Reception 'benchmarks'
 

May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?


Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?


Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?


Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


Steve

Steve wrote:

May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?

Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?


I usually don't think in terms of a touchstone banchmark, but
Deutchse Welle, at any of the several frequencies you can receive it,
would work as well as any for me. If it's a night of at least decent
reception, DW is like an AM station across town. If DW is faint and
distorted, I figure I might as well bag DX for that evening. I'm
referring to their broadcasts from Wertachtal, not Sackville in Canada.



Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?


Regularly? Probably XEPPM from Mexico City - 10,000 watts at 6185.
Never strong at all, but always steady.




Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


Southwest Michigan, USA.

Tony

I go for KUZZ in Bakersfield. Or the TIS in Mohave on 530.

I'm in L.A. County.

On 14 Sep 2004 05:48:04 -0700, (Steve) wrote:

May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?


Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?


Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?


Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


Steve

"Steve" wrote in message
om...
May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?


Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?


The time signal stations WWV and CHU. I know they broadcast all day, with
the same power and antenna patterns. If I don't hear them when I expect, I
know conditions are probably bad, or maybe just weird.




Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?


I rarely try to pick signals out of the noise anymore. The programs I like
come in very reliably. At the times I listen, however, James Lloyd's signal
is probably the weakest and least reliable. Still, it's almost always at
least readable. He was coming in pretty well last night, heh-heh-heh.




Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


Steve

Chicago area.

Frank Dresser

In article ,
(Steve) writes:

Subject: Reception 'benchmarks'
From: (Steve)
Date: 14 Sep 2004 05:48:04 -0700

May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?


Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?

Usually 12.095 ( BBC , Ascensiion Island)
7.415 ( WBCQ, Monticello Maine)
or 5.975 ( BBC Antigua)

Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?

Radio New Zealand 15.720


Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


- Quite a few,

Would like to have small, comfy homes Up in Canada ( Cape Breton)
& maybe Grenada, Bermuda or Grand Cayman
Alaskas fun too..

- You Buying , perchance ??

Steve

Dan / NYC..

Hmmm...I'm was curious about XEPPM after reading this, but there's
always something on 6190 or 6180 drowning it out. I guess it won't be
a benchmark for me!

Steve

Tony Meloche wrote in message ...
Steve wrote:

May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?

Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?


I usually don't think in terms of a touchstone banchmark, but
Deutchse Welle, at any of the several frequencies you can receive it,
would work as well as any for me. If it's a night of at least decent
reception, DW is like an AM station across town. If DW is faint and
distorted, I figure I might as well bag DX for that evening. I'm
referring to their broadcasts from Wertachtal, not Sackville in Canada.



Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?


Regularly? Probably XEPPM from Mexico City - 10,000 watts at 6185.
Never strong at all, but always steady.




Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


Southwest Michigan, USA.

Tony

On 14 Sep 2004 05:48:04 -0700, (Steve) wrote:

May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?

Yes.



Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?


VOLMET signals from various parts of the world. You can pretty much rely on
the fact that they are indeed broadcasting, at once an hour, as per their
schedule. If you can't hear them, then you know propagation isn't currently
possible from there to here on that frequency.


Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?


11253 kHz, USB RAAF Volmet.
Also, 8906, MWARA NAT-A.


Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


Auckland, New Zealand.


Steve

Hmm, a few typographical errors:

I meant "at least once an hour".

And, I meant "11253 kHz, RAF Volmet".

Sorry for any distress and inconvenience caused :-)

Mark.

"Mark" wrote in message
news:1095414471.974151@ftpsrv1...
On 14 Sep 2004 05:48:04 -0700, (Steve) wrote:

May I ask some more nosy but extremely intesting questions?

Yes.



Is there a particular signal that you tune to regularly and use as a
reception 'benchmark'? If so, what is it?


VOLMET signals from various parts of the world. You can pretty much rely
on
the fact that they are indeed broadcasting, at once an hour, as per their
schedule. If you can't hear them, then you know propagation isn't
currently
possible from there to here on that frequency.


Of all the signals that you listen to regularly and that are strong
enough to be clearly understood at least half the time, which is the
weakest and/or most difficult to receive?


11253 kHz, USB RAAF Volmet.
Also, 8906, MWARA NAT-A.


Finally, if you've answered the above two questions, what part of the
world do you live in?


Auckland, New Zealand.


Steve

Mark wrote:

Hmm, a few typographical errors:

I meant "at least once an hour".

And, I meant "11253 kHz, RAF Volmet".

Sorry for any distress and inconvenience caused :-)


That hardly makes up for the countless ships and aeroplanes lost at sea
thanks to your bad information, does it?





mike