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...