Moon-net April 2014

moon-net@mailman.pe1itr.com

103 participants
119 discussions

by Pete M

I have been playing with a new Triquint ULNA device (TQP3M9036). It Shows a lot of promise. It is like a MAR or MSA device in that it is 50ohm in and out. and has a claimed NF about .4db nf ( their numbers). I have built several pramps to test them and have gotten even better than they claim and they cover 50-1296 with ease and NF is .4ish or below. The S11 and S22 are both great and the OIP3 is +35db also ...very nice device. It has great promise as a good terrestrial LNA. Preamps are foolproof to build and would cost under $50 if all the best quality parts are used. Just for information only ... Pete WA2ODO -- ++++++CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE++++++ The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system.

3 months, 3 weeks

Beko HLV-1200 SOLD.

by pa3fpq

Gents, The amplifier is sold. Johan PA3FPQ

3 years, 2 months

Doppler question

by Juan Antonio Fernandez

Sri I made, at least a mistake, I send it again. Hi all, Very interesting answers. I come from Sats world, where the Doppler is a serious issue and it is so quick that it is impossible to work JT65. I will speak thinking in one carrier. Sats need to receive in only one fix frequency (it is an active RX with a wideband), if the Sat receives a carrier in this frequency then it will be repeated. The signal TX from the Sat will be in one fix frequency. So people who work Sats must correct its TX frequency (according with actual Doppler) to reach the sat in its fix frequency, in the same way because of the Sats will repeat this signal in a fix frequency, people must correct its RX frequency (according with actual Doppler). This way of dealing with Doppler is very interesting because NOBODY KNOWS the Doppler of the other stations and nobody needs to know it, we only need to know our own Doppler. If we would use this agreement to EME communications we will always speak about the frequency we hit the Moon, in other words the frequency which the Moon hear us and repeat our signal. The actual EME software shows us the Doppler as the sum of the Doppler effects to reach the Moon and to receive the bounce signal, so Moon will receive us at ½ Doppler announced, the other ½ effect will appear after de bounce. I will try to set a couple of examples. 1.- We will agree to hit the Moon in 1296.070. This is the frequency I will announce in the log. In our software the dates will be: *Self Doppler +3KHz *DX Doppler -2KHz The sign that the software shows will aplly to RX frequency and the opposite to the TX frequency, and always ½ magnitude on each one. Both of us must deal with Doppler, each one must do their task to hit the moon in the agreed frequency and to receive the bounce according our Doppler. Then we must set on our transceivers: *Me TX: 1296.070 -1.5KHz = 1296.0685MHz RX: 1296.070 +1.5KHz= 1296.0715MHz *DX TX: 1296.070 +1.0KHz = 1299.071MHz RX: 1296.070 -1.0KHz= 1296.069MHz Each station who sees the post will act only according its own Doppler. Don´t mind where is the DX station. 2.- In this case I see a signal in my receiver in 1296.070. What kind of pair of frequencies I must set (I know nothing about the DX station I have still decode nothing), I only know me own Doppler, and it is +2KHz. I must hit the moon in the same frequency that my partner: TX: 1296.070 -1.0KHz = 1296.069MHz RX: 1296.070 = 1296.070MHz WE WILL NOT NEED TO KNOW NO MORE THAN OUR DATES. I haven´t spoken about what frequencies will be the echoes (both echoes), to make the understanding easy. As a drawback we should change our habits, we should always use the RIT as follow: TX: The frequency we choose plus the opposite sign of Doppler and ½ Doppler magnitude. RIT: the sign of our Doppler and ½ Doppler magnitude. Although at first glance it seems not to be interesting in 144MHz but we will always hit the target in whatever band, even in 144MHz. Somebody can tell that they need a computer, to do JT65 of course, if you do CW surely have a smart phone with the proper software to know your own Doppler or you can print it before. If I made some mistakes let me know. It is my 2 cents. Juan Antonio EA4CYQ

6 years, 6 months

VE6TA 432 CW EME Dubus Results

by Grant Furnald

Despite the minus 25-30 Degree C weather I activated the station for the 432 contest. Activity is lower than previous years and an elevated K index disturbed conditions. The following stations were worked this weekend; N4GJV, ES5PC, VK3UM, JA6AHB, I1NDP, OK1CA, UA3PTW, SP6JLW, LZ1DX, NC1I, DL9KR, SP7DCS. Huge signals this weekend from DL9KR, NC1I, UA3PTW, OK1CA, and VK3UM despite the disturbances, and apogee conditions. I called W1AW/4 and received QRZ's, and heard the following with no opportunity to call, DL7APV, DF3RU, PA3?, and IK2OLO?. Overall a fun weekend and nice to hear some of the big signals make it back from the moon. I also managed to work WA4NJP as W1AW/4 prior to the contest period. I hope to make it on for the 13 cm contest next month. 73's to all and thanks to the stations who got on. Grant VE6TA DO33gs

8 years, 5 months

weekend plans

by jimmyv＠hol.gr

I have no special contest plans other than I will be qrv in cw random calling cq on 2m-70cm-23cm. Hope gear at eme qth is ok. Emphasis will be on 144&432MHz so as to help increase cw activity on those 2 beloved bands. Pls note that I have bad qrn on 2m at moonset window even at high elevation, but will hang in there. A tip: due to poor moon conditions and especially deep qsb minimums expected on 2m, when you hear qrz send your call a few more times for the period(s) needed, and be patient. QSO reward in this mode deserves the extra effort. Want to wish GL to all participating stations and hope mixed and digital stations attempt to have fun in cw also. It is not about the numbers or dxcc's, it is about the moon journey...either spacecraft man guided or not, has its merits and joy. 73 Jimmy SV1BTR 2m: 16*6el xpol 70&23cm: 6.1m dishes

8 years, 9 months

Larcan amps and conversion kits....

by Marshall-K5QE

This post is for Paul-N1RJX......please contact him for the Larcan amps and parts, NOT me. I saw these amps at the SE VHF Conference in Atlanta last weekend and they really look nice. Paul has 6M amps, 2M amps and 222 amps available. Prices are very good and output is even better....what a deal!! In addition, he has the parts kits to allow you to convert a 6M amp into a 2M amp, so if you are interested, please contact Paul. de Paul-N1RJX I have just got the next batch of caps in for the 2m Larcan conversions based on WA1ZMS Brian's work. These include the extra caps based on WA3LBI and VO1KS's observations too. These kits include all of the caps, tape and coils to modify a lo/lo Larcan to a 1Kw 2m Larcan. Around 55 components in all to change out plus many straps to add. The kits are $175 shipped and yes it still amazes me how ATC can ask so much for a cap that I cannot hardly see. For conversion kits please contact me at g6yzc(a)msn.com For conversion detail, or to order a fully converted and tested 2m 1Kw Larcan, please see the following links. http://members.rennlist.org/warren/2mLarcan.html http://members.rennlist.org/warren/larcanamps.html Paul N1RJX 978 906 5524

8 years, 10 months

Stacking distance 4x9 DK7ZB

by Ivan Kaitmann

------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 13:50:50 +0200 From: Juan Antonio Fernandez <ea4cyq(a)gmail.com> Subject: [Moon-Net] Stacking distance 4x9 DK7ZB To: moon-net <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com> Message-ID: <CA+5nehNKRinAwSxC8phmF0s=Pn=W=Yn9BYP9TJD95=M5+us9bQ(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hello all! I have purchased these antennas built by WIMO as WY209 reference. The WIMO Manual tells that: Vertical distance: 3.40m Horizontal distance: 3.22m It is strange that vertical distance is longer than horizontal distance. I asked WIMO about it and they told me that this info is from DK7ZB source. I can`t find original DK7ZB info, but in the VE7BQH chart shows a DK7ZB 9 elements a bit sorter ( 2.39wl in spite of 2.5wl from WIMO), where the distances are: Vertical distance: 3.32m Horizontal distance: 3.56m Could someone clarifies what could be the best stacking distance for these 4x9 elements antenna. Thank you very much in advance. Juan Antonio EA4CYQ

8 years, 11 months

Re: [Moon-Net] VHF Meeting 2014 held by OZALS from 8-10 of August

by Peter Hansen

Hello Every 4 year the famous meeting is held in Denmark. This year it is placed close to the German boarder in a place called Kliplev. It takes places from the 8-10 of August. This years meeting is hosted by the OZ1ALS contest team that many knows from different VHF and up contest. Throughout the event there are different interesting lectures, fleamarkt and most important VHF and up entusiasts are meeting for discussing radio and technical things, or just enjoy some beers and good food. There are accomodation for many people so feel free to go and look on www.vhf2014.dk<http://www.vhf2014.dk> for further informations. Booking is online and there is a list where the participants are listed. Hope to see alot of you there. 73 Peter OZ1LPR on behalf of OZ1ALS contest team.

8 years, 11 months

Re: [Moon-Net] Question About Interference From Different Types of Lighting

by Chuck Smallhouse

Hi Guys, I apologize for the previous e-mail . It had a lot of typos and wasn't complete. The result of a very late night and a harassing XYL, wanting me to come to bed. Something that you have to look forward to Bob ! Chuck Hi Bob, I have some rather biased advice(experience from several installations) when it comes to wiring a ham shack/workshop. First if you feel confident enough, you can save a great amount of money by at least wiring all the wall mounted stuff yourself, before the wallboard/sheet rock is installed. What you really want is probably 10 times more outlets than the electrician has ever seen before, in one room of that size. I always also do an interesting control function. From where the 240 VAC comes into an outlet(s), I run a 3 wire (and ground) 240 VAC cable, to a wall mounted outlet box that has a pair of mercury wetted high power relays (~50-100A+) in it, that are energized by a 115 wall switch at your entrance door. Between that switch and the mercury wetted ones, you can control all the outlets, 240 and 120 VAC, that you will not want to be on continuously, in your absence. This doorway located switch will also act as a safety or panic/emergency switch. The other two switches by the entrance door control the lights and the overhead fans and/or the AC. Do not use wall mounted variable lighting or fan switches, as they can be RFI generators, Some of these different types of additions, for your needs , might not be appreciated by your electrical inspector, so you can add the external relay junction box, that's plugged into your 240 VAC socket later, A lot of external wiring with Romex and wall boxes, can be done after the fact. All should be to code (logical), but probably won't be in the inspector's book ! You need to have many, many outlets around on all the walls, both of the "switched on", and of the " continuously on" types. I use different colored covering wall plates to ID them. An over abundance of both types are needed behind your operating positions, and also behind your "test bench". Also don't skimp on placing 240 VAC outlets around the room, at least one on every wall. Rationale: There are some items that you want to run continuously in your absence, like clocks and frequency stds, etc., and most others that you can switch on/off, with one switch at the door, when you are entering or leaving. As far as overhead lighting goes, numerous hanging, four bulb, 4 foot long, florescent fixtures provide more than adequate light and are generally long lived, I haven't yet really detected any RFI from mine. Here again just install 120 VAC outlet boxes in the ceiling, where you think that you may want to later install them. Although they now are replacing the transformer type of ballasts with electronic ones. that are supposedly longer lived, but they may be suspect RFI generators. In any case don't use any CFLs, as they can not only emit an audible tone but also possible RFI, and in my experience, they don't last any longer than incandescent bulbs. LED bulbs are the way to go, but you need to test each brand for possible RFI. The CRE brand sold by Home Depot (at least through their catalog) so far, I haven't had any trouble with. Multiple LED fixtures are often interfaced with single electronics enclosures, that have been a great source of problems. . In all cases GET/INSIST on a guarantee from your supplier, that you can return all light sources that generate RFI. BTW, you may want as much as a 200A service to your shop, I do, to my radio room and a 100A to my remote EME shack, 400A to the property, including the house. I can clarify more later, if you desire. 73, Chuck W7CS At 09:06 PM 4/28/2014, you wrote: >At my new QTH in AZ, I'm in the process of laying out an enclosed >operating room (not for surgeries but for my ham radio, hi, hi). It >will be 320 sq ft & located inside a metal insulated 1500 sq ft >workshop. I'm really excited abt finally having a comfortable room >for a couple of different stations as well as test bench with >various test equipment. The framing & exterior siding is planned to >be done May 16-19. The electrical wiring will take place after that >is completed. > >I had an electrician here today to look at my sketches for location >of various electrical outlets & a lighting plan consisting of >several T8 fluorescent fixtures & several adjustable bullet lights. > >I watched one You Tube video (think it was fm EU) which showed how >some different LED lights caused interference which was >quantitatively measured. Some bulbs caused no interference, some a >moderate amount & some were vy high levels. The electrician said >the newer T8 fluorescent bulbs use an electronic ignition similar to >LEDs which causes me concern. He suggested an alternative approach >of using several track lighting strips with halogen bulbs. I know >they're not as efficient as LEDs or fluorescents but suspect they >also don't generate interference. > >So, my question for this group is what experience hv you had with >LEDs, halogens, &/or T8 fluorescents generating interference in the >HF, VHF, UHF & SHF spectrums? > >Tnx & vy 73, >Bob, K6PF

8 years, 11 months

Re: [Moon-Net] [moon-net] Question About Interference From Different Types of Lighting

by John Regnault

Bob, Almost all types of modern lighting can produce VHF interference, an unfortunate consequence of 'green' legislation in many countries. My method is to go and test an example with a FT817 and short antenna and check for noise. CFL bulbs, I have seen low frequency HF noise but nothing at VHF. Most of the lighting at my EME station is 230V CFL bulbs. LED lighting - most have some form of SMPS and the majority, even with an EMC marking, do produce some VHF noise. Some examples were detectable at 12ft with a 'rubber duck' antenna on 144MHz. The LED 'halogen replacement bulbs' sold in the local DIY stores are a complete nightmare. The SMPS is in the bulb holder with almost no room for EMC filtering! Conventional fluorescent tubes themselves are fine at VHF (not so hot on 1.8MHz) but I have detected VHF noise from newer 'electronic ballast' systems. Conventional ballasts I have not seen any VHF issues. Halogen bulbs are fine, the ones I have in the kitchen are 230V ones. BUT; the low voltage ones tend to have a SMPS or 'electronic transformer' which can be as bad as LED systems. One problem in Europe is that even the ones with a CE certification, which should include EMC testing, does not address the issue of radiated emissions from the supply cables above 30MHz. If I had a choice I would stick to filament bulbs or tube fluorescents and not worry about the cost. 73 John G4SWX

8 years, 11 months

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Moon-net April 2014