In deference to the OP in the KPA500 clicking thread...
Having once operated EME (on CW) and meteor and tropo scatter, I can say that terrestrial path loss is not necessarily lower than the EME path. Many years ago, W7UBI (SK) in Boise, ID and I ran twice-weekly two-meter MS schedules for over a year. We both had EME capable stations. The distance between up was about 850 miles, an easy MS distance but extreme for tropo. If memory serves, our rate of completion of valid MS QSOs was in the neighborhood of 30-35%. But what was interesting was that there were times when residual (tropo) signals were readable. The point is that for either terrestrial mode, high power was both appropriate and necessary. I should add that in addition to path loss, terrestrial noise is also an issue to be overcome.
As to the broad (wide) signals, those are not necessarily caused by strong signals but weak receivers.
Wes N7WS On 7/17/2018 8:59 AM, turnbull wrote:
EME boys fave a lot of patb loss and their Yagis point to the moon. For terrestrial worm, the path loss is generally much lower and especially when there are othdf local hams or good propagation the signal levels can be high. This often leads to excessively wide signals on different audio frequencies. Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. -------- Original message --------From: "Dave Cole (NK7Z)" <[email protected]> Date: 17/07/2018 15:30 (GMT+00:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KPA500 thermal clicks yes... Weak Signal, not low power. The EME boys use 1 KW. 73s and thanks, Dave NK7Z https://www.nk7z.net
______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [email protected]
