think it may have been among the various comments associated with the anniversary of the feat.
But apart from the question of whether he heard di-di-dit via LF or HF is the question of whether he heard it at all. We who have listened for LF (or even HF) minisculo signals through noise realize how easy it is to hear what one wants to hear. And the obliging assistant? Well, feeding one's kids is a powerful incentive to say the right thing, and again, imagination helps. I guess I'm a doubting Thomas, but I do wonder about the power of a coherer.
I don't mean to demean the accomplishments of Willy (who will always be one of my heros), but, well, I do wonder some times ... .
What we need to do, of course, is do the same thing again using the best possible recreation of the tools.
I think it would be a worthy objective.
Jim Mandaville, KF7A, Tucson, AZ
Re: Marconi Transatlantic
Posted by Lyle Koehler on February 06, 2002 at 22:09:19
John Belrose discusses this in quite a bit of detail in a paper called "Fessenden and Marconi: Their Differing Technologies and Transatlantic Experiments During the First Decade of this Century". I can't get the link to come up at the moment, but a web search for "Fessenden and Marconi" should turn up the location of Belrose's paper.
WA is audible !!
Posted by Dick Goodman - WA3USG on February 06, 2002 at 23:50:57
Good grief ... WA is audible in Mechanicsburg, PA. Throw away the computer! 73 Dick
Wellbrook 1010 Loop?
Posted by Frank H. Reynolds on February 07, 2002 at 09:39:24
I'm thinking of getting a Wellbrook LFL 1010 active loop. Anybody tried one out succesfully?
Frank
Re: Marconi Transatlantic
Posted by Jim Mandaville on February 07, 2002 at 17:59:26
Thanks for that lead, Lyle. It came up first line in a search:
http://ewh.ieee.org/reg/7/millennium/radio/radio_differences.html
Haven't read it yet, but it looks very interesting.
Jim
FS: Rycom Selective Levelmeters
Posted by Howard White on February 07, 2002 at 20:41:51
I have for sale 3 Rycom 3121B selective levels meters. Units are scratched up and dusty but all receive. Each unit includes hard shipping case and a photocopy of complete manual. $75 each includes shipping CONUS.
Tnx, Howard WD4AKS
Re: VLF OTH
Posted by Dick Goodman - WA3USG on February 07, 2002 at 21:35:31
I copied VLF very well this morning from near Harrisburg, Pa. The ARGO traces looked very good but there must have been a lot of rapid QSB. I could make out some of the characters but not quite enough to make a positive ID. I had both "WA" & "VLF" within one Hz of each other on the screen.
Re: Marconi Transatlantic
Posted by Harry, VE3GRO on February 07, 2002 at 23:09:54
Thanks, group. I meant 1901, of course, and another time I'll make sure all my sentences have proper verbs! 73. H
VLF will ID temp as ATE
Posted by Paul Cianciolo on February 07, 2002 at 23:26:33
Hi folks - At Bill's suggestion, and in the spirit of experimentation and Rip Van Winkle, I've decided to temporarily change VLF to ATE until someone hears me. Antenna is pointed NE/SW. QRSS60 185.301.000 KHz. Thank you.
BA status?
Posted by Jay Rusgrove on February 08, 2002 at 06:15:38
Looking for BA on last night's captures. Anyone know what mode he is running? Thanks.
Jay Rusgrove, W1VD
TH copy in Maryland
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 08, 2002 at 09:15:17
TH cw beacon - 189.38 - is really loud(audible)and strong copy with Spectrogram this morning here in Maryland de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
Re: BA status?
Posted by John Davis on February 08, 2002 at 16:35:49
Brice continues to operate in conventional CW.
John
Re: BA status?
Posted by Jay Rusgrove on February 08, 2002 at 18:02:09
Thanks. That probably explains what I saw on the Argo captures.
Jay Rusgrove, W1VD
Re: did ever a similiar system in the Western hemisphere exist
Posted by John Davis on February 08, 2002 at 18:25:34
:: Did ever a system like the Russian time signal system "Beta" exist in the Western hemisphere? If yes, where? ::
I am not familiar with any similar system in the West.
:: And why do the Russian also run time - signal transmitters on higher frequencies? ::
Simplest reason of all...more people have receivers for those frequencies than for VLF.
:: ONE CONTINUOUSLY OPERATING time signal system on frequencies around 25 kHz would (satisfy) ALL DEMANDS ON EARTH for time synchronisation - civil demands and military demands! ::
One of the reasons more people are equipped to receive HF than VLF is that HF is easier to receive with compact receivers, requiring little or no external antenna, and is plagued with less mandmade and natural noise to cause interfence. Apart from the military, and the relatively small number of civilian users who also need the phase stability of LF or VLF propagation in their work, there are few users who are willing to go to the trouble of acquiring VLF radios and constructing the antennas needed to receive those frequencies reliably.
It's true that in recent years, the LF time services from Rugby, Boulder, and Mainflingen have been used by the general public through such means as radio-controlled clocks. But even in these cases, at LF frequencies which are somewhat easier to receive (due to antenna efficiency) than VLF, the kind of gear used by the general public requires a relatively strong signal from within the same country...or at the very least, within the same continent.
With the lower antenna efficiency of 20-25kHz frequencies, achieving global service from a single site would require very high power indeed. It could be done, but the current variety of time services presently available seem to meet the current demand without requiring most users to buy new equipment.
John
Re: Marconi Transatlantic
Posted by John Davis on February 08, 2002 at 19:30:22
A very interesting paper indeed! John Belrose is also a very effective presenter; wish I could have been there in person.
To summarize for those who haven't had time to read the article yet (be sure to do so!), it appears the 12 December 1901 transmission was centered on 850kHz. Marconi and his assistant believed they heard the letter S on three different occasions within about two hours, after trying for two days.
Belrose is clearly one of those who don't believe the combination of frequency and the available receivers was good enough to really cross the Atlantic. But as he says in his conclusion, "Whether Marconi heard the three faint dots or not is really unimportant. His claim 'sparked' a controversy among contemporary scientists and engineers about the experiment that continues today." I would go one step farther, and say that Marconi's belief that he had indeed heard what he thought he heard, was what spurred him to keep working the extra year it took to achieve undeniable, more-or-less-practical wireless communication across the ocean.
In that year and a fraction, the verifiable wireless crossings included:
* October 1902 from Poldhu, Cornwall to the Italian cruiser Carlos Alberto anchored in the harbour of Sydney, NS; frequency about 272 kHz.
* The first West-East transatlantic radio transmission between Glace Bay and Poldhu on 5 December 1902; frequency about 182 kHz.
* The first Canada/UK transatlantic actual radio message (a press message from a London Times correspondent at Glace Bay to his home office), from Glace Bay to Poldhu on 15 December 1902.
* The first USA/UK transatlantic radio message from the Marconi station at South Wellfleet, MA, to Poldhu, from President Theodore Roosevelt to King Edward VII, on 18 January, 1903.
Belrose notes, "History has recorded that the above messages were successfully transmitted, but how well these messages were received is a matter of conjecture.... It is clear that Marconi was still struggling in 1908 to achieve reliable transatlantic radio communications." Marconi's faith in spark as the only way to do wireless communication (reinforced, no doubt, by J. A. Fleming's beliefs as late as 1906 that only impulses could radiate and that HF currents could not) led him down an increasingly blind alley.
By contrast, Belrose's descriptions of Reginald Fessenden's activities in the same article make it clear he believes Fessenden deserves more credit for making wireless a practical reality. By the time Marconi received his Nobel prize in 1909, Fessenden had already long established the value of continuous waves and made his greatest practical contributions to the field of radio communication.
A most fascinating read. Don't miss it!
John
Re: Musicmann 279 - what about the possibility of a superconductive aerial?
Posted by John Davis on February 08, 2002 at 20:56:10
Superconductivity...a very expensive process for a conductor of any appreciable size. Moreover, it wouldn't help. The losses of electrically-short aerials are not in the conductive antenna surfaces themselves, but in the ground system and surrounding objects.
John
Re: Musicmann 279 - would not be a ground dipole the ideal aerial?
Posted by John Davis on February 08, 2002 at 20:58:18
Not very likely. A ground dipole is exceedingly inefficient at these frequencies, and its radiation patterns are highly unpredictable. An electrically short vertical over seawater is much more likely to do a better job for them.
John
NC LF now transmitting PSK2
Posted by Dexter McIntyre, W4DEX on February 09, 2002 at 10:32:56
NC transmitting PSK2 passed the burn in test overnight. I can copy the signal Q5 when it is below audible threshold. I am using DL4YHF's "Spectrum Lab V1.7x" which can be found at:
http://www.qsl.net/dl4yhf/spectra1.html#download
This is a very powerful program with lots of features.
73,
Dexter For current beacon status see:
http://www.gostanly.com/w4dex/
.
NC LF suspending PSK2 xmission until further notice
Posted by Dexter McIntyr, W4DEX on February 10, 2002 at 14:52:46
Until I can figure out what I am doing wrong. Thanks Jon, Lloyd, Mike, Jay and whoever else may have been trying to copy the signal.
What I am receiving here on SpecLab's vector display is not what I think it should look like after reading more about the mode. If I now understand correctly the vector display should only show the signal at Ø
and 18Ø degrees. The signal I was transmitting has many vector lines appearing to be random. But SpecLab is able to decode the signal locally after doing fine tweaking of the receive frequency. The signal shouldn't be as hard as it is for me to tune in so I suspect this indicates a poor modulated pattern.
I am modulating with a the same RF setup I use for JASON. The generator is the LO at 5000 Hz lower (172.700 KHz). IF input is from the sound card which is the modulated 5 KHz signal. The output of the mixer is filtered to remove the image which leaves the 177.700 KHz desired signal.
Any suggestion will be appreciated.
73,
Dex
TAG Sending JASON on 177.800
Posted by John Andrews on February 10, 2002 at 15:32:29
TAG is now operating in Jason 0.92 mode on 177.800 kHz, sending a text string that takes about 15 minutes to repeat.
If this turns out to be a bad frequency, I can easily move...just let me know. Any reception reports would be appreciated. I will have to run in QRSS30 mode from 6:30 AM to 6:00 PM on Monday, as Jason's computer is needed for other things.
TAG will run in WOLF mode later this week.
John Andrews, W1TAG TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
VE7SL Medfer Bcn Reports
Posted by Steve McDonald on February 10, 2002 at 20:26:35
Any screen shots of my 900mw beacon on 1997.755 would be greatly appreciated - now that we are in the DX season. It will run all week (as usual), starting at 0330Z (7:30 PM PST tonight) and run until the same time next Friday night.
Steve / VE7SL
TAG in WOLF mode
Posted by John Andrews on February 12, 2002 at 20:33:12
I am currently running TAG in WOLF mode on 177.800 kHz. Reception reports would be appreciated.
John Andrews, W1TAG
TAG's WOLF captured in NC
Posted by Dexter McIntyre, W4DEX on February 12, 2002 at 23:12:27
Within about an hour of the cage door opening TAG's WOLF was caught in NC. Expect some howling this weekend.
Dex
> C:\Dex\WOLF>wolf061 -q TAGc.wav -f 1849.5 -r 7999.75
> WOLF version 0.61
> t: 24 f:-0.878 a: 0.7 dp:117.5 ci: 3 cj: 78 AI.RCLESLR H/N5 ?
> t: 48 f: 0.172 a:-0.4 dp:115.2 ci:12 cj:177 OVXUQUGMYU09UL ?
> t: 96 f:-0.693 a:-1.5 dp:113.8 ci:15 cj:104 WJYTQGQ*I7R7ZI5 ?
> t: 192 f: 0.645 pm: 703 jm:661 q:-12.4 -8.2 VG0*7AE/1YO/JVZ ?
> t: 288 f: 0.645 pm: 743 jm:661 q:-11.4 -8.3 /LPG X8T2SQ3OI4 ?
> t: 384 f: 0.645 pm: 903 jm:661 q:-10.6 -7.5 /MQ7BQ9HKQ5N/V6 ?
> t: 480 f: 0.645 pm: 1023 jm:661 q:-10.1 -7.1 NQM2 9I58 PWOOZ ?
> t: 576 f: 0.645 pm: 1086 jm:661 q: -9.5 -8.6 BO0IRRT/R8ZYIKZ ?
> t: 672 f: 0.645 pm: 1122 jm:661 q: -8.7 -7.6 /AOK.OMTMBVO.18 ?
> t: 768 f: 0.645 pm: 1235 jm:661 q: -8.2 -6.6 8M8LH2???PP3N27 ?
> t: 864 f: 0.645 pm: 1305 jm:661 q: -7.9 -8.4 SHNEQ5W5LEI.6 1 ?
> t: 960 f: 0.645 pm: 1313 jm:661 q: -7.3 -5.9 1QLQRDCST8H4EW1 -
> t:1056 f: 0.645 pm: 1323 jm:661 q: -6.8 -8.6 O 2*RLX/L2M5LIR ?
> t:1152 f: 0.645 pm: 1355 jm:661 q: -6.5 -8.5 93MWLDUB713HH8 ?
> t:1248 f:-0.098 pm: 1636 jm:874 q: -3.9 -6.9 F4MI0ZOT5PWY18 ?
> t:1344 f:-0.098 pm: 2113 jm:874 q: -3.2 -8.8 525???8V6F55KL8 ?
> t:1440 f:-0.098 pm: 2564 jm:874 q: -2.4 -5.8 HELLO NC DE TAG -
> t:1536 f:-0.098 pm: 2957 jm:874 q: -1.8 -5.0 HELLO NC DE TAG -
> t:1632 f:-0.098 pm: 3034 jm:874 q: -1.4 -4.4 HELLO NC DE TAG -
.
Re: VE7SL Medfer Bcn Reports
Posted by Jim Smith on February 14, 2002 at 00:59:45
Steve,
A screen capture showing reception of your beacon on 160M in Colorado at 0436 Z on 14 Feb 2002 can be found at:
http://members.aol.com/w0eea/eea2.jpg Rcvr: Icom R-9000A Antenna: 1100 foot unterminated Beverage @ 180 degrees.
73,
Jim WØEEA w0eea@aol.com http://members.aol.com/w0eea/
14 miles East of Kiowa, Colorado N39 18 W104 12 DM79vh
Lowfer Speaker
Posted by Rich, W6APZ on February 14, 2002 at 20:42:34
Our ham radio club, located about 30 miles south of San Francisco, California (in Palo Alto, near Stanford University) is looking for someone knowledgeable to speak on the topic of Lowfering at a future meeting.
Please let me know if you know anyone in this area who might be interested in informing our group about Lowfering.
Thanks de Rich, W6APZ
PBJ 13.55787 mhz COPY
Posted by Tony Levstik on February 14, 2002 at 22:17:01
I was able to Copy beacon PBJ on 13.55787mhz at 3hr14min UTC and made an ARGO screen capture. My location is Sherman Texas.
Tony Levstik levstik1@worldnet.att.net
Fwd: [Lowfer] (ZWI) OFF AIR
Posted by Don Moth W2MPK on February 14, 2002 at 22:51:52
Howard Mortimer (Mort) asked me to pass this along. He has just returned home from the hospital and has shut his beacon ZWI on 178.6 khz down TEMPORARILY. Will get it back on normal CW as soon as his health improves.
Don W2MPK
VE7SL copy in Maryland
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 15, 2002 at 07:31:08
Copying VE7SL on 1997.755 QRSS 3 last nite and this morning very nice--was also hearing audible.de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
JDH Attn: Dex
Posted by Steve McDonald on February 15, 2002 at 17:31:39
Dex ...if JDH is fired up tonight, could you e-mail me with his frequency. ....don't want to spend the night 2Hz off frequency again!!
Thanks...
Steve
JDH Freq Attn: Dex
Posted by Steve McDonald on February 15, 2002 at 18:17:05
Dex....can you check John's frequency tonight and let me know what it is?
....I don't want to be 2 Hz low again all weekend!
Steve
Signals looking like garlands on spectrograms
Posted by Harald on February 16, 2002 at 00:01:01
Sometimes GBZ transmits signals looking like garlands on spectrograms. (Click to view spectrogram (32KB) in new browser window.)
What is the purpose of these signals which seem to be transmitted nearly every Friday, Saturday and Sunday?
Are they only modulator tests? If it is so, why does only GBZ transmits such type of signals? What is the real purpose of these signals?
Harald
TAG running CW on Saturday
Posted by John Andrews on February 16, 2002 at 10:07:16
TAG is presently on 177.800, sending 6 wpm CW. For those in the northeast who long to hear such things, be my guest. Back to WOLF tonight.
Also copied NC this morning from 9:10 to 9:30 EST, with an excellent signal:
t: 480 f:-0.166 pm: 1210 jm:813 q: -9.9 -7.9 R010O8ZNR5RB9SZ ?
t: 576 f: 0.732 pm: 1354 jm:676 q: -3.8 -4.3 SRI TAG NO CPY -
t: 672 f: 0.732 pm: 1628 jm:676 q: -2.8 -3.1 SRI TAG NO CPY -
t: 768 f: 0.732 pm: 2317 jm:676 q: -1.8 -2.1 SRI TAG NO CPY -
t: 864 f: 0.732 pm: 2431 jm:676 q: -1.2 -1.4 SRI TAG NO CPY -
t: 960 f: 0.732 pm: 2708 jm:676 q: -0.2 -0.6 SRI TAG NO CPY -
t:1056 f: 0.732 pm: 2839 jm:676 q: 0.5 0.0 SRI TAG NO CPY -
t:1152 f: 0.732 pm: 3284 jm:675 q: 0.2 0.1 SRI TAG NO CPY -
t:1248 f: 0.732 pm: 3858 jm:675 q: 0.9 0.7 SRI TAG NO CPY -
John Andrews, W1TAG TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
TAG Back in WOLF Mode
Posted by John Andrews on February 16, 2002 at 19:03:38
TAG is back in WOLF mode on 177.800 kHz.
John Andrews, W1TAG TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
And on 185.800
Posted by John Andrews on February 17, 2002 at 13:57:37
In an attempt to avoid the nighttime LF broadcast QRM, TAG is moving to 185.800 kHz, remaining in WOLF Mode.
John Andrews, W1TAG TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
RLD(185.555) beacon off the air
Posted by Brian Helms on February 17, 2002 at 21:55:25
RLD will be off the air until early OCT '02
Now to 178.400...
Posted by John Andrews on February 18, 2002 at 09:31:36
Believing with confidence that "location is everything," TAG is now on 178.400, with hope that this is a safe haven in the RF-polluted swamp that is Stanfield, NC.
John Andrews, W1TAG TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
Lowfers in North America
Posted by Klaus Müller on February 18, 2002 at 15:33:20
Although LOWFERS transmitters are surely unreceiveable in Europe, I have got two uestions about LOWFERS in North America?
What frequencies are allowed to use?
Is speech transmission allowed? If yes, in which mode (AM and/or (C)SSB)?
Re: Lowfers in North America
Posted by John Andrews on February 18, 2002 at 16:15:40
Klaus,
We are allowed to use 160 - 190 kHz. The total length of the antenna and transmission line should be no greater than 15 meters. Power is 1 watt DC input. The length limitations mean that transmitter PA stages are usually located at the feed point of the antenna.
There are some additional spurious emission restrictions, but they are easily met, considering the "Q" of the antenna systems.
There are no restrictions on modes or occupied bandwidth within the allocation.
John Andrews, W1TAG
Mystery Signal 186 KHZ
Posted by Jonathan Jesse on February 18, 2002 at 19:41:58
Last week I noticed a signal that popped up around 186 KHZ. Actual freq appears to be 185.997 I've been watching everyday when I can and at 1:55 PM local everyday, a carrier is present for a short time. It's fairly strong here and audible in the speaker.
It starts out with a long dash about 20 secs at -47db as measured by SPECTRAN, then followed by about 6 secs at -37db, 8 secs -47db, 10 secs -34db, 10 secs -47db, and finally 10 secs at -47db.
Any ideas as to what it is? I did grab a screen shot.
Thanks,
Jon W1JHJ Plymouth, MA FN41qw http://geocities.com/ws1k.rm
QRSS(10) tests
Posted by Stan Wilson on February 19, 2002 at 08:39:29
AA4XX and ON5EX have been conducting QRSS(10) tests on the amateur 30 meter band the last couple of weeks. 10140.00 khz in the evening and late into the night.
The power output level has now been reduced to 1 mW. Amazing, AA4XX signal was copied in Europe at 2.5 mW. Last nite it made the 690 mile trip from NC to MO at 1 mW. Simple 30 meter dipoles at both ends fed with open wire line.
I have seen ON5EX traces but due to multi-path (or perhaps inexperience in using ARGO) have not been able to decode his signal. The technical challenge appears to be multi-path and not power level. I find Spectran a little better than ARGO, but both work. I am using 250 hz crystal filter in the receiver (FT1000MPMKV) and running with AGC off, RF amplifier on. Not using the receiver DSP filter or noise reduction. S-meter always reads zero and at transmit power below 200 milliwatt no longer had audible sound.
I believe the results to date are a good indication of what one can expect on HIFer 22 meters.
de Stan ak0b
Re: DGPS outside USA and Canada
Posted by Lee Reynolds on February 20, 2002 at 11:45:14
Art,
the stuff *is* out there! The ALRS (Admiralty Listing of Radio Signals) details DGPS stations worldwide but is moderately expensive and is not available on the 'net.
http://www.csi-wireless.com/support/pdfs/radiolistings.pdf
Is a good starting point - go there....
Lee
Re: QRSS(10) tests
Posted by John Andrews, W1TAG on February 20, 2002 at 16:42:17
Stan,
Those are good results. I'm looking forward to the Hifer season starting up again this spring. I believe that the long distance "record" from last year was Steve Olney's reception of my RY beacon. This was in August, 2001, with RY running in QRSS3 mode. RY was in Raymond, Maine, and Steve is in NSW, Australia.
I suspect from our results last year that QRSS10 is near the limit for slowing down. Anything slower was tough to read with the frequency stability imposed by propagation conditions. Most of the beacons were operating at QRSS3 or 5, as I recall.
Part of the fun was that results could be had in the normal waking hours, unlike some of the LF work.
Hopefully, we'll attract some new folks this year, and make it more interesting.
John Andrews, W1TAG
voice
Posted by mark batten on February 20, 2002 at 21:02:17
Hello,
just wanted to ask if anyone does any voice on the low bands.
And where to get more info. thanks,
Mark
TAG and NC Wolf
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 21, 2002 at 06:16:55
Getting nice Wolf copies on TAG -178.4 and NC -177.7 here in Maryland de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
Re: voice
Posted by John Davis on February 22, 2002 at 01:07:22
:: just wanted to ask if anyone does any voice on the low bands. ::
Depends which "low bands" you mean. There are broadcasters on LF in other parts of the world, which you can hear in North America some nights around 150kHz on up. There are some airport beacons from 190kHz on up that have either transcribed weather broadcasts or automated weather observations in voice. One Part 15 LowFER, KLFB, transmits AM audio, and others in California operate in SSB mode.
A little time exploring the pages at this site will yield plenty of additional information.
John
Why are there no broadcasting transmitters between 284 kHz and 353 kHz altho
Posted by Udo Maier on February 22, 2002 at 08:30:49
On some (especially older radio sets) the longwave reception range reaches from 148 kHz to 353 kHz., although the range between 284 kHz and 353 kHz is not used for broadcasting. Why is it not used for broadcasting transmission? Longwave broadcasting range is overcrowded and an extension would be very sensitive!
Was in earlier times the range between 284 kHz and 353 kHz used for broadcasting transmission?
When was it given up?
Why is there no state, which runs –against international law- a broadcasting transmitter in this range? (Some states run broadcasting transmitters against international law in some amateur radio shortwave bands in order to get good propagation. Why then not between 284 kHz and 353 kHz? This range would have a better propagation then shortwave and would be receivable with some customary receivers!)
Are/ were there any broadcasting transmitters in the range between 353 kHz and 525 kHz?
Announciation: the Bavarian Broadcasting Company (Bayerischer Rundfunk) run until 1999 two small radio stations (transmitting power: 200 watts) in Hof (Germany) and Wuerzburg (Germany) on the frequency 520 kHz. Both transmitters are still active, but now working on 729 kHz with a power of 500 watt. The frequency 520 kHz was given up, because many modern radios with PLL synthesizer tuning could not receive them!
Transmission frequencies of NDBs
Posted by Udo Maier on February 22, 2002 at 09:01:02
Nearly all NDBs work on frequencies between 284 kHz and 525 kHz, i.e. the frequency range between longwave broadcasting band and medium wave broadcasting band.
But some of them work (also in Europe) in the longwave broadcasting band and especially in the former Soviet Union also in the medium wave broadcasting range.
In some regions NDBs can be found on frequencies just above the medium wave broadcasting range ( around 1700 kHz). There is an interesting question: on which frequencies can NDBs be found?
Are there NDBs below 200 kHz?
Are/ Were there NDBs in the VLF – range (I never heard or read about NDBs in the VLF – range. But why not?).
Why do/ did no NDBs operate (e.g. for long range navigation) in the VLF – range?
Would it be allowed according to the rules of ITU to run a NDB in the VLF – range?
Re: voice
Posted by Harald on February 22, 2002 at 09:50:07
In Europe, there is not only voice on the LF. There is also music. Because in Europe, North Africa, Russia and Mongolia the range between 148,5 kHz and 283.5 kHz is used for broadcasting transmissions.
The bandwidth is 9 kHz. Although the audio quality is worse than on FM on course, it is for us in Europe worth listening to it, since this range allows at night time not very seldom good reception conditions to transmitters in other European countries, which are often better then on medium wave or short wave!
(There are some stations which are only on longwave active, e.g. Atlantic 252, only on longwave outside their supplying range receivable, i.e. Europe No. 1 and RTL French in Germany or easiest to find in this range, i.e. "Deutschlanndfunk", which is also active on FM and MW in Germany, but not in whole parts of the country.)
The biggest noise sources are PLC systems on high voltage lines and the electronic of modern cars (if you hear it with a car radio)
QSL - cards from VLF - stations
Posted by Klaus on February 22, 2002 at 10:02:00
VLF reception with a PC is very convenient and my desire for QSL cards of VLF transmitters grew in the last time, because I can show the stations my reception, which they should confirm, in a file or printed version, which is especially easy to confirm!
But some questions remain:
Which VLF stations answers reception reports with a QSL - card? Is it possible to send to some stations an E - Mail?
Is it possible to get trouble with police or secret services when I write a letter to a VLF station?
Transmission from mysterious sources
Posted by Harald on February 22, 2002 at 10:10:50
There are some reports of the reception of radio signals from mysterious origin. The perhaps best known is the reception of KLEE TV at the end of the fifties in UK, although KLEE TV was at those days already since 5 years not any more on the air!
From much bigger interest is radio interference in coincidence with an UFO sighting.
There are two reasons why it is:
1.) all phenomena, which are often kept as UFOs as balloons, halos, reflections on clouds, the planet Venus do not disturb radio services. Occurrence of radio interference in coincidence with an UFO sighting gives it a note, that this is really an unidentified phenomena of special interest! (I do not believe, that UFOs are spacecraft from other stars, but why should not some UFOs be natural objects with strange properties. They could consist of a special kind of the such called “dark matter” or from multidimsional nature.)
2.) radio waves run through fog and cloud and frequencies below 30 MHz can be received far away from the radiation source. So the analysis of radio emission from UFOs would allow to build up an UFO monitoring network, which would even work at bad weather!
In fact in the Hessdalen area at Norway where sometimes strange lights in the sky occur, there are according to Massimo Teodorani (e – Mail: mteo@linenet.it) sometimes strange signals in the VLF – range which appear like inclined lines in a graph which gives frequency vs. time.
An excellent report about a still – unexplained and very mysterious UFO incidence can be found on the internet page http://members.ozemail.com.au/~vufors/valensum.htm . (In this article radio interference in coincidence with the UFO is described). This page describes the mysterious disappearance of Frederick Valentich and his Cessna on October 21st, 1978 during an UFO incident near Melbourne, Australia.
The air traffic controllers of the airport of Melbourne recommended me this article, after I asked them if they have more information about this famous UFO incidence!
(In 1998 at the lighthouse of Cape Otway, where Frederick Valentich had last radio contact a memorial plate was mounted http://www.lightstation.com/unknown.htm)
Re: Transmission frequencies of NDBs
Posted by Jacques d'Avignon on February 22, 2002 at 13:10:40
Hi:
In North America, the NDBs can be found the band between 194 and 530 kHz. There are a few empty spots in there but TUK in Nantucket operates on 194 kHz and YWA in Petawawa, Ontario operates on 516 kHz. Matter of fact DIW operates on 198 kHz, the same frequency as BBC.
I know of no permanent beacons below 194 kHz anywhere in the world.
Jacques
Can your soundcard sample with 48 kHz?
Posted by Harald on February 22, 2002 at 14:56:36
Perhaps there are still some people using the soundcard as a VLF receiver and still do not know, that their soundcard can sample with 48 kHz..
If you want to find out, if your soundcard can sample with 48 kHz install “SpecPlus” (available on ) on your computer. Choose on the menu of “SpecPlus” under “Options” the menu point “Audio settings”. Set the sample rate to 48000 Hertz.
Choose first the button “Apply”, then the button “close”.
Set the value “Max” for the frequency axis on 24000 Hertz, the value “Min” you can choose freely, but I would recommand a value between 10000 Hertz and 15000 Hertz.
If you see on the spectrogram which appears on your monitor a signal on 23400 Hertz, then your soundcard can sample with 48 kHz. This signal is the signal of DHO38 in West – Rhauderfehn, Germany, which works on 23400 Hertz.
Otherwise if no signals are present check the connection of your aerial to the computer (use therefore an other analysis software, e.g. “Spectrogram” with a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz. If there is at least one signal either on 16 kHz, 19.6 kHz, 20.9 kHz or 21.7 kHz the aerial is all right. Do not expect to receive all these signals simultaneously! Otherwise turn your TV on. A line must appear on 15.625 kHz. If none of these signals is visible on your monitor, check the aerial and its connection to the computer. If the aerial is allright you have to check your soundcard…)
If you receive signals with “SpecPlus” with a sampling rate of 48 kHz and there is no signal on 23.4 KHz (but one of the other signals mentioned above on 16 kHz, 19.6 kHz, 20.9 kHz or 21.7 kHz and/or the line from TV horizontal deflection frequency on 15.625 kHz) retry the check at a later point of time, because DHO38 is not always on the air. Sometimes it is for some days out of service!
The software “SpecPlus” works very stable. Since August 2001 I use it with a sampling rate of 48 kHz and there was –although I use a Windows98 operating system- no system crash during a session. And such a session, which I run always unattended lasts 6 hours to 24 hours!
Re: Can your soundcard sample with 48 kHz? - source of mentioned software
Posted by Harald on February 22, 2002 at 15:04:35
Unfortunately I forgot to tell you the sources of the software I mentioned. Here it is:
SpecPlus http://www.qsl.net/dl4yhf/spectra1.html Spectrogram http://www.visualizationsoftware.com/gram.html
Effiency of aerials of VLF transmitters
Posted by Harald on February 22, 2002 at 15:17:03
Can a transmitting aerial of a VLF transmitter have an effiency of nearly 100%? If no, which are the highest effiency values of such aerial? How big is the effiency of the aerial of TACAMO and other similiar system?
Why did OMEGA use sometimes single mast aerials or fjord span aerials and not aerials from the Goliath type whch were used in Annapolis or other comparable facilities (I believe that such aerials have a better effiency!).
What are the disadvantages of VLF aerials consisting of multiple masts as they are used in Rugby or West - Rhauderfehn? (Of course they are more expensive to built, but if their effiency is better in the long run they are more ecconomiccally!)
The former emergency longwave radio system of the USA
Posted by Harald on February 22, 2002 at 15:29:35
On the page http://www.conelrad.com/perki.html the former emergency longwave radio system of the USA is mentioned.
But one question remains: why was this system not used as a public information radio in normal times? It would have been a very effective way to transmit educational programs.
Why were these expensive transmitters not used for such a purpose? This would have encouraged also the industry to offer reception sets. And we in Europe had an interesting challenge for reception!
Re: The former emergency longwave radio system of the USA
Posted by John Davis on February 22, 2002 at 19:11:06
:: But one question remains: why was this system not used as a public information radio in normal times? ::
There are two main reasons. Interestingly, your next two sentences contain the seeds of the answer.
:: It would have been a very effective way to transmit educational programs. ::
A large fraction of our population does not trust the government with dissemination of news.
In the case of news, our history has repeatedly demonstrated the value of an independent press. (Although it can be argued that since the great majority of all news outlets in this country are now owned by Rupert Murdoch and a handful of overwhelmingly gigantic corporations, the so-called independent press is not very independent any more.)
It is an article of faith with many of our people that--despite examples of government broadcasters in many Western democracies who mainain a high degree of autonomy and objectivity through changing regimes--all government news sources are somehow mere propaganda tools.
Another article of faith with many Americans is that we are a loose collection of 50 sovereign nations, except in the areas of defense and international treaties; and some states don't seem even willing to concede that point. (grin) Many of our people do not even want the federal government to be involved in setting national standards for education...let alone being involved with the actual education itself.
That's why most of our public radio and television broadcasters are licensed to not-for-profit organizations in individual cities. There are a few networks owned by individual states, too. But the national program providers of public television (PBS) and public radio (NPR) do not own any stations. They exist as membership organizations to which individual stations subscribe.
By contrast, the emergency network would have been entirely owned and operated by the federal government. If it had been built, it might have been acceptable as a source of emergency information--but it would have been mistrusted as a source of general news.
Now for the second part of the answer...
:: Why were these expensive transmitters not used for such a purpose? ::
This question almost answers itself. The transmitting stations WERE expensive, and that is one main reason only one was built to test the idea.
In addition, citizens would have had to buy billions of dollars of receivers that did not yet exist in mass market quantities; receivers which had only one function: to alert the public in case of a national emergency. Their coverage area was too large to be used for local emergencies such as floods or severe storms or industrial accidents, which would have at least made them more useful in everyday life.
We now have special weather radio receivers which do provide both local and national alerts from VHF transmitters whose coverage areas are better tailored to the needs of the local public, so we are not likely to see a return to the idea of a nationwide LF radio service.
Regards,
John
Re: Why are there no broadcasting transmitters between 284 kHz and 353 kHz altho
Posted by John Davis on February 22, 2002 at 19:32:40
Remember one of the sayings of the hippies in the Sixties? "Everbody has got to be somewhere."
Aeronautical and maritime beacons had to be somewhere too. For decades, that "somewhere" was the frequency above the longwave broadcast band. Now, the band is used less by conventional beacons, but is becoming more used by DGPS and Although shortwave broadcasters often show up in out-of-band locations on HF, to do that on LF would endanger safety of life by interfering with navigational tools.
Older radios with longwave bands often tuned higher than the LF broadcast frequencies simply because it was easy to manufacture them that way.
Variable capacitors for those radios had to allow for a nearly 3-to-1 tuning ratio to encompass the entire MF broadcast band. Such a wide range is obviously not needed for LF broadcasting, but to restrict the tuning range for only one band would make tracking between the local oscillator and the tuned RF stages more of a design and manufacturing nuisance.
And who knows? Perhaps the peculiar sounds of navigational systems may have entertained some listeners. (grin)
Regards,
John
John
TAG Off this weekend
Posted by John Andrews on February 22, 2002 at 20:55:50
TAG will be mostly off the air this weekend as I play with computers and clean up the area.
John Andrews, W1TAG TAG Status: http://webpages.charter.net/w1tag/
What frequencies below 1.8 MHz are in which countries for amateur radio?
Posted by Udo Maier on February 23, 2002 at 11:20:13
What frequency ranges below 1.8 MHz are in which countries reserved for amateur radio? In Germany it is just around 136 kHz? What are the regiulations in other countries? I know from U.S. it is the range between 160 kHz and 190 kHz and in Great Britain a small range around 73 kHz?
But how are the regulations in other countries? Are in some countries frequencies around 500 kHz reserved for amateur radio? Or at other ranges?
In which countries are in which amateur bands below 1.8 MHz speech transmissions allowed? If they are allowed, which modes are allowed(AM, CSSB, SSB?)
Re: What frequencies below 1.8 MHz are in which countries for amateur radio?
Posted by John Andrews on February 23, 2002 at 18:31:11
Udo,
There is no U.S. amateur allocation below 1.8 MHz. The range from 160 to 190 kHz is available for unlicensed operation with the 15 meter antenna and 1 watt input transmitter restrictions.
This could change as early as this year, assuming the FCC gets around to acting on petitions that have been before it for quite a while.
John Andrews
Re: What frequencies below 1.8 MHz are in which countries for amateur radio?
Posted by Webmaster on February 23, 2002 at 21:01:13
On the Longwave Home Page (www.lwca.org) click the Digital and Amateur link for more information on LF amateur bands around the world.
John
(Very!) Old Member
Posted by Jim Wood on February 23, 2002 at 22:51:12
Greetings.
I was a member/subscriber to the LWCA/Lowdown for many years in the 1980s. Other "things came up," and I couldn't pursue this most interesting hobby.
Two questions:
1) What ever happened to GWEN? Is that still active, or was the whole operation abandoned. I recall there was a lot of anti-GWEN sentiment 15 years ago.
2) I need an active receive antenna badly. This would be for HF as well as longwave. There are two interesting articles posted on this site, and, if necessary, I guess I could build my own. I remember there was a fellow, Ralph Burhans, who offered what looked like a pretty good active antenna amp once. Is this still available, does anyone know; if not, does anyone have a good recommendation (and not the $1000 one from the UK, plea$e!).
Thanks
BRO-LEK QRSS/WOLF Comparisons
Posted by John Andrews on February 24, 2002 at 09:43:29
As earlier reported, BRO is running QRSS60 on 182.200, and LEK is running WOLF on 182.250 kHz. Both stations are about 1100 miles from me, and along the same bearing. This report is for Sunday, Feb. 24 (EST times).
0330 - 0400: No sign of either signal. No WOLF hits at the correct frequency.
0400 - 0430: BRO is barely readable, with fragments of an "RO". No correct WOLF copy, though the last 4 lines are on the correct frequency.
0430 - 0500: A clear "BR" from BRO, with the "R" better than the "B". 12 clear lines of copy from LEK.
0500 - 0530: A clear "O" and a pretty rough "B" from BRO. 14 clear lines of copy from LEK.
0530 - 0600: A very good "RO" from BRO (the "O" is quite crisp). 7 clear,
and 2 partial lines from LEK.
0600 - 0630: "BR" is very readable, with the start of a sad-looking "O".
(My sunrise time is 6:30.) 8 clear lines of copy from LEK.
----------------------------------------
No big conclusions should be drawn from one night's observations. It is safe to say that both signals were copyable at the same time, and that I could get 15 characters from LEK to 2+ characters from BRO when both signals were present.
I'll do this for a few more nights, and pass along the results.
John Andrews, W1TAG
LEK ,XM/NC receptions
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 24, 2002 at 10:22:42
I have not had much success with any of these ..I seem to have a very strong carrier less than 1 hz below LEK and that seems to be giving much of the problems with trying to get a wolf copy --Nothing I have done at the station seems to eliminate that carrier so not sure where its coming from..and only a weak copy on NC so far but have not done any all nite captures.Kinda surprised that such weak copy on NC but maybe conditions--antennas seem to be working OK HI!!
de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
Re: What frequencies below 1.8 MHz are in which countries for amateur radio?
Posted by Geri, DK8KW on February 24, 2002 at 12:37:09
Hello Udo,
I many countries in Europe there is an allocation on secondary basis around 136 kHz band from 135.7 to 137.8 kHz, the U.K. has a band between 71.4 and74.4 kHz. Some countries have special allocations at VLF, for example some German hams may use 8900 to 9000 Hz for experiments. Best 73, Geri, DK8KW (W1KW)
Re: (Very!) Old Member
Posted by Lyle Koehler on February 24, 2002 at 13:19:16
Several people have reported excellent results with the active whip antenna described by KØBRA in the September 2001 QST. You can also build the circuit using an ordinary J310 FET running from a 12 volt supply as described on the AMRAD web site at www.amrad.org/projects/lf The J310 is cheap, readily available and does not require a heat sink, but the intermod performance will not be nearly as good as the version using a special FET. Frequency coverage of the active whip is 10 kHz to 30 MHz.
Re: (Very!) Old Member
Posted by John Davis on February 24, 2002 at 13:26:18
:: 1) What ever happened to GWEN? ::
Mercifully, it went away. No longer needed, they say. Many of the sites are being converted to Differential GPS in the 300kHz range.
:: 2) I need an active receive antenna badly. ::
Ralph Burhans doesn't seem to be selling such items these days. However, LF Engineering (www.lfengineering.com) is still around, and Universal Radio should have a couple of models to choose from also.
Glad to have you back in the hobby!
Re: LEK ,XM/NC receptions
Posted by Dexter McIntyre, W4DEX on February 24, 2002 at 19:36:23
Lloyd, has the pipeline between us dried up? I just checked the coil tuning and found it slightly off. A little tweaking made 3 db difference on the spectrum analyzer. I moved up 1 hz to 184.899 to put a little more space between NC and XM.
Dex
Active Antennas
Posted by Jim Wood on February 24, 2002 at 21:55:42
Thanks much for the info. Is there a way to get a copy of the QST article easily? ARRL's site does not list back issues or articles therefrom.
Thanks again,
Jim Wood
Active Antenna
Posted by Jim Wood on February 24, 2002 at 21:59:34
John,
Thanks for the leads. I have an inquiry off to LF Engineering, and pending a favorable reply to my request for additional technical info, will probably opt to buy one rather than build from scratch.
Jim Wood
Re: LEK ,XM/NC receptions
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 24, 2002 at 22:11:02
The tweaking must have helped Dexter because you are the usual big signal tonite---no copy on XM yet.de Lloyd
BRO/LEK Day 3
Posted by John Andrews on February 25, 2002 at 07:39:27
Here are the results for the BRO (QRSS60) vs. LEK (WOLF) experiment on Monday, Feb. 25 (EST times):
--------------------------------------------------
0230 - 0300: A weak "BR" from BRO, but copyable. 12 of the LEK lines show the correct frequency, but there was no copy. Some tweaking might bring that out.
0300 - 0330: A very strong "O B" from BRO. 13 lines of correct copy from LEK.
0330 - 0400: A good "R", and then it died completely during the "O". 14 lines of correct copy from LEK. This may be an illustration of the summing of frames done in WOLF. The strongest signal was early in the file, but the program held on.
0400 - 0430: The dots in the "B", all of the "R" and the first dash in the
"O" were very good. LEK copy was totally absent, with no hits on the correct frequency.
0430 - 0500: Very good copy of the "O B". 13 lines of clear copy with LEK.
0500 - 0530: Good copy of "RO". 3 hits on the correct frequency for LEK, but no copy.
0530 - 0600: Very good signal from BRO, with dogbones on the "R". 8 hits on frequency for LEK, but no copy.
0600 - 0630: A weaker "B", and the start of a good "R". 10 lines of clear copy from LEK.
-------------------------------------------
Conclusions: Not as clear cut as yesterday's run. BRO was clearly identifiable from 3:00 - 6:30, but LEK was missing in three half hours.
Interference is a possibility. Will keep running!
John Andrews, W1TAG
WA and VD copy in Maryland
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 25, 2002 at 09:07:47
Had a kinda weak copy of WA and VD (185.3) here in Maryland this morning...both faded out de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
Re: Active Antennas
Posted by Lyle Koehler on February 25, 2002 at 13:18:34
There are several ways to get copies of QST articles. The cheapest way is to borrow the magazine from a nearby library or a local ham. However, the ARRL web site offers a couple of other options. This is from the ARRL members-only web site:
Some back issues of QST and QEX are available from ARRL. QST issues are $5 each, postpaid; QEX issues are $5 each, postpaid. Contact pubsales@arrl.org for availability.
You can get a photocopy of any article for $3 ($5 for nonmembers) for each article requested. Contact the ARRL Technical Secretary (reprints@arrl.org, 1-860-594-0278) if you wish to get photocopies.
The article reference is: "The AMRAD Active LF Antenna" by Frank Gentges, QST, September 2001, pages 31 through 37.
Re: WA and VD copy in Maryland
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 25, 2002 at 22:10:12
Big captures of both WA and VD tonite here in Maryland...
Musicmann 279khz
Posted by Paul Strickland on February 26, 2002 at 05:19:25
Musicmann have been given a licence to broadcast offshore from Ramsey Bay, Isle of man, UK using 500kw and will be on the air late 2003. Don't know why such a long delay. Maybe the CFA doesn't come with assembly instructions...
Re: BRO/LEK Day 4
Posted by John Andrews on February 26, 2002 at 07:28:06
Due to an error in setup, I did not get captures of BRO last night. If time permits this evening, I will run some of the .wav files and see what happens. I have found a strong carrier 1 Hz below LEK, and that may be responsible for the following:
LEK was received clearly from 0330 to 0430 EST this morning (2/26). However, after that, the signal to noise ratio went very low, and there was only a 2-line burst of partial copy between 0530 and 0600 EST.
John Andrews, W1TAG
LEK wolf copy in Maryland
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 26, 2002 at 21:44:02
Nice wolf copy of LEK tonite on the new frequency -182.15-
de Lloyd W3NF FM19MH
Re: Musicmann 279khz
Posted by John Davis on February 26, 2002 at 23:26:48
Thanks for the update, Paul.
I suspect assembly instructions are just one of many things the CFA doesn't come with... :-)
Still, I wish them best of luck.
John
A table of all longwave broadcasting stations in the internet
Posted by Harald on February 27, 2002 at 04:22:10
A detailed list of all longwave broadcasting transmitters can be found (in German language) on http://home.t-online.de/home/freyer/lang.htm.
The list is of course made for listeners in Central Europe, but I am sure it can be also from some worth for listeners in other parts of the world.
Re: BRO/LEK Day 5
Posted by John Andrews on February 27, 2002 at 07:32:55
LEK having moved to 182.150 kHz, here's the BRO (QRSS60) vs LEK (WOLF) report for February 27 (EST times):
0230 - 0300: BRO starts to show on the screen, nothing readable. One hit at the correct frequency on LEK, but nothing decoded.
0300 - 0330: BRO looks choppy (t-storm static), but you can make out the end of the "B", a fairly clear "R", and the first dash of the "O". 6 hits on the correct frequency for LEK, but nothing decodes.
0330 - 0400: BRO is there, but not readable. 6 hits on LEK's frequency, and 2 of them decode properly.
0400 - 0430: BRO is still there, somewhat stronger, but still very chopped up so the characters can't be read. Only 1 hit on LEK's frequency, with nothing decoded.
0430 - 0500: Getting clearer. Can make out the "RO". 11 hits on LEK's frequency, but none of them decode.
0500 - 0530: A pretty clear "BR" is visible. 14 hits on LEK, and 11 of them decode cleanly.
0530 - 0600: Choppier on BRO. You can see the end of the "O" and the start of the "B", but they are hard to make out. No hits on LEK's frequency at all.
0600 - 0630: Gets better at the end. Can't make out the "R", but the "O" is very distinct, though cut off by sunrise at the finish. 15 hits on LEK's frequency, and 5 of them decode correctly (at the end).
--------------------------------------
Conclusions: A noisy night, with a cold front moving into the area. Weather is unusual -- temps were in the low '50s overnight (this is February?). With both WOLF and QRSS you can tell that signals are there, but the success rate is much less than earlier in the week.
John Andrews, W1TAG
BRO/LEK Day 5 - Correction
Posted by John Andrews on February 27, 2002 at 08:27:23
As I left the house this morning, I noticed that my receiving loop was not aimed at MN. We had a windy day yesterday, and it must have been blown about 45 degrees off the correct heading. That would account for a few dB on this morning's results.
John Andrews, W1TAG
LEK - BRO Wrapup
Posted by John Andrews on February 28, 2002 at 09:18:47
Since last week, LEK has been transmitting in WOLF mode, 50 Hz above or below BRO, who has continued to send QRSS60. Both stations are in MN, on the same loop bearing for me, and at a distance of about 1100 miles.
I have been comparing the signals as recorded from 0230 to 0630 EST (0730-1130 UTC), which has been the best time period for that path over the last year. I have only rarely copied either station during the evening (pre-midnight) hours. Lyle has observed that the E/W paths tend to be less productive than N/S paths, and that pretty much squares with my experience.
In reading a QRSS signal with software like Argo (which I used), the brain becomes a big part of the process. On seeing a broken line exactly on 182.200 kHz, I can reasonably assume that I'm seeing BRO, and then try to figure out what's being sent. Since Bryce has been sending "BRO", I only have to guess one of three letters. Sometimes that's not possible -- only fragments are present. You "know" you are copying BRO, but it would be tough to prove it to others.
On the face of it, WOLF is less vulnerable to a runaway imagination. Unless the signal is being correctly decoded, you only see endless permutations of the alphabet. I have in fact seen some of the words I spoke aloud on realizing that conditions were really bad! But there are a lot of clues in the numeric data in the WOLF output, the most important of which is the apparent frequency. Just as with BRO, I KNOW that LEK is on frequency. I'm not going to waste my time looking farther than 0.1 Hz from Lyle's announced spot. And once having correctly decoded LEK, I can watch for that particular frequency on later files. This allows you to say that the signal "is there," even though WOLF isn't decoding it correctly.
With a few exceptions, during the last 6 nights, if I could say that BRO "was there," LEK was also, using the above criteria. The exceptions probably trace to interference. WOLF occupies a much larger bandwidth than QRSS60, and while you benefit from the mini-spread-spectrum nature of it, WOLF can be clobbered by a signal that your brain would ignore in QRSS mode.
There were a number of instances where BRO could be legitimately copied with clearly readable characters, and LEK just wasn't decoding. As many have observed before, there is a threshold for WOLF. I've found that the "q" values are a big help in anticipating what's going to happen. Copy is likely with values above -3, though last night there was one file where it was at -2 with no luck.
When WOLF copy is possible, you get 15 characters. If you only got one correct line in the full 27 minute, 10 seconds it can handle, you would only have received 13 more characters than you would for a QRSS60 signal. If you receive multiple lines, as is common, you have lead-pipe-cinch confirmation of correct copy.
QRSS -- 60, in this case, would be my choice both for simplicity, and for the ability to identify a station as being receivable. With our 2 or 3 letter call signs and a reasonbly active imagination, it would be the weak signal mode of choice for most current Lowfer activity.
WOLF has a clear advantage for moving more information in the same amount of time, and should be workable at the same signal levels that produce "correct" QRSS60 copy. If it only decoded in real-time, it would be much more valuable mode for 2-way QSOs. As it stands, with fast computers at each end, and a short transmit/receive switchover, QSOs with "real" information should be possible. Dex and I attempted it once, but my transmit antenna was not up to the task. Note that with my new 1.6 GHz P4, a full-length WOLF file takes 1 minute, 50 seconds to decode. Neat.
Thanks to Lyle and Bryce for the signals. If anyone has any opinions, pro or con, please weigh in!
John Andrews, W1TAG
www.lwca.org
potrzebie