Past Messages - February 2006

Hello from the persian gulf region, heard this beacon last night and not sure who owns it, its on 1722 khz and sent in cw OKN over and over,more than 6 times, can someone tell me who owns it.

What is the power and antenna regulations for a MedFer station operating in the 1700 khz band?

I notice several stations were listed as active but no indication of what power levels or antenna types.

In this low sun spot cycle would be interested in seeing posts from others who have had some success in this region.

The rules are available through our LowFER/MedFER/HiFER pages linked from the lwca.org home page. When you go to the first Low/Med/HiFER page, click the About Part 15 link at the bottom. The complete current FCC Part 15 Rules are available there, as well as older condensed text summaries.

* carrier frequency and sidebands confined to 510-1705 kHz
* maximum total length of antenna and ground connection (if used), 3 meters
* DC input power to final amplifier not to exceed 100 mW (excluding filament power, if applicable)

THIS MORNING I HEARD MY FIRST LOFER BEACON, MO AT 189.500 KHZ. RIG WAS
TS50 SET FOR 191.000 KHZ LSB 75METER DIPOLE ARGO SOFTWARE SET QRRS30 AT
1500KHZ. GOOD COPY THROUGH THE NIGHT.

I wonder if we would have to count the size of a capacity hat if it did not have a direct connection to the driven element? 3 m seems really short for 1700 khz but if we could get all of that current up to the top of the driven element then might be a little more interesting.

If a capacity hat didn't have a direct connection, it wouldn't be particularly effective.

Three meters is short, but the object of Part 15 was not to promote long distance communication, after all. The fact that we can sometimes achieve it is through attention to detail, and by sheer luck with respect to propagation and noise conditions.

And bear in mind, 3m at 1700kHz is twice the fraction of a wavelength that 15m is at 170kHz, so you already have an advantage over LowFER limitations.

I would concentrate on minimizing losses in the ground system, the area surrounding the antenna (keep it free of obstructions), and the tank coil, more than the tophat. You can attack losses directly in those areas without penalizing yourself on antenna height.

Remember, the limit of 3 meters is for total antenna length plus transmission line, if used, and ground connection, if used. Employ no transmission line by putting the final amplifier at the base of the antenna, and use as short a lead as possible to the ground system, but do make the ground system very good--the nearest thing you can manage to a vast sheet of copper, if that were possible. Some of us use an extensive mat of chicken wire around the base of the antenna for that purpose; very cheap and effective, although it may have to be replaced every year or two if one's soil is corrosive...or more often if there are lawnmower accidents.

Using CWGet, recieving ADG. Was messing around with Spectran 3 when I found it. Have not found listed as a beacon yet. First thing I've heard down here, really cool!

Re: ADG on 277 khz
Posted by Dave K8DAW on February 08, 2006 at 06:03:24.
In Reply to ADG on 277 khz posted by Dave K8DAW on February 08, 2006 at 05:03:26.

Found ADG, 30 miles away in Adrian, MI. Also found RYS on 419, Grosse Ile, MI, 40 miles away. My location is Lambertville, MI.

Re: 1722 khz Beacon
Posted by Michael Oexner on February 09, 2006 at 09:56:26.
In Reply to 1722 khz Beacon posted by larry fields on February 03, 2006 at 21:56:57.

This might have been OKN-1720 from Kandahar in Afghanistan, coordinates N31°29'58" E065°51'09".

Does anyone know the location of these beacons: HI 430, NWH 413,UCI 381, DS 373 and YTL 328??
Thanks, Dave K4PBN Birmingham,Alabama

I created a nice height diagram of the antenna masts of many (not all) longwave broadcasting antennas in Europe. The transmission power is the maximum transmission power used by the facility (and for which the antenna is designed). The actual used transmission power may be less.

As you can see on http://mediasuk.org/archive/campobasso.html , the mast radiator of the Campobasso Transmitter in Italy (frequency: 1575 kHz, transmission power: 2 kW) is not mounted on the ground, but on the roof of an old castle.

Is this a good or a bad antenna? Would such an antenna work more efficiently than a mast radiator of the same height on the ground?
Would such an antenna have much or low skywave radiation?

If it provides the desired coverage area without causing interference to distant stations, it is (by definition) a good antenna. Whether it is efficient or not is a very different question.

A vertical radiator with an elevated ground radial system can minimize earth losses in the immediate vicinity of the antenna. However, only about 4 or 5 meters elevation is required at the high end of the mediumwave broadcast band to achieve that result. As the radiator's base is raised further, the effects of earth reflection distort the radiation pattern, favoring medium-high angles over groundwave propagation. At a quarter wavelength elevation, the local coverage can be very poor indeed. This was discovered the hard way in the 1920s and early 1930s, when broadcasters tried to minimize real estate costs by locating broadcast antennas on the roofs of their buildings and employing counterpoise ground systems.

Without knowing the dimensions of the castle, it is hard to estimate the performance of the system. Just from the pictures, the castle appears to be tall enough that it would be preferable to locate the antenna at ground level, if there were sufficient open terrain available. My guess is that there was not sufficient suitable land area, but that the engineers determined coverage from the elevated antenna would be adequate for the intended purpose.

As interesting as broadcast antennas are, though, let's please remember that the theme of this message board is longwave radio. Thanks.

Thanks for putting together the antenna height diagram. It's very interesting to study and contemplate.

Re: ID Beacons?
Posted by Dave Childs on February 12, 2006 at 00:20:47.
In Reply to ID Beacons? posted by David Beck, K4PBN on February 09, 2006 at 19:29:57.

[PS: I was unable to bring up the preview screen & submit this using FireFox browser]

Re: ID Beacons?
Posted by Webmaster on February 12, 2006 at 01:35:59.
In Reply to Re: ID Beacons? posted by Dave Childs on February 12, 2006 at 00:20:47.

:: [PS: I was unable to bring up the preview screen & submit this using FireFox browser] ::

Check your security or privacy settings, if any are provided in Firefox. They may be set needlessly strict.

We do not accept messages from browsers which hide their identity or the language they support, or if such information is blocked by third-party software on your computer. That behavior is a common trait of message board spammers, so all such attempts are ignored.

Re: 252
Posted by lloyd chastant on February 13, 2006 at 06:20:42.
In Reply to 252 posted by Mike Terry on January 28, 2006 at 01:39:29.

Hi, is there a recommended antenna to use for trying to receive SAQ? Loops? Longwires? Active probes? A local group of hams would like to try and hear it - we are in the Cincinnati, Ohio area. We were thinking about using an HP 3586C selective receiver in combination with sound card spectral analysis software...but the antenna has us baffled. Thanks! 73, Jim N8ECI

All of those antenna types have been used by different folks to receive SAQ. I would base the decision on the type and nearness of noise sources to the intended receiving location.

At my previous home in a semi-rural location, a longwire worked well because I didn't have much QRM difficulty and could extend the wire as far as needed to achieve adequate signal levels. I could hear the Russian ALPHA navigation signals well, and the Indian Navy VLF transmitter, so I could be reasonably certain of getting at least some copy from SAQ.

A loop is good for nulling noise if it is coming principally from one direction, and it's OK in terms of sensitivity if it has enough turns to resonate at that low frequency. You would also want to be sure that the direction of the required null doesn't also line up with the intended signal, of course.

Active antennas have the advantage of allowing you to find a spot where local noise levels are relatively low but (hopefully) the desired signal won't also be attenuated. That's what I'm planning to use at my new home in town. An active probe can also be portable, which is great if you have to undertake an impromptu "field day" to escape electrical noise.

If you have time to test all three options, that would be ideal. But if you don't, an active whip in an open field or park might be the best general-purpose option.

For the latest news on the Feb 19 SAQ 17.2KHz transmission you can go to their official website -
http://www.alexander.n.se/
Their website is in Swedish or German so first go to the lower left-hand column on their homepage and click on the British flag for English. Then go to the top of the left-hand column and click on the word "Home" - this will bring up the homepage in English. Over to the right you will see a place where you can click for News. This will give you the latest news on their transmissions and latest updates. Good luck hearing SAQ on Feb 19. 73 Todd WD4NGG

Thanks for the reply, John. The site we want to operate from is at the old Voice of America site in Bethany Ohio. We have identified a location out in the antenna field that is 1/2 mile away in all directions from structures and power lines. Unfortunately, 700WLW is a few miles down the road and we are concerned about their signal swamping us. It may work out that WLW is off the null side of the loop, or we thought about using a low pass filter of some sort to filter them out. Do you have any references to web pages that might help us calculate the number of wire turns, loop diameter, tuning cap etc that would be appropriate for a loop at 17kc? Thanks again for your help. 73, Jim N8ECI

Reg Edwards program RJELOOP3 will allow you to make calculations for a multi-turn rx loop:
http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp/page3.html#S301%22

Re: ID Beacons?
Posted by Matt on February 15, 2006 at 09:20:28.
In Reply to ID Beacons? posted by David Beck, K4PBN on February 09, 2006 at 19:29:57.

I didn't have any luck with hi and there are no beacons on 430 in the us as far as I can tell.

It is hard to recommend one VLF antenna over another but a loop has several advantages. It can be tuned and because of this it will discriminate against out-of-band signals like the WLW you mentioned being nearby and it can also discriminate against noise coming from certain directions. Only problem with a loop is it takes some work to build one and you are close to a deadline Feb 19. I did some calculations and to build a reasonable standard air-core loop for 17.2KHz you would need to wind 100 turns on a frame 10ft x 10ft square. This would require about 900-1000pf to resonate at 17.2 KHz and require about 1200 meters of wire or close to 4000 ft of wire.
A more practical loop antenna would be a ferrite-core loop and these can be small enough to set on a table-top but it will take some work to find suitable ferrite that has good sensitivity and "Q" on VLF and in a size big enough to work with. I have a large ferrite-core loop I bought in kit form about 25 years ago made by Jim Hagan NN4AA that uses 7 ferrite cores glued together to make one single rod about 30 inches long. It uses slip-on coils and will tune down to 10KHz with great sensitivity. I used that antenna last fall Sept 25 to copy SAQ during their last special event transmission. The kit is no longer made by Jim and the ferrite rods used in it are no longer being made also I believe.
This season I will be using my 160 meter dipole antenna into an upconverter running into a Yaesu FRG-100 with 250Hz CW filter for receiving SAQ. What I am doing with the antenna is I ground the coax and use it as a shielded downlead and then I tune the center lead or 1/2 of the dipole using an adjustable slug-tuned series inductor made by J.W.Miller. The inductor's range is about 12-60mH (millihenries) and this will resonate 1/2 of the dipole from about 25KHz down to 11KHz. Resonating the antenna really brings up the signal level and also rejects out-of-band signals. You could do something similar out in the field with a 150-200ft longwire and series inductor to resonate the wire. You might find a large value adjustable inductor in a junkbox - similar coils were used in TV horizontal oscillator circuits. This would be a good quick and easy way to get an effective antenna going for 17.2KHz.
Active whip antennas can do a good job but they can be susceptible to overload from out of band signals like your nearby WLW on 700KHz unless it has a good effective low-pass filter built in. Hope these suggestions may help. 73 Todd WD4NGG

For those interested in listening for the upcoming SAQ 17.2KHz CW transmissions on FEB 19 I have enclosed a list of VLF target signals I have been using to optimize the receiver and antenna here for best results. I would suggest a receiver with at least a 250Hz CW filter. This is the latest list of VLF stations I could find and there are several unidentified stations I am hearing also. For best chances of hearing SAQ your receiver should be able to clearly copy these stations and cleanly separate the ones closest together like the ones on 19.6 and 19.8. These are the signals I am currently hearing on the U.S. East Coast - In particular you should be able to hear Norway 16.4Khz as a good test of receiver sensitivity and signal-to-noise ratio. All sound like MSK RTTY.
16.4 Norway S2 / 18.6 Germany? S4 / 19.6 U.K. S4 / 19.8 Australia S7 / 20.27 Italy S3 / 20.9 Unid S6 / 21.4 Hawaii S8 / 21.8 Unid S8 / 22.1 Unid S5 / 23.4 Germany S7 / 24.0 Cutler, ME S9 +30 / 24.8 Jim Creek, WA S9+10 / 25.2 LaMoure, ND S9+20 .
The stations in Europe like Germany 23.4 should help give a rough bearing for a loop antenna towards SAQ also. 73 Todd WD4NGG

MY Medfer and Hifer beacons 'ESA' are now QRT (or off the air).
Thanks to W1TAG, WA6AJY and N5GBD for their signal reports.
73 Jim V. M.

Re: ESA beacons QRT
Posted by jim vander maaten on February 16, 2006 at 15:02:18.
In Reply to ESA beacons QRT posted by Jim Vander Maaten on February 15, 2006 at 12:54:57.

Jim,
I contemplating your antenna, understand that the overall problem can be broken into two distinct categories: antenna apeture and sufficient signal into the receiver to overcome the receiver's internal noise figure.
The VLF band is characterized by an unbelieveable natural noise level. (Imagine being able to hear a respectable amount of energy from every lightning discharge that occurs in the entire world!) Therefore, the minimum antenna is incredibly small provided there is a suitable means to couple the intercepted energy into a receiver. The preamp in active antennas performs that coupling role. So, practically any antenna you implement--whether E-field probe, loop, long-wire--is big enough, and little difference will be found between these in terms of picking up a signal (or the dominating noise in the band.)

Others have correctly stated that often the limiting factor in hearing remote stations is not the natural noise, but rather, local noise sources. You are correct in assuming the easiest way to eliminate local noise is to put a large distance between the noise and the antenna. (Interestingly enough, receiving site selection has been a common thread in successful SAQ reception in NA.) My home is disappointingly noisy for E-field antennas, but is about 40 dB. better with any kind of a shielded H-field (loop) antenna, even though the absolute output level of an untuned loop will be significantly lower than an E-field antenna. I encourage use of the MSK stations around the world as "practice" sources to evaluate the SNR of any site. Australia and Hawaii are starters, depending on who's on at any time. Loop azimuth and all the other variables in siting are "knobs" you should use to optimize the receive SNR.

The second part of the issue--receiver coupling--has been realized in a number of ways, often without knowing the real reason why. Resonating loops provides a means of getting more voltage out of the loop, regardless of the number of turns, but, except for possible rejection of out-of-band overload, does not improve antenna performance in terms of SNR. Loop tuning can be replaced with broad-band pre-amplification to achieve the same output voltage if that's your desire. Some of my designs have used magentically coupled negative feedback to broaden and flatten the loop response. Active amps can also provide excellent impedance translation between, say, a parallel resonant loop and its associated high impedance, and a long run of RG-58. Should you embark on a resonant loop approach, remember that the number of turns is arbitrary provided you have a good range of caps in the junk box. I have never sought to optimize loop output--balancing number of turns, wire loss, Q, etc. against developed voltage. When building broad-band loops in copper plumbing and waterproof conduit boxes I have always optimized the number of turns to keep the loop self-resonance above my highest frequency of regard.

For quick and dirty preamps, don't overlook the battery-powered HP AC VTVMs at the swap fests. Theose having an analog output on the rear panel will couple a receiver input to an antenna connected to the hi-Z, low-C at the AC input. Use the attenuator to keep the voltmeter amplifier out of saturation.

And, NO, I've never heard SAQ in Austin, Texas, but that has not prevented me from continuing to try. (Slow learner??)

Thank you for the information. At this point we've pretty much run out of time to prepare antennas. We have two longwires oriented northeast and east, the former being around 450 feet long and other 200 or so. We have tied the two wires together to form a capacitance hat of sorts, with a 60' vertical element down to our operating area. The past couple of nights we have been able to "hear" MSK stations around 20 KHz as well as one station that has odd narrow vertical components of varying spacing in the spectrum waterfall. The MSK stations, according to what we can find on the 'net are in the US but we don't know about the 'squiggly line' station (for lack of a better term). Saturday night we are going to try and add a resonant circuit at the bottom of the downlead and see if it has any effect. For a receiver we are using an HP3586 selective receiver with 50, 75, and 10k Ohm unbalanced inputs, and a 600 and 10k Ohm balanced input and we'll experiment around with receiver coupling to try for the best results with the stations around 20 KHz. The 50KW AM station down the road at 700Khz doesn't seem to bother us below 30 KHz but I measured +8 dBm on the wires at their frequency!

Thanks again for the great info in your post. If we don't hear SAQ this time, hopefully the experience will help us in the future if they do another winter event. If nothing else our preparations and experiments have generated a lot of interest in VLF among the local ham community.

** The High Accuracy National Differential GPS station in Hagerstown, MD on 454 kHz can be heard during my "daytime DX window" (10:00 AM-2:00 PM Eastern local) here in Lilburn, just outside of Atlanta.

This station was first reported in DXLD 6-029 on Feb. 12

The distinguishing characteristic of the signal is a brief data burst every second, and continuos data at 1 kbps. From what I have found on web searches, the station is running 10 KW into a 299 foot vertical, with guy wires as a top hat. It is diplexed with a standard DGPS transmitter on 307 kHz.

Because it is diplexed, I wonder if anyone near Hagerstown hears data on 761 kHz (454+307).

I caution those listening for this, that many portable receivers that tune to 454 kHz will suffer from feedback oscillation from the receivers 455 kHz IF, if the internal ferrite antenna is used.
For that reason, all my reception has been with an external longwire and tuner. The data bursts every second will let you know you have this signal, and not receiver generated feedback. Again, it does raise the question as to why a frequency just 1 kHz away from the standard MW IF frequency was chosen for a 10 KW transmitter.

They daytime signal is poor, but there. At night it is very strong. It reminds me of WGU-20 two and a half decades ago, but WGU-20, while near Washington, DC, had more power (48 KW) and a much lower groundwave frequency (179 kHz), I could hear them "daytime" in Florida, with less sophisticated equipment.

I would be interested in reading about daytime reception of the 454 kHz signal from others. Listen at night first, so you know what to listen for. I'm sure it's night signal blankets the Eastern seaboard.
Brock Whaley, GA
for DXLD
for DXFlorida
for LWCA

Successful copy of SAQ first CW transmission for nearly 1 full hour this morning 02/19/06 from 0845-0940 UTC from Hilton Head Island, SC. Copy was weak but readable RST 229 - some static in Southeast US this morning. VVV de SAQ SAQ SAQ. After 0930 they slowed down to about 10 WPM for the last few minutes. Alternator sounded very good. 73 Todd WD4NGG

Went to the home of the West Chester Amateur Radio Association (WCARA) (the former VOA Bethany Relay Station) and watched Jim Miller and Mike Murphy have some limited success with their equipment at picking up the signal well inland here in Ohio. They had coils and capacitors and receivers and laptops and you wre able to see the code as it came across. The conditions were up and down.

I heard the SAQ transmission here in Marietta Ohio for the first time. It was very weak. I have wav files if anyone interested. Receiver is a Rycom r-1307a/gm (Canadian). Antenna is a 350 ft center fed zepp (ladderline fed) at 65 ft. It made my day!
73...Steve...N8YE

I had copy here in central MA on both runs. There were periods of local electrical noise. Copy was mostly of the callups, though I did catch a couple of 73's at the end of the 1300 UTC run. Was able to watch the CW visually with Spectran on the second run.

Here is a compilation of SAQ reception reports that were posted to the LWCA.org LowFER e-mail reflector this morning:

From: Steve Ratzlaff
To: lowfer
Subject: [LW] 0900 SAQ not heard, NE Oregon
Date: Feb 19, 2006 4:35 AM

Heavy continuous static; no sign of SAQ here in NE Oregon during the 0900 utc run. Will try at 1300. (16.4 heard/seen just barely above the high static level.)

From: "dave.riley3"
Subject: QSL SAQ Grimeton Sweden on 17.2 kcs.
Date: Feb 19, 2006 4:45 AM

Good morning, SAQ Grimeton...

DE DAVE AA1A, MARSHFIELD, MA FN42pb

Condx are quiet with slight atmospherics

Antenna is 10' loop with 3 turns resonated into audio amplifier into Rycom 1307A receiver

Here is what I copied;

Thought to hear some VVVs before 0900Z

Then;

09XX
18 VV
20 VVV VVV
21 VV SAQ VV DE SAQ
22 SAQ SAQ
23 VVV DE SAQ
24 VV SAQ
26 V

NIL

Signal was in QRN of atmospherics and TV birdys.

Reference; Either side of SAQ were MSK sigs approx 5db above noise.

Regards and Thank You much,

Dave Riley - AA1A
Marshfield, Mass. USA

Where another Alexanderson Alternator once was used in 1906, www.radiocom.net/Fessenden

--------------------

From: Steve Ratzlaff
To: lowfer
Subject: [LW] SAQ not heard in NE Oregon
Date: Feb 19, 2006 8:40 AM

I listened both at 0900 and right now at 1300 utc with nothing heard or seen from SAQ. Static was heavy and continuous both times, though a little less at 1300. On Spectran, base static level was running -50 to -40 dB.

16.4 Norway was poorly heard/seen at 0900 but not at 1300. 37.5 Iceland faintly heard at 1300. But 40 JJY 30 dB over the noise level at 1300 utc. :)

Both an LF converter and an AR7030 modified by me for good sensitivity down to 10 kHz were used; antennas were 400 foot N/S longwire and 10 foot diameter loop tuned to 17.2.

The Russian Alphas are apparently turned off this Sunday to conserve power; they were easy copy Saturday.

From: Jay Rusgrove
To: lowfer, rsgb_lf_group
Subject: [LW] SAQ in CT
Date: Feb 19, 2006 8:50 AM

As Murphy would have it...wind blew antenna almost exactly 90 degrees for the first session and didn't notice it until daylight...

This clip from end of the second session...and a bit of run on carrier after the 73's...(it's about 1.7 megs)...

From: RJ Mattson
Cc: lowfer
Subject: [LW] QSL Radiostation Grimeton
Date: Feb 19, 2006 9:06 AM

RX: RBL-3. 7-tube(valve) TRF.
ANT: 50 Turn Box Loop. 8 ft (2.4 m) Diagonals.
Grid: FN31ar

From: Alberto di Bene
To: rsgb_lf_group, LWCA Lowfer
Subject: [LW] SAQ at 13:00Z, this time with an NRD-525 Rx
Date: Feb 19, 2006 9:14 AM

For the transmission of 13:00Z I connected the active mini whip to the JRC NRD-525 Rx. The quality of the reception was inferior to that of the morning, but I recorded the audio and post-processed it with Adobe Audition 1.5, which is an excellent tool for audio management.

To: lowfer, rsgb_lf_group
Subject: [LW] SAQ in CT
Date: Feb 19, 2006 9:17 AM
Attachments: saqfeb06A.jpg saqfeb06B.jpg

From: Laurence KL1X
To: lowfer
Subject: [LW] No SAQ in OK
Date: Feb 19, 2006 9:23 AM

Nil on both runs and nothing on 16.4Khz. Strong FSK on 18.6 and 19.8 etc and quite quiet against previous tries. 18.6 was much weaker on the later sked

From: Dexter McIntyre W4DEX
To: LowFer LWCA, RSGB LF
Subject: [LW] SAQ in North Carolina
Date: Feb 19, 2006 10:04 AM
Attachments: saq_tuneup_19feb06.jpg

SAQ was easily detectable on Spectran but was unable to copy the CW.
Last year's January test was Q5 CW using the same receive equipment.

From: Alberto di Bene
To: lowfer
Cc: rsgb_lf_group
Subject: [LW] SAQ spinning the tuning dial....:-)
Date: Feb 19, 2006 10:06 AM
Attachments: 4small.gif

Just before starting the QTC, SAQ did some frequency adjustment, maybe changing the load on the alternator (anybody knows for sure?)

From: Warren K2ORS/WD2XGJ
To: lowfer
Subject: [LW] SAQ in New Hampshire- Report on behalf of Bill Ashlock
Date: Feb 19, 2006 12:01 PM

Bill Ashlock reports in from his cabin in the White Moutains of northern New Hampshire copy of SAQ that was 1.5-2dB above the noise. This is much weaker than his copy last January. Bill will fill in the details when he returns to civilization (and an internet connection).

This is to confirm Warren's report of my aural reception of SAQ at both 4:00 and 8:00 EST time slots (in spite of the -5F temperature and high wind in the mountains). The signal was much weaker than the 12db S/N last January from here in Andover and barely tickled the meter on the SVM. I'll be very interested in determining if the transmitted signal was actually that much less in ERP compared to the signal a year ago - as a scan of US reports seems to indicate this. The mountain location has a much further overland path and could suffer also from much poorer soil conductivity.

It was interesting to find the signal was approximately the same strength and S/N both inside and outside the cabin. (Yes Allan :) I think the lack of power line noise (normally wiping out reception indoors) could have resulted from the cold dry weather having a positive effect on leaky insulators. Another interesting discovery was that I could completely null out some non-powerline buzz heard inside and outside originating from approximately the same direction as SAQ by putting a tilt on the hand-held loop.

SAQ received in Colchester, Vermont this morning - 0900 UTC transmission. Sometimes above noise and clear copy, other times at the noise level.

Jim N8ECI and Mike KA8ABR were able to detect signals from SAQ using the Spectran spectrum display program by I2PHD. Receiver was an HP 3856C Selective Level Meter disciplined by rubidium standard. Antenna was a shortened Marconi, 40 ft. long vertical section, two horizontal wires heading northwest (400 ft.) and northeast (300 ft.). Receiving location was Bethany Relay station of the VOA, now out of service. Set up in transmitter building, using guard tower (ex World War II short wave station) for antenna mount and receiver location. Parallel tank circuit consisted of secondary from a friends Tesla coil (28 mH) and large value air variable. Entire 900 UTC transmission seen on Spectran and QRSS viewer Argo. Could see distinctive fluctuations in frequency. Signals very weak and noise level high. No audio from SAQ detected by ear in Icom R-71/Palomar Engineers VLF converter or HP set. Bandwidth of set up was about 200 cycles, used slight off-tuning to reduce noise around signal from SAQ. Could not copy most letters due to signal fluctuations and noise. Distinctly saw "SAQ" come through towards the end of the 900 UTC transmission when keying speed reduced at SAQ. Did not see any of the 1300 UTC transmission until around 13:40 UTC when a curving signal appeared on the Spectran display right where SAQ had been transmitting earlier. Outside air temperature around zero (0) degrees F. Big thanks to the crew at SAQ and to Todd, WD4NGG for suggestions on antenna selection....

R. Alger on 153 Kc is coming in strongly enough (at 0255Z) to overcome its characteristic low modulation level - I can clearly hear their audio tonight. That's a first, here.

I'm pleased to report that we have increased the number of permissible HTML tags available to everyone, and the About HTML file has been updated to include them. This message incorporates a few of the new ones for demonstration purposes...not that anyone necessarily wants all posts to look this way! <grin>

You can, for instance, use <div align=...> to center, full-justify, or right-align text now, as I have done in these first three paragraphs.

Not yet in the documentation, but informally available: Some common online expressions that previously would have been filtered out as erroneous HTML are now passed, such as "<g>" for "grin" (although ironically, when the moderator and I are logged on in our official capacity to post links, we can't do it that way because we're then obliged to write pure HTML only <g>). You can also write "<grin>" and have it come out as <grin>, although <smile> and <wink> translate to the e-mail smilies :-) and ;-) respectively.

(Just remember not to use "<s>" in place of <smile>, because <s> is valid HTML for ~~strikethrough~~. You would end up putting a line through the remainder of your message that way.)

Let me know if there are other tags you'd like to have too--apart from links and images, which we're already considering how best to handle.

Now...your opinion, please, on another feature we could implement on the LW Message Board!

With the software as-is, we can easily create multiple versions of the Message Board to handle different specialties of the hobby, like NDBs or LW Broadcast or Part 15 activities. We've never had a huge volume of posting, and no one has yet asked for a specialized area of their own, but it can be done at any time. The one potential drawback is, each board would be completely independent. Nobody posting to one would have any idea what was going on with the others, unless they made it a point to visit them all...much the same drawback as exists with so many e-mail reflectors that partially duplicate each others' efforts and fragment the flow of imformation in the hobby.

Or, with a modest amount of additional development, I think I could make this a full-fledged collection of forums like you may have seen on other sites. There would be a main forum listing of all the categories, with each category displaying the date and subject of its most recent posting. You could then click to enter whichever ones interested you on that day.

So...do you think this would be worth doing some time this year, or do you feel the current arrangement is sufficient for the foreseeable future?

Hi John.. I like your suggestion of "full fledged collections of forums".. Why not use one of the free forum managers like phpBB? I've installed and managed phpBB forums for a number of organizations and it is simple to use and simple to manage - you can have as many or as few forums as you like. You could set up forums on DSP-based signal recovery and analysis (like we used for SAQ this past weekend), antenna design techniques, and perhaps modulation analysis/discussions, station sightings, etc. Just my $0.02...Jim N8ECI

Thanks Jim. Our present hosting plan doesn't give us very good support for PHP; and unfortunately, none of the newer plans I've found with ample space and support for PHP will simultaneously let me do some of the other things we still need to do with CGI scripts. Kind of a Catch 22.

Of course, the real question here is not so much the technology we use, but "if I build it, will they come?" Do folks feel that the recent upturn in posting is sustainable, within seasonably adjusted expectations? Are we likely to continue having the same interest in, say, LWBC activity...or maybe even more interest, if it had its own area?

And if we do multiple forums, how many should we try initially and how should they be categorized?

I've seen some forums subdivide their subject matter so extensively that people don't know where to post their specific question or comment. This has been a particular problem on one motorcycle site in which I participate. For a time, they not only had separate forums for each model from a given manufacturer, but subdivided those into separate 'general discussion,' accessories, and maintenance tips sections for each model too...in addition to an overall technical questions area for all models, a general discussion area for all models, etc. No wonder folks had trouble figuring out the best place to post their message, and as a result there were also a lot of off-topic threads. They're going through a fair amount of work re-consolidating many forums now.

So, to deflect some such headaches here, I'd really appreciate our users' input on both (a) whether we really need multiple forum categories, and if so, (b) what categories they'd most like to see/which ones they think would make the most sense for us to host.

John,
Speaking strictly for myself: I'm completely satisfied as it is. Creating multiple areas to post is likely to cause some confusion as you suggest, and important posts could be missed. In any event, I'm sure I do speak for everyone when I say thanks for your continued efforts on the board!
T.

My mention of multiple forums was only to indicate the capabilities of the forum software that I commended, not necessarily to suggest that they would all be appropriate for LWCA. The phpBB software works just as well with one forum as a hundred. However, one thing I do not like about the current setup is the fact that it pops a new browser window for each message read. Please don't take that as a complaint - just a personal annoyance. 73, Jim N8ECI

As to multiple forums....I dont see a lot of postings here yet and I would like to keep tabs on what is going on generally in the LongWave world.Particularly in areas I am not very active in. I always think a splitting up can mean that a lot of people miss out unless they open up lots of different "groups" to see what is going on.

OK if you start getting lots of postings to specific topics, then some filtering may be in order. A lot of the day-to-day traffic seems to have been removed by use of the reflectors. I think there is room for a vigorous discussion on the message board without it greatly affecting others who may not be very interested in the topic. At least with the subject lines you do see what is going on and can read to see if it is of interest.If a specific interest group sets up, I would certainly want to monitor particularly if it was "technical". I am not particularly interested in (say) BC programming material but I do like to see what people on your side of the pond are hearing, to compare with my propagation forecasts for 136kHz.

Good signals of MP XKO XGJ on 137.7 on Argo at 30sec in N Ill. MP faded at midnight, others Okay. Also seeing others but only traces.
Setup is R8 fed by T with lotsa ground wire.
New this season is a different loading coil arrangement - note this is a receiving antenna.
The T is 3-stranded, ea 4-feet apart and 45-feet long, mounted between two Rohn 50-foot towers.
The verticle consists of a lower coil w/ taps, say 20 turns, 10 gauge, on usual pail bucket. Next, at mid-point is larger coil that has about 1.4MH of no. 12 wire.
Near the top is a smaller, lighter former with smaller wire. Forget, but say about 0.300MH there.

Re: LF 137.7 MP XKO XGJ
Posted by Warren K2ORS/WD2XGJ on February 25, 2006 at 11:47:30.
In Reply to LF 137.7 MP XKO XGJ posted by Peter B on February 25, 2006 at 11:00:56.

Hi Peter,
Thanks for the report! You have a very nice receiving setup. WD2XGJ was running approx. 1.2kW output from a modified Racal-Decca PA into a vertical transmit loop antenna 80' high by 145' horizontal.
I am sending 9 wpm cw at the moment (11:45 AM EST) on the same frequency. Will revert to QRSS when darkness approaches.

I also have found that it is really beneficial on receive to resonate the antenna as you have done.

I've been tinkering with radio for a long time, but some things have been quite profound over the years.

Spurred by an article in QST about 1961 about meteor trails and whistlers, I rigged up a three turn loop outside and coupled it to a phono pre-amp using a 6SC7 and plugged that into the AF input jack of my National NC 240D receiver.

Heard mostly harmonics of the 60 cycle power line, but learned I could re-orient the loop and null out the power line stuff.

But one early evening, I heard a strong Morse code station. It was very high pitched. My first thought was that a new ham had moved into the neighborhood. But how could I be hearing a "beat" note receiving on an audio amplifier?

It was NAA, and as I recall, NAA was sending something like 5 letter groups instead of straight text.

Since I was a kid back then, I was actually able to hear the keyed carrier. I always said it was about 16 KC, but today I'm not sure. I found one reference to 17.8 KC. I've lost my notes from those days, but I remember rigging up a mixer/oscillator feeding into my NC 240D receiver around 2.5 MC using that same pre-amp and logged maybe 6 or 8 stations in the 14 to 20 KC region. NPG and several other Navy stations come to mind. And was there a GBR in the UK?

One source of current VLF frequency assignments, with some past historical data included, is the ELF and VLF frequency Guide by Trond Jacobsen. NAA has been authorized for a number of frequencies in the past, including 15.5kHz, but I'm not sure if that's the one you heard.

I certainly know what you mean about being able to hear the under-20kHz stations by ear back then.

In the late 50s, my family lived in a very rural part of northeast Kansas. (And I don't mean in the modern sense where a town of 10,000 people can be called "rural," either. I mean there weren't more than a score of households within a four mile radius!) We were near the end of a three mile long single-wire party line that served all the hand-cranked telephones in our little settlement. I discovered in the wee hours of Sunday mornings, when no one was using their phones, that I could hear all kinds of strange clicks and tweaks; and one time, even dawn chorus, before I even knew what that was. I never caught any whistlers, though. But a few times, way up high in pitch, there was Morse code. Most of it was number groups, but sometimes there was plain text, mostly faster than I could copy.

I didn't know about VLF stations at that time, so this was a mystery to me for a couple of years, until I ran across an article in Popular Electronics about submarine communication. By then, the phone company had converted us all over to dial phones using balanced lines, so that receiving option was no longer available to me.

There was indeed, on 16.0kHz. It closed down on April 1, 2003. Near the bottom of the main LW Message Board list, you'll find a post from Harald, titled "QSL-card from last transmission of Rugby Radio."

John D,
Thank you for the link to the ELF/VLF frequency guide and info on GBR.
And it's neat that you mentioned hearing VLF stuff on the rural telephones in your younger days. I was at a Nike missle site in Korea in '68/'69 and our fire control area was about a mile from the launchers. We were connected by cable,radio,and open telephone lines.
At quiet times in the middle of the night, I could sit at the telephone switchboard in the control van and with the headset on, hear numerous weak pings and whistles.
John

I recall doing something similar, probably around 1962. I had a Hallicrafters SX-101 receiver with a "phono" input, and while connecting something to it one day, heard high-pitched CW. I stuck an RF choke across the input to kill the hum, and tied onto one of my antenna wires. The signal was coming from NAA, only about 400 miles away. The CW was mostly code groups, but I believe they did the usual VVV DE NAA when idle.

About four years later, I was in college in Maine, and built a 1-transistor VLF regen receiver. I think my antenna was a cliplead to the radiator in the dorm room, and the copy was excellent. For some reason, 17.2 kHz sticks in my mind as the frequency for all of the above, but I may be wrong.

By the time that I built a decent VLF converter in the early '70's, most of the CW had gone, though I seem to remember copying NSS in CW.

Re: ID ???
Posted by Alan G3NYK on February 28, 2006 at 17:58:59.
In Reply to ID? posted by Bob on February 27, 2006 at 19:47:54.

Hi Bob, your "vini" isn't something like "SKR" inside out (that is, translating the spaces to marks) is it?? A three letter call would sound more reasonable down there.

Past LW Messages - February 2006

Addresses and URLs contained herein may gradually become outdated.