[Boatanchors] 10 meters
D C _Mac_ Macdonald
k2gkk at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 5 16:01:25 EDT 2013
I would guess that any increase in ionospheric
refraction caused by the nuke tests would be
comparable to a wee bit of flatulence in a Cat 5
hurricane when compared to the levels caused by
solar radiation and geomagnetice disturbances.
I remember being awakened around 0300 local (EDT)
in 1958 in my western NY bedroom shack by the
aurora that was so bright it was almost like day!
Turned on my Globe Scout 65 and Hallicrafters
S-20R and had a ball working the west coast on
10 meter AM.
IIRC, the old sun was so pocked in the '56 - '59
time frame, '58 was designated the International
Geophysical Year (IGY).
* * * * * * * * * * *
* 73 - Mac, K2GKK/5 *
* (Since 30 Nov 53) *
* k2gkk at hotmail.com *
* Oklahoma City, OK *
* USAF & FAA (Ret.) *
* * * * * * * * * * *
> Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 15:47:38 -0400
> From: rbethman at comcast.net
> To: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] 10 meters
>
> I wonder - how much of that was possibly due to nuclear testing?
>
> We'll probably never know.....
>
> [I was on the Enewetak Atoll cleanup in '77.]
>
> It was an enlightening 5 months. Then again, so was the trip I made out
> to the Nevada Test Range in the early '90s.
>
> Bob - N0DGN
>
> On 6/5/2013 3:26 PM, manualman at juno.com wrote:
> > Much of that was due to F2 propagation. Those F2 layers were very ionized
> > due to lots of sun activity and other things that kept those layers
> > active.
> >
> > Pete, wa2cwa
> > http://www.manualman.com
> >
> > On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 13:37:16 -0400 Al Parker <anchor at ec.rr.com> writes:
> >> that makes much more sense to me, I was wondering.
> >> BTW, I do remember the great 10m prop. back in the late 50's.
> >> 73,
> >>
> >> Al, W8UT
> >> www.boatanchors.org
> >> www.hammarlund.info
More information about the Boatanchors
mailing list