Maybe you didn't increase the threshold sufficiently. Please note that AGC THRESHOLD values are in error by whole 21 dB with preamp on (9 dB with preamp off). So, you probably didn't get the threshol
It could be, but looks like it isn't. IM is absent at main filter inputs. Something around Q9 stage seems to be causing it, maybe Q9 itself, diodes, ferrites, even filters... 73, Sinisa YT1NT, VA3TTN
Than can work to some degree, you are using hang time to reduce the frequency of gain changes saving you from some of the distortion. Perhaps you have a much better behaved noise than I have :-) Thes
Forgot to mention that stacking registers should be numbered, and the number of the currently active one displayed, for example, in the top left corner of LCD. 73, Sinisa YT1NT, VA3TTN
Lucky one, you can use the full sensitivity there, and could even use more of it, it it was available. Which reminds me of Yuri's advice to preserve enough sensitivity for such locations. Well, given
Which translates to -184 dbW/Hz, a fascinating figure for 40 meters, good even for 10 meters. What time of (UTC) day? For a "remote" location in your area ICEPAC suggests from -171 to -155 dBW on 40
Well, when confronted with 100 turns per scan of 20 m SSB band, I quickly recognised the value of reducing that number to only 40, even if that must be payed by using 25 Hz resolution instead of more
ICEPAC thinks that's about time for the noise level to start rising. Compared to that, I have a clear view of, well, apartment building across the street :-) Got one on eBay, the best ham-related inv
Of course it's not the only way, it's not even a good one. The recommended way is to lower the characteristic impedance of the line acting as antenna. That is, to lower the L/C ratio. For 80 m dipole
A longer piece of wire can only outperform a 1/2 wave dipole (or a 3/8 wave dipol) in a very limited range of directions, at expense of underperforming in all the other directions. That's elementary
There is only one explanation for a loop (or anything else) outperforming a dipole (or anything else) in ALL directions: your dipole is wasting at least 75 % of RF energy. Instead of claiming that "l
Did you investigate WHY? Antenna A (as sophisticated as it can be) can outperform antenna B (as UNsophisticated as it can be) in ALL directions (both azimuth and elevation), ONLY if antenna B has too
That's true. The "capture area" argument is valid only if signals received by all parts of antenna are combined in-phase, which is not case with long wires for most of directions. 73, Sinisa YT1NT,
Regarding "capture area", please note that it is NOT separate from directivity (loss ignored). Therefore, NO antenna can have a "capture area" larger than some other antenna in all directions - just
... This and all other numbers apply ONLY to the direction of maximum gain. Capture area is very small for direction with low gain, regardless of antenna size. 73, Sinisa YT1NT, VA3TTN
Yes, the effective capture area for a given direction can be calculated from the gain in that direction, but then it is redundant. 73, Sinisa YT1NT, VA3TTN
If the wavelength is known, as it normally is, then effective area can be calculated from isotropic gain, and vice versa: Ae = Gi * lambda ^ 2 / (4 * Pi) Gi = 4 * Pi * Ae / (lambda ^ 2) The origin of