[Fourlanders] FW: [VHF] Gene's QST Column - Part 1

[Rogers, Ron]

But wait a minute.......you are promoting the use of a technology that requires a CW operator skill set. That would give an unfair advantage over "Code Free" licensees that are also trying to contest and be on a level playing field as you !! 

You have to take that into consideration.......


Ron 
WW8RR

________________________________________
From: fourlanders-bounces at contesting.com [fourlanders-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Brian McCarthy [brian at rfacres.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 5:16 PM
To: Bill Pence
Cc: Fourlanders
Subject: Re: [Fourlanders] FW: [VHF] Gene's QST Column - Part 1

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Bill Pence <pence.bill at gmail.com> wrote:
> maybe these old codgers should set up spark gap EME, then they can
> have their own organization (I bet Wayne Green -- still not dead, btw.

Does anyone have an estimate of MDS and bandwidth for a coherer tube
receiver? I'm trying to calculate the power and link budget
requirements for EME with 1905 vintage radio technology. I suspect it
requires quite a bit more power than sending a De Lorean through time.
It would probably take out the eastern US power grid. Should I be
estimating for a center frequency of something like 50-60 KHz? What
would it take to make an antenna with positive gain for that frequency
range? If we could move up to about 100 KHz, we might be able to load
up the Golden Gate Bridge as a halfwave dipole. Do you think we could
convince the the bay area to let us put two or three director elements
above it and put insulators on either end?

Thoughts anyone? Beuller?

Tongue planted firmly in cheek. Now where did I hide the flak jacket
and Nomex underwear?

Brian
NX9O
_______________________________________________
Fourlanders mailing list
Fourlanders at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/fourlanders