I have been playing with a new Triquint ULNA device (TQP3M9036). It
Shows a lot of promise. It is like a MAR or MSA device in that it is
50ohm in and out. and has a claimed NF about .4db nf ( their numbers).
I have built several pramps to test them and have gotten even better
than they claim and they cover 50-1296 with ease and NF is .4ish or
below. The S11 and S22 are both great and the OIP3 is +35db also
...very nice device. It has great promise as a good terrestrial LNA.
Preamps are foolproof to build and would cost under $50 if all the best
quality parts are used.
Just for information only ...
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system.
I’m ready on 6cm with the same dish I’m using on 3cm.
Despite the strong local 5 GHz WiFi noise, had a nice 579/569 first QSO with this setup today with HB9Q, thank you Dan !
Setup is a 3.7m dish and 60W at CP feeder.
I can be QRV on 6cm or 3cm most of the days, skeds and tests are very welcome, as usual.
qrv 70cm, 33cm, 23cm, 13cm, 9cm, 6cm and 3cm.
I also missed a lot of sleeping as most of you ;-)
Made 19 analog qso's during those long two nights. Got a ssb contact
with PI9CAM when they tx with 50 watts or less. Nice!
Spent a lot of time looking for more stations, but maybe low activity
during my window.
Additionally made 9 jt qso's, 6 of them new contacts. Some of them could
be worked in cw as well.
Had some probs with defective contacts of my control cables and lost a
preamp. But no matter it was really funny.
Will not party in the contest because of the ARRL rules.
Hope to work you soon!
73, Slawek dl6sh
We had a successful demonstration of 3 cm EME at the Microwave Update
Conference in St. Louis, MO on Oct 13, 14 and 15. I was located in EM48ss in
the hotel parking lot. The antenna was a 1 m offset fed dish made by
Winegard. Power was provided by a GaN device delivering 30 watts to the
feed. I used a KX-3 IF and DEMI transverter locked to a 10 MHz Isotemp TCXO.
I was not able to take advantage of measuring moon noise as a pointing
assistance as there was a local beacon up the band that was getting into my
GR-1216 noise meter. I plan to look into better ways of measuring moon noise
over narrower bandwidths ...However I drug out the compass and was able to
get reasonably close on azimuth and when we started hearing stations we
could easily optimize the dish and establish a new azimuth reference. The
theoretical 3 dB beamwidth of the 1 m dish at 10 GHz is 2.2 degrees. My dish
mount is calibrated in 1 degree increments making it easy to update once we
find the moon. Elevation readout was provided by a Sears digital level
placed on the offset dish feed support. Based on prior sun noise
measurements, I determined that the arm angle was 3 degrees below the actual
pointing angle of the dish. I requested that other stations who wished to
call me do the mutual Doppler correction on both receive and transmit so
that I could receive and transmit on 10368.050 MHz.
On the first moon rise, we did work on JT-4F G3WDG at 2257Z, OZ1LPR at 2305Z
and OK1KIR at 0042Z, We attempted contact with K5GW on cw but it was
confirmed later that Gerald had some tracking program issues and we gave up
for the night. The attendees were able to copy K5GW calling us on cw so that
provided a good demo to the guys. The tones from the other 3 stations were
also heard in the loudspeaker. so despite the fact that we had to manually
(with some luck) keep it on the moon without the help of moon noise, we did
On the second night, we had a repeat QSO with G3WDG at 2342Z (thanks Charlie
as you confirmed we were on the moon) and WA3LBI at 0023Z. I then ran a sked
with K5GW with me doing the mutual Doppler correction on both receive and
transmit and we established contact by 0130Z. We then went back to CQing on
.050 hoping for further contacts. We were surprised and pleased to make a
contact with G4CBW at 0135Z who was only running a 1.5m dish. We finished
the evening with a nice contact with OK1CA.
Thank you to the stations we worked and my friends who helped me with setup
and teardown.73 de W5LUA 10/17/2016
As the VHF manager who organised the VHF theme at the RSGB convention I would like to publically thank Peter for another really inspiring talk.
Some 45 years ago as a young amateur I went to a talk by Peter on EME at a RSGB convention in West London. As a result of Peter's talk I was hooked on EME for life.
On Saturday, after Peter's talk, I was aproached by a young amateur in his early 20s who had never seen anything about EME before. As a result of Peter's talk, which focused on 5.7GHz EME, this young man told me that was what he really wanted to do in amateur radio. This is a story that many others in the UK will also recognise.
So Peter again, "thank you" - 52 years of EME and still inspiring newcomers.
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 16:04:45 +0100
From: "Peter Blair" <g3ltf(a)btinternet.com>
Subject: [Moon-Net] My talk on 6cm eme at the RSGB convention
To: "Moon-Net" <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>, "freetalk moonnet"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
My thanks to everyone who sent me pictures, notes etc for this talk It was well received and I understand that there will eventually be film of it and all the talks at the convention on you-tube. I wasnt able to use all the material but the support I received from you all in the 6cm community was terrific. Thankyou again.
73 Peter G3LTF
I have for sale a PA for 23cm made by Marko LZ2US, using TH327.
The PA is practically unused and has never transmited. It was part of my project of setting up a 23cm eme station at my summer QTH but I have no time to be there at all but 1 week per year, so it was never completed. It is not worth having it there and never using it so i decided to give it a way.
Here are the specs:
Tube :TH 327
Output : >2000 Wattas
Gain App. :9dB
Efficiency App. :32% linear Mode
Voltage :220-240 Volt
Voltage :3 phase 380-405 VAC
Will be delivered in a wooden box.
I am asking Euro 1,000 + shipping from Athens to anywhere you like, preferably within EU. If there is a good home for this nice PA, please email me direct.
Pictures are available upon request.
Serge VE1KG writes:
* The question Joe is does it DECODE better than WSJT 7 or WSJT 9.03???
!VERY MAJOR FLAME SUIT ON!!!!!!
That is not a question that many on this reflector can answer although I
hope I will get a few thinking. Some will just produce large quantities of
unhelpful; 'it works for me' without really understanding the issues!
With a near-perfect transmission and a good receiver (not as is commonly
used by most amateurs on EME - see below!!!) Joe's new code and protocols do
have a lower decoding threshold than previous releases of his software. I
suspect that the older versions WSJT7, 9 etc have slightly wider decoding
The real problem is that amateur digital transmitters and receivers with
crystal filters suffer from some degree of inter-symbol distortion due to
non-linear phase shifts within the passband. Inter symbol distortion is a
very serious issue with most modern high-speed digital communications
systems but still has relevance with the relatively slow symbol rate 'JT'
amateur modes. Most amateur users of 'JT' modes overdrive the transmit chain
resulting in clipping and resultant inter-symbol distortion after being
passed through a crystal filter. Some might think a narrow crystal filter on
transmit 'cleans up' SSB transmissions but in this context it makes the
transmission worse. Faster symbol rate modes often used for MS are worse
than JT65 or QRA64. Poor FSK441 or MSK transmissions often suffer 2-3dB
receive decode penalties because of this. The effect on large shift, 'JTC'
versions is more noticeable than the lower shift, 'JTA' ones. It also might
have some bearing as to whether QRA64 will, in practice, outperform JT65! In
the past few months I have seen some very poor QRA64 transmissions.
After a lot of simultaneous testing with live JT65B signals and recorded
files it does seem that WSJT7 and WSJT9 sometimes decode signals better than
Joe's newer decoders. My personal conclusion after many tests is that this
is a result of transmitted signal quality! The problem is, that often,
newcomers to EME and some DX-expeditions have poor transmitted signals.
Hence the questions. On excellent transmitted signals and using digital
receive filters, Joe's new decoder and software outperforms the older
versions. However the number of such excellent transmitted signals around is
low! Hence myths and 'urban legend stories' of one version of WSJT vs
another, particularly on this reflector abound.
In performing such tests you need to be careful about subtle audio
re-sampling and manipulation (even inside the WSJT software). Using VAC can
obscure the validity of such comparisons, as I consider that it introduces
issues of its own. I am looking for a good text book or treatise which
explains the issues with non-coherent re-sampling and errors in digital
If you do not understand my explanation of why many people see practical
differences in the various versions of Joe's software please do not comment;
'it works for me with my FTxx or ICyy' as this will not contribute to our
overall understanding of amateur very weak signal digital communications.
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 19:27:11 +0000
From: serge <ve1kg(a)eastlink.ca <mailto:email@example.com> >
Subject: Re: [Moon-Net] Release of WSJT-X Version 1.7.0
To: Joe Taylor <joe(a)princeton.edu <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> >,
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
The question Joe is does it DECODE better than WSJT 7 or WSJT 9.03???
Experimenting will tell us.Congratulations & thank you for this new software
which keeps me busy
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 22:12:07 -0000
> From: "John Regnault" <john.regnault(a)btinternet.com>
> Subject: [Moon-Net] WSJTX vs WSJT7 or WSJT9?
> To: <moon-net(a)mailman.pe1itr.com>
> Message-ID: <018c01d25ca0$6f9da1d0$4ed8e570$(a)btinternet.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Serge VE1KG writes:
> * The question Joe is does it DECODE better than WSJT 7 or WSJT 9.03???
> That is not a question that many on this reflector can answer although I
> hope I will get a few thinking. Some will just produce large quantities of
> unhelpful; 'it works for me' without really understanding the issues!
Humbly submitted for counter-flaming, I must disagree, because of:
2. "Save All"
links to a program you (or any on this reflector) can use to create a
variety of JT65 signals (as wave files) at various levels of s/n,
timing, and other parameters. You can then try to decode these same
files with any version of WSJT and WSJT-X to compare the quality of the
decodes produced, including how well they handle Deep Search (to do that
one should insure that they all have access to the same call3.txt data).
I would also suggest that the Callsign and Grid boxes be empty when
testing each version.
To include the vagaries of one's own equipment, any of these versions of
WSJT and "X" can "Save All" which saves wave files of the actual audio
from your equipment. These can then be used in the same way as those
produced by SimJT to quantify/compare the abilities of any version of
WSJT and "X".
Anyone interested enough can empirically compare the various versions