Re: Hifers 31-March
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 01, 2016 at 16:17:31.
In reply to Hifers 31-March posted by Ed Holland on March 31, 2016
Re: Beacon EAR
J.B., see EAR fine this morning so it's getting out well as always,
73, Garry, K3SIW, EN52ta, Elgin, IL
Re: Hifers 31-March
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 01, 2016 at 16:17:31.
In reply to Hifers 31-March posted by Ed Holland on March 31, 2016
good to see AA0RQ making to the west coast, 73 ED
Geomagnetic HiFERs
Posted by John Davis on April 02, 2016 at 22:48:07.
The current G1-ometimes-borderline-G2 geomagnetic storm has provided an opening from Illinois to here this afternoon, plus enhancements to other stations on this band that was nearly dead this morning (only NC was slightly audible, USC and EH barely visible, no one else at all at 10 AM CDT).
But at 2:28 PM CDT (1928 UTC), the skies opened up! Slant mode SIW appeared from nowhere and split into two parts, and faint copies of that splitting signal appeared 2 and 4 Hz above, and at least one trace 2 Hz below. (There may have been more, but EH had drifted down that far and covered them up.) The main traces then split again.
Meanwhile, both WSPR SIWs (13555.400 and .375) made an appearance. The lower one (on the dipole antenna) was weaker than the vertical, but only by a few dB and decoded nearly as often. Neither one decoded for the first few visible traces, until those multiple Doppler shifted copies of the signal settled down a bit. A capture from the WSPR 2.12 screen appears below this message.
An Argo capture here shows a point in time a little after 2100 when WM picked up in level for a while. 900 Hz = 13555.400, ± 1 Hz or so.
WM dipped in level about 2130, then went away entirely a few minutes later. The SIWs all dipped in level too, with the lower WSPR disappearing entirely for a few time slots...but at 2148, both SIW WSPRs boomed in at fully audible level with bright traces.
BTW...hoping this event might also help the path from Colorado to here, I tried for RQ and a few others between WSPR transmission slots. I could see what appeared to be keyed carrier in the right spot for RQ, but it wasn't strong enough to hear, so there's no way to be sure. However, GNK was blasting in. No trace of FRC or anyone to the west.
Am still monitoring the watering hole while making this trip to town to report, and will update further.
John
1936 -15 -1.4 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0 1936 -10 -2.0 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 1940 -18 -1.4 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0 1940 -11 -1.9 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 1944 -20 -1.6 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0 1944 -13 -1.8 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 1952 -22 -1.4 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 1956 -24 -1.6 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 1956 -17 -2.1 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2000 -23 -1.7 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2000 -17 -2.1 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2004 -25 -1.6 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2004 -19 -1.9 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2008 -27 -1.4 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2012 -26 -1.3 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2016 -27 -1.5 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2016 -20 -2.0 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2020 -25 -1.4 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2024 -24 -1.6 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2024 -17 -2.0 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2028 -24 -1.4 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2028 -19 -1.6 13.555402 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2032 -24 -1.5 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2036 -23 -1.5 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2036 -16 -2.1 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2040 -21 -1.5 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2040 -15 -1.9 13.555402 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2044 -20 -1.6 13.555372 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2044 -15 -2.0 13.555402 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2048 -20 -1.6 13.555372 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2048 -14 -1.8 13.555402 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2052 -19 -1.6 13.555372 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2052 -13 -1.8 13.555402 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2056 -19 -1.6 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2100 -19 -1.6 13.555373 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2100 -14 -2.1 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2104 -17 -1.6 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2104 -13 -2.0 13.555403 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2108 -20 -1.6 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2108 -14 -1.8 13.555404 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2112 -20 -1.6 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0 2112 -15 -1.8 13.555404 0 K3SIW EN52 7 2116 -23 -1.4 13.555374 0 K3SIW EN52 0
Re: Geomagnetic HiFERs
I see NOAA finally did determine the storm to have reached G2.
By the time I returned to the field after supper, the opening was mostly over. SIW appeared for a few minutes at a time, sometimes long enough for WSPR to decode, right up to sunset. There were a couple more brief appearances after that, but with considerable Doppler spreading and/or for only a few seconds at a time. There were no more appearances of WM.
MTI was quite strong an hour or so before sunset, and I had copy of PBJ for a while, but it ended abruptly right after a "B." FRC was quite strong for a few ID cycles, then became a letter here and a letter there.
RY faded early this evening, and EH ended up being the last one visible today.
John
1750 MeterTonight
Posted by John Davis on April 03, 2016 at 04:32:34.
Despite moderately high QRM and the return of a carrier right on SIW, I had fair copy. See the attached capture.
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: siw0402l.jpg
Re: Beacon EAR
Coming in well here in SE Kansas before daybreak Sunday. It actually showed up a little after midnight and varied from just barely visible to decent copy a number of times during the night. The best instance was this final one before sunrise.
John
Re: 1750 MeterTonight
Posted by John Davis on April 03, 2016 at 17:13:08.
In reply to 1750 MeterTonight posted by John Davis on April 03, 2016
Afternoon WSPR on 2200 M
Much better copy in the quiet of early morning than I had last night while experiencing QRN to S9 or more. Only had time for this little snippet, though, while waiting for somebody...anybody...to show up on 22 meters half an hour after sunrise.
Posted by John Davis on April 04, 2016 at 02:40:05.
On a tip this afternoon from Michael Sapp, I checked 137.5 kHz WSPR after I got done watching for openings to Illinois that didn't materialize on 22 meters today. Out of 90 or more minutes, I only got these three decodes, roughly two hours before sunset.
2016-04-03 22:08 WH2XND 0.137501 -17 -1 DM33xt 5 KD4IDY EM27kc 1573 72 2016-04-03 22:12 WH2XND 0.137501 -17 0 DM33xt 5 KD4IDY EM27kc 1573 72 2016-04-03 22:44 WH2XND 0.137502 -11 0 DM33xt 5 KD4IDY EM27kc 1573 72
That result is not from any shortage of signal. As you can see in the attached file, the WSPR signal was more than ample...but there was an unrelenting steady carrier just below its lower edge here in SE Kansas.
It's a good signal to practice your LF receiving techniques on. WA3TTS was copying it just before noon at a distance of over 1800 miles!
John
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: xnd0403.gif
Re: Belarus 279 khz
More from mediumwave.info
TURKMENISTAN Turkmenistan 279
After the closure of the Belarus station on 279 kHz. I hear Turkmenistan on the same frequency. Here in Romania the signal is S5 now at 0745 UT (10:45 am local time) on my 60m random wire antenna. The modulation is rather low. I'm expecting the signal to improve a lot in the evening.
Tudor Vedeanu (Gura Humorului, Romania), dxld yg (1/4-2016)
Posted by Mike Terry on April 05, 2016 at 07:10:49.
TURKMENISTAN Re: Turkmenistan 279
Ashgabat on 279 KHz on 2 April heard from Perseus site in E. Finland from 2339 tune. Weak modulation at SINPO 35443 but otherwise clear signal. Increasing noise level after 0015. Recognized program format and language from previous shortwave logs in 2005 on 4930 KHz and 5015 KHz and visit to Ashgabat in Oct 2006. Woman announcer in Turkmen with occasional music in background to 0000. Program of instrumental music on a solo stringed instrument at 0000 w/ man announcer. At 0033 after a man announcer, the music switched to more elaborate instrumentals with multiple instruments and akin to Turkish folk music. The same man announcer was heard in this segment that went to 0059. A woman announcer was heard at 0059 and some instrumental music to 0100 followed by 5 time pips, a man announcer and the Turkmenistan National anthem by a choir to 0102.5. Man and woman announcers w/ dramatic tone and martial music mixed - many mentions of "Turmenbashy" and "Ashgabat" to tune out at 0109. This segment used to be heard on 5015 shortwave in this time frame. Stringed instrument sound was most likely the "Dutar", the most popular stringed instrument in Turkmenistan and
similar to the Kazakh "Dombra" which I heard many times in trips to Kazakhstan in the mid-2000's. These are 2-3 string instruments with long narrow necks and in somewhat different form factors and names, popular throughout Central Asia.
Bruce Churchill, dxld yg (3 April,2016)
Posted by Mike Terry on April 05, 2016 at 07:13:51.
In reply to Turkmenistan 279 posted by Mike Terry on April 05, 2016
After the closure of the Belarus station on 279 kHz. I hear Turkmenistan on the same frequency. Here in Romania the signal is S5 now at 0745 UT (10:45 am local time) on my 60m random wire antenna. The modulation is rather low. I'm expecting the signal to improve a lot in the evening.
Tudor Vedeanu (Gura Humorului, Romania), dxld yg (1 April,2016)
Re: Tweaks to PVC
Posted by Ed Holland on April 05, 2016 at 07:35:11.
In reply to Tweaks to PVC posted by Ed Holland on March 27, 2016
After a little follow-up testing, it seems my tweaks to PVCs aerial matching have severely hurt performance. The root cause is an incorrect type toroid used for the replacement feedpoint balun. Suspicious, I made a 1:1 transformer using another identical core and put it in the receive line. The result was drastic attenuation. Fortunately I will be able to use the old balun again, and keep the revised shield to radial isolation. It still means another trip to the roof.
If that were not enough, whilst in the garden today, I found one half the balanced listening antenna had broken from the feedpoint in the tree and was laying on the ground. Luckily I have some time this week.
Cheers,
Ed
Re: Tweaks to PVC
Posted by Ed Holland on April 06, 2016 at 02:16:47.
In reply to Re: Tweaks to PVC posted by Ed Holland on April 05, 2016
PVC is back on air after extensive work on the aerial system.
The old balun was rewound, adding some insulating lining to the binocular core. I found that some chafing had resulted in contact of both windings to the ferrite. This was put back in the circuit in place of the bad toroid. I then tested the feedline and found that it measured leaky and odd at dc, as if moisture had penetrated. This was old reclaimed cable of unknown origin. This run was replaced with new coax I had to hand.
Connecting the receiver to the antenna as a first check I was pleasantly surprised with plenty of signal and atmospheric noise. I then tuned up PVC. ATU settings are different again from any previous arrangement, so hopefully signals really are going out this time.
Cheers,
Ed
Re: Tweaks to PVC
Posted by John Davis on April 06, 2016 at 15:48:48.
In reply to Re: Tweaks to PVC posted by Ed Holland on April 06, 2016
Will keep listening here in Kansas. I'm not sure if I'll make it back to the field today, following last night's rains, but there will be more opportunities this week.
Turns out, yesterday was a good day to do maintenance. The band was terrible here. Codar was blasting in at mid-day, but only NC, USC, EH, and RY (in their unaccustomed role as the Faint Four) were visible at the watering hole, and nobody else was audible. Well, apart from SWBC sidebands that hadn't been present in some time. By 5 PM Central, only EH and RY remained; everyone else--even codar--had gone home early for the day, I suppose. :)
Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Ed Holland on April 08, 2016 at 04:30:08.
Hi folks,
I am looking for a little advice here please. Our Hifer transmitter makes its way via a vertical antenna on the house roof. I originally measured out the appropriate length of vertical, and laid 6 radials, plus tying the ground system to the scaffold of our solar system. The vertical was tuned using a gdo, obtaining a weakish dip at the desired operating frequency in the hifer band. There was also a stronger dip about 2 MHz lower. Please bear in mind that this was the first time I have set up any of this or used the equipment.
Reading around, I now wonder if my setup is more like an elevated vertical (the roof is non conductive) and I ought, as a consequence, pay more attention to tuning the virtual ground system.
Any thoughts?
thanks
Ed
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by John Davis on April 08, 2016 at 05:07:38.
In reply to Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by Ed Holland on April 08, 2016
Hi Ed,
I'm not sure I'm picturing your antenna configuration correctly. Could you sketch the layout of the vertical, counterpoise radials, RF transformer and ground connection (with dimensions) and attach it to a message? That would probably be most helpful.
Do keep in mind the limit of 250-256 KB per file, of course.
John
472-479 kHz
Posted by Mike Terry on April 08, 2016 at 14:48:35.
ARRL MW Experiment Sees Ongoing Research Role After Hams Gain 472-479 kHz: UK to Sell Off 750 MHz of Radio Spectrum
By The ARRL Letter on April 7, 2016
The coordinator of the 600 Meter Experimental Group, Fritz Raab, W1FR, said this week that he sees an ongoing role for medium frequency (MF) experimentation, even after Amateur Radio gains access to the new 630 meter band (472-479 kHz). An FCC Report and Order authorizing Amateur Radio access to 2200 meters (135.7-137.8 kHz) and 630 meters is anticipated soon. In his 1st quarterly report for 2016 on the WD2XSH Experimental license work, Raab said that once the new 630 meter ham band is in place, he expects ARRL experiment participants to pursue work in that part of the spectrum under their Amateur Radio licenses. But, he said that more MF research remains, and he would recommend continuing work under the WD2XSH Experimental a while longer, shifting focus to 461 to 472 kHz.
Posted by Mike Terry on April 08, 2016 at 14:50:49.
UK to Sell Off 750 MHz of Radio Spectrum: Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
By The ARRL Letter on April 7, 2016
UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne announced in the 2016 budget that 750 MHz of public sector radio spectrum would be “released” — that is, auctioned. The Amateur Service in the UK currently shares significant spectrum with the public sector. In “Supporting the digital economy,” the Budget 2016 document calls electromagnetic spectrum a valuable and scarce resource.
Posted by ED Holland on April 08, 2016 at 17:46:35.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by John Davis on April 08, 2016
Hi John,
Thanks for your response. I will try and sketch up a diagram later today. However, for now, I can try and describe things a little better:
The whole system is on the house roof, which is nonmetallic. The house is on a hillside, making the roofline about 10' above ground on one side, and nearer 25' on the downhill side. The roof plan is a regular hexagon. The vertical element is about 16.5' tall, a stout wire suspended in PVC pipe as a mast, placed at the centre of the roof. This was supposedly tuned for a dip with the GDO at the 13.558 mHz beacon frequency.
The radial system is realised as follows: 4 wires fan out to four vertices of the hexagon, over one half of the roof area as viewed from above, and these lie directly on the roof surface. A large solar installation occupies the other part of the roof, and a connection is made to the supporting framework. The wire radials are ~21' long, but I don't have measurements for the solar scaffold, which also connects to house electrical ground.
The system is fed with 75 Ohm coax (because I already had lots of it). At the feedpoint there is an isolating & impedance matching transformer. Given the ~30ohm theoretical vertical antenna impedance, the transformer has a turns ratio of 1.4:1, for a 2:1 impedance transformation. Feedline ground and radial system are isolated by this transformer.
I'm sure a sketch will make this easier to comprehend!
Cheers,
Ed
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 09, 2016 at 14:44:49.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by ED Holland on April 08, 2016
I now have 25 radials on top the ground as of yesterday...I will try to find time to put a few more down...those trout keep calling me...Ed thanks for all the reports on AA0RQ , I got your QSL card in the mail...hope to like it.
Also I'm going to listen for PVC more often.
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by John Davis on April 10, 2016 at 18:01:20.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by Bill Hensel on April 09, 2016
Bill Hensel wrote:
I got your QSL card in the mail...hope to like it.
I can attest that it is quite a nice one, myself. Been meaning to thank you for it, Bill. I check every time I'm at the farm, but apparently we're in a part of the solar cycle now where we must have a geomagnetic storm for me to see or hear anyone closer than 450 or 500 miles on 22 meters.
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 10, 2016 at 22:08:40.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by John Davis on April 10, 2016
With that big sun spot that is growing it might just happen again.
Pixie
Posted by Marky on April 12, 2016 at 17:43:28.
Has anyone tried converting the "Pixie" (a very inexpensive 40 m transceiver) to the lowfer bands?
Thanks,
Marky
Re: Pixie
Posted by John Davis on April 13, 2016 at 03:44:15.
In reply to Pixie posted by Marky on April 12, 2016
Over on the HiFER side of this message board, Dave AA7EE related last autumn that he briefly used the transmitter part of a Pixie for his beacon SPT at 22 m, and he has written about other instances of using it at HF (see aa7ee.wordpress.com/tag/pixie-2/ ), but I don't know of anyone who has tried using one at LF. Perhaps if Dave sees this thread, he will weigh in with his thoughts on the matter.
There are several potential disadvantages to the Pixie at LF that I can see, myself. First, in the LowFER band, one would want a transmitter capable of as near to the permitted 1 W DC input as possible, due to the low antenna efficiencies and high noise levels that are part of life at LF. The original Pixie was capable of something on the order of ¼ W output, if I recall, and I have read of some modifications resulting in 300-400 mW, but that's still shy of the goal.
Second, the Pixie achieves much of its simplicity by virtue of a simple Colpitts oscillator with a crystal working on its fundamental frequency. Those are difficult to come by at LF these days! Usual LowFER practice is to use an HF crystal or oscillator module and divide the frequency down, or else sometimes use a PLL or DDS-based synthesizer.
Third, many of the inductors and some of the capacitors will have to be scaled up in value (and therefore size) for the lower frequencies, and I'm not sure how practical that will be if you're hoping to use one of the kit boards.
Given these factors, it may be more practical to use a design that's only slightly more complex, but which was created more specifically for Part 15 LF operation, written up some years ago by KØLR. Variations on Lyle's design, expecially the final amplifier, have been used in many LowFER rigs. The basics of the circuit can be found in the LWCA library at lwca.org/library/articles/k0lr/protoboardXmttr/index.htm (it should be noted that there is no necessary reason to use the same solderless breadboards that he did for purposes of this article; any popular construction technqiue works with just a minimum of care in layout). A version using an HF crystal and divider instead of the Epson programmable oscillator module is available at lwca.org/library/articles/k0lr/SimpleLowFERTransmitter.htm; it also goes into the amplifier philosphy and antenna matching considerations a bit more. And, there's another article at lwca.org/library/articles/k0lr/all-in-one describing a more elaborate version than you're probably interested in building, but it has further details about the Class D final amplifier, including a table of output filter component values for different load impedances.
One of the more popular approaches in recent beacons has been to build an Ultimate3S kit as a very versatile exciter and follow it with a KØLR final to achieve 1 W.
John
Re: Pixie
Posted by Marky on April 13, 2016 at 16:06:02.
In reply to Re: Pixie posted by John Davis on April 13, 2016
Thanks for the information.
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Ed Holland on April 13, 2016 at 16:37:54.
In reply to Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by Ed Holland on April 08, 2016
Sorry, still no drawing - it has been a busy week...
However, I did look at the system again with my primative instrumentation, and have done some reading around.
First of all, using the dip meter, coupled to the end of the antenna feedline there is no obvious resonance at or near the Hifer band. There is a sharp dip at 11.5MHz which could be the antenna, or of course resonance of a mismatched feedline. Looking higher and lower in freq for corresponding dips should help to discriminate between these possibilities.
I also tried using the dip oscillator coupled via the ATU. Again, there was no sign of resonance, even at my supposed good ATU control settings. I have a super-sensitive RF current indicator (homebrewed) and this was quite helpful, since the energy from the dip oscillator was sufficient to activate it. This allowed me to find alternative ATU settings at which there was both resonance indicated by the GDO at 13.5MHz AND a peak in antenna current. Reconnecting the transmitter, the same peaking of output was verified. I have been running PVC with the new settings since 10-APR.
Now, about that reading. In a very comprenensive article available here: http://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/design_of_radial_ground_systems/ I begin to understand the influence of radial lengths - and the importance of tuning. It is quite likely that the ground system of PVC's antenna network has greatly affected the resonant frequency, driving it well below what would be expected from the height of the vertical element assuming a true ground mounted system. Armed with this idea, I plan to head back to the roof and experiment with tuning the counterpoise/radial system. A slight fly in the ointment, I suspect, will be the influence of the large solar panel array, which is fully in the ground plane zone, making it difficult to add truly independent counterpoise wires for a full 360° around the base of the vertical. However, if I can at least establish cause and effect for the system tuning, I can begin to think about the next course of action to optimise it.
Cheers,
Ed
HiFERs This Week
Posted by John Davis on April 13, 2016 at 19:38:33.
This morning, the band got an even slower start than over the weekend, despite elevated lavels of solar flux today. I got up early and was watching by daybreak, but nobody showed up at all until 8:02 AM CDT, when EH finally faded in faintly. RY followed several minutes later. It took until 9:30 for USC to show up for work, and NC later drifted down to join the group just before lunch time (the first attachment shows the group about an hour after NC's first appearance). No FRC at daybreak or afterward, nor WV.
However, during the noon hour, there were two anomalous signals where MTI and PBJ should have been...see the second attachment for these. What was anomalous about crypto-MTI was that instead of the usual slow, leisurely dots and dashes, it sounded like high speed keying of random characters. The spacing between bursts sometimes resembled the timing of MTI's ident cycle, leading me at first to think it was a bad connection somewhere at the real MTI--but sometimes the burst went on significantly longer than the typical "MTI," so I don't know what to think now. Likewise with the string of dots(?) below it.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: noon0414.jpg
File Attachment 2: fake-mti.jpg
Re: HiFERs This Week
Interesting John.
I have repaired the receiving aerial here in Calif. and hope to find time for listening again in the mornings. For anyone listening for PVC, the repeat period has been reduced to 5 seconds. This reduces dead time, whilst still leaving an obvious gap between repeats.
Cheers
Ed
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Ed Holland on April 17, 2016 at 08:11:52.
In reply to Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by Ed Holland on April 08, 2016
Quick update: I found time today to head up on the roof and re analyse the vertical antenna system. Without feedline, the system indicated a clear resonance at at ~12.5MHz using the dip meter. Clearly what I had seen via the feedline wasn. With a combination of shortening the telescoping sections of mast, and reeling in the radial wires to tune the counterpoise system, I did did my best to move resonance up to the operating frequency. There is now a dip at 13.5MHz, and ATU settings indicate a very different reactance. No chance yet to monitor the signal from a distance. Rf current, indicated by my makeshift meter seems to be lower, but signal strength using a receiver on the nearby dipole seems stronger. Time will tell.
regards,
Ed
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Paul on April 17, 2016 at 18:00:34.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by ED Holland on April 08, 2016
Hi Ed,
I think I am picturing your setup.
Sounds like your radials may be a bit too long, or there is something near the vertical throwing it off (a TV antenna maybe?).
FRC is running a hamstick vertical antenna mounted to the roof of a shipping container. That is the polar opposite of a tuned radial system. Yet, it puts out a fine signal.
The Hamstick has a fairly high Q, and the tuning is more critical than with a full length 1/4 wave vertical such as yours. But, even when it wasn't yet tuned, RFC still put out a lot of signal.
I'd suggest using something other than a grid dip meter to check for resonance at the transmitter end of your feedline. I use one of those MFJ units that reads resistance and reactance. Much easier. Also suggest losing the impedance matching transformer. There isn't enough T.P.O. to worry about that. Just connect the coax inner conductor to your vertical wire and the shield to the radials and call it good.
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Ed Holland on April 17, 2016 at 21:16:08.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by Paul on April 17, 2016
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the ideas. I think your analysis is spot on... Radials were too long, certainly.
As for instrumentation, I don't have much beyond the dip meter and a measurement of current into the feeder coax. I have been watching noise bridges on Ebay, and may get one to play with. I'm not licenced, so aside from this, I'm a listener, and almost anything will work for a listening antenna without much calculation or scrutiny. The chance to play about with these low power transmitters and learn some first principles through practical experience is all part of the fun.
To your comment about the impedance matching transformer: Some articles I've read suggest that the impedance of an antenna setup like the one for PVC may well be quite a bit higher than that expected for a classical ground plane vertical. In which case I may be better off without it.. It certainly simplifies things.
Fortunately, it is relatively easy to mess about with the setup, and only a single story ladder climb to get up there, so changes can be made on a fairly casual basis.
Cheers
Ed
MTI report
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 20, 2016 at 02:24:57.
MTI was copied Q5 at 2217 utc for 6 ids in a row as I hiked around with my KA 1103
Re: MTI report
Posted by Ed Holland on April 20, 2016 at 18:25:14.
In reply to MTI report posted by Bill Hensel on April 20, 2016
Hi Bill,
I am intrigued, do you just carry the KA 1103, or do you have some additional setup to make it "hands free" or augment the antenna?
Cheers,
Ed
Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Ed Holland on April 20, 2016 at 21:29:31.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by Ed Holland on April 17, 2016
More pieces of the puzzle slot into place. After quit a bit of wondering, I found reference to the effect of containing the antenna's conductor in PVC, just as is the case for the namesake beacon. In designs for a 2m antenna of 5/8 lambda configuration the author warns of the altered velocity factor, stating that this may result in element lengths shorter by up to 19%.
http://www.rason.org/Projects/ant54/ant54.htm
This certainly falls into the ball-park suggested by the amount I had to shorten PVC's vertical, and the difference in actual vs expected resonant frequency for the original setup.
Cheers,
Ed Re: MTI report
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 21, 2016 at 12:20:22.
In reply to Re: MTI report posted by Ed Holland on April 20, 2016
The KA 1103 fits in my fly fishing shirt pockets or fishing jacket...often I sit and listen or simply walk holding the radio in my hand...when I hear a beacon come up I stand still and listen for it...
I can also configure the antenna in such a way that it extends vertically while the radio is in my breast pocket and that way I can walk hands free...often I will head copy cw on the ham bands while walking....
Re: MTI report
Posted by Ed Holland on April 21, 2016 at 18:08:08.
In reply to Re: MTI report posted by Bill Hensel on April 21, 2016
Thanks Bill,
That sounds ideal. I had a look at the KA 1103 after you mentioned it - and it seems to have a rather good reputation for sensitivity. The only portable I have that is easy to lug up the local hill is my Grundig YB400 PE, but to be honest, it is a bit deaf. I've no reason to think that it is malfunctioning. There is also a DX/local switch that helps make it even more unresponsive!
If I got serious, I could make a listening field day of it with the Lowe HF225. That receiver will run from 12V, and I have a suitable bicycle light battery pack that would run it for an hour or two, with a wire hung in the trees in to the 400 Ohm antenna input. Not listening on the move, perhaps, but it might be interesting to try.
Cheers,
Ed
Re: MTI report
Posted by Frank Lotito K3DZ / WH2XHA on April 23, 2016 at 11:49:16.
In reply to MTI report posted by Bill Hensel on April 20, 2016
http://www.radiolabs.com/radio/Kaito/kaito-1103.php Re: MTI report
Interesting radio, amazing what can be squeezed into a small package! - I do not doubt that this receiver can pick up something. But what are the "quantitative" performance characteristics of the KA-1103 radio? The web site only presents "qualitative" testimonies of its performance. How do you compare radios of this type to other radios, including those radios deliberately designed to meet (at least) the manufacturer's "quantitative" performance characteristics?
Posted by John Davis on April 23, 2016 at 20:24:00.
In reply to Re: MTI report posted by Frank Lotito K3DZ / WH2XHA on April 23, 2016
I've never used a KA-1103 myself, but I thought I remembered reading a review in Monitoring Times once that had at least a few specs. Here it is: www.monitoringtimes.com/mtfirstlook-kaito1103-2.pdf Not a whole lot to go on, but better than the average e-commerce Website generalities. :)
John
HiFERs This Weekend
Posted by John Davis on April 23, 2016 at 20:38:29.
Shakespeare died 400 years ago today, so I guess 22 meters did the same today in memory of the bard. At solar noon, NC had drifted down into collision with USC, EH was visible with a gap or two, but nobody else was around...not even codar. I could almost see the keyed carrier of WV, but couldn't hear anything to be sure that's really what it was. Farther up, a keyed carrier with the timing to be MTI was visible at the expected spot, but still too weak to discern by ear.
Just a little while ago at mid-afternoon, "NCUSC" and EH could still be seen, and RY and everone else were still absent. Even MTI did not put in an appearance this time, though the boken carrier I think is WV was just starting to approach audibility.
I switched over to watch SIW at the LF watering hole for a while, but hope to try HF again before sunset.
John
Re: HiFERs This Weekend (Sat PM)
Posted by John Davis on April 24, 2016 at 16:48:54.
In reply to HiFERs This Weekend posted by John Davis on April 23, 2016
I did indeed look at HF again about an hour before sunset, after the QRN levels rose enough to make further monitoing of 1750 meters pointless (and a powerline buzz obliterated any hope of seeing/hearing anyone on 630 meters). Ny that time, USC had retired for the day, NC wasn't doing so great, and only EH was holding forth at the watering hole. No WV or MTI, either, but occasional partial copy of FRC.
CQ LowFER Beacon Ops
Posted by John Davis on April 24, 2016 at 16:53:15.
I'm working on the lists for both the print and online versions today, so if you've got a schedule change planned for the summer, now would be the time to let me know about it. Thanks!
CQ HiFER Beacon Ops
Posted by John Davis on April 24, 2016 at 16:53:49.
I'm working on the lists for both the print and online versions today, so if you've got a schedule change planned for the summer, now would be the time to let me know about it. Thanks!
Re: CQ LowFER Beacon Ops
Posted by John Hamer on April 24, 2016 at 19:04:17.
In reply to CQ LowFER Beacon Ops posted by John Davis on April 24, 2016
Just moved to Conway SC from Florence. Bought 10 acres to play with. I have mostly been working on my receiving setup. I tested the JH transmitter out today and all is well. Planning on having an antenna up in a few months. Location is FM03mw.
Re: HiFERs This Weekend
Posted by John Andrews, W1TAG on April 25, 2016 at 20:20:04.
In reply to HiFERs This Weekend posted by John Davis on April 23, 2016
The absence of RY over the weekend was not due to propagation. I needed the antenna for other purposes! Should be back on now.
Spent some time on Saturday and Sunday running WSPR-X at the watering hole. As expected, SIW copy was quite consistent during the day. There is an interesting intermodulation effect between the SIW WSPR signal and the slow SIW signal 15 Hz above it. I frequently got a spurious SIW WSPR decode at 13555.370 kHz. It was typically down about 10 dB from the real WSPR signal, and would show up with the real signal in the upper teens of SNR or better. It's not the same thing as getting 60 or 120 Hz sidebands on a very strong WSPR signal. Not at all sure where the intermodulation occurs.
John, W1TAG
Re: HiFERs This Weekend
Posted by John Davis on April 26, 2016 at 04:55:03.
In reply to Re: HiFERs This Weekend posted by John Andrews, W1TAG on April 25, 2016
Oh look, there's RY again! :)
Interesting about the intermod between SIW slant and WSPR. I've not seen that effect yet, but then, it's been two weeks since we had an opening on this short path. Will keep watching.
In the attached file, there's some intermod in m external clipper whenever one or the other of the beacons gets especially loud, and particularly when there's a lot of noise, as there was today with Codar and other buzzes and outbursts. USC is visible sometimes, NC is strong a lot of the time, and EH and RY take turns doing the same.
Had WV for a while about 2230 UTC, but it was gone by half an hour later. Steady carrier about where MTI should have been. Thought I was getting little intermittent snippets of PVC for a while; right frequency, but when the signal faded up a little more, that turned out to be the chirpy random ditters that infest the band. Also had a little SSB to contend with for a while.
JD
---------------------------------------------------------------
File Attachment 1: 25apra.jpg
NEAR FEST - 18 inch PVC Loop Stick and Amp
Hello,
I am trying to find the name or call sign of the man who was selling 18 inch PVC pipe with an antenna inside. It turned out to be a very effective LF and MF antenna system.
Maybe 2013, 2014, 2015?
This man made three or four of them and sold them at NEAR FEST in New Hampshire.
Info send to N1EA at QRZ email address.
73
David N1EA Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query
Posted by Ed Holland on April 28, 2016 at 06:33:03.
In reply to Re: Elevated Vertical antennas query posted by Ed Holland on April 20, 2016
Hi Folks,
I did manage a little remote testing of the signal. Seemingly it is still "getting out" and well audible at the 1 mile range, but I am still unsure if it has good efficiency or a proper match.
And yet - this is fertile ground for tinkering (which is why I started). To that end, I have secured a Palomar Noise bridge from "A popular Auction website" and plan to do some more antenna analysis. Also, I think my antenna current meter is capable of misleading readings,. and could use a little thought as to what it is telling me.
So I predict: Fun with impedance analysis, Experiments with revised matching, Tinkering with counterpoise/radials, some sanity checks on transmitter output and measurement etc.
Cheers
Ed
Re: CQ LowFER Beacon Ops
Posted by N1KGY on April 28, 2016 at 21:38:47.
In reply to Re: CQ LowFER Beacon Ops posted by John Hamer on April 24, 2016
Not too far from me, about 170 air-miles. I'm in between Goldmine and Warrenton NC, FM06wf. I have one EWE aimed just North of West (~280deg) and one pointed Northeast (~30deg) Reversing the feed on it would point it at 210 degrees... putting Conway well within its pattern. Let me know when you're putting up the antenna, I'm happy to give you day-one sig reports. We can coordinate by HF.
73
n1kgy
potrzebie