[DX-CHAT] Active Antenna
Anil wrote: Suggest me a good , simple sensitive Active Antenna for my Grundig YB 400 short-wave Rx. 73s Anil You might want to look at the MFJ 1020C Active Antenna. I don't own one, but I have used one, and it does work. Considering the value of what's inside the box, you might want to look for a used one on Ebay or something. Have you tried simply extending the antenna further by using one of those clamp on ( or inductance coupled) SWL wire antennas? I don't have the Yacht Boy model you have either, but all of the SWL portables that I have are substantially improved by just adding more antenna. Radio Shack sells such an accessory, or used to. But I think I've seen them at other stores that sell SW radios--even large dept. stores like maybe Walmart. If your Yacht Boy has a connector for an outside antenna, I would use that and just string a wire around. Not as neat as an active antenna perhaps, but certainly cheaper. If you get a little energetic, and want to try building one yourself, they are pretty simple. Here's a circuit you might consider. http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/circ/activant.html Dave W7AQK Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] Very well justify quote
QUOTE FROM EI3IO,G3SDL I'd like to discuss a few additional issues in respect of some of the information already provided. Firstly the DXCC list itself is a political list; just look at the principal requirements for DXCC status; UN recognition, ITU call-sign series or inclusion in (a) the U.S. Department of State's list of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty as having a local Administrative Center, or (b) the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Now what constitutes inclusion on the State Department's List, as TRNC would seem to qualify? - the politics and foreign policy of a powerful, important and sovereign nation. Now lets look at this illegal call-sign prefix 1B. The ITU Radio Regulations (Article 19 and Appendix 42) do not provide for any call-sign which starts with the figure 0 or 1 or where a single letter followed by a figure forms the national identifier; in this case the second character is never 0 or 1. There is therefore a clear problem for 1B BUT now lets consider some call-signs which we know and love, which are also a problem but no one raises even a whisper of concern about them. 1A - a DXCC entity listed as an unofficial call-sign in the DXCC list - note in this case the word 'illegal' or 'unauthorised' call-sign is not used. Then there is S0 another disputed territory but not as disputed as TRNC; again it is not using a call-sign series conforming to the Radio Regulations of the ITU. S0 is also listed as an unofficial call-sign in the DXCC list. So are some of us not being just a little hypocritical when complaining about the use of 1B by TRNC as an illegal call-sign? In terms of problems of recognition TRNC has similar problems to Kosovo, Palestine, Taiwan and Western Sahara. In amateur circles we've already seen stirrings of discontent with the disputed (by some) independence of Kosovo in recent times. However in the case of TRNC, no one can dispute that the United Nations Security Council issued two resolutions (541 and 550) proclaiming that the Turkish Cypriot declaration of independence was illegal and requested that no other sovereign state should recognise the legality of the declaration and asked for its withdrawal. So once we get into the world of politics and human relations things get blurred. Let us accept there are always international political problems in the World, whether its the politicisation of Antartica, who owns the Falklands/Malvinas, whether Macedonia should have a new name or whether the British Isles should be called the Western European Isles. I for one wish the 1B licensees well - I understand that they are operating under difficult conditions but they are operating in accordance with the regulations of the State in which they live. I do not think that any person living in any of the disputed territories around the World should be denied the fun and enjoyment of operating an amateur radio station. I also understand the deep rooted problems between the two Cypriot communities but these need to be solved in an appropriate way through negotiation, NOT by invoking emotive statements in amateur radio news groups and email lists. Best 73s to all Dave EI3IO, G3SDL Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Very well justify quote
DXCC rules prohibit recognition of states that are in rebellion. Those rules have denied DXCC accreditation to operations in Karen State (Burma/Myanmar), by rebels in Cambodia (XU1SS), rebels in Chechnya and many others over the years. TRNC is such a rebel area - in this case one with a local government established by action of the military of a foreign state in opposition to the internationally recognized government of Cyprus. TRNC is, in effect occupied territory. If TRNC had any legitimacy, ITU would issue a callsign block as they have for other entities (Palestine, Vatican, etc.). Instead, TRNC receives as much status and legitimacy as a would be given to Little Havana in Miami if the Castro regime in Cuba were to declare it independent of the United States. As to some of the other entities questioned: S0 Western Sahara is on the UN list of Self-Governing Territories 1A SMOM is a legacy entity that was on the DXCC list prior to the last rules update. Much like The Spratleys, Scarborough Reef, Mt. Athos, etc. it would probably not be eligible for entity status under the current rules BV Taiwan, VR Hong Kong and XX Macau are all legacy entities from the pre-2000 DXCC list. Hong Kong and Macau are both on the US Department of State list of dependencies. Taiwan is recognized on the Department of State Independent States in the World list. Hong Kong and Macau both qualify under current rules and it is debatable whether the Independent States of the World list should be added to the DXCC rules as another option for qualification. Any entity that is created on the soil of and declared independent from an internationally recognized government by the action of an outside power as in the case of TRNC has no legitimacy in the international community. For the Turkish government to promote an independent TRNC while suppressing the legitimate desires of the Kurds for self-determination is a crime against humanity. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of soyer ecesoy Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 8:27 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] Very well justify quote QUOTE FROM EI3IO,G3SDL I'd like to discuss a few additional issues in respect of some of the information already provided. Firstly the DXCC list itself is a political list; just look at the principal requirements for DXCC status; UN recognition, ITU call-sign series or inclusion in (a) the U.S. Department of State's list of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty as having a local Administrative Center, or (b) the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Now what constitutes inclusion on the State Department's List, as TRNC would seem to qualify? - the politics and foreign policy of a powerful, important and sovereign nation. Now lets look at this illegal call-sign prefix 1B. The ITU Radio Regulations (Article 19 and Appendix 42) do not provide for any call-sign which starts with the figure 0 or 1 or where a single letter followed by a figure forms the national identifier; in this case the second character is never 0 or 1. There is therefore a clear problem for 1B BUT now lets consider some call-signs which we know and love, which are also a problem but no one raises even a whisper of concern about them. 1A - a DXCC entity listed as an unofficial call-sign in the DXCC list - note in this case the word 'illegal' or 'unauthorised' call-sign is not used. Then there is S0 another disputed territory but not as disputed as TRNC; again it is not using a call-sign series conforming to the Radio Regulations of the ITU. S0 is also listed as an unofficial call-sign in the DXCC list. So are some of us not being just a little hypocritical when complaining about the use of 1B by TRNC as an illegal call-sign? In terms of problems of recognition TRNC has similar problems to Kosovo, Palestine, Taiwan and Western Sahara. In amateur circles we've already seen stirrings of discontent with the disputed (by some) independence of Kosovo in recent times. However in the case of TRNC, no one can dispute that the United Nations Security Council issued two resolutions (541 and 550) proclaiming that the Turkish Cypriot declaration of independence was illegal and requested that no other sovereign state should recognise the legality of the declaration and asked for its withdrawal. So once we get into the world of politics and human relations things get blurred. Let us accept there are always international political problems in the World, whether its the politicisation of Antartica, who owns the Falklands/Malvinas, whether Macedonia should have a new name or whether the British Isles should be called the Western European Isles. I for one wish the 1B licensees well - I understand that they are operating under difficult
