W3RE :
Apparently you missed the references I cited for BBC Engineering
reports.Apparently everyone else did also, as they've not been mentioned since.
And as for only hams being aware of seaside gain, the entire MW DX community
has taken that as a matter of course for a hundred years.
It seems to me there has always been little cross-pollination between the MW
and 160 DXers, which is a shame. MW DXers have a lot of knowledge based on the
plethora of high powered transmitters all around the world operating 24 hours a
day with non-changing (almost) antenna systems.
Chuck
> Also w2re@hudsonvalleytowers.com wrote:
>
> >>... "Is there any scientific data in print to prove the theory that ocean
> front property is better than a location inland about a mile or so on a
> ridge overlooking salt water for HF. ... I understand the theory that
> verticals literally in or on the water have a huge advantage."...
> >>
>
> It is not a theory that there is a remarkable increase in MF transmission
> when closely approaching saltwater waterline. It has been observed over at
> least a half century by what must now be millions of observers, certainly
> the vast majority not hams, observed at least since inexpensive
> transistorized portable radios were available around 1960.
>
>
> These and millions of others took these radios everywhere with them, and it
> was soon common knowledge that you could hear the New York AM stations all
> day long if you took the radio out over the salt water at east coast ocean
> beaches as far south as Cape Hatteras. Not a bit of theory involved, just
> undeniable observation.
>
> The wow factor of this has severely diminished since the internet, and
> nobody except hams thinks that hearing NYC AM stations during the day down
> the east coast is the least interesting.
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|