Propagation: Terrible!

This morning, having a bit of difficulty raising any SSB QSOs, I tested 20m paths using WSPR.

The results were not encouraging.  Despite the tens, if not hundreds of WSPR stations present on 20m, only four - yes, FOUR - could hear my 2W signal!  That's something of a first at 20m for me.

Things got substantially better late afternoon, allowing a decent SSB QSO into eastern seaboard USA.  From then on, it was downhill, fast.  I just managed to complete a valid QSO with a WA7 station - invisible on the waterfall and only faintly audible - in Oregon, using OLIVIA 32/1K, before the band died a death once more.

It's not now uncommon to find 20m the highest band that can be used for the whole day.  17m opens fairly regularly, and even 12m can open mid-mornings, though it's been dead for a couple of weeks now.

I guess we can only expect more of the same - and worse - for the next couple of years.

Ho hum!

Christmas Day Grumps

With a few moments to spare after unwrapping the kids' gifts on Christmas Day, I turned my overworked FT-450 to 20m.

I sent a CQ on JT9.  A strong signal came back in reply.  'Good start', I thought.

Except, the message, which carried no identifying information, simply said 'WATCH YOUR ALC'.


Well, that was a bit odd, because I've several tens of thousands of QSOs without a single such complaint about ALC before.  My power was the same as it always is, and the ALC meter was completely inactive.

The complaining operator was, in fact, both misguided and of the wrong frame of mind for Christmas Day.  Given his JT9 signal here was +15dB S/N, no doubt he thought my similarly very strong signal was overdriving.

Unfortunately, and as is far too commonly the case on amateur radio, the operator had to keep on sending pointlessly admonishing messages without once sending his callsign or locator, thus making his offence a matter of law, and worse than had I actually been overdriving.

Once again, it left me thinking: 'why does anyone bother with ham radio?'  Thankfully, that feeling soon passed...

Third Party Billing (loosely ham radio-related)

I'd like to pass on a little warning to anyone who has a mobile phone and/or internet service - which means just about everyone these days.

I recently found out, through a minor fraud on my mobile data box account, that third parties are able to charge against that data account.  Just about all communications providers have this clause, and are quick to justify it in that some people donate money to charity using this system (which is how texting a number appearing on a TV screen achieves this aim.)

Whilst it's clear in the contract that this can happen, and I had seen it before signing up, what isn't clear is that third parties intent on ripping you off can come in from nowhere and start running up large bills on your innocent data account. 

This, in effect, is a back door to your bank account, with premium rate services you've never heard about, let alone agreed a contract with, typically adding between £4.50 to £9 per week to your charges!  A simple click might suffice to form a contract (though not a fair, lawful one), in some cases.  Even though the practice is dubious at best, unlawful at worst, your chances of bringing a case against someone sitting in a bedroom in China are remote, to say the least.

A number of online discussions note that several UK comms companies created the organisation - PayForIt - that facilitates these third party transactions.  Certainly, there appeared to be a very intimate and immediate realtionship between EE and PayForIt when I contacted them to try and stop this fraud. 

Whilst EE told me I had to cancel these odd contracts, they curiously were able to stop future payments in one case, and refunded most of the other money taken after some persistence.  So, whilst they tell you they must pay the third party, they also acted in my case to stop paying them.  It's all very cosy and inconsistent.

In short, with some robust legally-worded letters sent by recorded delivery to EE's headquarters, I managed to put an end to this and get most of my money back, though I didn't lose much.

What you need to do is ensure that, if you don't want some dodgy companies forming a contract against your data/internet/phone account, and then taking you for an expensive ride, then you must contact your provider(s) and tell them you want third party charging - all of it - blocked.  Most do this immediately on the phone, or you can change settings on your account online.  But, beware any existing third party charges, as you need to personally cancel these first. 

As with any contract, it's best to get confirmation in writing when you take out a contract that third parties cannot charge your account. 

Most of all, take charge and issue, if necessary, the provider with your own, written, recorded delivery modification to the contract stuffed into your hand when you buy a data-capable device.  Don't just feel you have to be subject to what the providers write down.  Just make sure you then have confirmation the provider has accepted this!

Go check your contracts right now!

RSGB Data Breach - ICO Response

The following has just been received from the ICO, in response to this incident:

"Thank you for raising your concerns regarding the way the Radio Society of Great Britain handles personal information.

Your concern relates to the email of 18/19 October 2016 where the sender failed to use the Blind carbon copy ‘Bcc’ function, when sending the email, resulting in the disclosure of personal email addresses to all recipients.

Our aim is to improve information rights practices. We do this by taking an overview of all concerns that are raised about an organisation with a view to improving its compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998 (‘the DPA’).

We do not investigate every concern we receive. We will put most of our effort into dealing with matters we think give us the best opportunity to make a significant difference to an organisation’s information rights practices.

Depending on the circumstances, for example, we may give an organisation advice about handling personal information, provide guidance, or ask it to review its procedures.

Please see our website for further information:

https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/our-information/service-standards/

Our decision

From the information you have provide to us it is likely that the Radio Society of Great Britain has breached the seventh data protection principle of the DPA as, whilst it did not disclose any sensitive information, it disclosed individuals personal email addresses by failing to use the ‘Bcc’ function when sending those emails.

The seventh principle states that:

‘Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.’

This is a breach of the seventh principle of the DPA, because it appears the Radio Society of Great Britain failed to take appropriate measures to ensure the security of the personal data.

Next Steps

As a result of this breach, we have written to the Radio Society of Great Britain informing them that they have breached the DPA by failing to take appropriate measures to ensure the security of the personal data, and giving them some advice for the future in this area to ensure a repeat of this incident does not occur.

Although at this stage we are not taking any further action we will keep the concerns raised on file. This will help us over time to build up a picture of the Radio Society of Great Britain’s information rights practices.

If you are dissatisfied with the way your case has been handled, you can ask to have it reviewed. Please note that we do not usually accept a request for a case review more than three months after the closure of a case. For more information please see our website.

Yours sincerely

Karla Bailey

Case Officer

Information Commissioner’s Office"

More LCD Monitor RFI Developments (and a sort-of fix!)

Someone sent a letter to the EMC section of the RSGB's RadCom magazine this week.

In it, the author explained how he had replaced a cheap VGA connector cable with a heavy-cored, multi-screened version that, he claimed, eliminated his RFI issues.  All three signal cables, and then the whole cable assembly, were screened.

As earlier reported, I bought a new LG monitor recently, only to find I couldn't use it due to very high levels of broadband RFI.

After trying a lot of the usual solutions - ferrites, chassis grounding, etc - I could only reduce the RFI by a very modest amount, and certainly not to levels that were remotely acceptable in this quiet rural radio situation.

I thought I'd have a go at the VGA cable solution.  Having forked-out £25 for a new unit from RS Components, I found it made absolutely no difference whatsoever over a cheap cable.

Somewhat belatedly, I then had the idea of coiling up the VGA cable to form an air-cored choke.  This instantly led to a huge drop in RFI, to the extent that all bands were clear of it, except for now very low RFI on a few spot freqeuencies on 12m.  I later found 6m was still very badly affected, looking like a loud Russian woodpecker signal across the entire band!

The choke I made was about 5 inches in diameter (I also tried a smaller sized choke, but it wasn't effective), and the RFI began to fall quickly on about the fourth turn, and quite a lot again on the final, fifth turn that I could manage with a thick 3m cable. It's probably a case of diminishing returns, but more windings will probably deal with the residual RFI.  Consequently, I've ordered a 10m VGA cable of the cheapest variety, to yield a much larger number of turns.  None of the standard split ferrites I have made a jot of difference in any number of installation configurations, and no matter how many I added!

What was interesting to note with this choke was the way in which the RFI changed with slight changes to the physical arrangement of the choke. Holding the choke together with cable ties was OK-ish, but because the windings can't be held neatly in sequence, but tend to run over one another, the choking effect is less than if it is wound around some larger diameter PVC drainage tube.  There is, of course, a lesson there for those of us who don't make our antenna chokes very neatly, where the lowered efficiency of the choke isn't so readily apparent!

I did also find that the RFI could be reduced further by winding the DC supply cable many (8-10) times around a large ferrite near the monitor's input socket.  I don't think there is any problem from the power supply, but that the choke is stopping RFI that's made it down the VGA cable and into the monitor from travelling down the additional 'antenna' of the power cable.  It's probably still worth keeping in place, but the main problem is that VGA cable.

UPDATE (and final word on this!)

The 10m VGA cable duly arrived, and a roughly 22-turn air wound choke made from it, wrapped around a 4.5 inch OD drainage pipe.  As expected, this did reduce the RFI considerably.

The RFI initially seemed to vanish entirely, including on 6m, where it was absolutely horrendous, when I connected the choke at the monitor end; previously, the choke was near the computer.  A very short lead to the choke prevents any radiating.  The image below shows the simple arrangement (ignore the yellow spade connector and wire, it is a redundant test wire.  Later, I added a couple of snap-on ferrites between monitor and choke, though they probably achieve very little.

After a day of testing, I did, sadly, find RFI traces on 12m and 6m, which remain too high for my liking, even with a less noisy HP monitor that I have.  The RFI, for example, sat on the OY6BEC 6m beacon frequency, which I love to listen out for during aurora events.

So, in the end, whilst I seem to have a very bad monitor for RFI, and did reduce it dramatically, the screen has been removed and won't be coming back into service!

Reverse Beacon Network

I'm one of those hams that loves an SSB QSO when the going is good, but also with a keen interest in propagation and beacon-like modes.

There are three beacon-esque modes like this I know of.  Sim-31 is an automated PSK-31 piece of software that is less like a beacon (but can be used as such), and more like a thing that collects QSOs entirely without operator input. 

As a result, SIM-31 has not caught on in popularity at all, and I have not heard any signals from this mode for a couple of years.  It's a bit odd in some ways, because all those SSB '59, thanks' QSOs you hear every day of the week are simply that: gathering as many DX entities as possible, with as little input as possible!  But humans like to have a purpose, however futile, hence SIM-31's failure to get a foot in the door.

The remaining two modes are much better known.  The Reverse Beacon Network, which is CW-based, automatically detects CW-sent 'CQ' calls, and plots them, together with the SNR, on a web-base map and reports to an associated database. 

Whilst well thought-out and of definite use (unlike Sim-31!), the RBN suffers from a lack of listening stations.  The software works fine, but does hark back to an earlier era of computing and, relative to modern digital modes, is less attractive and user-friendly.

For example, early this morning, across all HF bands, there were just 30 or so stations popping up on the RBN map.  So the idea that propagation can be seen in real time is thwarted by the lack of stations taking part.  This is made worse, for any ham mode, because there is a high density of ham stations in the Western world, whilst Africa, Latin America and other large swathes of the planet have very few, or no stations.

The remaining mode is WSPR.  This has extremely good coverage, although it, too, is hamstrung by the unequal distribution of wealth and so ham stations across the globe. 

Even on 12m now, on the approach to the lowest point in the solar cycle, there are a good number of active WSPR stations present, such that a basic picture of propagation can be seen.  On the bread-and-butter bands of 20m and below, the coverage on WSPR is extremely good, with a few stations active from remote places like Antarctica on occasion. 

On reflection, then, I think that the RBN is unlikely to grow very much further, if it has grown much at all. WSPR, on the other hand, seems to have established itself in the consciousness of most hams. 

WSPR does suffer regularly from RTTY QRM on weekends, where the RBN might be more flexible in QSYing, if one is receiving a wide range of frequencies.  WSPR, away from busy bands and weekends, is focused on a fixed QRG, and hence there is no hit-or-miss as to whether or not you will hear the signals.

Venturing onto MF - With a Barbed Wire Fence!

Last night, I had one of those 'let's try this!' moments, having started to think about WSPR at MF frequencies.

Now, an effective antenna at MF is something that awaits another lifetime and a property with tens, if not hundreds of acres of land.  A ground dipole is also out of the question, due to very high mineralisation and ground conductivity (in excess of any results I've seen from anywhere in the world.)

For this lifetime, I have to make the most of what's available.

Out came the soldering torch and, within minutes, I had the flying lead connections from a 4:1 balun to...wait for it...a 90m-long barbed wire fence that runs E-W down a 5 degree slope on hugely conductive soil, and an earth stake.  The wire might be 50% longer than this, as it probably continues at 90 degrees at the bottom of the hill.

The fence antenna runs along the stone wall, down slope.

Modelling this arrangement on MMANA-GAL is not easy.  Using modified dipole and sloper files yields low gain values of about -25dBi.  I've no idea whether, in fact, this software works reliably below 1.8MHz.

In any case, here is how my trusty SARK-110 analyser measured things:

A roughly 90m-long fence antenna's curves.

The SARK's output is very interesting!  The SWR remains at low levels throughout the HF, and even the MF spectrum, with many points along the way that yield very good matches.  For example, one of the cursors (M1) lies at 10MHz, with a 1:1.1 match there.  Coax losses are minimal at lower frequencies, but a twin wire feed would probably improve matters.

I would guess that there are quite high losses in this 'antenna' system, and its low height must mean it is a cloud-warmer.


But, listening on WSPR (I have no transmit ability as yet), I was hearing, for example, LA1TN at least 5dB more strongly than any other UK station, which suggests that, whilst it may not be ideal, it is certainly worthwhile experimenting some more.

Running on 10MHz WSPR for a couple of hours shows that the hearing ability is very good, being the only one, or with the only two hearing the US during late morning hours today, and with a signal report between 5dB better and 1dB worse than the other receiving station (both in Scotland.)

On the transmit side, in keeping with its Beverage-type set-up, it's not so good into Europe, being well down by over 10dB on other UK stations.  I'll see what it can do across the Atlantic when the grey line comes over tonight...

WSPRing a Transient Geomagnetic Disturbance

Last night, I was a bit busy with other things in the house, so I left WSPR running at 2W on 20m into my vertical delta loop.

At the moment, on a quiet geomagnetic day, 20m dies around 19:30UT.  This was happening as usual last night.

But, at about 21:00UT, 20m opened up again, with US stations coming in quite strongly for a while.  My 2W signal was also getting across again at the same time.

Looking at the Kiruna magentogram, there was a pronounced but short-lived disturbance about the same time, which would appear to explain why the band came alive again for a while.

The three RX stations were W3CSW (blue), W4MO (orange) and KK1D (brown).  Because of the way line plotting works on my spreadsheet, I've entered a 'filler' data point of -35dB for W3CSW and W4MO, as they lost reception from me for an hour or so before the field changed.

Add caption

VK6XT on 12m WSPR!

It's not unheard of, but it has recently been quite rare to get openings on 12m to VK.

This morning, whilst chancing a go on 12m WSPR, VK6XT came in rather weakly at first, but over the next hour, built up to -2dB!  VK6XT himself was not reporting any spots from anywhere.

VK6XT vanished from the WSPR map at this point, presumably to try and make some standard QSOs.  Unfortunately, I couldn't hear anybody calling CQ.

That's strong, man!

RI1ANR

A nice surprise last evening (17:00-17:14UT) was to have a two-way WSPR exchange with the Russian Antarctic station, RI1ANR.  Quite a distance for 2W from a simple vertical delta loop to travel, helped along by the grey line enhancement on 20m.

Both sides were hearing each other at about -23dB.

RI1ANR

WSPRing The Terminator

At the moment (early November), the terminator runs almost identically at MW and easternmost EA8, providing ideal conditions to test propagation along the 'grey line'.

Luckily, EA8/LA3JJ is often on the island of Fuerteventura, running a good WSPR suite on many frequencies, including 5MHz.

Terminator 'grey line' at 06:15UT November 05.  Screen grab from DX Atlas, with permission.

Here are the results, together with some annotations on the main features and how they relate to the changing time of day (click to enlargen image).  For once, the geomagnetic conditions were very quiet (Kp 1-2)!

WSPR on 60m.

Here are the results from 18:28UT 03/11/16 to 10:30UT 04/11/16 on 60m WSPR between myself and DK8FTA, a path of 1235km (click for larger version).

Interesting to see a clear effect of the advancing terminator in the morning.  The maximum signal isn't very pronounced, and occurs about an hour before DK8FTA's local midnight.  Other than auroral effects, I can't readily explain that - yet!

It needs much more data, but there superficially seems to be a roughly 2-hour periodicity in the data.  That needs figuring out if it's seen repeatedly!

Here also is the result of WSPR on the same, 60m band, between myself and GM8DOR, who is directly north of me.

The result is very different over this short, 'D'-layer dominated 362km path, starting from an essentially unchanging value of about -22dB during the night, and shooting up as sunrise approaches, to settle at its daytime value, also flat, at about +15dB.

OFCOM Lose Amateur Radio Abuse Cases.

Organisations like OFCOM like to publicise successes, but not often failures.


Word has recently reached me as follows:

"Ofcom have recently had a failed prosecution as the defendant claimed “aggravation” and “exacerbation” by repeater users had lead [sic] him to his actions. 

The result of this ruling is that any on-air discussions or other acknowledgement of any form of abuse can be used as a successful defence for the behaviour. It is more important than ever that we never acknowledge or discuss abuse on air and definitely never respond to an abuser. 

Ofcom have been monitoring repeater traffic in the two ongoing cases we discussed but in each case had heard amateur users of the repeaters responding to the abuse, this has resulted in their resources being diverted elsewhere as the evidence they are collating will not be able to support any formal action."

So now you know!  If you hear someone messing about, don't respond, seems to be the right legal response.

Giving up on the magnetic looop antenna.

For years, I've been building and experimenting with magnetic loop antennas, all of which have been made of 15mm - 28mm copper plumbing pipe.

If you're wondering whether a magloop is worth having, I can say that it is - provided you don't spend too much money on a commerical unit.

Magloops.  I've built a few...

I say this because, if you can solder and build an antenna carefully, then there is nothing a commercial maker can provide that will be any better in terms of performance.  Indeed, with homebrew, you can knock-up multi-loop arrays that will probably be better than a commercial unit, and use wider bores to maximise efficiency at lower frequencies.

The only advantage you get with a commercial magloop is the remote tuning mechanism which, of course, is quite a big advantage over manual tuning, especially if the antenna is outdoors!  Many of you will be able to make stepper motor drives and so on, which is not that difficult, but was a challenge for me.  

This week, I decided I would clear out my magloop constructions.  All of them 'worked' in as much as they matched up nicely to 1:1 (and quite easily, using vacuum capacitors).  But none of them make you feel they are worth the effort and money put in - unless your situation leaves you with no alternative.

The reality is that, whilst a magloop will indeed give a dipole a run for its money, and the likes of G3JKF's three loop arrays might even beat a dipole sometimes (the environment makes a huge difference), they are a complex and expensive alternative to a simple arrangement of an end-fed wire or dipole.  At the moment, no worthwhile permanent installation magnetic loop is available commercially for less than about £500.  The most expensive is over £1000.  Neither will 'work' any better than some copper tube bought at your local DIY shop.

Once, when I started my ham career, a small antenna for a wildly windy location was very desirable and, in winter, almost essential.  But, with a small tower to which I can attach a half sloper, this requirement has now passed; the simple wire covers 80-30m, no matter what the weather.  In the absence of a tower, a strong timber pole or tree could have provided an alternative in the shape of an inverted-L (WSPR shows the performance of the two to be almost identical.)  For almost all paths, the wire usually beats the magnetic loop quite easily.  And I speak of a QTH which is undeveloped, open, and elevated.  It has a copper mine for ground!

From Russia (via Ukraine), with love. 

So, whilst I regret the passing of the magloop era here, I at least know how to make and match one up if I ever feel the need again, and which capacitors are best (Russian vacuums.)

If you are stuck up on the 35th floor of an apartment building, or have a postage stamp front yard, then a magloop is a very good compromise that gives you near-dipole performance across several bands, allows access, without too much scaling up, to the lower bands, and lets you work the world whilst avoiding planning controls - at least in the UK.

Here are my findings from the years of soldering:

(1) A three loop array, as used by G3JKF and replicated here, works very well and, when installed at about 2-3m high can match or beat a low-ish wire dipole (almost all 80m dipoles are low, relative to the wavelength.)  Your environment is critical to how well - or not - your particular antenna will work.

(2) A Russian vacuum capacitor of about 7.5-350pF and a roughly 1.2m square loop will yield coverage from 60-20m, perhaps also taking in 17m.  If you can only afford one capacitor, buy a 7.5 (or 10) - 1000pF, which should cater for all loop designs and ham bands.  You need at least 2.5m square to cover 80m.  Ukrainian sellers are usually very reliable and offer caps for about £100, sometimes a bit less.

(3) Efficiency is helped by wider bore tubing.  It's uneconomical to go beyond 28mm, which is also about the largest commonly found tube in DIY stores, and where 90-degree elbow joints cost over £5 each!  At 20m and above, 15mm pipe is much cheaper, and has high efficiency of about 95% or more.

(4) I've never noticed any meaningful difference, when connecting the loop to the capacitor, between using Flexweave wire, braided copper strap, or solid copper strap in the performance (using WSPR) of a magloop.  My final arrangement was solid copper strap clamped with stainless hose clips to the vacuum capacitor.  Some aluminium conductive grease (used to preserve Yagi joints), was added between the strap, clamp and cap, to ensure a corrosion-free connection.

(5) Air capacitors are fine, and need less torque to tune. But, except for spot frequency (e.g. WSPR) use, you will definitely need gearing to achieve fine tuning, even when using a stepper motor.  A vacuum capacitor can be tuned accurately by hand and ear, and is much more stable than an air capacitor.  Vacuums also, of course, take very much more power than an air spaced cap in most cases.

(6) Performance indoors can be surprisingly good.  But watch the power, as the field intensity can reach high levels.  Not much of a worry for many photon-hardened hams, but worth considering (and avoiding) when there are kids about.

(7) I quickly moved away from using Faraday primary loops.  These are mechanically unstable in many homebrew cases.  Much better stability and consistency is found by using a 4:1 balun, with one side of the output connected by a short, stout wire to the centre of the lower tube section (not the top - this is less efficient), and the other to a gamma wire or rod (a 10 sq. mm earth cable is good for this), connected to roughly 2/3 the way up one side. You can also ditch the balun, which may or may not extend your loop's tuning range slightly.

(8) For 'spot' frequency use, which is useful with a high-Q, narrow bandwidth antenna like a magloop, you can use an antenna analyser to accurately tune up outside or away from the rig.  Spot frequency use is now much less of a problem with the JT modes, which you may never in fact need to stray from!


Here's to the coming of the next 'magloop moment'!

Another RSGB Data Cock-Up

Back in 2012, the RSGB's Len Paget sent out my personal data, without my consent, whilst representing the RSGB, to an external organisation that had absolutely nothing to do with amateur radio, and an organisation of which he wrongly assumed I was a member.  Only Len Paget can explain why that happened.

Following this incident, the Information Commissioner's Office censured the RSGB as having been "unlikely" to have been compliant with the Data Protection Act 1998.  Short of a legal determination by a Court, those words are the closest the ICO can come to saying there was no compliance.

The RSGB at the time said it hired consultants to advise them on this issue, and that data controls would be improved.  After weeks of saying nothing to me, I asked whether the RSGB thought an apology might be in order.  Evenutally, an apology was issued, but with the legal disclaimer of 'without prejudice'. 

Yesterday, in an entirely different and certainly not deliberate set of circumstances, the RSGB's ARISS coordinator, Ciaran Morgan, sent out an e-mail to multiple recipients without blind carbon copying.  As a result, each recipient could see the whole list of private e-mail accounts to which the e-mail had been sent.

It's twenty years since the Data Protection Act came into being and, whilst this latest incident is accepted as a genuine accident and an apology issed by the RSGB, it does show the RSGB, like many organisations, is very slow to adhere to the law.  I can't comment on Ciaran Morgan's thinking at the time, but one of the hardest issues to overcome with e-mail is where the individual 'forgets' he is part of a wider organisation that has serious legal obligations, and sees e-mail as informal.

What the RSGB seems in need of is getting all its staff and volunteers who handle personal data to understand very well they are not sending e-mails on behalf of themselves.

Whilst some of these inadvertent data releases might appear trivial to the outsider, it may not necessarily be so.  More than one of the e-mail addresses released were state school accounts. Others may have concerns about abusive partners discovering their private e-mail addresses.

In the end, however serious or not you might think these things are, it is the law, and it is not for the RSGB to assume you are 'OK' with passing personal data around to people you don't know, unless specific consent has been given.  Neither is it 'OK' for the RSGB to think this is just radio talk amongst friends.

The ICO has received a referral, asking them to ensure the new General Manager - and the RSGB as a whole - is clear as to its legal duties.  Both Morgan and the General Manager have issued immediate apologies over this latest incident.  On my suggestion, they also issued an apology to all the other recipients who had their data released.

Those mentioned in this post have a right of reply, noting that I retain all correspondence in both cases with the RSGB and the ICO as conclusive evidence of truth in reporting.

Amateur radio - the potential

In a recent QST edition - I can't remember which one - I found a really nice statement of support for ham radio by the FCC.

On searching online today, I found that same message as reproduced by the ARRL.  The message is:

"97.1(e) Continuation and extension of the amateur’s unique ability to enhance international goodwill."

This point - the enhancement of international goodwill, is readily familiar to all of us who operate radio on a regular basis.

Courtesy DL3BC

We find ourselves making instant friends, sometimes talking to parts of the world torn by war and strife.  Other times, we might talk with people in nations we are told are contentious, or might not even be formally recognised by others.  Almost all of us rise to the challenge of setting politics to one side, and making goodwill the sole focus of our efforts.

I'm very glad to see this FCC support engrained in the radio 'constitution', as it were.  Whilst the UK government also has a long-standing message of general support, it does tend to see ham radio in purely technical terms, perhaps a leftover from the war years, when hams might be useful to the nation.  That does little to engender a supportive attitude from ordinary members of the public.

I hope the ARRL, the RSGB and indeed all other representative bodies read, absorb and repeat often the basic point that more cynical members of the public should hear: we may appear a bit sad and niche in our shacks, but we are actually performing a vital, unpaid role in support of peace and goodwill, every day.

Let's celebrate amateur radio for what we all know it is: a great force for peace where others fail.

Thai king - RSGB plays it safe.

The RSGB, formerly the London Wireless Club, is a strange organisation that seems to revel in big-wiggery and deference to what it sees as 'important' people.

HS1A.  Very dead.  Image: WikiCommons, author unknown.

This week saw the demise of King Rama IX, of Thailand.  Whilst a general summary of his reign might conclude that he was, like many royal elites, a pragmatist who did what he had to to maintain 'stability' (read: preserve his position), he was also given to brutality at times.

King Rama IX switched sides - and permitted atrocities - when his position was at stake.

Probably a good job, then, that the RSGB seems to have consulted the king's track record, and found quite a few terrible instances, such as the 1976 Thammasat University massacre, before issuing a very brief, terse SK announcement in this week's GB2RS.

A day later, the ARRL also released a gushing announcement, celebrating the king's many interests (but none of the bad ones.)  At least they admitted that he almost never used amateur radio.

Perhaps it might have been more fitting to the memory of those who suffered under Rama IX - and the fact that this wasn't ever an active ham - for the RSGB and ARRL simply to have ignored his death.

SSTV Surprise!

Over the past week, 12m has sprung back into full swing.

OK, it's not like 2015, when you could have long, armchair QSOs with anybody you liked across the pond.  But it's not too bad.

At lunchtime yesterday, whilst scanning around 12m for some SSB signals with the 3 ele LFA Yagi, I stopped at 24.940MHz, where, for the first time ever on that band, I heard an SSTV transmission.  Thinking it was probably a Spanish AN400 or something, I fired-up the SSTV software, just out of curiosity.

Wow!

I was amazed to see a 3B station coming through with a really clear signal.  In my surprise, I confused 3B with 5B.  Eventually, it clicked this fine signal was coming from Mauritius!

That left me very satisfied for the day, and yet another example of 12m coming good when all supposed experts predict no propagation.

Signal reports - mind your noise floor!

Are you a keen user of digital modes?  I certainly am!

In fact, for the past few years, as kids grew up and had early bed times, I was only able to transmit regularly thanks to digital modes and the lack of need to shout down a microphone!

During the years, I've very often noted the sometimes large difference in received and sent 'dB' (signal-to-noise across 2500Hz) reports using, for example, JT65 or JT9 modes.  This large difference can be present both when each station has a simple omnidirectional antenna, and when I am using a good Yagi, with the other using a simple antenna.

The question, then, is why is there this difference?  A little experiment this afternoon showed one of the most significant factors in this phenomenon - electrical noise.

Sorry, terrible conditions on HF here...  [Image: Wikicommons]

I've a simple single experimental PV solar panel that feeds a battery DC lighting system, and also, during good days, feeds a small wattage into the AC mains.  The inverter, like most, produces modest RFI, but is perfectly tolerable, so long as it is producing and not 'hunting' for power on cloudier days, above 80m, which is only ever used here during the night anyway.  When it gets in the way of radio, it can be entirely shut down, day or night.

So, this afternoon, I received an R9 station in western Siberia on 15m.  His report from here was initially -16dB, which is not a bad signal - and he could have been using low power.  But when I turned the inverter off, and the RFI noise floor dropped substantially, the R9 station shot up to a steady -1dB for the next two transmissions.  The other stations jumped in strength also.

Clearly, from this simple test, one reason why I almost never get a signal report better than the one sent is because the vast majority of people are living in settings where their noise floor is significantly higher than mine, here in the electrically-quiet countryside.

So, those folk who get really very excited when I send them a better signal report than their software gave me should really be less gleeful and realise this is only happening in most cases because, sadly, they have a noisy setting that is masking others' signals.

Delta Loop Matching - D'oh!

Recent posts have been all about trying to fathom out a series of problems that sprung from nowhere with my delta loop for 15m.

The delta has worked through hurricane winds for more than six years, worked global DX, and never complained a jot.

I started the investigations when I could hear the received signals breaking up intermittently, revealing a problem somewhere.

Having eliminated the audio from the rig as the problem, it was time to follow the coax!

Throughout this story, the rig itself - an FT-450 - and two standard SWR meters all reported perfect happiness at 1:1.15.

My SARK-110 analayser, though, had other ideas.  It showed a good curve from time to time, but had lots of noise.  The noise initially appeared to be down to the MCX connector, but eventully proved to be fine.

Anyhow, to cut a long story short, I found plenty of problems when I started to dig:

(1) badly corroded coax, which I replaced.
(2) a somewhat damp 4:1 balun, though it was only condensation and in fact, seems to work fine
(3) a supplied patch lead from the SARK to the outside world was defective and lost continuity.
(4) a metal fatigue fracture had developed in the antenna's hard-drawn wire, which was simply cut away and a new join made.


The fifth and final problem I discovered, when I just couldn't get the impedance and SWR curves to make any sense despite all the renovation work, was sorted out at past midnight last night!

It turned out that the 4:1 balun was the wrong step-down for the delta, which is corner fed for mechanical simplicity in the 15m antenna's case.  Bypassing the 4:1 with a pair of crocodile clipped leads and connected to a 2:1 yielded the perfect curves for both.

So, I guess the take-home messages are:

(1) a good SWR at an analogue meter can fool you into false security if the impedance is wrong at the antenna
(2) an analyser, or certainly the SARK, can reveal problems that otherwise you would either not know about, or not find out about until they might pose a risk to your rig. 
(3) it seems you can always trust a SARK analyser
(4) RG58/U is not a good coax to use (well, we all start somewhere!) and may have such losses even in 15m-runs that it can mask mismatch problems.

SWR Anomaly! (revised)

Yesterday, I reported on the problems of corroded coax, and a successful fix.

Well, sort of!  Whilst connected to a standard SWR meter, or when using the rig's own internal SWR monitor, all was well in the world of the antenna match.

But, on connecting my trusty SARK-110 analyser to the antenna, I just couldn't get a stable reading.  One minute it was showing a nice curve with low SWR, the next, it was showing a steady SWR of 5 or more.  There was no such instability at the old-fashioned SWR meter or rig.  The key to the problem was that the curve would often shown the hints of a good curve, but with horrendous noise spikes all over it.

This took me a while to sort out, because the strange MCX connector on the SARK never fills me (or some others) with confidence; I do wish it was something more robust-looking, even though it does seem quite well secured to the circuit board.

The problem got more and more unclear as days went by.  One moment it would report a nice curve in the middle of the band and the next, some senseless curve that took off towards 26MHz.

Mightily cheesed-off this lunchtime, I disconnected the delta and connected an alternative feed line to it.  This resulted in the SARK reporting an open circuit!  I was certain both feed lines were perfect.  This had to mean something to do with the SARK was at fault.

Eventually, with a multimeter, I checked the continuity of all the connectors and cable hitched-up to the analyser, to discover the real source of the problem: an intermittent break in the SMA patch lead supplied with the SARK-110.  In case I had really lost track of what I was doing by now, I hooked the whole analyser system up to a dummy load and you can see the result below:

The impedance (red) going somewhere odd, whilst the SWR is up in the sky!

A new patch lead is on its way from RS Components...

Corroded Coax!

The 15m band has been quite active for DX lately, which is very welcome.

But, on listening around, the received signals were intermittently loud, then quiet, then loud.

Something was wrong!

I checked the external speakers in case the connection there was bad.  The problem persisted with the internal speaker. 

The coax braid on the old RG58U has turned to green dust!

I then checked the other bands.  They were fine.  Probably not the rig's audio circuitry, then.

Finally, I switched out my 15m delta to listen on 15m using my 20m delta.  Perfect audio!

Aha!  Must be the coax. A wiggle on the cable seemed to confirm this. After 6 years out in the harsh coastal environment here, the old RG58U had corroded to a nice green powder from the PL259 connecting to the antenna to a length of about 6 inches (150mm) from it.

So, out came the cutters, and the RG58, only ever used in my early days, is in the bin.  The new RG8-X is hanging out the wall, waiting for a calmer day for replacement!

Electric Fence RFI - The OFCOM View

Ever since I've operated at this QTH, there has been 'clicking' RFI from electric fences in the area.  As a farming and equine community, it's to be expected.

For all those years, the RFI has been sufficiently low level not to cause a problem and a simple press of the noise blanker button eliminates it completely.

Electric fences are very eaay to install now, and often tend to be permanent.

But recently, a new fence has gone up to contain a new group of horses.  The RFI under certain weather conditions is severe, hitting over S9 in roughly one second pulses.  Whilst the noise blanker continues to get rid of it most of the time, if a JT signal is present, for example, the noise blanker can let the RFI through.

OK, so this is not the worst RFI problem ever encountered.  That much I grant you.  The irritation comes from the fact that it is still RFI, and RFI that can easily be eliminated altogether if only the farmer paid attention to the wiring and insulation quality of his installation.  After all, if it's producing RFI, the fence won't be as effective as it would be if it was radio quiet.

So, I decided that I'd call OFCOM.  As usual, they were very quick to respond.

When I called them back this morning, they said there was nothing they would be doing, because it was "not sufficiently persistent" and I "can work around the interference".  He said I should speak to the farmer, even though I'd told him that he was more likely to put up more bad fences in retaliation to an approach (farmers here are used to having things their own way and not being concerned about others) than try to fix the existing one.  I underlined the futility of approaching an uncooperative farmer by saying that, without any backup to the complaint from the law or OFCOM interest, I'd simply be told to get lost,and the consequent contempt for amateur radio that would foster.

The assertion by OFCOM that electric fences are "not persistent" in that they "won't be there for very long" is a very odd and entirely ignorant one.  Cheap, easy to install and designed in very consumer-friendly ways these days, electric fences around here are a permanent means of containing animals, with the added benefit of taking just minutes to reconfigure in another part of the field.

So, whilst I reluctantly agree with OFCOM that I can work around the RFI, if not altogether successfully, the harsh reality is that those of us operating from the countyside, and which is often very radio quiet, can't expect any protection under the law - or at least from those charged with upholding it.

Transparency? Not at the RSGB! (Updated 14/02/2017)

For the past year or so, I've been asking the RSGB to publish full details of the General Manager's pay packet.

This started with questions about the former GM, Graham Coomber's remuneration.  A reply from the society, justifying the pay, claimed Coomber was in early in the mornings answering e-mails, and out late at night and the weekends in meetings.

Of course, running a big society, even if it is a hobby society, does carry many responsibilities and there is a fair amount of work to get through.

The central question, though, is this: does being a GM of a hobby society, paid for almost exclusively by its members' subscriptions, justify a salary of, well - there's the rub - we don't know how much he's paid!

What we can say from statutory accouting rules is that for some time, the salary has been "more than £60,000".  According to this 2013 post, and allowing for the fact that inflation has been essentially flat-lining since, that takes Steve Thomas's known salary into the top 5% of UK earners.  Quite a pay packet!


Don't get me wrong.  I don't mind someone earning a good salary for a hard day's work.  But without full transparency, you can't have full accountability.  If a poll of RSGB members were conducted with them knowing the full salary, then perhaps they might approve.  Or not.

Given we, the members, pay for the GM's salary, I think he should waive his right to a hidden salary, and publish it with each accounts.  There is absolutely nothing, other than his consent, that stands in the way of that happening.

Graham Coomber and his merry men weren't willing to make this disclosure when I asked a couple of times.

Now, with a new man - Steve Thomas - at the reins, it's a great shame that he, too, seems perfectly happy to keep the exact amount of money we pay him secret.  I've asked him directly, even advising him that silence would be taken as unwillingness to disclose - and there's been no reply (unlike over other matters, which he's always replied to.)

So I was very disappointed to see this 'keeping mum' continue at RadCom.

I sent in a letter in the same kind of vein as this post, highlighting that, even at the cut-off point of £60,000 for a full declaration, this was over 2.5 times the salary of a time-served NHS nurse, who I think most people would agree put in a very hard day's work.

That the letter was not published might be simply down to the volume of letters received.  Or, as I tend to think, it might indicate that the RSGB continues to be unwilling to make the full salary known, especially when emotively - but accurately - compared to our treasured nurses.  A month later, RadCom is still failing to publish the letter.  I doubt it ever will publish it.


Having recently rejoined the society precisely because I felt Steve Thomas was a more practical, out-there-in-the-field sort of man, I now feel rather hoodwinked.

Mr. Thomas has shown no sign yet of accepting the validity of my argument, and the membership don't yet seem to be adding any pressure.  That's probably because most RSGB members don't take an active interest, but simply pay their dues "for the magazine".  That's a standard response whenever you start talking about the RSGB with fellow hams. Update: Last week (of the 6th February 2017), Steve Thomas stated that he published his remuneration in line with accounting rules.  In other words, he rejects the argument that he should state his full salary to the members.

Mind you, looking at the half-yearly accounts for the RSGB this month, which reveals a deficit of over £13,000 (up substantially on the 2015 figure), one might hope that pressure will start to build.  Why are we paying full commercial pay rates for a hobby society's GM when income is falling, and we know there are membership and thus money troubles straight ahead?

Whilst the RSGB itself is not a UK registered charity, the Radio Communications Foundation (RCF), which has a contact address at the RSGB HQ, is.  The RCF is legally distinct from the RSGB, and the GM of the RSGB has no role, or at least one that needs to be declared, in the RCF, although at least one other staff member (given as Marilyn Slade on 19/9/2016) of the RSGB is directly involved in both organisations. But, all the same, the two bodies are clearly initmately interwoven, so who could argue with the kind of arguments contained in this report on senior officer pay, and that it ought to apply to member-funded hobby societies, too?  The word 'trust' is important, I think...

In respect of the deficit, I think the RSGB is beginning to show panic.  It latched on to one year as being a cash cow by selling more books.  A summer-only voucher scheme has now been extended in order to lever some more dosh out of members' pockets.   It seems from the accounts that the tired, repeated content of many of these books isn't persuading many to reach into those pockets.

The worry I have now is that the RSGB has become blinkered and lost for ideas on how to keep its bottom line healthy, and I'm not persuaded that a "roughly break-even" final accounts, as the RSGB again says it expects, will actually transpire.  The whole idea, indeed, of a 'break-even' seems fatally flawed when we know the post-war Baby Boomers are reaching the end of their lives, and following generations aren't taking an interest in radio.  A cash crisis in the near future is really the only realistic expectation from this situation.

And, to cap it all, as I have boringly and repeatedly pointed out, the failed venture that is the National Radio Centre - otherwise known as a luxuriously-appointed club station for a handful of RSGB bigwigs, increasingly continues to cost the RSGB dearly - over £18,000 this year and up £1000 over last year, and apparently without taking depreciation of assets into account.

How much money the NRC makes for the RSGB is unknown, at least beyond the RSGB office, because there is no specific entry for that.  But it's probably nowhere near enough to break even, let alone make a surplus.

The claim that the NRC has inspired "many" new entrants into the hobby has, to my knowledge, never been proven with real numbers.  If it is true, then the RSGB also seems never to have gone on to show us how many of those "inspired" by the NRC have translated into new society members.  We can only realistically expect it is a tiny number, entirely unworthy of the money spent at the NRC.

Hurricane-Proofing a Vertical Delta Loop

Regular readers - if there are any - will know of my passion for the vertical delta loop.

Quiet in receive, and a top performer from this elevated site overlooking the Irish Sea, it's a long-term success that I will never abandon.

The only problem with an elevated site near the sea is the very high winds we experience.  From October to early March, Atlantic storms are frequently blasting us with 65mph gusts.  But 45 - 50mph can (and do!) occur at any time of the year.

For five years, I've simply held my delta loop up with a standard fishing/squid/roach pole of very thin glass fibre, guyed with one set of Dyneema 2mm rope at the bottom of the fifth section (i.e. at about 4m above ground.)  The pole is 8m tall overall, with the top two sections removed.  The base/radial wire of the loop is at about 1.8m over ground.  This has worked well, requiring the antenna to be retracted only for a few hours when the very worst winds are passing.

The wind wasn't very strong - just 30mph - for the video below, but you can just about see the top wobbling about in the wind, which is what I've been trying to get rid of recently.

But, as the fishing pole stands out in sun, rain and lots of wind, the glass fibre does weaken at maybe 2% per year.  The amount of bending that the pole undergoes in a 50mph wind is quite remarkable, and yet it does so for years without snapping.

When these poles snap, it's because a small crack has developed on the top of one segment, on the side to the lee of the prevailing wind.  With further wind, the crack quickly develops into a rip, and the support fails.  

With my current pole reaching old age, I decided I'd attach a second set of guys at the 6m point (i.e. the bottom of the 7th section), so that rope, and not the pole, takes the brunt of the bending forces.

Just about visible: the new set of guys at the upper end of the loop support, doing their job in a 45mph wind at the time of this photo.

I don't use special guying rings, just the best quality UV-resistant cable ties I can find.  The price of ties has gone up markedly recently, and so buying a proprietary set of rings is more attractive now.  Or, you can always machine your own from nylon or a suitably UV-resistant material.

The result has been to reduce the bending of the top four sections to essentially little more than a quiver in even a force 9 gale.  The very worst winds haven't yet arrived, but I think I'll be happy to let the antenna fly in a 65mph wind.  [UPDATE: it has now survived 66mph gales with ease]

This is the view from the delta's base in gusts of about 45mph with the new guys:
This system is a lot easier to go to sleep with during a severe storm than something just a tad more expensive trying to brave the same weather:

I just hope we don't see a repeat of January 2014, when we saw 109mph one day!

40m WSPR Challenge Results

Having done pretty well with 30m and 20m WSPR challenges recently, I tought I'd try 40m.

Again, the basic antenna is pretty simple - just a half sloper against the tower with a 3-element 12m Yagi on top.  Luckily, it's on sloping ground and appears to be 15m tall from just 80 m away horizontally.  So this, plus the far field ground, does yield very good gain - about +7dBi over the inherent gain of the antenna, with no obstructions.  The sea is a minimum of 2km away.

I was really pleased with the results, because there are plenty of very-well appointed 40m WSPR stations out there.  As you can see from the table below, I reached 12th position, with only a handful of extra spots gained by those up to about 4th position above me.

Not bad for a half sloper!

Whilst the antenna does have a very good native SWR for its type (1.4:1), the results do confirm that the location is very important.

So my station is doing pretty well, reaching near the top of the tables on each band. 

Clean That Magmount!

I've recently gone back to doing some portable working from the car using a 20m AmPro vertical.  At £19.99, these are really very good value for money and, being just a wire up a stick, work well. 

Except, I've been having some problems.  First, the SARK-110 analyser was refusing to give sensible results.  There was a lot of noise on the signal, and I just couldn't approach a correct SWR reading.

Resorting to a simple analogue SWR meter, I found a good match, but then this went awry when I tried to key up at the rig.

It seemed like the magnetic mount, one of those Chinese three-magnet units, was at fault.

Many people report that these Chinese magmounts rust very quickly indeed.  I can confirm that this is so, which is very annoying and typically lacking in attention to detail.

Baby, I was born to rust...

The metal bar that connects the front two magnets with the rear one, and which forms the mounting point for the antenna, is aluminium.  Newer models tend to have a single fixed plate between magnets now, but the corrosion is much the same.

On removing the coupling where the coax is joined to two concentric rings (one for the sheath, the other for the inner), I found a good amount of aluminium corrosion, which I suspect was hastened by dissimilar metals (the coax coupling is brass.)

I cleaned all the connectors with light sandpaper and a stainless steel kitchen scourer (don't use normal steel wire wool - it will leave infinite amounts of rusting metal in your coupling - and probably lead to electrical shorts.)  A spray of WD40 and then cleaning this off with paper towel, and then the application of some aluminium conducting grease, avoiding any short between inner and sheath connectors (£6.00 from Innovantennas), completed the job.

I'm afraid that I didn't take any photos for lack of time, but don't be afraid to undo that coupling from coax to antenna mount - there is nothing to fall apart and it is quite robust to be handled roughly.

Suffice it to say that these units are not at all ideal for permanent exposure to the elements in countries that are anything other than deserts.  If you want a good mount for UK weather, you probably need to look at a drilled-in unit of some sort. Otherwise, you can just remove the magmount after each use, though these units do moderately scratch paintwork over time.

20m WSPR Challenge

Having come 15th in the 30m WSPR challenge earlier in the week, I thought I'd see what my 20m delta loop could bring in on Friday/Saturday 13-14th August, 2016.

I continued to contribute to others' results with an 8% transmission rate.  The delta is twin fed via a 6:1 homebrew voltage balun (unusual for this station), and is vertically polarised.

My 20m delta.

I was pleasantly surprised to reach 11th in the score table, out of what looks like a total world station list of about 220.  Being in the top 5% of WSPR sensitivity will do me just fine, thanks! 

Being a weekend, there were a fair number of periods where RTTY interfered badly with reception.  I'm also aware that signals that ought to be decoded sometimes aren't.  This may or may not be down to the old netbook computer I'm using, but the problem can't be too bad, given my relative position in the table.

11th on unique receptions, 19th on total distance.

30m WSPR Challenge Results

Inspired by fellow blogger, PE4BAS, I surrendered my rig to 24 hours of continuous 30m WSPRing yesterday.

 I'm not particularly well-equipped for 30m.  The antenna is a half-sloper, nominally cut for 40m and matched in the shack with a simple ATU, running from about 5m above local ground, sloping to about 1 metre.  The 'missing half' is provided by bonding to my modest lattice tower that supports a 3 element 12m LFA beam.

The 12m Yagi and tower, prior to the installation of the sloping wire antenna, that forms the 'other half' of the antenna used for the 30m WSPR challenge.

At 40m the SWR is remarkably good for such an antenna - just 1:1.4.  But at 30m, it's about 1:2.5.  Losses are pretty low at 10MHz, even with coax feed, so the theory was that the antenna would work reasonably well.  Sloping ground in all directions except to the north east, and an elevated aspect near the sea is known to help signals considerably, especially to the Americas.

After 24 hours, where I spent 15% of the time transmitting (probably a mistake in terms of the total stations received), I was really pleasantly surprised to find I'd reached 15th position in terms of unique spots, which numbered 163 over the 24 hours.  This was just a couple behind the likes of K9AN and GM4SFW, respected long-term stations with 'good ears'.

Here is the evidence, courtesy of PE1ITR's WSPR Challenge page:

Not bad, at 15th position (unique spots.)

Amateur Radio: A Perfect Storm Ahead?

Things aren't so good on the HF bands of late.  Approaching solar minimum, we're seeing few sunspots, yet seemingly endless geomagnetic storms.  Even 20m is often difficult at times.

Of course, ham radio is already in troubled waters because of its inability to reach out to and recruit youngsters, who are permanently attached to their cellphones, tablets and consoles.  With each passing year, the age profile of ham radio, at least in the UK - and by the RSGB's own admission - is increasing by the same amount. 

Add to that the sad fact that many of the hams now reaching the end of their lives used to be professionally involved in radio and electronics.  There is almost nobody to replace them.

Spotless.

Wind on the clock about 10-15 years, and a big decline in ham enthusiasts seems almost inevitable.

In tandem with this period, we have to take into account the suppression of interest in ham radio that a solar minimum is known to bring.  When propagation is poor, operators tend to 'take a break', sometimes never to return.

The problem for the next few solar cycles, according to the best 'twin dynamo' theory we have of the Sun, is that we may well have to endure 30 or so years of very low solar activity - a repeat of the 'Maunder Minimum' seen during the Middle Ages.

Here's a plot of how the Sun is likely to play out, together with modelling results that have clearly accurately reproduced what happened in past cycles, enhancing our confidence in future predictive power:

The end of solar activity - and ham radio?  Image courtesy Prof. Valentina Zharkova.

This really doesn't bode well for ham radio.  True, the lower bands of 7-1.8MHz will be less affected.  But these need longer antennas - space that the average UK Joe often doesn't have.  Whilst one Joe will find a way, others will decide it's too difficult, and not bother.

And as if that wasn't enough, the hobby is suffering from rapidly increasing spectrum noise, often arising from directly-imported Chinese goods of poor quality.  LED lights, TVs, electric fences, CCTV power supplies - they're all taking their toll, with very little in terms of enforcement activity taking place.


This is a bit like amateur astronomy, where magazines are stuffed full of expensive telescopes and accessories that imply all is well, but that just about nobody has a dark sky under which they can be put to best use.  What's the point of a $4000 rig when all you can hear is next door's solar PV system?

So, I think the likes of the ARRL and RSGB need to wake up - fast - to these three problems that really could see a whole generation fail to take an interest in amateur radio.  If that happens, it will probably be impossible to promote a resurgence of interest once the Sun shows a little more life.

'K' For Kernow - A Year On...

Yesterday, I put my proper journalist's hat on and went looking for a response to the following series of questions from the Managing Director of the RSGB.

At the moment, the Poldhu Club in Cornwall, who had a 'K' regional secondary locator granted for only a year after a ridiculous debacle between the RSGB and OFCOM, are seeking support for the RSL to be continued.

"Dear Steve,

Even if you would not wish to make comment on the 'K for Kernow'
(Cornish RSL) debacle that raged 18 months or so ago, I think you may
agree it wasn't handled by either the RSGB or OFCOM very well.

I am writing an update to the situation as we approach the end of the
year's grant of 'K', now that the calming effects of time have come to
pass. 

At the time of the RSGB's objections to the new RSL, it stated that, to
paraphrase, there would be "wide repercussions" and "confusion" in the
ham community, arising from such a grant. 

A number of people involved, and including myself as an observer and
commentator, found such banshee-esque comments rather silly, and
unlikely to be based on any evidence.  It did not help that the RSGB
claimed repeatedly that "significant numbers" of members had raised
"objections" about the new RSL, yet could not then provide those numbers
to me when I asked Graham Coomber on two occasions.  It smelled of rat,
you see?

Of course, you aren't under any legal obligation to respond to
journalistic enquiries like this, although I might expect, as a member,
I might get something meaningful in return. 

In pursuit of that aim, does the RSGB now regret making alarmist
comments about the consquences of a new RSL, and/or does it have any
proper, objective evidence that shows the year-long grant of the 'K' RSL
has led to any real "confusion" or "wide repercussions"?  Has any other
county, nation or ethnic minority made an application for its own RSL
since 'K'?

Does the RSGB, on reflection, now accept the extraordinarily rare
governmental grant of National Minority Status was never likely to be
repeated in a manner that would lead to a flood of similar applications?
 Alternatively, does the RSGB maintain this original position?

Does the RSGB now accept that, whilst being Cornish might loosely relate
to an association with a county,  the minority status grant was never
"county" based per se, but on an ethnic minority basis - just as being
welsh yields an association wih an ethnic 'nation', rather than a single
administrative county within that nation?  Did the RSGB allow itself to
think of Cornwall less as a very ancient nation, recorded consistently
as a constituent nation of Britain and distinct from England for
centuries, and more simply as a name for a modern administrative county?
 Was the RSGB aware of the legal distinctions arising, for example only,
from the 1337AD establishment of the Duchy of Cornwall?  Does it,
indeed, accept that the National Minority status granted is valid?

Does the RSGB regret making comments that could be perceived as
insensitive, at best, when it asserted that Cornwall was an integral
part of England, seemingly being rather dismissive of the new minority
status, and potentially insulting to those who declare themselves,
including officially (and validly) in censuses, to be 'Cornish', and not
'English'?    Was the RSGB not insensitive, also, in claiming a flood of
new applications would follow, when it failed to recognsie a key
distinguishing factor for Cornish difference from other parts of 
England was their Celtic language, strongly related to the other Celtic
nations, and a critical factor in ethnic identity?

If there is no comment you wish to make, that will be recorded in the
eventual article, but such silence does tend to result in an adverse
image for the organisation, especially when member-funded.  I realise
that this is a complex issue, but one must recall that the RSGB found no
difficulty or reluctance in wading into an ethnic-based issue with very
little evident sensitivity.  It must show itself to be circumspect and
alive to ethnic diversity, even where such ethnicities - mostly white
people in 'just another part of England' - don't outwardly differ as
much as we commonly believe."

The response came just over a week later, and doesn't say very much at all. 

It does, though, show something very wrong with the RSGB's understandin of

events, in that it was not the "EU" that granted minority status, but the UK

government!   

"I've followed-up with some of the Board members who were involved in the 

discussions and would offer the following comments:

Following the decision by the EU to award Cornwall Minority Status, Poldhu 

Amateur Radio Club asked the RSGB to support an application to Ofcom for

Cornish amateurs to have permanent use of K as a Regional Secondary Locator.

This was discussed with Ofcom who were not inclined to support this approach.

The Society received a number of inputs, both supporting and opposing the

proposal. There were strong views expressed against the permanent use of K 

on the basis that Cornwall is not a 'country' and that many of those belonging

to the EU recognised Cornish minority group are no longer located in Cornwall.

The RSGB Board took the view that a permanent change based on a county boundary

would mean other counties could follow suit and we therefore did not support

the proposal.

Ofcom eventually determined that the use of K would be permitted for a period 

of one year only for stations permanently located in Cornwall. The RSGB have 

been supportive of this temporary approach to mark EU recognition. We support 

the initiative by providing the administration, on behalf of Ofcom, of the 

issue of Notices of Variation (NoVs) which allow amateurs to operate with K 

as a Regional Secondary Locator.

Best regards,

Steve Thomas, M1ACB
General Manager
Radio Society of Great Britain "