G0KCH zones 7 countries 25 slots 41 bands 3 score zones x slots 287
G3NZP zones 2 countries 4 slots 4 bands 1 score zones x slots 8
G3RMK zones 16 countries 38 slots 114 bands 8 score zones x slots 1824
G3VJM zones 4 countries 19 slots 21 bands 3 score zones x slots 84
G3YSX zones 7 countries 24 slots 37 bands 3 score zones x slots 259
G4ANN zones 7 countries 24 slots 25 bands 2 score zones x slots 175
G4FYY zones 8 countries 21 slots 21 bands 1 score zones x slots 168
G7OBF zones 1 countries 1 slots 1 bands 1 score zones x slots 1
M0HQM zones 5 countries 16 slots 16 bands 1 score zones x slots 80
M0TZZ zones 13 countries 35 slots 97 bands 6 score zones x slots 1261
M0WID zones 14 countries 37 slots 108 bands 8 score zones x slots 1512
VK6PG zones 2 countries 2 slots 2 bands 1 score zones x slots 4


I have now fixed most of the observer entries in my observer file, so once again USA, Australia, Italy and Canada are independent countries.

One problem that I cannot solve is that not all reporters put the correct band in their report to the database, so some members will find that they will be reported as making transmission on more bands than they actually used.

73

Stewart/G3YSX

While mucking about with carpet tiles I set the club K3 running on WSPR.  Power output is 1/2W which is a bit higher than most but was the only attenuator I could find to allow the auto ATU sense the correct band.  This needs 1W drive to the ATU.
Here’s a map of where we’ve been heard.  Spots are combined 40-10m.

Hello All,

I know a few of you are not familiar with the 40 CQ Zones that the World is divided into .
So here is the Link you need.
73
Keith G3VKW

http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/cq_awards/cq_waz_awards/cq_waz_list.html

Here is the latest

G0KCH zones 5 countries 19 slots 33 bands 3 score zones x slots 165
G3NZP zones 2 countries 4 slots 4 bands 1 score zones x slots 8
G3RMK zones 8 countries 28 slots 86 bands 7 score zones x slots 688
G3VJM zones 3 countries 16 slots 18 bands 3 score zones x slots 54
G3YSX zones 5 countries 19 slots 30 bands 3 score zones x slots 150
G4ANN zones 5 countries 16 slots 17 bands 2 score zones x slots 85
G4FYY zones 5 countries 15 slots 15 bands 1 score zones x slots 75
M0HQM zones 4 countries 12 slots 12 bands 1 score zones x slots 48
M0TZZ zones 9 countries 25 slots 68 bands 6 score zones x slots 612
M0WID zones 9 countries 30 slots 91 bands 8 score zones x slots 819
VK6PG zones 2 countries 3 slots 3 bands 1 score zones x slots 6

Note that US, Canada, Italy and Australia are classed as a single mega country until I get the observer locations sorted.

StewartG3YSX

I have written some python code to analyse the CSV files published on the WSPR site (although the latest one uploaded is only for 2/Feb).

Phil M0ZTT has provided me with the members list and I can extract results for the entire club in a matter of seconds, although the rather simplistic code may take somewhat longer as the contest continues)

Running the program I get

CARC WSPR Competion Adjudicator

G0KCH zones 4 countries 17
G3NZP zones 2 countries 4
G3RMK zones 7 countries 28
G3VJM zones 3 countries 16
G3YSX zones 5 countries 19
G4ANN zones 5 countries 13
G4FYY zones 4 countries 14
M0HQM zones 3 countries 8
M0TZZ zones 7 countries 23
M0WID zones 9 countries 30
VK6PG zones 2 countries 3

However I have only classified the non-ambiguous callsigns, so at the moment the program classifies all, strange call + all US + all VE + all I + all VK into one huge single country. To fix this I need so help classifying the observer locations into zones and ARRL entities. Keith, our chief DXer has said he will help with that.

I need to update the program to take into account the bands that the contacts were made on, and will do that shortly.

So, provided the CSV files continue to be published, we will soon have the adjudication code to publish interim results on a regular basis.

If any wants to do a code review to make sure I have not made any mistakes, and if anyone wants to audit the observers file, that help would be most welcome.

– Stewart/G3YSX

The Clubs WSPR contest should start at 0001 on Monday the 1st of Feb 2016.
However Malcolm G3NZP has brought to my attention, the “wspr.com” website has been Down for a week!

If it doesn’t come back on line, I may have to delay the start date…

I will do my best to keep you informed

73 Keith G3VKW

To whet members appetite for the WSPR challenge which the club is running in February I thought I’d set the club station to work and see what can be achieved using this fantastic digital mode.  In the spirit of WSPR I used 5W from the K3 as measured on the Expert to a 30m folded dipole, well within Foundation licence conditions.  The results are remarkable.

On Wednesday the 17th July Dr Colin Forsyth from the Mullard Space Research Centre gave a presentation on how radiation from the Sun affects the way Radio Waves move around the Earth. He started by explaining the different states of matter and how they react when subjected to varying degrees of heat. This was followed by an explanation of how the Suns surface is made up along with the magnetic fields and how they interact with one another. When the Sun ejects masses of plasma, CMEs (Coronal Mass Ejections), these interact with the magnetic fields and behave in different ways with some plasma going back to the surface and some into space depending on the strength of the ejection.
 
Colin then explained how the Earths magnetic field is made up and showed many illustrations to highlight how this changes through time. This was enhanced by an explanation of how a CME when impacting the Earths magnetic field is not able to get to us on the surface because of the protection our magnetic field gives us. However it does affect the upper layers of our atmosphere by changing the way that Radio Waves are able to reflect/refract off the ionosphere and thereby changing the distance that we are able to communicate.

All sorts of other effects take place such as where the magnetic fields join at the poles the particles of plasma are able to react with the gasses in the lower atmosphere, they slow down and become visible as the Northern and Southern Lights. Obviously there was more detailed information given and is not covered by this brief report.

Suffice to say that it was an interesting evening with many questions from those that attended. The meeting had to be held alfresco because Hut 18 had an infestation of what turned out to be Bees.

BrianG

The following question was posted on the QRPL list a few days ago:

I plan on some portable operations(camping, hiking, etc…) and I was
wondering what are the optimum length of radials for verticals, or
counterpoise for End-fed half waves wires?  Frequencies are 40 through 10
meters (including 30,17, and 12 meters).

I seem to remember something about at least 2 or 3  ¼ wavelengths laid on
the ground.  I just want to get a consensus of the group here about what
seems to work best. 

My response may be of interest to some members of CARC:

I am not sure whether the attachment will make it through the reflector (it’s only 21KB), but it’s worth a look if it does.

It is Fig 30 from Ground System as a Factor in Antenna Efficiency, which is the seminal paper by Brown, Lewis and Epstein published in Proc IRE vol 25, #6 June 1937.

This is the paper where the 200 radial comes from, although they ran out of wire at 113 radials as you can see from the graph.

This shows that with two radials at 1/8 lambda, received field intensity is slightly less 50% down on theoretical maximum. Received power goes as the square of intensity, so two radials are slightly less than 6db down on theoretical maximum, i.e. less than 1 S-point.

If you go up to 15 radial at 1/4 lambda to get to something like 148/196 intensity, i.e. 2.5dB down.

Given that 15 @ 1/4 lambda represents a practical maximum for temporary operation, you have to work pretty hard to win the 3.5 dB relative to the two 1/8 lambda wires.

Two other points of note are that you get within 1dB of maximum with
60 radial at 1/8 lambda and if you go up to 113 radials 1/10 lambda seems to be about 1dB down. However I do worry how accurate the top left corner of the graph is.

I would of course be interested in knowing whether there is later (definitive) evidence that contradicts George Brown’s paper, but the conclusion that very few radial are all this is needed seem startling compare to the advice of the seasoned DX community, which I am sure disheartens operators of ordinary means.

Stewart/G3YSX