Re: [IRCA] Michigan DU's, Sept.20th

[Neil Kazaross <neilkaz58@xxxxxxxxx>]

For a normal single loop KAZ I'd prefer 15 x 60 ft to assure plenty of low
end signal. Bottom wire 2 ft above ground is fine. You may want to test it
with the bottom wire on the ground as well, but what happens when it snows
lots on it is not known to me. Note to all, don't even think of trying a
DKAZ or similar double loop with the bottom wires on ground.

73  KAZ

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:57 PM, C B via IRCA <irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: C B <bevdxer@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America <
> irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:57:32 +0000 (UTC)
> Subject: Re: [IRCA] Michigan DU's, Sept.20th
> Hi Kaz,
>
> Thanks for sharing the results of your ongoing antenna testing. It's very
> informative. I think I found a way to squeeze a single west KAZ onto my
> lot. I was curious about the estimated performance difference between a 12'
> x 48' vs a 15' x 60' single KAZ. How high should the bottom element be?
>
> Thanks for your many insights & 73,
>
> Craig Barnes
> Wheat Ridge, CO
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 9/21/17, Neil Kazaross <neilkaz58@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [IRCA] Michigan DU's, Sept.20th
>  To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" <
> irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  Cc: "abdx" <abdx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  Date: Thursday, September 21, 2017, 12:35 PM
>
>  T storm QRN  have been a bother
>  here in IL with the now near record warmth.
>  Re: 882 I get the same two carriers, but never
>  audio past KHAC USB slop and
>  WLS slop.
>  Likely AUS/NZ mix. Perhaps you can do better, being further
>  from
>  both KHAC and WLS.
>
>  Re: 1098 hopefully you can get it better soon,
>  and tell that the man is
>  speaking an
>  island-type lang. I think this usually their s/off.
>
>  Re: 828  3GI gets out for 10
>  kW. I've had carriers for years. Sometimes
>  WCCO has faded down by then. Last season I
>  managed some audio, same as
>  podcast. Another
>  possibility for me is at month's end or into early
>  Oct
>  where in good cx ABC stns. hang around
>  'til 1200 UTC and you can make out
>  their
>  trumpet fanfare into ABC nx.
>
>  I wonder what 693 is? So far no audio and here
>  it is bothered by the
>  tragedy of WSCR
>  IBOC.
>
>  Re: antenna
>  experiments. The Double Flag is a good antenna for
>  sunrise
>  DXing for DU's with good low
>  angle pickup and 7 dB more signal (given the
>  same footprint) than the Double KAZ. However,
>  the DFlag seems to have in
>  general 5 to 10
>  dB worse back null and while that doesn't harm me much
>  at
>  sunrise, it is quite harmful to my DX any
>  other time. So it is back to a
>  DKAZ for my
>  west antenna and once I have it working like before, I will
>  add
>  a second one staggered by about 30 feet
>  south and 80 feet east and array
>  them.
>  Modelling shows this is promising. I haven't any more
>  room to array
>  them directly inline.
>
>  73 KAZ Barrington IL
>
>  On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:27
>  PM, Tim Tromp <kilokat7@xxxxxxxxx>
>  wrote:
>
>  > Heavy t-storms
>  crackling across the band this morning spoiled what could
>  > have otherwise been decent DU conditions
>  (decent for Michigan).  Unattended
>  > SDR
>  recordings this morning caught the following:
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  612, with threshold audio, man speaking, and music heard
>  starting at 1128
>  > UTC and ending at 1131
>  UTC and back into person speaking.  Not really
>  > enough signal to understand any speech or
>  ID the song played in between the
>  >
>  talk.
>  >
>  >
>  > 693, a nice solid carrier at 1126 UTC and
>  lasting for a few minutes but not
>  > good
>  enough for audio.
>  >
>  >
>  > 738, threshold audio
>  at 1125 UTC but buried by 740 WRPQ splatter, which was
>  > worse than usual here this morning.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  828.002 UNID, 1136 UTC, man speaking, possibly an interview
>  with another
>  > person (YL maybe?),
>  unfortunately nothing intelligible due to WCPT/WBAP
>  > splatter and strong t-storm noise
>  that's been plaguing me the last several
>  > mornings.  First time ever hearing any
>  audio on 828, usually a just a weak
>  >
>  carrier at best, even during good DU cx here.  Honestly
>  it's a channel that
>  > I usually
>  don't even consider checking, but the propagation was
>  different
>  > this morning.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  882 SAH, a couple of strong solid carriers at near equal
>  strength beginning
>  > at 1123 UTC and
>  separated by 1 Hz, but neither good enough for audio.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  1098 presumed V7AB, faint music first noted at 1123 UTC and
>  again with a
>  > peak at 1128 UTC with song
>  ending and then man speaking, but much splatter
>  > from local 1090 WKBZ to contend with this
>  morning and t-storm crackle.
>  >
>  >
>  > Weaker DU carriers
>  also noted peaking between 1116-1130 UTC on 549, 558,
>  > 576, 585, 594, 603, 621, 693, 702, 729,
>  747, 756, & 1035.
>  >
>  > 73,
>  > Tim Tromp
>  > West Michigan
>  > Perseus
>  SDR + southwest phased BOGs
>  > Local
>  sunrise: 1131 UTC
>  >
>  _______________________________________________
>  > 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