Re: [IRCA] Puyallup, WA Ultralight TP's for 2-1

[d1028gary@xxxxxxx]

Dennis,

Thanks very much for your comments on the FSL antenna development.

Your TP reports from Kalama each morning are very interesting and useful here, of course. It seems like we share the same general Asian propagation trends, but with slightly different overall results because of the different antenna systems. You typically receive the high band Japanese stations much better than I do, but the FSL's seem to dig out the low band Asian mainland stations a little better as compensation. When you report reception of a huge TP signal on your Eton E100 (barefoot), I usually have the same monster signal here. So we must be on the same propagation "planet."  :-) Thanks again for your daily TP reports.

73, Gary
   


-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Vroom <vroomski@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America <irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sat, Feb 1, 2014 10:09 am
Subject: Re: [IRCA] Puyallup, WA Ultralight TP's for 2-1


Gary,

Your new FSL loop did very well this morning. Conditions were down here this 
morning and nothing near audio on your receptions on 639, 648 & 657. Enjoy 
reading your reports and FSL development.

Best regards,
 
Dennis,
Kalama, WA



On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:17 AM, "d1028gary@xxxxxxx" <d1028gary@xxxxxxx> 
wrote:
 


Hello All,

This morning was the first test for a new 12" FSL (the first completed in this 
winter experimental period), but the Asians didn't seem to cooperate with very 
good propagation. 

Like Dennis I had both 1566-HLAZ and 1575-VOA at good levels around 1510, and 
594-JOAK at a fair level around 1520. Right at 1525 the new FSL (description 
below) was able to barely receive threshold audio from 639-CNR1, 648-VOR and 
657-Pyongyang, but these signals were nothing to shout about-- and they bailed 
very quickly. On the high band some regulars like 1503-JOUK and 1593-CNR1 were 
MIA during sunrise enhancement, and since Dennis didn't report them either, it 
seems like high band propagation wasn't exactly thrilling either. In any case 
the new FSL was compared against the 12" FSL used for last year's Ocean Cliff 
DXpeditions (and Fall Season DXing), and it does seem to be slightly superior in 
sensitivity.

Although the new FSL is the same 12" diameter, it uses the huge new 1162/46 Litz 
wire sold by Ming Mak instead of the 660/44 Litz wire sold by Scott Lowe (the 
1162/46 Litz wire is actually cheaper than the 660/44 Litz wire, and provides 
greater sensitivity). The new FSL design also uses a two-coil switching system 
in an attempt to increase upper band sensitivity, and provide easier tuning on 
the higher frequencies. Depending on the A/B test results of this new FSL the 
other new winter season models (of greater diameter) will be built according to 
the most sensitive design.

73 and Good DX,
Gary DeBock (in Puyallup, WA, USA)
C.Crane SWP 7.5" Slider loopstick Ultralight +
12" Medium Wave FSL antenna



  

_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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


 
_______________________________________________
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