Re: [IRCA] [NRC-AM] Recent DXpedition to Grayland, WA & Florence, OR
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [IRCA] [NRC-AM] Recent DXpedition to Grayland, WA & Florence, OR



There are a couple of papers, one by Knight and Thoday "Influence of the ground near transmitting and receiving aerials on the strength of medium-frequency sky waves", Proceedings of IEE, Vol. 16, #6, June 1969, and "LF and MF Propagation: An Approximate Formula for Estimating Sea Gain" by Knight, the BBC paper RD 1975/32.

A quick reread says 1000 feet shouldn't make too much difference at least on land of the same elevation, if I've sailed past the mathematics successfully, so my original point does not seem to be backed up by theory, or (presumably) peer reviewed observation. But there is an empirical gem in the second paper on page 917 concerning cliff-side signals: "...mesurements of the magnetic-field strength due to Rome, 845kHz, at the top of Beachy Head (a vertical cliff in southern England 160m high), gave results 2.3dB higher than values measured on a beach well away from the cliff. This enhanced filed strength is believe to be a purely local effect, associated with the sharpness of the cliff edge; 200m from the edge, the measured increase was only 0.4dB. These figures are consistent with the theoretical increases in the magnetic and electric fields which occur near the apex of a rectangular wedge illuminated by a plane wave..." Interestingly he goes on to say, similar to Bill's point about Gary's "extreme DXing" prowess: "....severe practical difficulties would attend the siting of an aerial so close to a cliff edge." (hi)

best wishes,

Nick


At 22:11 07-08-12, you wrote:

On Aug 7, 2012, at 4:14 PM, Nick Hall-Patch wrote:

> I suspect that the Florence location suffered somewhat from being 1000 feet
> inland, Gary and Bill. My limited experience has been that you're generally > better off being right at the coast for the best DX, although Gary's experience > seems to point to an advantage to being right at the coast and higher up, and
> that phenomenon certainly needs to be looked at more carefully.

That's almost what I blurted out in my original email -- what Gary [and others' research to understand it] may have stumbled upon is the true nature of 'sea gain' or 'coastal effect' and that it falls off REALLY rapidly away from the coast whether you're at sea level or elevated.

I think it's really hard to 'compare' what Gary's able to hear on a small portable radio with a super cool FSL antenna with what I do via a Perseus & DKAZ. Somehow I give him several 'bonus points' just for doing what he does LIVE, with cars whoosing by and a few hundred feet above the pounding surf while I'm literally sleeping! Now that I've been to where Gary did his last DXpedition I'm VERY impressed. I would not do what he does.

I might visit Sea Lion Caves down the road but I would NOT stand out there with a portable radio and a FSL and cars whooshing by at sunrise! For that alone he deserves a '10' on the Olympics scale.

> There was a research paper done years ago by the BBC, I believe, showing the > "coastal effect" as a wavefront moved from the water to the land, and although > there were peaks in signal strength as one moved inland, their location depended > on the frequency of the received signal, were compensated for by lower signal > strength in the area between the peaks, and, overall signal strength dropped the > further inland one went. I'll look it up again when I'm home; I have a vague > recollection that cliffs might have been incidentally involved, though I don't
> think that clifftop vs. seashore was investigated.

I've seen that paper and know some people who had something to do with it ... assuming they're still alive. It was incorporated, in some fashion, into the Rio 1979 Final Acts where the Region 1 & 3 MW stuff was negotiated/allocated. I remember once writing a TI-59 'program' to calculate desired and undesired signals along radials using the 'Rio Plan.' Had to see if changes we wanted to make to VOA MW facilities would affect Rss by more than 0.5 dB -- the limit to having other admins notified!

Blah, blah, blah ... that's when people still gave a hoot about AM and HF. :-(
_______________________________________________
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