|
Antenna for shortwave reception
John Smith wrote:
... Hmmm, from your statements, and text--if adhered to, most-certainly suggests, they must be following your advise, surely! The "alligators", or, i.e., stations which are all mouth and no ears ... However, I am willing to debate, argue, stand-behind, etc., all which I have said ... I actually HAVE built my antennas, and continue to do so ... indeed, my statement is, "Only lamers buy them." Regards, JS P.S. Just in case you wondered, yes, I did purchase a couple, in the early days ... Regards, JS |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and-Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
RHF wrote:
This is Why I refer to Amateur Radio as "The Craft" : The Mastery* of the Body of Knowledge and Practices related to the Science and Art of Radio Operating. * All Praise Be To Them That Do. -but- that is not me : for i remain simply a plain old shortwave radio listener : who keeps his swling "k-i-s-a-p" = keep/ing it simply and practical I enjoy sending intelligence from point A to point B without wires. I enjoy making spikes (not Xmas trees) on my FSH-313. My work involves UHF FM transmitters of between 10 mW and 250 mW. These need to go 300-500 feet (flawlessly). This is very similar to my hobby (what I enjoy). I can't believe they pay me to do this. |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and-Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
On Dec 28, 8:38*pm, Telamon
wrote: In article , *John Smith wrote: RHF wrote: [stuff] RHF, I have no bone to pick with you, don't fall victim to trolls here which just wish to "stir up chit", to mask their ignorance ... SNIP - Now that is funny. One Trolling idiot posting - a response to another trolling idiot "don't fall - victim to the Trolls". - - -- - Telamon - Ventura, California Ah Telamon - You know me all too well ~ RHF |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and-Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
On Dec 29, 5:50*am, Dave wrote:
RHF wrote: This is Why I refer to Amateur Radio as "The Craft" : The Mastery* of the Body of Knowledge and Practices related to the Science and Art of Radio Operating. * All Praise Be To Them That Do. -but- that is not me : for i remain simply a plain old shortwave radio listener : who keeps his swling "k-i-s-a-p" = keep/ing it simply and practical - I enjoy sending intelligence from point A to point B without wires. *I - enjoy making spikes (not Xmas trees) on my FSH-313. *My work involves - UHF FM transmitters of between 10 mW and 250 mW. These need to go - 300-500 feet (flawlessly). -*This is very similar to my hobby (what I enjoy). -*I can't believe they pay me to do this. Dave - You Are One of The Lucky Ones. - enjoy ~ RHF |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and-Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:50 am, Dave wrote: RHF wrote: This is Why I refer to Amateur Radio as "The Craft" : The Mastery* of the Body of Knowledge and Practices related to the Science and Art of Radio Operating. * All Praise Be To Them That Do. -but- that is not me : for i remain simply a plain old shortwave radio listener : who keeps his swling "k-i-s-a-p" = keep/ing it simply and practical - I enjoy sending intelligence from point A to point B without wires. I - enjoy making spikes (not Xmas trees) on my FSH-313. My work involves - UHF FM transmitters of between 10 mW and 250 mW. These need to go - 300-500 feet (flawlessly). - This is very similar to my hobby (what I enjoy). - I can't believe they pay me to do this. Dave - You Are One of The Lucky Ones. - enjoy ~ RHF . I do. Thanks. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
On Dec 27, 12:57*pm, John Smith wrote:
Billy Burpelson wrote: ... Say what? He said he "ain't here to be a ham", so why would he want to transmit? Well, consider me a "different type of ham." *In that, I always construct my antennas to receive the best signal for the application at hand, ALWAYS--transmitting is only a secondary consideration. *As, I have never found an antenna which has been found to receive the most efficiently fail to do so in xmit mode. *Given both xmitter and receiver have the same input impedances ... I do, frequently, see hams adjust the antenna, and its' type, for the xmitter--and the best readings which can be obtained in that mode. *I pay far more attention to how the antenna receives ... I can always crank up power on this end, should I ever find it necessary--I don't know what the guys capabilities on the other end is/are ... Regards, JS JS, Good Antenna Building Concept : You Can't Talk To Them -unless- You Can First Hear Them. ~ RHF |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and-Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
RHF wrote:
... - Now that is funny. One Trolling idiot posting - a response to another trolling idiot "don't fall - victim to the Trolls". - - -- - Telamon - Ventura, California Ah Telamon - You know me all too well ~ RHF . Problem is, telemundo does not use the term "newsnet troll" correctly. His definition: "newsnet-troll = anyone not agreeing with me or pointing out inaccuracies in my text." Quite obviously, most here will appear as a troll, to telemundo ... sad, so very, very sad. :-( Regards, JS |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and- Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
In article ,
John Smith wrote: RHF wrote: ... - Now that is funny. One Trolling idiot posting - a response to another trolling idiot "don't fall - victim to the Trolls". - Ah Telamon - You know me all too well ~ RHF . Problem is, telemundo does not use the term "newsnet troll" correctly. His definition: "newsnet-troll = anyone not agreeing with me or pointing out inaccuracies in my text." That is just a comprehension impaired interpretation. Quite obviously, most here will appear as a troll, to telemundo ... sad, so very, very sad. :-( You have a great imagination but you don't know how to usefully apply it. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
RHF wrote:
... JS, Good Antenna Building Concept : You Can't Talk To Them -unless- You Can First Hear Them. ~ RHF . Well, I'd like an antenna like this one (see URL, below.) He comes into my location in the low valley of CA like a door buster, from his secret location in NV. Jumping the high Sierra Mountains in a single leap! grin http://www.smeter.net/w6obb/antenna-farm.php Regards, JS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
Here's why antenna efficiency is important for transmitting but not for
HF receiving. First, the definition of efficiency: For a transmitting antenna, it's the fraction of the power applied which is radiated. The remainder is turned into heat. For receiving, it's the ratio of the power which is delivered to the receiver to the power which could be delivered to the receiver if the antenna had no loss. The efficiency of a given antenna is the same when transmitting and receiving. Sometimes people use "efficiency" to mean other things -- this is the meaning of the term in all antenna literature and texts. Consider this communications system: transmitter - antenna - propagation path - antenna - receiver - listener A receiver unavoidably adds noise to the received signal. So if no noise is injected in the propagation path, the signal/noise ratio is the ratio of the signal entering the receiver to the noise created by the receiver's input circuitry. This is generally the case at VHF and above. When receiver noise dominates, as above, increasing the receive antenna's efficiency increases the signal arriving at the receiver, so the signal/noise ratio improves. This allows you to hear the signal better. But it only works for VHF and above. HF is a different story. At HF, there's a lot of atmospheric noise (injected in the "propagation path" part of the system), and unless the receive antenna and receiver are exceptionally bad, the atmospheric noise is much greater than the noise created by the receiver. I mentioned a simple test in my last posting, to see whether this is the case -- just disconnect the antenna. If the noise level drops, atmospheric noise dominates. It's not hard to make a receiver that atmospheric noise will dominate with a 3 foot whip antenna at HF. So at HF where atmospheric noise dominates, the signal/noise ratio is the ratio of the signal entering the receiver to the atmospheric noise entering the receiver. Compare this to the situation described above for higher frequencies. Now let's see what happens when we improve the efficiency of an HF receiving antenna. Because both the signal and the dominant noise come from locations in front of (that is, on the transmit side of) the antenna, improving the efficiency of the antenna makes both the signal and noise greater in the same proportion when they arrive at the receiver. There's no improvement at all in the signal/noise ratio. The effect is the same as turning up the receiver volume control. The only way you can improve the signal/noise ratio is to somehow favor one over the other, such as by making the antenna directional. And an inefficient, directional antenna like a Beverage or small loop will nearly always enable you to hear better in some directions than an efficient, nondirectional antenna because directionality helps and inefficiency doesn't hurt. How about transmit antenna efficiency? The signal strength from the transmit antenna is proportional to the antenna's efficiency. (It also depends on other things, but I'm just talking about efficiency here.) So if the efficiency of the transmit antenna increases from, say, 33% to 66%, the power levels of the signals at the receive antenna and the receiver double, and there's no change to the received noise, on either HF or VHF and above. So improving the transmit antenna efficiency always improves the signal/noise ratio at the receiver, in this case by 3 dB. That's why you can hear bunches of HF stations with a very inefficient antenna, but they won't hear you if you try to transmit using that same antenna -- it's because the noise is injected into the system between you. And it's likely that you'll be able to hear stations just as well with the very inefficient antenna as with a much larger, efficient one. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
Roy Lewallen wrote:
... Roy Lewallen, W7EL YEAH, what he said! LOL And, I must defer to him, his experience allows nothing less ... Regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
Sum Ting Wong wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 14:43:27 -0800, John Smith wrote: You seem to feel that s/n ratio is something to pursue, I tell you it is not. You must have been one of the really strong stations I heard during the last ARRL 160m contest that kept calling CQ over and over without being able to hear all the stations that were answering you. It must have been frustrating. 73, S.T.W. I have given some thought your statement; I mean, it just strikes me as so bizarre, I ignored it. S/N ratio will NOT improve with an antennas efficiency, indeed, it will increase lineally. The more efficient the antenna (sensitive) the more-efficient it will be at receiving "on frequency noise" from even greater distances. However, a poor antenna may be "efficiently receiving" harmonic related noise which a cheap receiver may have inadequate rejection against ... indeed, there are many "side-scenerios" which are possible. You seem to wish for a very highly efficient/sensitive antenna which will do some sort of noise rejection (or, for some reason, have, in error, given antenna physics this magical/mystical ability(s.)) However, "that/those antenna(s) only exists in science fiction, at least at this date." Surely, you have poor design which is subject to static noise and/or poor antenna pattern which has noise sources within that pattern. And, of course, if one operates an omni antenna, noise is a given, unless you live in a very remote part of the world, or are running a dummy-load as an antenna ... Regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
Sum Ting Wong wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 14:43:27 -0800, John Smith wrote: You seem to feel that s/n ratio is something to pursue, I tell you it is not. You must have been one of the really strong stations I heard during the last ARRL 160m contest that kept calling CQ over and over without being able to hear all the stations that were answering you. It must have been frustrating. 73, S.T.W. I have given some thought your statement; I mean, it just strikes me as so bizarre, I ignored it. S/N ratio will NOT improve with an antennas efficiency, indeed, it will increase lineally. The more efficient the antenna (sensitive) the more-efficient it will be at receiving "on frequency noise" from even greater distances. However, a poor antenna may be "efficiently receiving" harmonic related noise which a cheap receiver may have inadequate rejection against ... indeed, there are many "side-scenerios" which are possible. You seem to wish for a very highly efficient/sensitive antenna which will do some sort of noise rejection (or, for some reason, have, in error, given antenna physics this magical/mystical ability(s.)) However, "that/those antenna(s) only exists in science fiction, at least at this date." Surely, you have poor design which is subject to static noise and/or poor antenna pattern which has noise sources within that pattern, confused with antenna efficiency. And, of course, if one operates an omni antenna, noise is a given, unless you live in a very remote part of the world, or are running a dummy-load as an antenna ... Regards, JS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
John Smith wrote:
his secret location in NV. 9041 Desert Lane Pahrump, NV 89048 http://maps.google.com |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message treetonline... Here's why antenna efficiency is important for transmitting but not for HF receiving. First, the definition of efficiency: For a transmitting antenna, it's the fraction of the power applied which is radiated. The remainder is turned into heat. For receiving, it's the ratio of the power which is delivered to the receiver to the power which could be delivered to the receiver if the antenna had no loss. The efficiency of a given antenna is the same when transmitting and receiving. Sometimes people use "efficiency" to mean other things -- this is the meaning of the term in all antenna literature and texts. Consider this communications system: transmitter - antenna - propagation path - antenna - receiver - listener A receiver unavoidably adds noise to the received signal. So if no noise is injected in the propagation path, the signal/noise ratio is the ratio of the signal entering the receiver to the noise created by the receiver's input circuitry. This is generally the case at VHF and above. When receiver noise dominates, as above, increasing the receive antenna's efficiency increases the signal arriving at the receiver, so the signal/noise ratio improves. This allows you to hear the signal better. But it only works for VHF and above. HF is a different story. At HF, there's a lot of atmospheric noise (injected in the "propagation path" part of the system), and unless the receive antenna and receiver are exceptionally bad, the atmospheric noise is much greater than the noise created by the receiver. I mentioned a simple test in my last posting, to see whether this is the case -- just disconnect the antenna. If the noise level drops, atmospheric noise dominates. It's not hard to make a receiver that atmospheric noise will dominate with a 3 foot whip antenna at HF. So at HF where atmospheric noise dominates, the signal/noise ratio is the ratio of the signal entering the receiver to the atmospheric noise entering the receiver. Compare this to the situation described above for higher frequencies. Now let's see what happens when we improve the efficiency of an HF receiving antenna. Because both the signal and the dominant noise come from locations in front of (that is, on the transmit side of) the antenna, improving the efficiency of the antenna makes both the signal and noise greater in the same proportion when they arrive at the receiver. There's no improvement at all in the signal/noise ratio. The effect is the same as turning up the receiver volume control. The only way you can improve the signal/noise ratio is to somehow favor one over the other, such as by making the antenna directional. And an inefficient, directional antenna like a Beverage or small loop will nearly always enable you to hear better in some directions than an efficient, nondirectional antenna because directionality helps and inefficiency doesn't hurt. How about transmit antenna efficiency? The signal strength from the transmit antenna is proportional to the antenna's efficiency. (It also depends on other things, but I'm just talking about efficiency here.) So if the efficiency of the transmit antenna increases from, say, 33% to 66%, the power levels of the signals at the receive antenna and the receiver double, and there's no change to the received noise, on either HF or VHF and above. So improving the transmit antenna efficiency always improves the signal/noise ratio at the receiver, in this case by 3 dB. That's why you can hear bunches of HF stations with a very inefficient antenna, but they won't hear you if you try to transmit using that same antenna -- it's because the noise is injected into the system between you. And it's likely that you'll be able to hear stations just as well with the very inefficient antenna as with a much larger, efficient one. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Well said Roy, however, can you explain why this is not so at VHF and above? I would think that would have to do more with mode than with antenna/propagation. When I turn down the squelch on my vhf rx i get lots of noise. Let me know. TIA, B |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
Brian Oakley wrote:
Well said Roy, however, can you explain why this is not so at VHF and above? I would think that would have to do more with mode than with antenna/propagation. When I turn down the squelch on my vhf rx i get lots of noise. Let me know. TIA, B It's purely because of where the dominant noise comes from, more specifically whether it gets into the system before or after the antenna. Atmospheric noise gets greater as you go down in frequency. At VHF and above, it's less than receiver noise, so receiver noise dominates and masks whatever atmospheric noise there might be. At HF and below, it's usually greater than receiver noise, so atmospheric noise masks the receiver noise. Obviously there's no precise line, so somewhere typically near the upper end of HF either one might dominate, depending on conditions, antenna, and receiver. The noise you get from your VHF radio when you turn down the squelch is receiver noise. You can prove it by disconnecting the antenna and noticing that the noise doesn't change. Disconnect the antenna from an HF receiver and the noise will drop, because it's coming from the other side of the antenna. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:32:58 -0800, Roy Lewallen
wrote: It's purely because of where the dominant noise comes from, more specifically whether it gets into the system before or after the antenna. Atmospheric noise gets greater as you go down in frequency. At VHF and above, it's less than receiver noise, so receiver noise dominates and masks whatever atmospheric noise there might be. At HF and below, it's usually greater than receiver noise, so atmospheric noise masks the receiver noise. Obviously there's no precise line, so somewhere typically near the upper end of HF either one might dominate, depending on conditions, antenna, and receiver. (...) Roy Lewallen, W7EL This might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_noise If you extend the red line showing man made noise, at greater than about 30Mhz, the man made noise (ignition noise, motor noise, etc) predominates over atmospheric noise. -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831-336-2558 # http://802.11junk.com # http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
This might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_noise If you extend the red line showing man made noise, at greater than about 30Mhz, the man made noise (ignition noise, motor noise, etc) predominates over atmospheric noise. In my last couple of postings, I was lumping man-made and atmospheric noise together as "atmospheric noise". Both enter the system between the transmit and receive antenna, so improving the receive antenna efficiency won't help the ratio of signal to either atmospheric or man made noise. The referenced graph doesn't show receiver noise at all, which dominates at VHF and above. It can be useful, however, to distinguish between atmospheric noise and *local* man-made noise, since the latter can sometimes be reduced by using techniques such as feedline decoupling and using horizontally polarized antennas. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
On Dec 29, 1:35*pm, John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote: ... JS, Good Antenna Building Concept : You Can't Talk To Them -unless- You Can First Hear Them. ~ RHF *. Well, I'd like an antenna like this one (see URL, below.) *He comes into my location in the low valley of CA like a door buster, from his secret location in NV. Jumping the high Sierra Mountains in a single leap! *grin - http://www.smeter.net/w6obb/antenna-farm.php - - Regards, - JS JS - Yeah some people have the money to Do-It-Up right. ~ RHF |
W6OBB Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm in Pahrump, Nevada
On Dec 29, 7:18*pm, Dave wrote:
John Smith wrote: - - his secret - - location in NV. - 9041 Desert Lane - Pahrump, NV 89048 - - http://maps.google.com |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
You ridiculous fool. You are the most complete brain dead example of a sub-human which has ever been presented to me ... You dumb twit. We don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Receiving is EQUALLY as important as the transmitting element in the above. Again you dumb twit, we don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Yeah, very sad of you to keep plonking and then continue to read me. I thought this was your trick? What a goofball. Takes one to know one. |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and- Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , John Smith wrote: RHF wrote: [stuff] RHF, I have no bone to pick with you, don't fall victim to trolls here which just wish to "stir up chit", to mask their ignorance ... SNIP Now that is funny. One Trolling idiot posting a response to another trolling idiot "don't fall victim to the Trolls". And the hobo of s.r.sw Teleamon, the biggest troll here....is telling other trolls how to act! Hillarious! |
W6OBB Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm in Pahrump, Nevada
RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 7:18 pm, Dave wrote: John Smith wrote: - - his secret - - location in NV. - 9041 Desert Lane - Pahrump, NV 89048 - - http://maps.google.com . Art Bell, W6OBB, Pahrump, Nevada http://www.smeter.net/pahrump/art-bell.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pahrump,_Nevada . Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm http://www.smeter.net/w6obb/antenna-farm.php SAT IMAGE = http://tinyurl.com/828s5d . The Art Bell W6OBB Loop Antenna Slide Show http://patriciaray.net/movie1.html QRZ : Art Bell [W6OBB] Pahrump, Nevada http://www.qrz.com/callsign.html?callsign=W6OBB . . KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz in Pahrump, Nevada http://www.knye.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KNYE http://www.rayjanko.com/area_51/21.htm http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin...sr=Y&call=KNYE * From the The Kingdom of [K]NYE . . . http://www.kingdomofnye.com/ http://www.co.nye.nv.us/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nye_County,_Nevada . KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz Transmitter Location : 36° 11' 52" N -by- 116° 02' 08" W http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...(KNYE-FM)&om=1 . Oh yeah, that IS the dirty culprit, and if you know where to turn, in the 80m band, you just might hear him! lol Regards, JS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
RP wrote:
You ridiculous fool. You are the most complete brain dead example of a sub-human which has ever been presented to me ... You dumb twit. We don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Receiving is EQUALLY as important as the transmitting element in the above. Again you dumb twit, we don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Yeah, very sad of you to keep plonking and then continue to read me. I thought this was your trick? What a goofball. Takes one to know one. Hey, telemundo is a great man, in his own mind, leave him alone ... humor here is sparse, he provides for a needed demand ... :-) Regards, JS |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and-Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
RP wrote:
... And the hobo of s.r.sw Teleamon, the biggest troll here....is telling other trolls how to act! Hillarious! Hmmm, I can see how you are mistaken; but, brother you are mistaken. telemundo would not even amount to a pimple of a decent trolls hoary old butt ... indeed, I can't imagine the lifeform he could make a pimple on .... grin But then, you know, he already knows that ... :-( Regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , Dave wrote: John Smith wrote: Dave wrote: John Smith wrote: I said NO such thing, indeed, I stated the EXACT opposite, it allows maximum power transfer to the antenna, however, the losses in the POOR antenna are now increased due to the losses in the matchbox--as heat. And, no problems which exist in the POOR antenna have been rectified, they are just masked ... That is vastly oversimplified. Absolutely, and at some point I must trust the reader has the resources to extrapolate; otherwise, all postings would soon turn in to the length, depth and completeness of a college textbook ... For example, an antenna is a two lane road, running in both directions(T/R), the same parameters which allow it to be the best choice for transmitting, also are in action when that same antenna "plucks" its' signals from the ether ... something I have pointed out in multiple ways, multiple times ... The average person must hear, read, study the same material six times before "learning" it. And, an instructor once pointed out to me, not all people respond to the same method, personality, mode-of-presentation as another or others ... so, he pointed out the importance of gathering data from multiple sources until the "epiphany" is realized ... You're the guy from Lost in Space! You are to kind Dave. The lost in Space Dr. Smith fooled some of the people some of the time where our Smith fools none of the people none of the time. And who does the Telanut think he is fooling? |
W6OBB Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm in Pahrump, Nevada
In article ,
John Smith wrote: RHF wrote: On Dec 29, 7:18 pm, Dave wrote: John Smith wrote: - - his secret - - location in NV. - 9041 Desert Lane - Pahrump, NV 89048 - - http://maps.google.com . Art Bell, W6OBB, Pahrump, Nevada http://www.smeter.net/pahrump/art-bell.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pahrump,_Nevada . Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm http://www.smeter.net/w6obb/antenna-farm.php SAT IMAGE = http://tinyurl.com/828s5d . The Art Bell W6OBB Loop Antenna Slide Show http://patriciaray.net/movie1.html QRZ : Art Bell [W6OBB] Pahrump, Nevada http://www.qrz.com/callsign.html?callsign=W6OBB . . KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz in Pahrump, Nevada http://www.knye.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KNYE http://www.rayjanko.com/area_51/21.htm http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin...sr=Y&call=KNYE * From the The Kingdom of [K]NYE . . . http://www.kingdomofnye.com/ http://www.co.nye.nv.us/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nye_County,_Nevada . KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz Transmitter Location : 36° 11' 52" N -by- 116° 02' 08" W http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...(KNYE-FM)&om=1 . Oh yeah, that IS the dirty culprit, and if you know where to turn, in the 80m band, you just might hear him! lol Regards, JS IF he isn't at his wife's ancestral home in the Philippines.... |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
In article ,
"RP" wrote: You ridiculous fool. You are the most complete brain dead example of a sub-human which has ever been presented to me ... You dumb twit. We don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Yeah we don't. This was posted in the shortwave group and cross posted to the amateur group. Receiving is EQUALLY as important as the transmitting element in the above. Again you dumb twit, we don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Yes we don't care. Yeah, very sad of you to keep plonking and then continue to read me. I thought this was your trick? No not mine although filters do get turned off from time to time for various reasons. What a goofball. Takes one to know one. And that make you one now doesn't it. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
In article ,
John Smith wrote: RP wrote: You ridiculous fool. You are the most complete brain dead example of a sub-human which has ever been presented to me ... You dumb twit. We don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Receiving is EQUALLY as important as the transmitting element in the above. Again you dumb twit, we don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Yeah, very sad of you to keep plonking and then continue to read me. I thought this was your trick? What a goofball. Takes one to know one. Hey, telemundo is a great man, in his own mind, leave him alone ... humor here is sparse, he provides for a needed demand ... :-) You are just a comprehension impaired fool that talks to himself. How you doing today? Have any nice conversations with yourself you would like to share with the newsgroup? -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
In article ,
John Smith wrote: RP wrote: You ridiculous fool. You are the most complete brain dead example of a sub-human which has ever been presented to me ... You dumb twit. We don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Receiving is EQUALLY as important as the transmitting element in the above. Again you dumb twit, we don't care about transmitting. We don't...? Yeah, very sad of you to keep plonking and then continue to read me. I thought this was your trick? What a goofball. Takes one to know one. Hey, telemundo is a great man, in his own mind, leave him alone ... humor here is sparse, he provides for a needed demand ... :-) For entertainment we defer to the anonymous Mr. Assembly-wizard and his cowardly anonymous side kick RP. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and- Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
In article ,
"RP" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , John Smith wrote: RHF wrote: [stuff] RHF, I have no bone to pick with you, don't fall victim to trolls here which just wish to "stir up chit", to mask their ignorance ... SNIP Now that is funny. One Trolling idiot posting a response to another trolling idiot "don't fall victim to the Trolls". And the hobo of s.r.sw Teleamon, the biggest troll here....is telling other trolls how to act! Hillarious! You are just a two bit anonymous posting moron that does not contribute to the news group in any meaningful way. None care what you post. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
The Difference Between : Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) -and- Amateur Radio Operators (Hams)
In article ,
John Smith wrote: RP wrote: ... And the hobo of s.r.sw Teleamon, the biggest troll here....is telling other trolls how to act! Hillarious! Hmmm, I can see how you are mistaken; but, brother you are mistaken. telemundo would not even amount to a pimple of a decent trolls hoary old butt ... indeed, I can't imagine the lifeform he could make a pimple on ... grin But then, you know, he already knows that ... :-( Having conversations with yourself on Usenet will not endear you to the normal readers you goofball. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
The Difference Between : Telaturd and real newsgroup users...
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "RP" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , John Smith wrote: RHF wrote: [stuff] RHF, I have no bone to pick with you, don't fall victim to trolls here which just wish to "stir up chit", to mask their ignorance ... SNIP Now that is funny. One Trolling idiot posting a response to another trolling idiot "don't fall victim to the Trolls". And the hobo of s.r.sw Teleamon, the biggest troll here....is telling other trolls how to act! Hillarious! You are just a two bit anonymous posting moron that does not contribute to the news group in any meaningful way. None care what you post. Yet you keep reading and responding to all these posts that you claim not to care about. Hillarious is right! You keep reading these people that you say contribute nothing. Hillarious again! Some people contribute to the newsgroup simply by pointing out what a turd you are....making sure others don't step in you. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com