<<<   ... but DX heard on the Rockworks #4 SDR file 
was cleaner and less affected by the splatter compared to the same signals 
at Rockworks #2.   >>>  
  
Thanks for your comments, Guy. 
  
It's probably wise to remember that Rockwork 4 likely has the best 
splatter-killing geometry on the entire west coast, with a solid rock cliff 
extending far above the turnoff site, complete with a wire grid to stop rocks 
from falling on DXers (and sleeping squatters). Backside signal rejection is so 
impressive that the site can even make figure-8 FSL antennas seem like they 
have some serious F/B ratio. Rockwork 2 has nowhere near the same ideal 
geometry, with gently sloping ground below the site, and a lackluster sloping 
cliff above it. That one factor alone could account for the splatter reduction 
you noticed at Rockwork 4.    
73, Gary DeBock (in the valley) 
  
  
  

----- Original Message -----

From: "Guy Atkins" <[email protected]> 
To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" 
<[email protected]> 
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 9:15:40 PM 
Subject: Re: [IRCA] Loop Antenna Gain for Rockworks #4 and #2 

Hi Chuck, 

My apologies for not considering gain differences. I was too "wowwed" by 
the obviously lower splatter levels on Dave's Rockworks #4 SDR files 
compared to mine from Rockworks #2 on the morning of October 24. 

I did no adjustments, but just zoomed in on specific signals to see the 
peak signal level and the level of the lowest "valley" in the noise nearby 
in frequency, and observed the difference as the station's S/N ratio. 

The antenna I was using is reportedly 9 dB "hotter" (compared, I believe, 
to the original ALA1530 used by Dave). I'm not sure how that affects the 
observed S/N on various signals, but DX heard on the Rockworks #4 SDR file 
was cleaner and less affected by the splatter compared to the same signals 
at Rockworks #2. 

What I know for sure is, if you can't be at Masset, Haida Gwaii, then 
*45.743417, 
-123.957941 
<https://www.google.com/maps/place/Manzanita,+OR/@45.7434236,-123.9582682,103m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x5494b61a5fb38495:0x9b94c876e8acf657!6m1!1e1>*
 
 is the place to be! 

Best DX, 

Guy 




> From: Chuck Hutton <[email protected]> 
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 
> Cc: 
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 05:00:02 +0000 
> Subject: Re: [IRCA] Interesting Rockworks Discovery & Oct. 25th DX Comments 
> Guy - 
> All true, and all already mentioned.But what I was asking is whether your 
> numbers were adjusted for the difference in antenna gains.I'm trying to 
> compare apples and apples as much as possible. Just like we can't just 
> compare raw numbers for systems with preamps of different gains without 
> mentioning the difference, we can't compare the Rockworks numbers without 
> mentioning the differences between Dave's system and yours. 
> Chuck 
> 
> 
> 
_______________________________________________ 
IRCA mailing list 
[email protected] 
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: [email protected] 


_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
[email protected]
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: [email protected]

Reply via email to