Re: [IRCA] NE Oregon TPs, Sunday--good for DU

["John H. Bryant" <bjohnorcas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve,

In multiple careful tests at Grayland on three different DXpeditions 
last fall, I found the useable TP signals on the Wellbrook was just 
about equal to the 700 to 900 foot Beverages that I was using there. 
The S-meter was higher, a bit, with the Beverage, but the Wellbrook 
was quieter, so the signal stuck up above the noise almost exactly 
the same amount on the two antenna systems.... This was where the 
signals were out in clear space between 10 kHz. splits. Where the 
Wellbrook was often superior, of course, was where the TP signal was 
fairly close in frequency to a US station that was in the rear 180 
degrees of the pattern. Since it is almost impossible to really 
ground Beverages at Grayland, the F/B ratio advantage of the Wellbrook is huge.

It certainly doesn't surprise me that your 1600 foot antenna out 
gains the Wellbrook.... I think that it ought to.  I sure would like 
to hear more thoughts on your comparison of vertical and loop 
elements. In a dead quiet environment, I think there is a decent 
possibility that verticals are superior. My Oklahoma location is 
"relatively" quiet and the verticals were a disaster.... Terrible 
noise where the loop elements were as quiet as church mice.

I should say that the Wellbrook did not do very well on our fall 
DXpedition to the Queen Charlottes. I found it the equal to the 
relevant BOGs on some occasions (1/3 to 1/2 the time), but the others 
had less luck, though they did not spend nearly as much time with it 
as I did. That is why I went back to Grayland a last time... to 
double check my results.... and the Wellbrook beat my Beverages at 
Grayland, hands down (the better F/B, of course.)  I still don't have 
any explanation for the results at QCI.

This winter in Oklahoma, I've been really having a party with a 
four-way, four loop array.  I've just submitted an article to the 
clubs outlining my tests over the past 18 months. With the length of 
the article and the reduced summer publishing schedule, it will 
likely not be out much before July.

John B.







At 02:01 PM 5/11/2008 -0500, you wrote:
> Yep..KAZ was up and at the rx by 1014 (5 min earlier than yesterday) 
> and DU cx were lots worse, surprisingly as A&K are low, cx last eve 
> were fine to the west(KOFI 1180 via sunset skip as is so very 
> common) , and KLZ 560 Denver was doing fine thru local WIND phase 
> null this morning. But...DU's didn't seem to get into that extra hop 
> needed to make it this far inland.
>
> 738 just a poor carrier past WGN IBOC and 702 not even that good. 
> Nothing else noted and nothing on 531 which I suspect was DU origin yesterday.
>
> 73 KAZ Barrington IL
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ratzlaff" <steveratz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" 
> <irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 8:20 AM
> Subject: [IRCA] NE Oregon TPs, Sunday--good for DU
>
>
> > This morning was good for DU reception, one of the best for me for 
> > level of audio on 891. I was up 15 minutes earlier, which seemed to 
> > make a difference for LWBC Radio Rossii--153 poor, 180 weak, 189 
> > weak/medium, 234 poor, 279 weak/medium around 1145 utc. (KAZ--note 
> > there are no beacons below 198.)
> > MW had hets galore, almost every channel up to about 1200 kHz, 
> > along with 1548. Audio, all definite or presumed DU: 594 poor DU 
> > talk; 738 poor DU talk; 774 poor/weak DU talk; 837 very poor ?; 855 
> > poor DU talk; 864 very poor ?; 891 best audio, rising to 
> > medium/loud several times, up to 30-45 seconds with woman and man 
> > discussing opera in Australia; a second station playing vocal pop 
> > music fading in and out, weak; 1107 very poor ?; 1116 weak DU talk. 
> > 891 the last to fade away around 1250 utc, with the two stations 
> > fading in and out. (First MW audio at 1200 utc.) All in all, an 
> > excellent morning for MW and LWBC audio.
> >
> > I hope KAZ made the effort to get up and check the band this 
> > morning. Addressing his comments of yesterdsy:  1098 presumed 
> > Marshall Islands carrier is almost always at least a weak het; on 
> > good mornings like today it rises to "loud" and would surely give 
> > decent audio if modulation were present. Today is only the second 
> > morning since I've changed over to the active loops on the 
> > Wellbrook broadband phaser so I really need more comparison checks. 
> > Today, when 891 was at medium/loud level on the longwire, it was 
> > weak with much poorer signal to noise ratio on the Wellbrook setup. 
> > When levels were weak on the longwire, the signal was gone on the 
> > phaser. I'm guessing that levels are about the same between the 
> > active verticals and the active loops--I can't directly switch from 
> > one to the other for instant comparisons. Better side lobe 
> > suppression that John Bryant observed for the loop over the 
> > vertical is not an issue for me for the TP reception, and I don't 
> > have enough domestic usage to be able to notice a difference there. 
> > If anything, I would say the active verticals give a little better 
> > signal overall.
> > I have not recently tried using the conventional Misek/Lankford 
> > homebrew phaser with my two parallel longwires, used "over the 
> > shoulder" for the TP reception. I briefly tried it last year with 
> > inconclusive results. I have limited time to try to optimize 
> > another "gadget", and am also checking for LF beacons, where the 
> > Wellbrook phaser or the conventional phaser don't work, so I 
> > haven't really done much trying to see if MW levels can be boosted 
> > with the conventional phaser.
> > I have not noticed 576 kHz as having a het here. This morning I was 
> > writing down the various hets heard, and 576 was not on the list; 
> > 567 was, though.
> > Comparing the Wellbrook broadband phasing system to the 
> > conventional Misek/Lankford phaser--I would class them as more like 
> > apples to oranges. The Wellbrook, you initially set the phasing and 
> > balance controls on a signal as close to 180 degrees in the null 
> > (E/W directions, for my dual-antenna setup), then you just forget 
> > about tweaking anything. Just switch the E or W control as you tune 
> > the radio, if you want to check signals from either direction. Of 
> > course the conventional phaser you're constantly tweaking for best 
> > null anytime you tune to a new frequency. The Wellbrook is "set and 
> > forget" for the most part. On domestics, you can tweak the controls 
> > for the absolute best null on some signals, usually ones 
> > considerably away from 0/180 degrees, but otherwise no tweaking is 
> > needed from 530-1700 kHz. John Bryant's various reports in the past 
> > using the Wellbrook phasing system give much better detail than my 
> > limited experience using it on domestics. Once you get your own 
> > Wellbrook setup going, it will be very interesting to hear what you 
> > have to say about it.
> >
> > Steve
> > NE Oregon
> > R75, AR7030, longwires, Wellbrook broadband phaser
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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















John B.
Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA
Rcvrs: WiNRADiO 313e, Eton e1, NRD-535(kiwa-mods)
Antennas: 700' NE/SW mini-Bev, Wellbrook Phased Array (pre-production version)

_______________________________________________
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