W8JI wrote:
"Since we have no idea what the direction and angle of noise was at
XZ, we can't possibly form any accurate opinion of what it means. "
I agree and disagree. I agree that it is impossible to discover (post
mortum) what was happening to the path in Milt's case. I made my original
speculation based on the low dipole being more sensitive to high angle
signals (an assumption), and that he was receiving better on it than a low
angle antenna. I agree that he may have had problems with his
beverage--lord knows they can be fickle for many reasons.
Don't misunderstand me. My original mention of backscatter was simply to
say that the evidence could be explained through back scatter rather than
some mystical ionospheric apparatus in operation, which was the implication
of some respondants. The consistancy of Milt's observation leads me to
believe that a geophysical apparatus may have been in affect--perhaps a
mountain range? Perhaps ground anomaly under the antenna(s)? A thousand
reasons could be proposed but all would be pure speculation.
I am personally quite interested in back scatter since this may be the only
way I will ever be able to communicate with our 160 comrades in EU from the
dark recesses of Minnesota.
Ford-N0FP
ford@cmgate.com
|