RSGB Books - Tired Old Reprints?

The RSGB has been latching-on more and more of late to the fact that its book sales are doing a lot towards its financial health.

This is a good thing, and most of us enjoy soaking-up as many ham radio texts as we can.

This year, there's been a big push, together with a £5 blanket book token for all members, to sell - yes - more RSGB books.

A good book, though the material is often very old.  Image: RSGB

I duly bought the 2015 Radio Communications book - a big, fat 'bible' of radio facts and tips.  It's not, by any means, a worthless book.  But, if you've been a ham for a while, the vast majority of the text will be sadly very familiar to you.  Simply other books and RadCom articles rolled into one compendium, albeit with a handy CDROM of the contents.

OK, in this, the RSGB book is a plain analogue, right down to the CDROM, of the ARRL Antenna Book, which never fails to sell in large numbers.  Perhaps it's easier simply to buy these large compendiums than fork-out for a large number of smaller books.

Personally, I think the RSGB books need a huge revamp and update in general.  The section on planning and the ham operator is very old - I've not seen any updates to it over the past four years, at best.  In places, it is misleading. 

For example, it states that 'legal action can quickly follow' in the event of a planning breach.  That's sometimes true, but it fails to point to the government's own guidance that planning breaches are firstly not a breach of the law in themselves and, secondly, that any breach is more often than not brought to a resolution through cheap and easily-achieved negotiation, not wildly expensive and time-consuming litigation.  In many cases, antennas are not major breaches, and often of minimal objective impact of any sort.

Another book I bought this Christmas was the RSGB 2015 Yearbook.  This is a total joke!  Basically, it's a few pages of ham radio stuff and then a printed directory of members.  Why on earth does the RSGB produce this tat when that data - and much more - is freely available on QRZ.com and other sites, and could also be available - maybe it is already - off the RSGB web site?

Earlier in the year, I bought a book about Radio Propagation, also by the RSGB.  It's OK, but very thin on detail, hardly any references to scientific research, and clearly out of step with latest findings and modes - there's nothing at all about the WSPR beacon revolution, for example. 

Come on, RSGB!  There is hardly a lack of new stuff to write - and write lively and well - about.  Let's hope 2015 sees the tired, repeat-published stuff start to fade away, and fresh stuff make an appearance. 

Building a G3JKF Magnetic Loop Array

Despite having a plethora of conventional and well-functioning antennas outside, I keep a constant interest in magnetic loops and their various designs.

The attraction of a loop is clear: small, not very prone to electrical noise, wide band coverage, and eminently suited to indoor use.

For a couple of years, I've been in touch with Ken Franklin, G3JKF, who has very carefully developed and tested, over a long period of time, a three loop array.  If you ever catch him on WSPR mode, you'll be amazed at how well his loops do.  A characteristic of Ken's signals is that he reaches just about everyone that any other, full-sized antenna operator reaches, often with comparable (or even better!) signals.  Rarely are signals from Ken significantly down on full antennas.

So, having messed about for ages, I decided I'd make use of a day off, and put together a G3JKF loop for 40m-10m. A 7.5-350pF Russian vacuum cap has just enough low-side range to tune 10m to a perfect match at the digital end of the band.

Before I start detailing the construction, remember that soldering with a blowtorch can be pretty darned dangerous! This is especially true of this build because you may find yourself soldering 'upside down' fittings, which may drip hot flux and/or solder onto your skin.  Eye protection and some decent heat-resistant gloves are advised.  Flux is also very corrosive, and generates noxious fumes that can give you a belter of a headache.  So plenty of open windows if you are working indoors.

You need pre-soldered, 15mm fittings as follows:
14x 90 degree elbows, 4x 45 degree elbows and 6 tees.  

You need a total of about 13 metres of copper pipe, but there is scope to recycle some you may already have. 

You need a pipe cutter, soldering flux (this is essential), and a gas blowtorch.  You can also use an electrical pipe heater, but these are too slow for me!  Also, some coarse wire (steel) wool.

Remember to clean each joint immaculately with wire wool before soldering, and add a liberal amount of flux to the pipe to be fixed. 

Start by making the complex-looking top joint for one half, as per the image.  This first one has to be assembled in a vice, all the fittings made square, and all of them soldered together in one go.

The first soldering is the most complex.  The arms are cut to 130mm each.

When soldering, heat the pipe ahead of the joint first, then move on to the joint itself.  If you heat just the joint, solder may run, but the underlying pipe may not be quite hot enough.  When you see a complete ring of solder appear at the joint, stop heating.  

When soldering pieces of tube, you may need to support them to make sure they're reasonably square and not sagging - there is some play in the soldered fittings.

With care, you should be able to control the heating well enough to melt one side of the connectors whilst the other just about remains solid.  When one joint is done, move straight to the nearest next connection to be made, until completed.  Give a good 15 minutes or more to cool down, as copper retains heat for a remarkably long time.

If, for some reason, a joint looks a bit suspect, you should first heat it to get rid of any blobs of solder, then clean it thoroughly with wire wool.  Add some flux at the joint, and heat the joint until solder melts into the join.  This should fix most failed joints, which will happen sometimes.

You then need to add the 45 degree elbows, and two pieces of copper 525mm long.  Solder these to the arms coming off the central connecting section.

The completed top joint for one half of the loop, plus the 45 degree bends.  The longest, topmost tube is just a connection to the capacitor, however you configure it.

At the end of these pipes, you add a further 90 degree elbow, and a 1m long piece of copper pipe.  Continue adding elbows and 1m copper pipe until you get to the point where it needs to join the second top joint section.  Repeat for the other side, at which point you will have nearly finished two complete loops of the array.

To join the bottom elbows, which you can't really access at times, use a large wood saw's blade near the handle, to act as a reflector of heat, a hint sink with an air gap to stop the floor being burned(!) and  a catcher for hot solder or flux.

You then need to make a second top joint, exactly like the first, and eventually join its arms to the outer loops.


The central loop vertical tubes have to be a bit bigger - 1100mm - to allow for the 'up and over' as a result of using a tee at the top joint.  The arm from the elbow at the tee to the second, down-going 90 degree elbow is 395mm long, of which you need two, of course.  Complete the loop all the way round.


My support is a simple lattice of light timber, held aloft at about 7 feet with a timber stand.  PVC clamps hold the loop firm. Details as per the photo.

You now simply need an air spaced or vacuum variable capacitor.  Anything in the range 10 - 1000pF should do, but my vacuum cap is 7.5-350pF, and tunes 40m-10m. The feed point is a simple SO239 connector to a gamma match.  A very short wire runs from the outer to the centre of one of the outer loops. The centre pin is connected to a piece of drawn copper or similar, which is soldered about 80% of the way up one of the sides. There are many matching variants, and you may prefer another.

 
Et, voila!  You have what must rank as the pinnacle of magnetic loop design.  Being 1m cubed, more or less, I can't actually get mine out of the kitchen where I built it without chopping the loops in half!  Eventually, I plan to house the loop in a timber frame with fibreglass panels and 'Coraline' corrugated roof; that' much easier than weatherproofing the capacitor, and avoids the effects of our heavy winds.

The completed loop, now with vacuum cap 7.5-350pF.  Braid straps to the cap ends are kept to the bare minimum - about 1 inch.

Very short, wide copper braid to the loop, kept in place with steel clamps. You should not use this method other than for testing, because soldering is better to reduce losses.  Cap is held in place with a ring of cable ties, and another to the copper tube each side.

There are very few of these loops that I know about, so if you have the time, the inclination to do some soldering, and a small amount of space to spare, why not have a go and put one to work on WSPR?  Total cost, even if you bought all the materials and tools, is only about £120, and much less if you already have tools and some spare lengths of copper around.



UPDATE (i):  Today (22/12/2014), 19 pairs of 21MHz WSPR reports heard by a combination of the respected stations, K9AN and N2NOM yielded, for both stations, a median difference of 0dB between my indoor three loop array and, in most cases, the sloping dipole operated by the well-run station at G8VDQ.  M1AVV and M0XDC added a couple of data points to the total.  Spots excluded the time during and leading up to the grey line, as there are significant differences in signal enhancement due to even quite small longitude separation between stations.

UPDATE (ii): Following discussions with G3JKF, the feed system has been modified to a 'parallel gamma' match.  Firstly, the coax goes into a homebrew or commercial 2:1 or 4:1 balun, rather than directly to the loop. In my case, a 4:1 balun yielded a perfect match at the upper end of the array's range, but a 2:1 didn't.

The centre pin from the balun is connected to a triangular section of microbore tube or thicker copper wire, which attaches to the loop at the same, 80% point up the side of one of the outer loops.  This returns to the centre pin parallel to the side of the loop, spaced by about 2cm, and then parallel to the bottom of the loop.  Adjusting the spacing can lower the SWR somewhat, and I found it was better to be at 2cm than 1cm, for example.

The 'parallel gamma' feed arrangement.  4:1 balun centre pin to triangle, attached to loop at 80% up left side; outer to short wire connecting to the centre of the lower leg of the loop. 

The outer conductor goes from the balun to the centre of the lower part of the loop, as it did under direct coax connection.

These changes bring the loop to a perfect match at 10m, whereas previously, it was nearer 1.5:1 or greater.  WSPR tests show the loop works very well at 10m.

~5:30-9UT 40m results, 2015 Jan 18. 

17m + 15m Magnetic Loop

Loops are always under test in one form or another up in the old shack.  Winter is a great time to build small antennas, because it can be done comfortably, indoors!

In cutting up an old design that resonated too low for what I needed, I recycled some copper tube, including recycling the expensive bend fittings, into a 17m loop.

A very hastily cobbled together test loop for 17m and above.  Just 0.55m a side!

The initial experiment was two loops in a figure of eight fashion, each loop being just 0.55m  on a side.  The antenna worked fine, but I found that it behaved much like a single loop of the same total perimeter.  So, that being the case, it was more of a 20m and below loop.  Handy, because it's more portable than a single 4 or 5m perimeter loop, but not what I was after that day.

So, chop off one loop, use just the other.  At 0.55m a side, the loop is at the lower limit of an ideal size for a 17m loop; this was a product of making the loop such that it would work well on higher bands, too.

The capacitor is a wide-spaced, roughly 10-250pF air spaced type, manually tuned.  The loop being borderline size, it's a little fiddly at 17m to tune, but much easier on 15m.  However, the old 'by ear' tuning system works easily enough!

The very simple Flexweave primary loop, just 0.44m long.  Matching is easier with a primary that overlaps the secondary.

Result?

It's working indoors, so a clear-site, outdoor test will have to wait.  But, it was picking up a JH station nicely on the grey line at 17m this morning, and is putting out a very strong signal across the EU.  It's certainly working properly.  As I write this, R0AU had picked up my 5 Watts at 3534 miles, at -27dB.  Weak, but it's early yet...

Remember that we're not trying to out-do SteppIR beam twiddlers here.  But we are offering a cheap, very simple to build loop for 17m that gives those living in apartments, HOA and other antenna-hostile locations a chance to go live and work the world, albeit more likely on low power digital and CW modes, on a band that otherwise needs a fairly extensive piece of wire.

Oh, and ignore those folks - and models - that say loops are not efficient.  They are.

The next step will be to revisit the multi-loop development, closely following the fine work of G3JKF, who has the most efficient magnetic loops I have ever seen.

RSGB Volunteer

A strange, knobbly letter arrived in the post, franked 'RSGB' this morning.

What on Earth?

Turns out it was a standard letter, with text identical to that of an article in the current (Dec. 2014) edition of RadCom, and a smart little pin badge with 'RSGB Volunteer 2015' inscribed upon it.

I'm an RSGB Volunteer!

This morning's post...

I presume this is as a result of enquiries with Graham Coomber as to whether the society might like me to continue keeping abreast of planning issues across Wales, something I've been doing anyway for a number of years.

Nothing in the letter tells me what the RSGB thinks I'm doing as a volunteer, of course!  Neither have I had any response from the planning committee, who were meant to be consulted on volunteer involvement.

I suppose I can read it as a 'gauntlet down' situation, in that, if I'm so convinced I can make a contribution well, get on with it!

Fair enough, I'd say.

So there.  I will have to network like mad and do some proper work now!

Hellschreiber

Hellschreiber, more commonly known simply as 'Hell', is a great mode, with a speed that allows you to have a nice chat, and plenty of time to edit a macro or just live-type.


Sadly, there aren't very many users.  Or so it seems if you scan across the bands.

Old school Hell.

This morning, RA6BG was sending Hell on 12m; it's the first time I've heard the mode on 12, so I gave him a call.  I sent a spot to the cluster, to find a remarkable number of people joining in the Hell fun!

So, it seems there is plenty of interest out there in Hell, it's just that someone has to jump in first!

CW Test

All I can say this weekend, during what appears to be a CW contest, that amateur radio tests are ludicrous, self-interested pursuits that give not a damn for established protocol, civility or respect for other band users.

WSPR - a sensitive beacon mode with well-established, fixed frequency spots.  Wiped out by the CW Test.

JT65 - a sensitive weak signal mode with well-established, narrow frequency spots, regarded as being of scientific value to propagation studies (see rationale for 60m access.)  Wiped out by the CW test.

If you think test interference on the bands is OK, it isn't.  One can only wonder at the abuse an SSB or wider band OLIVIA operator would suffer if he started transmitting in the established CW portions of the bands.  But, somehow, it's fine for CW operators to push aside everyone else.

At least it dismisses the long-held fiction that CW operators are somehow superior and privileged...

WSPR Upgrade

Thanks to M1AVV for news of the latest upgrade to the superb WSPR beacon mode software, which can be downloaded from here (15.7Mb.)

Whilst I've only run WSPR 4 for a few minutes thus far, it's immediately clear that it's a big improvement on the WSPR of old.

For starters, received signals are processed and displayed within a couple of seconds, rather than the several tens of seconds it could take the old version if used on older PCs and what now seem like the very anachronistic 'netbook' computers.

The new WSPR also seems to decode pretty much all it hears; sometimes, the old WSPR struggled with signals afflicted by strange propagation effects.

Adjusting the RX noise is cleaner and easier now, and a handy new 'make the next cycle a TX cycle' button avoids having to slide the TX slider to 100% and then back again.

All in all, almost perfect.  It even adopts the existing interface settings, though it did take a couple of tries to get the TX to work properly - for some reason, RTS had changed to VOX.

JT65 - Moving it Along a Bit...

JT65 is a great mode, enabling global DX with very modest, even poor antennas.  For many locked-up with moaning neighbours and small properties, it's a real godsend that makes radio possible where otherwise it would be impossible.

But it is slow!  Each QSO, if you follow the standard format, takes seven transmissions, meaning each of your CQs, if you are calling, are spaced by no less than nine minutes, including the one minute gap from 73 to CQ if you stick to your chosen even or odd cycle.  That's not a lot of QSOs per hour, and the problem becomes acute at grey line time.

I've taken a leaf out of a Russian operator's book, and ditched the RRR to move straight to a <HIS CALL> with RR and 73 all in one.  It saves two minutes off each QSO, which is significant when the grey line is marching along apace.

Most are fine with this, but there are compulsive-obsessive perfectionists that will send you a signal report again if you don't fall into his expected, strict pattern.  In the rare cases where this happens, I simply move on to another CQ or move to another mode altogether.

So, two minutes saved are two minutes gained, as it were!

TS480 Box for /P

[Standard Health and Safety advice applies - use brain, and wear eye goggles if you feel so dangerous you might damage your eyes!]

My TS480sat became rather redundant after a couple of years of faithful service, largely as a result of frustration with its tendency to drift when used with digital modes.

But the Kenwood is a good rig, and not one to dispose of lightly.  It has remarkably good audio both out to the world and from the internal speaker, which in itself makes it a keeper.

The basic layout for my box design.  The transverse arrangement allows for both good cooling throughput and easy accessory connections.

The problem with the TS480 is that Kenwood seem to have conceived of it mainly as a car-mobile transceiver, so it's a bit cumbersome, to say the least, to use it as a standalone field-portable unit.  If you want to connect digital interfaces, then things become even worse, because the radio body will be so far back that it can't be attached to the carrier.

There are no base screw holes in the supplied TS480 carrier, so I drilled four on each corner (see text for important comment about this!)

So, because I operate from windswept beaches where airborne sand is a real problem, I decided to build a box for the darned thing!  I used lightweight, exterior grade plywood of 1/4 inch thickness for the sides, with 21mm x 21mm timber to secure the panels and add some stiffness.

 The carrier has no base screw holes as standard, so using some standard oil and a sharp metal bit on a slow speed hand drill, I cut four holes.  This is perfect, but there is a problem that becomes apparent later - the screws make the side panels bow out slightly when screwed into the wood, so they no longer properly line-up with the 480's screw holes!  It would thus be better to make the holes at the base of that 'U' section to the right of the image, and either side of that panel mounting, on the left.

To allow for efficient air throughput to cool the 480, and to permit easy connection of other equipment, I placed the body of the radio lengthwise, with hinged doors to both sides, closed simply by magnetic door fixings, which have an ample 4Kg strength.

Do remember to drill a small pilot hole for all your screws, because if you don't, softwood timber will show a strong tendency to split.  

Use flush hinges to make small doors for air circulation and accessory connection.  I put the magnetic latch on the top of the box because it's easier to fit and adjust that way; you can put it inside, for a neater finish.

The power cables of the 480 are quite long and stiff, and tangle into a mess.  So I just tied them up into a bundle, removed the banana plugs and soldered the wire to panel-mount terminals bolted onto the plywood side.  I added a third terminal to permit earthing of the rig.  Now the rig is entirely enclosed, with only the need for two shorter, more manageable cables to the battery.  Remember to use heavy-duty cable of about 25-30A rating for that.

Banana panel terminals attach to the 480's power cable, allowing the cumbersome wires to stay inside the box.

I reused the 480's carry handle by screwing it into the box, which works well.  If I had longer ones, I would have preferred to us bolts, for peace of mind. A lick of exterior varnish is finally applied, to keep it all neat and tidy.

Nearly finished!  The rear, showing the power and earth connection terminals.  Rememeber to fit runners to prevent the connectors being damaged!

All done!  You could also fix an SO239 panel connector for the antennas, for added convenience.

RadCom - It's Been a While...

Now, this blog is primarily aimed at encouraging amateur radio on a pocket-money budget.

For example, if you look up the 'I-Am' end-loaded vertical antenna I wrote about here some time ago now, you will save yourself about £200 over the commercial version and have significantly lower losses in the feed system. More importantly, you will learn more about antennas, and even be a little less frightened to experiment with non-established designs; there's little to get wrong, if you follow the basics.

So, it's disappointing, to say the least, to find RadCom, as so many other hobby magazines, reviewing equipment within its pages that doesn't so much save money as encourage you to spend more of it.

Turn to the Christmas 2014 edition, page 32.  Here's a review of the 'Whizz Whip' - a simple telescopic whip antenna currently primarily aimed (given its direct male coupling) at the smaller Yaesu mobile transceivers.

Now, there are people who can use most types of equipment, and the 'Whizz Whip' is probably useful in some circumstances.

What I wonder about is whether any situation makes the 'Whizz Whip' a good antenna choice, given that it costs - wait for it - 5p short of £100!  As the review diplomatically asserts, a whip like this needs a counterpoise to reduce RF feedback from the I3 current, and help make the situation more stable altogether.  It doesn't come with one!

Which kind of brings any sensible operator to ask: why not just use a simple homebrew inverted-L, vertical dipole or something like that?  Total cost for one of those can be pennies, maybe a couple of quid if you buy a new SO239 connector (not that you in fact need one of those!)

RadCom repeats the sin, rather, when it moves, at page 61, to review what's ambitiously called a "quarter size" G5RV.  At least this only costs £24.99, giving the maker a pretty low margin all in all.

But, come on!  Why would you buy an antenna like this?  Can't you cut some wire and solder?

Let's imagine you have little space, which is the justification, it seems for the review.  You can build your own twin-fed dipole for maybe £15 if you bought all the stuff, a lot less if you have an established junk box.  You don't have to give it a name - it's not really a G5RV at all, more a doublet.

What really annoyed me about the '1/4 size G5RV' review was its use with 30m - that's 100 feet - of Mini-8 coax.  Whaaaaat?  30 metres?  If you mounted the antenna at 10m, and your garden is meant to be small (the justification for the antenna and review), that gives you 20m of coax to eat up somewhere on the ground, remembering that the height is covered by the twin line!!

I think a realistic assessment ought to have been made with no more than 15-20m of coax.  Of course, the SWR figures would be somewhat worse under that condition, due to coax losses being reduced.  Even then, it's a question as to why you wouldn't simply build a shortish doublet fed only with twin to a 4:1 current balun and a tiny section of coax to make it to the ATU - far lower losses even at very high SWR - and cheaper. At 5m a side (2m longer than the commercial unit), you could work 20m and up efficiently.

Quite why RadCom is reviewing a quadcopter (p68-69) is anyone's guess.  But that guess might be related to the advertising income, given that it featured prominently - read expensively - on the back of last month's RadCom.

And then we come to some stuff about propagation beliefs being wrong.  I tossed the magazine aside when I read that one-way propagation might be down to higher noise at one station over another.  Tsch!..

'Missing Component', Missing Response.

Last month, the RSGB launched an appeal within the pages of its RadCom magazine, urging members to become active participants in various activities for the society.

It's a really good thing, and one you'd imagine wouldn't need doing, being a society of members.

Many old timers out there, familiar with the RSGB of old, will wonder just how willing the society 'bigwigs' are to listening and surrendering any form of responsibility to 'lay' members.

The answer may lie in the silence generated by my very recent offer to help, which continues a series of correspondence during 2014 with Graham Coomber, the General Manager of the society.

First off, Mr. Coomber is always impeccably polite, and no doubt has an awful lot of correspondence both sensible and nutty to wade through daily.  It's to his credit he finds time to respond at all.

But beyond that, it's been clear that, within the old man's club, there's a great reluctance to (a) accept views different from those of the society and consequently (b) that no real change is seen as necessary.

My pet issue has been making the UK a friendlier place for hams in terms of what they can and can't put up before planning needs to be a consideration.

The RSGB, via Graham Coomber, has openly and honestly admitted to me that it has failed, in the past, to win support for any changes.  To be honest, I'm not sure how hard the society tried.  Worse, it seems the society is using the past as a guide to the future, now concluding there's little point in having another go.

Change takes time.  It also takes good skills from someone with a track record of campaigning for change.  It isn't something the RSGB seems to have any heart whatsoever for doing, and so the status quo remains.  With my 25+ years of successful environmental campaigning (the political, and not 'activist' sort), you'd think the RSGB might show some humility and accept offers of help.  It needn't be from me, you understand, but certainly someone who has done this kind of thing before, and has an unusual degree of tenacity.

But it doesn't seem at all interested, not even as an informal representative of the society.

Not much of a member society, then!

Also evident from recent responses from the society has been an over-sensitivity to putting one's views forward.  When I pointed out certain changes within Wales, the planning committee instantly rushed, like some kid found red-handed nicking sweets, to phone the Welsh Government. 

I was then told that my views weren't correct, and that TAN 19, which governs telecommunications, including amateur radio (clearly as a copy-and-paste afterthought), is not generally considered for amateur planning purposes.  The society also said the rules in Wales were much the same as those in England.  This is true, but doesn't take into account local development plans, SPGs and the like, all of which can and do affect what happens locally, and can be made legally-binding by way of consent clauses, even if those guidances are not legal instruments in and of themselves.  Not until I contacted the RSGB did it seem to realise that an entirely new piece of planning legislation was coming into existence in Wales during 2014-15. 

As a regular recipient of and contributor to consultations on planning issues within Wales, I could check to see what input the RSGB had made into the new legislation, which is seen as a significant change to the rules here.  Go on - hazard a guess at how much input your society had put into arguing for better planning rules for hams during the consultation?  Well, I could find none at all, and a challenge to the RSGB, asking them how much input they made over the past two years has gone without reply for two months now.  It's safe to assume your society made no input at all.

Now, is the view - that the official Government guidance document, TAN 19, is not of any real significance for hams - correct?

Well, I would agree that sometimes, TAN 19 may not be considered.  But it is where the official guidance on amateur radio lies (and for the most part, surprisingly, makes sympathetic noises.)

What the whole episode led to was my contacting OFCOM last week for help in sourcing any document concerning 'safe' levels of RF for amateur radio.  Why?  Because I've been keeping tabs on a lot of planning and appeal applications, and 'health and safety' features very frequently in the decision-making, typically by councillors and officers who have next-to-no technical awareness, and set-upon by rafts of objectors fearful of any change, whether reasonable or not.


What happened?  Well, I was directed by OFCOM to a shedload of documents, one of which was no longer live online, all dealing with RF radiation from - you guessed it - mobile phones.

And that was the point I was trying to make to Graham Coomber and the society all along: that amateur radio applications invariably become conflated with rules, regulations - and more importantly - fears - about mobile phone 'masts'.  If my enquiries about amateur radio installations lead to OFCOM and then to rafts of irrelevant documents about mobile phone safety, then that is where enquiries from planning officers and the public will lead.

Obviously, this is not a good place to be.  Unlike the ARRL, we can't even rely on any UK advice on any concerns about RF safety planners and neighbours may have - even if they shouldn't normally be considering H&S (because it's covered by existing laws and authorities.)

Mr. Coomber also told me that a member is "more likely" to gain planning permission if he/she uses the RSGB planning service.  It sounds reassuring, but I doubt very much the society has the necessary evidence to demonstrate this claim is true.  That's because it would need the RSGB to conduct a large-scale assessment across numerous authorities, submitting identical applications for the exact-same properties, with and without RSGB input, to the same case officer.  It would be a very tough experiment to run, actually.

So, the question again turns, in my mind, to whether the RSGB is capable of change, when change requires an abandonment of the top-down, 'we know best' attitude that has undeniably and evidently dominated the society for a very long time.  I also wonder how much attention the society is paying to the views of its new PR lady. 

Time, as always, will tell.  For now, so far as campaigning for better planning rules for hams is concerned, there's little doubt the RSGB is little short of useless.

Ampro Mobile Antenna - 12m Variant

The higher HF bands have been wide open during the past couple of months, and activity is very high there.

As regular readers may recall, I sold my G-Whip Pro Mobile antenna during last spring, as it was just a little too much fuss to change bands with it.  Much better, in my view, to have a handful of monoband whips tuned-up and quickly screw in and out as bands dictate.

Mobile whips are much of a muchness, really - there's not an awful lot of latitude for one to be better than the other, being simply helically-wound verticals, the lower HF ones with loading coils, the upper ones without.

The Ampro-12 atop the radio car(!)

 
I love 12 metres, so opted for an Ampro 12 from Nevada, for £19.95.  Nevada charge a very reasonable standard delivery rate, and their service is very good, fair play.  The antenna arrived essentially next-day.

The Ampro, a very slimline design, has a standard 3/8" male screw fitting, which will see it attach to the vast majority of magmounts without any fuss.  The whip has a stiff lower section, and then a very lively stainless steel top section which is the part you raise up and down to get the right match to the transceiver.

The top whip is held in place very securely by two small set screws.  The only problem is that the supplied Allen wrench is made to a very poor quality, such that it is more round in profile than hexagonal! Accordingly, it doesn't work.  But Allen keys are so common that this is not a problem worth worrying about.

The top whip is kept firmly in place by two set screws.

Matching is very easy, and remains stable with changing environments.  Nearby metal sheds and power lines do affect mobile whips quite a lot, so if you do encounter any difficulty, it's best to take the car somewhere clear of development to match the antenna.

Performance-wise, the Ampro is, in essence, just a piece of wire on a stick, so it works as well as any other wire on a stick would!  My first QSO was with a 7U station in Algeria, who was hearing me well enough.  A TO station (Guadeloupe) was coming in extremely strongly at well over 59, but I didn't get a chance to have a QSO.

So, yes, this Ampro whip works as you would expect, is a really good price, and robust enough to last many years.  I was impressed by the way it shirked-off an encounter with a height limiting barrier at my local supermarket.  The springy upper section came into its own, merely whipping back into verticality on clearing the barrier!

Just remember that, whilst your car looks a bit silly with a huge antenna on top, it will typically give you 3dB - that's twice the input and output - over one installed on a tow hitch or eye.  It's also easier to match, due to the lack of complicating matters such as heating elements in the rear screen.

Blog's rating 

on price: 10/10
design: 9.5/10
performance: 10/10

Twisted Gamma Match

Attention has turned again at this station to the wonderful and intriguing magnetic loop.

Having been doing some more technical reading, I thought I'd try out a twisted gamma match, brought to our attention by Prof. Mike Underhill probably more than anyone else.

Now, most people who make a magloop use a primary 'Faraday' loop, which couples to the secondary, larger loop.  This works well, especially if the Faraday loop is squashed into an oval, which tends to yield easier matching.

But I was curious whether the gamma match would work as well as - or better than - the two-loop system, although the overall efficiency of the antenna was already superb.

Solder shield to one side of the loop, and the gamma wire to the centre..

So, out came the blowtorch and solder, and off came the Faraday loop!

I connected the shield of the coax directly to the bottom of the large loop, and then soldered about 2 metres of relatively heavy duty (30A) insulated equipment wire to the centre conductor.  I twisted this, with no idea what might work and what might not, until the wire wrapped up half one of the bottom pipes, up one whole side, and a few inches along one half of the top pipe.  Prof. Underhill seemed generally to do much the same, loosely wrapping one whole half of a circular loop with the gamma match wire.  I used a crocodile clip to connect the end of the twisted gamma match to the top rail of the magloop; you eventually solder this in place.

I tuned-up by ear with the magloop's 0-200pF air-spaced capacitor, to pleasantly find the SWR a perfect 1:1.  Running on WSPR at 5W in poor daytime conditons on 20m showed the system was working as expected.  Comparison of my received signals by US and Canadian stations showed I was level-pegging with other transmitting stations known to have very efficient beacon systems.

More tests needed, but the twisted gamma is very easy to do, seems non-critical as to design, and is less prone to being disturbed when knocked or moved than a Faraday loop.  You can find lots of information about loops and matching systems here. 

Update: I've rebuilt the magloop in wider-bore, 28mm copper.  This has slightly changed capacitor requirements, but works perfectly well.  Using the twisted gamma match, I've been particularly pleased with its performance on 40m, where nightly PSK on 10W and WSPRing on 5W reveals an efficient antenna, more especially considering it is working indoors! On 60m, it's more than once been the only antenna getting across to the US, which is remarkable when up against outdoor antennas across the EU!

RSGB: Up The Swanny?

The latest edition of RadCom just dropped through the letterbox.

Fair play, the editorial team are making what is a fairly obvious attempt to change the content so that it appeals to mere mortals as well as career engineers.

On page 7, half-yearly and unaudited accounts are presented.  They make for troubling reading, indeed.

Having ridden a significant but very short-lived wave of sales during the centenary year (2013), 'normality' is now coming home to roost.  This month's RadCom heavily promotes the new Handbook, whilst trying to get members to boost the society's income with a £5 book token. 

Whilst I could go through a lot of detail, the bottom line is that the RSGB has taken a huge, 9.2% drop in income as compared with the half-yearly results for the same period last year.  Its income from interest has halved in one year.  The RSGB states it expects a "roughly break-even" position for the full year.

Now I don't know much about business, but when faced with a situation like this, a subscription fee hike would appear to be wise, if unwelcome.

One detail that I think the membership ought to severely criticise the Board for is its continued operation and financial support for its ill-conceived National Radio Centre at Bletchley Park.  This accounts for an overhead of £18,414 - or a staggering 25% of the RSGB's total non-activity overheads.  I've said it before and I'll say it again - the NRC has no meaningful worth to the society or its membership, and is entirely unaffordable.  It has been the focus of much criticism and needless expense.  Why it isn't being closed down as an expensive luxury is something that will become a louder cry in coming months, I think.

Urgency should be setting in amongst the Board members and all members of the society alike.  If the society maintains its current, quite static line of activity, then it has only a few years left before hitting the hard rocks of financial unsustainability.

Many have commented in the recent past that the RSGB has only "about ten years left."  On the latest results, that would seem to be rather optimistic.  Membership, and so income, is still falling, and the realisation that nobody's been doing anything to attract newcomers to the hobby has come way, way too late.  Many of the RSGB's members have been only too enthusiastic to play their part in the downfall, in their attempts to keep radio an exclusive man's club.

The RSGB now runs, unless it shows exemplary management direction, the potential risk of making mistakes in an effort to improve its future prospects.  With a break-even outcome, it has no latitude to invest in improvements to services to its membership, many of whom seem simply to join "for the magazine".  It has reached a point where it can only - just - keep its head above water.

The time for a total revamp of the society, how it does things, what it throws money at, and what services it provides, is now.  Not tomorrow.  Not the next time a new Board is appointed. Now.  If not, then during the next couple of years, we'll be seeing accounts with little more than increasingly red numbers.

On the positive side, we can take a glass half-full approach and say that the RSGB's time may have passed, and that a new kind of representative for the radio community should come into existence.  Many would welcome that, and I would be one of them.

Switch Mode Power Supply RFI

Just when you thought we had enough QRM on the bands, I seem to have found a new culprit yesterday - domestic CCTV systems.

Now, before we begin, CCTV isn't rare.  It's used by a large swathe of the neighbour-harassed population, so there will be one near you.

Because of their popularity, and developing HD technology, CCTV is subject to huge competition and cost pressures.  As a result, so is the quality and design of the various components.

The facts:

I bought a 'Home Guard' CCTV system with a 1TB HDD and 2 cameras.  It cost £189 at Argos, a very popular UK retail outlet.

After a full and careful installation (well, there are only a couple of basic BNC and PSU connections, after all!), I powered up to see whether there was any RFI.

Sadly, there was.  A lot of it.

The 12m band went from a totally quiet, noiseless environment to one with a S5 hash.

Here's the evidence:

So, if you buy one of these, which are probably the same kind of unit sold under endless branded guises, then chances are it will have a cost-cutting PSU, and RFI as a result.

I'm taking mine back as not fit for purpose, and a breach of European Directive 2004/108/EC, the material part for consumers being Article 5 (hat tip to UKQRM for this):

"Equipment shall be so designed and manufactured, having regard to the state of the art, as to ensure that:

(a) the electromagnetic disturbance generated does not exceed the level above which radio and telecommunications equipment or other equipment cannot operate as intended".

Argos were exceptionally good with me - they accepted the complaint and refunded me with no quibble whatsoever.  They even called me back the same day when I told them about the wider issues with selling this product.  

But, many other shop assistants will look at you with a blank face if you present them with this complaint as a basis for returning and claiming your money back.  It's understandable, but not acceptable.  It's probably best to ask for the manager, if there is one, and explain it is a piece of equipment that is probably illegal due to its RFI-generating nature, and that the problem of power supplies like this generating RFI is very well known and the reasons for it understood (omission of isolating components.)

Tell the shop you are also the holder of an OFCOM radio licence, and that you will be reporting the product to both OFCOM and the local trading standards office.

DO NOT ACCEPT the shop telling you to contact the manufacturer, even if the manufacturer asks you in their instruction leaflet to contact them 'in the event of a problem'.  This is not an equipment  operating problem for the maker to help you with, it's a basic manufacturing flaw.   It is the SELLER'S legal obligation to deal with complaints and refund you (a replacement isn't appropriate here, because it's likely all their CCTV systems will use the same PSU - you should tell them this if they dig their heels in.)

If the shop, as often happens, really digs their heels in, you can try and ask the manager to write down their reasons for refusing to accept the return and/or refund you, and then go to ask for help from your local trading standards office at the Council.  Inevitably, these are rather stretched and much less able to help than once was the case.

Antenna Switch

Like most hams, I accumulate antennas over time.  I have one commercially made antenna switch, which can handle QRO operating, and so has some pretty robust switching.  However, it only has three antenna ports, and I never use more than 100W, usually much less.

Here's what my commercial unit looks like.  You may wish to note that a four port switch sells for anything from £60 - £90, depending on maker.  That's a lot of money for what is actually an extremely simple device.

Knife switch on a commercial, higher-power 3 port antenna switch.  Simple, but expensive.

As I have five antennas in active use at the moment, and always a couple under experimentation, I decided to make my own, seven port switch.

Now, a note of caution: if you use more than 100W output, you may want to select your switch unit with consideration to how robust the contacts are, and whether their arrangement might be too close for higher powers.  At 100W or below, the following should be more than adequate, but it's up to you and your training to check!

I obtained my 11-position, single pole switch from a well-known online auction site for about £2.50 each.

At the same time, I bought a smallish aluminium box from RS Components, who seem to have a more sensible size range than other outlets.  This was about £12.  I bought a lot of twenty SO239 panel-mount connectors for £8 - all the way from Texas - via the same online auction site.  They took a mere week to arrive.

The 11-position, single pole switch, and all the connections.  The SO239 on the left is attached to the common pole, to which the transceiver is connected.  The remaining seven are antenna ports.  Don't forget to add a grounding post as well.

I then bought a reamer, which cuts larger holes in metal to allow the SO239s to fit through.  This was a one-off tool outlay of £11.

Making the switch is easy-peasy, lemon-squeezy.  Just drill a number of modest sized holes where you want the connectors, and then use the reamer to widen the holes until the SO239s sit snugly against the box.  Then drill some smaller holes for attaching the SO239s to the box using M3 or thereabouts bolts and Nylok nuts.  Two is enough for each connector.

Drill a hole in the bottom of the box (NOT THE LID!), which is where you stick the switch through to attach it to the metal case.  The lid goes on last, and becomes the bottom of your antenna switch box.

The rest is just a case of connecting each antenna port to the switch.  You also need to attach a bolt through the lid somewhere out of the way so that you can ground the box directly (and not to another piece of equipment like an ATU, etc.)

And as I can hear the purist elders ask: "Ah!  But what about the inter-port isolation, my boy?", I ran a test using two rigs, one on a connected port, the other on a disconnected port.  According to this simple test, the isolation is very comparable to the commercial unit, being of the order of 60dB.

So there you go.  Apart from the fact that you rarely see antenna switches with more than four ports, this project saves you a lot of money.  Sure, you can do a nicer, less hurried soldering job than me, and maybe use a chunkier switch, but that's another story!

ARRL DXCC Award

For some reason, I went to do battle with the LoTW site this afternoon.  Like every other time, I ended-up going round in circles, trying to find somewhere that was user-friendly.

Eventually, I once more figured-out how to apply for a DXCC award, this being rather belated by now, and not really of any importance to me, to be honest.

In total, the certificate would cost me £38 at today's exchange rate.  £38 - for a piece of paper?  I can get a walnut-effect mounted brass plaque for a bit more off E-QSL, a system that, whilst admittedly much more open to abuse, is infinitely easier to use.

I can only imagine that, if QRZ.com get their skates on properly, they could sweep the floor with a reasonably-priced award program linked to their very nice new logbook, which is now double-blind until confirmation by each station.  It's clear such a program is in development, and needs only to be launched.

So, the ARRL can get stuffed, because only egotistical fools with space to fill on their walls pay £38 for a piece of paper. 

0% Compliance for USB Chargers.

During ongoing discussions within the radio community about EMC issues arising from the flood of Chinese USB chargers, my attention was drawn to this important article.

Given that most of us have several of these damned things around the house, this is certainly worth a read:

http://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/electrical-professionals/product-safety-unit/plug-in-chargers/

Suprisingly Useful Tip of the Day

The other day, I accidentally soldered a PL259 to the free end of a roll of RG-8X.  This proves to be surprisingly useful, because I'm always chasing a brainwave when I am connecting-up coax, usually a brainwave in bad weather, or when there are other things to do as well!

By making sure I always have a PL259 nicely finished off at the end of the reel, I can just cut the right length needed for the job, connect-up at the antenna, and pass the other end through the wall for some comfortable indoor soldering to finish the job!

SIM 31 Mode

No sooner had you managed to twiddle all your settings than another digital mode arrives!

Yes, folks, SIM-31 is here.

Fair play, it's a good new take on PSK, seemingly much more robust in the face of poor conditions than plain PSK-31.  There aren't many using it as yet, but it's very early days.

What SIM-31 doesn't have is charisma!  Whilst it has a chat mode, its set macro offerings are very 'Spanglish' in nature, and the whole package feels just a bit sterile.

That is pushed even further in that SIM-31 includes a fully automated setting that can initiate and complete a QSO without any operator input whatsoever.  I mused on that type of 'amateur radio' in yesterday's post, and the distinct feeling you get when you see an automated 'CQ' call is one that highlights the pointlessness of 'conversing' with a machine with no human at all on the other end.

I'm not sure if SIM-31 will take off in the community.  For my money, I much prefer the quirky but very robust ROS mode for when conditions are poor (ROS was developed for this purpose.)  Despite the powerful benefits of ROS, very few use it.  I suspect SIM-31 will discover the same ground.

You can download SIM-31 from this site. 

Philosophy of Radio

Oh dear!  It's serious when it comes to philosophical matters!

The prompt for this post is the discovery that my FT-450, a lovely acquisition from a famous internet auction site, allows the recording of 10-second messages - typically 'CQ' calls - for later playback.

Now, I've often developed sore throats from calling 'CQ', so this facility is really useful.  But, it does beg the question: if we can automate 'CQ' calls, and automate most of a QSO via the various digital modes, are we as operators simply reduced to button-pressers at the appropriate moments?

The point being that, whilst most modes need us to click a mouse or press a button, that's only from kindness of a sort; it's pretty obvious from modes like WSPR that the whole experience of radio can be fully automated, with no need for an operator, other than being the licence holder for the transmitter, at all.

Now, I love WSPR.  It's a phenomenally useful mode.  It's also fully automated.  You can even exchange valid QSLs based upon it.  So, is full automation a future for radio?  Yes.  But not the full future.  Automation where it's appropriate and useful.

Otherwise, it's clear that real humans love real involvement in the sending and receiving of transmissions, and I see little evidence that what we have today is going to be much different from what we will have tomorrow.  You only need to spend a couple of days on faceless digital modes to realise the truth of this!

Ten.

Ten.  That's the global total of operators, including me, that are currently active on 60m WSPR.

Admittedly, I only just came to 60m this week.  But really, only a handful of stations across the globe?

This is a real shame, and rather contrary to the spirit of allowing access to 60m, which is meant to be largely for the purposes of experimentation.  Surely, figuring out the propagation system using the invaluable resource of WSPR is a lynchpin of such work?

Come on, guys and gals!  Get active on WSPR.  If it weren't for the couple of ZS stations active on 60m WSPR, there would be no stations outside the EU. 

This really is a sorry state of affairs, dear ops!

Fitting PL259 Plugs to RG8-X

Like many operators, I'm a regular user of the relatively low-loss RG8-X coax.  It's a lot nicer than using the very bulky, stiff RG-213, which has much the same loss characteristics.

It's always a bit of a question as to how best to connect coax to a plug.  Soldering to the braid through the plug holes is always prone to heat-damaging the inner insulator - damage that you can't assess because it's largely out of sight.

An old, dismantled RG8-X plug to coax connection.  The screw thread provides very good physical and RF coupling.

 
But it's very easy with RG8-X.  First, I use coarse aluminium oxide sandpaper (or a metal file/rotary tool head) to rub away a key to the base metal all the way round the outside of the bit that attaches to the outer sheath of the coax.  I then carefully heat the plug and add a thin layer of solder all the way around.  If you melt a blob of solder onto the tip of the iron and simultaneously let it touch the plug, this is a very good way to quickly transfer heat to the plug.

After the fairly long time it takes the plug to cool down, I strip the coax as usual.  I pull the outer braid back over itself, so that it faces away from the plug.  You can then screw the plug directly onto the braid and PVC sheath, which fits very snugly, without the need for excessive force.  This makes a very stable, secure and sound RF connection with the plug, as you can see from the years-old example recently disconnected.

To make doubly-sure of a good connection, I then wrap the remaining short length of braid around the tube of the PL259 that fits over the braid/sheath, and then apply solder, which attaches itself very easily to the plug due to the earlier pre-soldering.  Once it's cooled, add a layer or two of self-amalgamating tape to add some mechanical strength and weather tightness (if needed.)

You now have a bomb-proof RF connection to the plug!  I'll add some more photos of the process when I get a chance...

When ATU Bypass Isn't Necessarily So.

A long time ago, when I was even more ignorant of ham radio set-ups than today, I tried to create a well-matched delta loop by using an ATU's SWR meter, with the matchbox set on 'bypass'.  I remember trudging backwards and forwards so much in that exercise that I'd worn a very muddy path in the garden!

Beware stray currents - and false SWR readings - on ATU 'bypass'.

I never did achieve a low SWR with the ATU meter, and wondered why that was.  The answer, it seemed, was that, even when switched to 'bypass', there is some kind of interaction between the RF and the ATU circuitry, leading to strange and usually meaningless SWR meter readings. 

This phenomenon made itself known again the other day, when I switched over to an extremely reliable 2-ele quad for 6m that has a 1:1.05 SWR at worst.  It went via a coax switch to the ATU on 'bypass', and then to the rig.  I keyed-up to check the antenna, and the rig SWR meter was reading 1:1.5!  I scratched my head a bit and thought about what had changed recently.

It turned out that the changed item was the position of the inductor switch on the ATU.  I'd been using an inverted-L on 60m, this antenna design necessitating the use of a matchbox.  I turned the switch back to its earlier position, and the problem 'high' SWR on the 6m quad vanished.  I connected to the quad directly via a separate SWR meter, and that also reported the expected, 1:1 SWR.   It was the same with the delta loop; only by using a standalone SWR meter and direct connection to the rig, rather than via an ATU on bypass, was I able to cut the right wire length with ease.

Some ATUs might be OK in this regard.  But seeing as many of us use relatively cheap units by the well-known producers, it's a salutary point to note next time you want to check what your antenna is doing!

Update: Someone pointed out to me that the ATU I was using is only rated up to 30MHz which, they opined, was also true even when set to bypass.  They're doubtless correct in this, but I think most people, perhaps naively, expect 'bypass' to mean 'completely bypass, whatever the frequency', which isn't the case.

RSGB Engages a PR Manager

I have to say I was relieved this afternoon to learn from Graham Coomber at the RSGB that the society has employed a PR manager to raise its profile.

Say it loud, say it clear. 

Neither the society nor the hobby of amateur radio is often in the general news.  I've been searching online from time to time for any hint of the hobby, and apart from the odd news item from the US, there really is nothing out there. 

Coomber says the Board have been aware for some time of the need to get better and wider publicity.  Whilst it costs the society money, I think it will prove to be money well spent.  After all, politicians, lobbyists and organisations typically issue several press releases to journalists each and every day, vying for column inches in the papers, online, and on TV news. 

According to Coomber, the society is already learning a lot from the PR manager, who has no previous experience of amateur radio.  Like Coomber, I'm very sure that's a good thing, because years of doing things 'our way' have not been successful by any measure.

Without PR, we are invisible and non-existent to the wider public.  That is a very bad thing indeed, especially as there are plenty of really interesting stories that might change perceptions.

So, well done RSGB Board for seeing the light, and doing something about PR.  Now it's a case of effective deployment.  We're watching...

The Future of Amateur Radio - The 'Youngsters' Debate.

In response to a thought-provoking and well-presented discussion on attracting youngsters to the great hobby of ham radio, I submitted the following response to the RSGB this morning:


Youth Proposals.

I was very impressed with Graham Muchie's missive on how best to revive the hobby, which prompts numerous questions to be asked.

I doubt I would ever have taken an interest in amateur radio were it not for CB in the early and mid-80s.  Now, stop and think about your reaction to the term 'CB'.  In most people, it's negative.  An undisciplined free-for-all using silly and needless jargonese.

Yes, CB was all those things, but only after you had learned how to put up an antenna, select the right coax, use an SWR meter and solder a PL259 plug.  And there you are: the essential basics of knowing how to put an amateur station together.  Whilst we might want it to be more technical and mysterious than that, it really doesn't need to be.  Radio is not, as it used and arguably still is seen by some, a club of exclusivity. 

OK, the fraction of CBers taking more of an interest in the technical side was probably fairly low.  But all of them had to know something about how to 'connect up', and all of them got to realise the benefits and limitations of radio transceivers in the home.  Those going illegal and operating 'linear'-assisted AM CB even saw the benefits of different modes and output powers.  Illegal, but they were learning.

In other words, some seeds of interest were sown amongst a fairly large proportion of the population.  More of those seeds would have germinated had there been no rabid antagonism surrounding whether or not you were Morse-literate, and a protectionist campaign to keep HF to the 'old-timers', aided by the option only of doing the full (and thereafter largely useless) electronic theory course, with no entry level at all.

How do we get kids to climb the amateur radio ladder?  Image: mine.

So, coming back to your suggestions, I would say that a simple, basic licence that focuses on the basic essentials of reasonably disciplined operating and gets youngsters onto 2m or even 6m and upwards should urgently be put in place.  My daughter of eight tried the Foundation Licence, but failed.  Because she hadn't learned?  No, because the exam wording, for a kid, was too convoluted for her to grasp what she was being asked about.   When I asked her the questions in a simple way, she would invariably know the answers.

As to demonstrating, I think this will always tend to attract people who want to show off what they, rather than someone else new to the hobby can do.  You nod at this in your article, and rightly so.  Only a selected group of people operating a well-aimed outreach campaign in large county shows, exhibitions and so on, who are known to be capable educators and motivators, can succeed with demonstrations.  The bloke who sits at home on 40m talking to his ageing mates up the road isn't going to cut it - and hasn't!

Let's combine the two foregoing and say that we need a much more simple first licence that abandons the dated approach and terminology of testing, where we can show youngsters that very high frequency doesn't mean very limited frequencies.  Do they know that two £35, 5W Chinese FM handies and two stick-and-wire quads can get them talking through a satellite every 90 minutes?  Do they know that they can bounce signals off shooting stars?  Do they know they can work the network of repeaters across the UK, and access distant ones with just 2W?  There is plenty more that they can do that not even I know about.

Much maligned by hams, but CB gave the radio bug to many in the 80s and 90s.

 
I don't think that kids entering the hobby, or even many already within it, want to focus on building transceivers, and I don't think this is the best thing to include in a basic licence syllabus.  How many of the total ham population really do build a transceiver?  I guess very few.  It should be part of the wider, career-long learning of an operator, but I think the debate about homebrew transceivers is really just an indication of the age of those involved in the debate, rather than what youngsters want to get involved in. 

And finally, moving on from that last point, I wonder what place in all this debate a proper understanding of what real young people feel about radio, and what takes their interest?  There is a certain feeling that it's middle-aged radio operators musing about what they found interesting as youngsters, not what today's youngsters find interesting.  Has the RSGB commissioned a proper, scientific survey?  It may wish to consider doing so.

Meteor Scatter on 6m.

For a long time, I've been trying to get some sense on how best to operate on 6m meteor scatter.

Of course, if you've just a wee bit of experience, MS is easy-peasy.

Plenty of pinging opportunity - if you can get some help to start off with!  Image: Wikicommons/Edmund Weiß

And there's the rub: I've not operated MS before, so which frequency?  Nobody seems to want to agree, with essentially all online resources being US-based.  In the EU, things are different, so I had to keep looking; 'PingJockey' is no good for me! 

I asked a few operators, who seemed to want to keep the MS activity to themselves by not recommending any frequency or mode.  The sole helpful and relatively up-to-date site I came across was this one by G0ISW - big thanks to him!  This site also pointed me to the EU-centric MS forum site maintained by ON4KST - again, big thanks are due there.

And which mode is best?  JT6M is ubiquitous in online resources.  This is not the latest MS mode, WSJT9 not even offering it as an option (it has reappeared in WSJT10 beta.)

The band plan for Region 1 is meant to have nudged MS operations from around 50.230 to 50.320, but operators seem to have other ideas, with only a very few having moved as IARU wishes.

Listening in at 50.230 just ahead of the Perseids, I could hear plenty of signals but no decodes.  This was my failing to appreciate just how stuck to JT6M everybody seems to be.  You have ISCAT A and B, JTMS, FSK441 but, no, all activity seems to be JT6M-based.  Then I got the decodes.

I'll see what the prospects of making some QSOs with a simple 2 ele quad and about 35W during the narrow peak of the Perseids might be later today.  For now, I'm glad I cut through all the dated and/or wrong internet advice, and once more, found out for myself, rather than through any help from experienced operators, how to cut it on 6m MS.

UPDATE:

A few hours after writing this, a lunchtime session produced my first MS contact with SP7QJF at a distance of 1147 miles (1847km) - not bad at all, and approaching the maximum expected distance for a MS QSO, given the simple antenna and low power of 35W out.  Later, I managed to bag three more QSOs.  It's a propagation mode that needs patience, but you can do it with simple equipment, at least on 6m.