[IRCA] ground conductivity

[Nick Hall-Patch <nhp@xxxxxxxx>]

(sorry for the strange way of quoting below, but the server at 
ieee.org was down due to power outages in New Jersey had apparently 
shut down the server at ieee.org at various times over the weekend; I 
presume that mail was bouncing at that time because I haven't seen 
any queued mail from then, and am catching up on my IRCA list mail on 
hard-core-dx.com.   And, lest you should ask why the world's premier 
engineering organization doesn't have appropriate backup power, I 
imagine that you are not alone.  Perhaps they sited the generator 
just above sea level?)   At any rate I lost a fair lot of mail, and I 
suspect that this list stopped accepting mail from me also as a 
result of the bounces.

So, getting back to the topic below, I guess John's reply illustrates 
my point.  Direct water path "should" be more important, and our 
South American logs attest to that, but in fact, 20+km of land 
between us and  the water path to Asia and Europe/Middle East didn't 
seem to attenuate signals much.  If they did, then the direct water 
path signals must have been truly magnificent.  So, I was wondering 
if intervening land with higher ground conductivity attenuated  long 
haul signals less (I wasn't talking about the ground under the 
antennas ).   Chuck, did you have intervening land to much of your DX 
targets in Newfoundland?

  I've never DXed from Newfoundland, but it seems that recently 
Allen Willie has been lamenting the lack of DX from a more inland 
location than he is used to at home on the coast.

best wishes,

Nick






> Tuesday, November 06 2012


> <http://www.hard-core-dx.com/index.php?topic=IRCA>
> IRCA
>
> I would tend to agree with Chuck that when you are on the coast, the direct
> water paths to the target areas are more important than ground conductivity.
> Conductivity is good, but, Gary DeBock's cliffside (rocks) listening with
> ultralights would tend to support the importance of a clear shot across the
> water even without Beveridges.
>
> John
> I think PEI has the inside edge to a lot of DX, Gary.  We were on 
> the northern shore of Howe Bay, with a good water path to South 
> America, but in fact there was a bit of a land path to much of 
> northern Europe and the Middle East, and certainly to Asia, yet 
> heard some amazing signals.  I suspect that mucky red soil is fairly 
> conductive, but still.   And the antennas used were corner fed loops 
> and an ALA100, suburban yard antennas.

_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx