[Lowfer] Active 1750 meter beacons

[PAUL DAULTON]

What frequency is IZJ on? Perhaps moving the freq might cure the problem.
If the beacon is in the house maybe moving the beacon will cure the
 problem.My Beacon is about
160ft from the house. I can receive quite well on 137 and on 500 khz
 without desense, I can often 
copy WEB without desense. My beacon is on 187.492khz , I set my rec to
 189150 usb when coping
WEB. Evidently the lower sideband rejection is enough to eliminate  the
 beacon signal. Most wwvb rec
in clocks are trf with narrow selectivity.
All my wwv clocks are battery power, maybe a bypass on the batteries would
 reduce rf pickup.
Interesting problem Ed, wonder if anyone else has any ideas.
Paul k5wms
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Phillips <evp at pacbell.net>
Sent: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:28:38 -0800
To: "Discussion of the Lowfer \(US, European, &UK\) and MedFer bands"
 <lowfer at mailman.qth.net> 
Subject: Re: [Lowfer] Active 1750 meter beacons
 
 
My IZJ beacon has been off the air for some time because it interfered  
with the WWVB clocks in the house. I wonder if anyone else has had a  
similar experience?  
 
Ed  
 
JD wrote:  
 
> >>>This list isn't perfect ... so I wonder if anyone out there  
> knows if beacons 3OHH, BOB, TMO, WM, MPK, and R are really active, and  
> if so what their frequencies/modes are? >>>  
>  
> I hope the occasional typo doesn't render the list useless in your  
> view. If perfection were the criterion for usefulness, neither that  
> list nor this reflector nor any kind of forum could be  
> called "useful," either.  
>  
> There's no way to force operators to tell us their status at every  
> moment. All I can say is that IN THE MONTH AND YEAR SHOWN, the  
> operators of the six stations you asked about told me personally that  
> they were active, in the modes and on or near the frequencies shown  
> (not all are able to measure). Beyond that, the list--any list--is  
> nothing more than a guide to what _may_ still be current by the time  
> you use it. As for typos or outdated info, I encourage both operators  
> and listeners to post their corrections to the location indicated at  
> the top of both the LowFER and HiFER lists. The list doesn't create  
> itself...it needs ALL our efforts to be accurate.  
>  
> Now, Paul said something very apt: "An email to those on lwca list  
> who are not currentlly active might bring some back on." Very true.  
> TMO is one of a few stations being revived this winter largely because  
> of my query to the operator about whether they had any plans. Knowing  
> that someone will try to listen is all the incentive some of them
 require!  
>  
> John  
 
 
 
_______________________________________________  
>From the Lowfer mailing list  
Send messages to: Lowfer at mailman.qth.net  
To sub/unsub visit: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer  
 
ltæmlt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/lowfer/attachments/20090109/05d43e2f/attachment.html