On the issue of cable ties.

Cable ties.  We all use them in quanity on an ongoing basis.  Plastic ties are not very environmentally friendly, though can be recycled.  Over recent years, they have become quite expensive, too - nearly £10 for a pack of ~30cm x 7.5mm ties now!

But, most of all, plastic ties succumb quite quickly to sunlight.  It's unwise not to replace load-critical plastic ties every two years.  Even supposedly UV-resistant ties are affected, and offer little additional usable life.

This year, when maintaining my 2-ele quad, which has lots of ties to keep spreader elements in place, I decided to ditch plastic ties and use stainless steel ones instead.  

I was glad to find out that there is no need for the often-advertised special tool to tighten stainless ties.  It can be done by hand very easily, but a pair of pliers is needed to fold and pull the excess tab where good tightness is required.

Servicing my 12m Yagi last night, I also replaced the ties keeping the coax balun on the boom.  A two year-old replacement had already cracked and was ready to fail completely.  This is a position that gets the highest UV exposure, so it's nice to replace plastic with stainless, such that I never need to replace those ties again or, more importantly, have to somehow deal with snapped ties and a wildly-dangling balun during a strong wind storm.

You can also use stainless for things like vertical pole attachments for stays, although its best to cover them with some rubber padding kept in place with shrink tubing (like the Spiderbeam kit), to avoid damage from scratching.

Best of all, stainless works out a lot cheaper than plastic over the long term, as they don't need replacing!

FT818 - dead!

Well, after just one outing, I've managed to kill my FT-818!

Sadly, after refusing to use them for years, I succumbed recently to using the dreaded Anderson Power Poles.  This was motivated by the need to relieve stress on the DC input jack of the 818, which is a fairly weak, 3.5mm phono type.  To do so, I used a typical 3D-printed adapter that screws semi-permanently onto the ground post.

Using one of these required the use of Power Poles.

After checking my connections three times over, when I came to install DC in the field, one of the positive poles came out of the plastic shroud and made contact with the chassis.  Uh, oh!

Sadly, the FT818 smelled a bit phenolic around the power input.  

The rig is already with Yaesu, who I have to say some good words about, even before I know the outcome of their assessment (others tell me this is likely a very easy repair).  

Yaesu's UK service centre responded within a few hours to my call for help, and were evidently delighted that I had not, as so many are inclined, tried to blame the damage on the product or some 'mystery event' for which the user was not responsible. 

As in the case of ICOM, who were equally efficient and helpful, this kind of service level does make a difference when we come to consider big-ticket equipment purchases.  For example, despite a bit of derision about the '1980s' 3D spectrum display on the FT-DX10, I may well buy one of those soon.  After all, my long-serving, hard-working FT450 is a Yaesu.

My modified adapter for the 818.  No more Power Pole connectors, and no removable connectors at all running right next to the chassis!

And those Power Poles?  Well, a good proportion of the ones I tugged at after the accident could be pulled out with a bit of flexing and pulling - precisely the kind of stress that is common during fieldwork.  All the ones I used have been cut off and put into recycling.  My old system of polarity-specific spade connectors is both cheaper, easier and far less prone to physical stress failure!

Wind (mostly) stops play.

Mercifully this year, the winter hasn't seen many strong winds.  All the bad storms have been directed further south than a typical year.

But today's a little bit wild, if not quite as bad as the infamous Storm Doris (see video at bottom of post).  Only a bit above 60mph(100km/h) today, compared to 85mph (136km/h) for Doris.

Days I hate...

 

Only the 15 and 17m deltas operational today (bands unusually dead), and a 20m fishing pole vertical, which stays up permanently, regardless of wind conditions (a useful tip there, for those considering antennas in windy areas of the world!)  12m Yagi and 20m delta are down.  I guess some greasing and servicing of the Yagi might be in order later in the week; some of the bolts look a bit rusty...

OFCOM - A total disaster (updated)

You know what's coming isn't good...

 

As regular readers will know, I asked OFCOM for approval for a special, non-standard callsign back in January.  This process is proving, well, typically government agency-esque.

Up until this morning, I'd received an e-mail from OFCOM which ignored what I had asked for and directed me to apply for a standard SES call online - which doesn't allow users to apply for super-special callsigns.  The message was a de facto refusal of the callsign sought.  

Weeks later, I received an email which informed me OFCOM was willing to approve the non-standard callsign, provided I sent the following:

"a letter or email from those organising the event" to confirm that, in this case the RAF, were happy to be associated with the callsign.

Well, in a remarkable feat of efficiency, I gained the approval from no less a figure than Royal Air Force Valley's current Station Commander,  Group Captain Andy Turk DFC ADC MA RAF, within 30 minutes of making my request.  If only OFCOM worked that well.

Let's not forget, at this stage, that whilst senior staff in the RAF are all very friendly and willing to help locally, they are still very busy people with enormous responsibilities, who have much better things to do than deal with correspondence about a highly trivial thing like a radio callsign.

Imagine my utter anger this morning, then, to find OFCOM has now changed its mind.  It now wants "the original letter" from the RAF!

Well, that is not what they asked for.  Consequently, there never was an 'original [i.e. physical] letter'.

Asking for a physical letter will waste my and the RAF's time, and make me look completely foolish and (incorrectly), unable to follow OFCOM directions.  

I wouldn't dream of burdening a senior RAF officer with such a ridiculous, unreasonable and contradictory request for a physical letter.  A callsign is nowhere - at all - near important enough to pursue like this.  But if OFCOM prove not to grant the call as they said they would when I provided - as I already have - a confirming "letter or e-mail", then this would be a significant embarrassment to all concerned, and a big disappointment in supporting this 100th anniversary of 4 Flying Training School.

The e-mailed approval from Valley included the e-mail address of the RAF Valley Press Office.  The station has a telephone number.  Did OFCOM try to confirm by any of these easy methods?  Of course not!  Evidently, they are too busy making jobs for themselves through mindless, contradictory bureaucracy, and too lazy to make an effort to resolve the situation, which of course is a situation brought about by their unexplained change of position.

So, Stage 1 of the OFCOM official complaints process has begun this morning.  We'll see what a dog's dinner they make of that!

[UPDATE]  I decided to phone OFCOM to reinforce my dissaproval of their actions.  Within an hour, the special callsign had been approved, no "original letter" required.  Of course, they still ignored the actual period of operation I asked for, although this is slightly longer, so not a problem.

The final insult came from the man who had handled all this at OFCOM.  He said it was because I had "created three cases".  By this he meant that each email from users - there is only one possible email address to use - creates a new case at OFCOM.  But that is a problem created by their rubbish bureaucracy.  And in any case, all my contacts had the correct original reference number.  

They could issue email address of an individual handler, once a case is opened, as many other organisations do.  It improves efficiency, for one thing.  But not at OFCOM.  Easier to try and shoot the messenger.  But people like me will have none of it.  This useless administration will be brought to the attention of the Minister of State in no time at all.  Not that he cares.

I'm grateful to the individual on the phone at OFCOM who still retained the will to live and help someone.  But the organisation itself?  Well, where do I vote them out? 

 

 

Alternative realities on 60m.

Yesterday was a really, really bad day for UK operators transmitting beyond the legal limit at 5.357MHz.  This is typical of 'weekend operators', often unfamiliar with the rules.

In fairness to the RSGB, one of their most useful and clear pieces of advice, free to members and non-members alike, is the 60m band plan.  So there is no excuse for not knowing where you are, and are not, permitted to transmit in the UK.  

The key bit for 60m in this advice, relevant to this post, is this extract:

How clear can it be?  60m advice from the RSGB.

Of course, 60m is a bit of a mess.  There is no standard allocation from one country to another.  If you are not often operating at 60m, you can easily come to think that, because that PA station is at 5.357MHz + 1500Hz audio then you, as a UK operator, can do the same.  Which of course, as the graphic above extremely clearly shows, is wrong!

Yesterday, I found G4DFQ - and not for the first time - busy tranmsitting as follows.  The indicated QRG on the screengrab is obviously that indicated under CAT control, and was what was set on my transceiver.  To help you, G4DFQ is the signal on the far right of the waterfall(!):

Now, G4DFQ, a licence holder for the best part of 50 years, has been contacted about this only recently, of course in a friendly advice sort of way.  His response was impolite and defiant.  He claimed to have been operating where he was for a long time, the clear message being 'go away, I'm doing nothing wrong'.

In response to this latest transgression, I got the following response as part of a much more impolite e-mail, which seems to indicate a strong degree of congitive dissonance:

"I consistently operate not higher than 850hz. [sic]"

Now that's very interesting.  The screenshot clearly shows G4DFQ's FT8 signal begins at 1693Hz, with the upper limit of the same signal being around 1750Hz. 

So there is no question that G4DFQ is transmitting 'higher than 850Hz' if his QRG, as it ought to be, is 5.357MHz, and is clearly operating out of band - and unlawfully.  Bizarrely, his claim of operating not higher than 850Hz shows he understands the need to keep below 1000Hz on some QRG.  It's just he isn't actually doing that, and strongly dislikes being told so!

I suspect that what old G4DFQ is doing is setting his transceiver dial at 5.358MHz, which he might be reading as the upper band limit for this spot allocation, and then transmitting his audio above that, taking it well out of band.  In other words, the arithemtic indicated by the RSGB screengrab isn't being performed.

Whilst this is not the biggest crime going, 60m is nevertheless a secondary allocation, the primary user being military.   If people like G4DFQ continue to show this cavalier attitude not only to operating but also to those trying to point out the error politely, then the inevitable outcome will be the withdrawal of 60m from amateur use. 60m is not a permanent given, and has been withdrawn after periods of experimental amateur allocation in some countries.

Everybody makes a mistake at 60m from time to time.  That's not an issue.  M0PIT, for example, can be seen in the same screengrab, temporarily making the same error.  There were plenty of others doing the same from the UK yesterday, but all recognised their error within a short time, and corrected the situation.  

The final part of G4DFQ's angry retort was to suggest I report him to the regulator.  Apart from an Austrian station who once sent very abusive digital messages on the air, I've never reported anyone to a regulator before.  But at G4DFQ's angry insistence he is doing nothing wrong, despite clear and repeated evidence he is, I asked OFCOM to look at that evidence and approach the operator, should they see fit.  As G4DFQ is keen to suggest, OFCOM is the regulator, not me.  Quite.

 

G3 gives rise to PMWE

Well, it's a nice pattern we see now.  G3 storm conditions overnight, G2 the previous evening, followed by now extremely strong, extensive PMWE returns.  No doubt higher HF will be pretty busy today...

OFCOM Chaos

I had a nice e-mail today from OFCOM.  It was the second e-mail I've had in recent weeks about the same topic.

I'd asked for a non-standard GB callsign to be used in the Spring.  The first e-mail was dry and disinterested, telling me to simply apply by the standard online form - which, as I already knew, does not allow for non-standard callsigns!

Weeks later, the second e-mail arrived.  This tells me that OFCOM are happy to grant the non-standard call sought, subject to the usual proviso that the organisation being celebrated agrees to be linked to it.

I'm not sure what the hell is going on within OFCOM.  It was very simple, very clear request for something that is not so unusual; non-standard calls appear in the UK regularly.  For all the world, it seems the first responder simply didn't read past the subject line, ignoring the content of the letter sent.

Well, I have only recently warned the Australians, whose licence is, like the UK, about to become free of charge.  Whilst it looks like something to be celebrated, it really isn't.  As the old saying goes, 'you get what you pay for'.  When you pay nothing, you get...

 

 

Even stronger PMWE

Very strong and extensive PMWE today:

 

Close to reality on 160m

Well, you've probably already seen it, and you may or may not like Callum.  But he does do a good job getting inside the heads of 160m net operators...

Why are we hostage to old men?

This week has been very interesting.  It's the week I realised that the effect of old men on amateur radio is much deeper than even I believed.  It's no surprise that all cases this week involved G4 callsigns, which indicates callsigns allocated decades ago by now - between 1971 and 1985.  If you were in your 40s on getting a licence in 1985, you're staring at your mid-70s today.

First, it started with the usual stuff.  A G4 busy holding Court on 60m FT8, merrily out of band by transmitting about 800Hz above the UK allocation for that band.  A friendly e-mail to point out the error, with a screen grab (not that anybody, including OFCOM, cares), brought back the usual 'I have been transmitting there for years' rebuttal.  Well, that's quite an admission.  But one that makes no progress towards being right.

Then I came onto digimode interfaces.  As earlier reported, G4ZLP (so another ageing operator), who has been making very nice interfaces for many years, seems to have lost the plot - or maybe can't get hold of parts - and now only makes a unit without on-board level controls.  This leaves us having to adjust levels using software, or the fundamental operating system's volume controls.  This is really a very retrograde step that makes using these units much more inconvenient and quick than it ought to be. 

Continuing my search, and keeping an open mind to different possibilities, I came across G4LIV.  He's 88 years old and, unusually for this hobby, a very friendly, communicative gentleman.  He sells his interfaces - with onboard level controls - on E-bay. They are very nice, but contain no soundcard.  I tried patiently to point out why this is a drawback (more wires, for one thing).  He accepted the issue, but pointed out that, as he was indeed 88 years old, well, you know, how long have you got left to change things?  

I understand G4LIV's position.  I could just buy one of his interfaces and give it a go; I'm sure it would be better, notwithstanding the extra mic/speaker wires, than no level controls on the interface.  Not sure about noise levels, though.

But in the wider scheme of things, it did highlight how very old men are somehow keeping important aspects of the hobby going.  It's not that I'm ageist or ungrateful - just concerned about its underlying unsustainability. 

Sure, you can homebrew.  But how many of us can homebrew a very low noise digital interface with onboard soundcard?  How many of us want to, given the fairly low price of commercial units - provided someone is making them?  I suppose someone with good writing skills, and who doesn't first assume everybody's a retired electronics engineer (take note, all radio magazine editors!), could write a series on how to build a top-notch interface.  But I've yet to see anybody do it.

For the moment, I'm left looking at a Signalink USB.  But according to G4ZLP, the Signalink has 20dB more noise.  Why would I want that?  

Surely someone, somewhere, who is not in his or her eighties, can start making high quality interfaces suitable for the modern era?  I mean, there is plenty of money in it, given practically all of us are using digimodes now.

PMWE intense

Apparently in response to a G2 overnight event, very strong PMWEs appeared this morning at 70 degrees north.  It's also been a very good Es day on 12m and possibly 10m.

 

 

VK in the dead of night!

Last evening saw VK3QN, a 6x6 14MHz array fixed on long path to Europe, suddenly appear at 01:30UT.  Only 2E0PYB and G4ZFQ also heard this beacon at about the same time.  Interestingly, no other station except for VK3MO was heard all night here.

VK3QN, 14MHz WSPR received at MW1CFN, 15-16/02/2021.  Long horizontal line is non-reception period.

VK3QN transmits every 10 minutes, continuously.  I checked that there was no downtime yesterday, and there was not. 

VK3QN, fixed beam long path (130 degrees).  Image (C) VK3MO, with permission.

So the onset of the signal at 01:30UT here is real.  By 04UT, the signal vanished again until about 08:30UT, which is longpath time again.

I plotted the spots before checking the magnetometry.  From past, long experience, we would expect this type of thing to happen in the time when the geomagnetic field is recovering from a fairly significant disturbance.  Looking at the magnetmotery, then, we can see that this is a correct prediction in this overnight case:

Radio, without the computer.

Yesterday, I managed to do a short test of the FT-818 from the beach.  I was interested to see, for the first time in a long while, how well 6W and then 2.5W PEP would get out on SSB.  No digimodes.

Just a tiny rig, 6W and a 1/4 wave vertical.

Well, it was a bad day to be anything other than a Dutch station!  It was of course a PA contest weekend, meaning lots of very interesting stations, none of which wanted to hear from Wales!

But I did find Sergey, EW2W busy doing non-contest QSOs.  I gave him a call and was picked up with a 57, later 59 report.  I was particularly impressed with the audio from the 818, as a small number of people claimed the lower frequencies were a bit cut off.  I didn't find that at all.

 

To finish this very short test, I went to the internal NiMH batteries, which gives 2.5W PEP on SSB.  I have to confess, even though it wasn't a DX contact, that I was amazed to easily have a mini-ragchew with frank, EA5HJV.  OK, the beach does boost the signal by a good 10dB, possibly more.  But, you know, 2.5W from internal power?  It's amazing, even if the receiving station has an enormous contest antenna!

When lockdown finishes, it will be very interesting to do long path work with low power SSB.  being free of digimodes is actually quite a nice feeling. With long path peak signals lasting roughly 30 minutes as we move towards equinox time, it's unlikely I'll need to take an external battery, not least as there are plenty of videos online already showing QRPp contact from the UK to Australia.

 

 

 

ZLP Interfaces.

Over the years, I've never used anything other than ZLP Electronics interfaces.  I knew nothing about how good they were, right back at the beginning.  I only bought my first because it was 'advertised' within DigiMaster software.

But I was lucky.  Their long-running DigiMaster Pro is a very low noise unit, and is very easy to set up, with just two cables, thanks to its onboard soundcard.  The ability to change input and, especially, output levels on the interface made this a very practical, zero-fuss-to-use unit.  It also had two outputs, so two rigs could be connected.

The (now discontinued) DigiMaster Pro interface.

 

In the market again for another interface to couple to my FT-818, I found out yesterday that, for some unfathomable reason, ZLP is no longer making the DigiMaster Pro.  Instead, it is producing just one interface, which is again low noise, but has no on-board input/ouput level adjustments.  

Whilst adjusting levels is reasonably easy at the computer, it's a lot less convenient than having controls you can quickly twiddle on the front of the interface.  This aspect is especially useful when two rigs are connected, as one will invariably need a different level to the other.

Volume controls gone!  Now it has to be done by software.  Very annoying!

I did send my view to G4ZLP that abandoning on-board volume controls was a retrograde step.  Neil has never been an especially communicative type, even when you wanted to buy something from him.  But he hasn't responded to this criticism.

A Tigertronics USB is the only real soundcard-inclusive alternative for me at this price and size range.  Those are alleged to have substantially higher noise figures than the ZLP units.  Units made by G4LIV are very good, but without an onboard soundcard, increase the wire spaghetti load without need and, thus, make them entirely unsuitable, especially for portable use.

Oddly, in this era of digimode dominance, we seem as a community to have no real choice of USB interfaces.  One, actually fairly major problem we have, is that so many products are made by one-man, sole-trader type businesses.  They make good stuff quite often, but equally often fail to make any preparation for the continuation of that business.  So the old guy becomes tired, frail, and ultimately stops making his stuff, leaving us in a bit of a pickle!

Commercial SWL - the modern way!

Thanks to a feature on QRZ.com recently, I was alerted to the fantastic website, Radio Garden.com

This site is a big improvement on similar, earlier sites.  You simply rotate the globe onto the region of interest, and all the radio stations - even local, low power FM ones, start playing, live, on your web browser.  There is also, of course, a mobile phone app for it!

 

Whilst it's not quite as romantic as sitting in the dark in front of a dimly-lit SW receiver dial, it's nevertheless a great way for youngsters discovering global radio for the first time - and the rest of us - to broaden our horizons.

FT818 arrives!

A remarkably fast turnaround of my E-bay purchase of the nearly-new (bought May 2020) FT-818 saw a small parcel deposited in the ice by the front door this morning.

Quite amazing size and weight.  Even the noise blanker is pretty effective (something even some much more expensive rigs are not always good at).

Anyhow, although it is effective, I'm not sure I would have paid £120 for the BHI noise canceller board.  For one thing, the microswitch that operates it is very likely to fail quite quickly, although it would be easy to repair, I guess. 

Took me about 30 minutes to figure out all the settings for digital modes use (hint: it needs to be put into 'DIG' mode!), but the frequency stability seems to work well, with a possible hint in database results that a cycle or two is needed before full stability is achieved.  That's perfectly fine.

Anyhow, here is the rig, with and without the noise canceller enabled (lit LED indicates it is off, rather oddly):

$2 a day

Always amusing to follow the exploits of the 'team' that has long been trying - largely without success - to persuade us of their ability to detect and predict earthquakes via changes to propagation at HF.

Despite what appears to be a misleading claim of an association with the 'X-Prize', GoFundMe still has their crowdfunder page up and running.

Unfortunately, if you take away the donations from the two people linked directly to the project, the 'team' has only managed to raise $45 in 19 days - or $2.37 per day. 

I guess people aren't persuaded. Which is very sensible of them.

As accessed 13:30UT, 11/02/2021.

 

All change!

Well, if you've noticed my post about being nearly ready to buy an IC-705 has been removed, it's because an unexpected offer became available today on ebay!

I found a nearly-new FT-818ND with a BHI DSP board fitted.  The DSP itself is worth £120.  The seller was asking £540 plus postage, so I offered £518 plus postage.  He accepted!

2021 portable activity pack!

 

So there we are.  Not quite as convenient as the IC-705, and mostly inconsequentially less maximum power.  But I'm happy with a small gel or, later, a FePO4 battery.  Whilst this is more weight, it's insignificant: a 10Ah FePO4 is only 1.2kg, providing ample operating time and an all-up weight identical to a FT-891 without a battery.

A data cable is already ordered, and activity can begin very shortly!

So, sorry for the confusion, but I'm happy to experiment with this radio at this price.  The IC-705 was, in the end, just too expensive for an additional maximum 4W out.  After all, from the beach, the 6W maximum output of the 818 magically becomes at least 50W effective!

BTW, if you're interested in portable QRP and good frequency stability (we seem to be a surprisingly rare bunch), then this post about a standard (non-TCXO) FT-817 by my colleague PE4BAS is worth a read:https://pe4bas.blogspot.com/2021/02/ft-817nd-drift-test.html

 

Solar activity drops for second month

Following a spectacular rise in solar activity at the end of 2020, which saw the higher HF bands light up very well, the sunspot number has decreased for the second month in a row. 

 

Whilst this kind of spike has been seen in the past, and is probably just part of the normal noisy plot of sunpot numbers, the precise form and timing of it is not as common as we might expect.  The last analogues of this spike seem best represented in the data of the early 20th century.

Latest solar image at 171Å.  The small active area is only evident in visible light as a slight plage.

 

Still, the trend is, hopefully, still upward, and that we'll see a return to a strong upward slope within the next few months.

Lab599 TX-500: No good for me!

 

Beautiful rig, but...

Well, thanks to a kind fellow on an .io groups forum for the Lab599 TX-500, I can finally, at very long last, answer the question: how stable in frequency is it?

The answer, unfortunately, was readily demonstrated as: 'poor'.  As you can see from the table of transmissions today, there is a very signficant drift that suggests strongly there is either no, or an inadequate temperature compensation of the XO.

 

My Kenwood TS-480SAT suffered from the exact-same magnitude of drift before I installed a £15 generic Chinese TCXO.  Since then, its drift has always been zero, without any 'warm-up' time.  

It's a mystery as to why most rigs don't bother with this incredibly inexpensive but very valuable component.  Given the dominance of digital modes now, it's even more strange.  Apparently, many people are still just focusing on CW and SSB when creating a rig.

Well, that's Lab599 in the bin for me, I'm afraid.  A real disappointment.  With the delayed delivery of the TX-500, it was already looking like a non-runner, as the weather is already warm enough on many days to venture outside for some /P work.

It's worth noting that the Xiegu line of hand-portable transceivers have pretty much the same standard frequency stability - but at half the price or less of the TX-500.  Not that they're any good for me, either.

The TX-500 also has a problem that Lab599 themselves accept, according to the forum, has occurred to "several" units, related to the audio amplifier circuit, causing the audio output to cease.  I'm sure they will sort it out, but I would want to wait for a year or so for all those actual and potential problems to be ironed-out first.

At the moment, it's looking like the FT891 will tick all the boxes.  TCXO as standard, good price, the option to take the power up beyond QRP when necessary, and a radio that gets good reviews from most.  The main - and quite serious - drawback is its 2kg weight.  But I can manage that easily enough; the TS480 is 4kg! 

Alternatively, if I think I can live with purely QRP power levels, then the tried-and tested FT817ND, with its very acceptable 1.1kg weight and a much lower price tag, would be a good buy, I think.

As always, your views on a decent backpack-portable rig are welcome!

 

Tale of two Turks

I'm not sure if it's a coincidence, or whether they are related, but there are currently two UK licence holders operating 14MHz WSPR from Turkey.

This is in fact rather useful, as both stations provide insights into a path that typically has few or no stations to cover it.

Other than one spot from TF4X of my 1W WSPR signal overnight, the Turkish stations were the only ones to hear me.  I heard nobody at all overnight, under fairly disturbed field conditions of up to Kp=6 during the earlier evening.

Note that the reaction of the signal to the lower station seems, for the most part, to be in antiphase to the upper station. Longer horizontal lines indicate periods of non-reception.  If, the antiphase might be explained by longitude difference, then we would expect TA4/G8SCU (lower trace) to lead the way.  But he doesn't.  Of course, our expectation might be wrong!

Two Turkish stations hearing my 1W WSPR signal, 03-04/02/2021.

PMWE alive again.

Strong polar mesospheric winter echoes (PMWE) have again appeared over the past day, apparently in response to a moderate amount of geomagnetic field disturbances.  

The link between PMWE and their summer equivalent (PMSE) and the field is well-established and non-controversial.  

 

Kp4 brings spots!

 

Aurora, seen from southern Iceland, 2011 (C) MW1CFN.

Minor geomagnetic field 'ringing' overnight, with much more disturbed conditions in the preceding 24 hours, brought 14MHz WSPR RX signals from Argentina and the Caribbean back to life in no uncertain terms.  Ordinarily, under quiet conditions, the band would have been absent of spots until twilight here:

LU1EGT=5W, LU1KCQ=1W, 9Z4FV=20W, at 14MHz WSPR 02-03/02/2021

On the transmit side, the field disturbance nicely killed my 1W signal to TF4X, lying underneath the auroral oval ring,although by 01:50UT, the rebounding field was bringing back to life quite strongly:

Received signal of 1W from MW1CFN by TF4X (14MHz)

In the case of EA8BFK receiving me, signal strength increased from before 01UT, and remained strong until dawn:

EA8BFK receiving MW1CFN (1W, 14MHz)

East Greenland magnetometry.