Yuri K3BU,
I've read your ducting article carefully, and as I told you in a private
e-mail a while back I think what you say is what is happening. I do think
there's some confusion introduced because of some of your terminology, though.
But I'm not surprised that Radio Science rejected your article. I don't
think it was due to them thinking "what does some poor ham slob know?" as
you said in your posting. They probably rejected it because all it contains
is observations (good ones), and theories with no sound analytical proof to
follow. Note the name of the publication: Radio SCIENCE, not Radio
Observations or Radio Theories.
Along these lines, in response to my polarization comments (that's all they
were, not something I was declaring as a truth) you said "Not so! Skewed
path is due to propagation being better, or pulled towards the equator
(solar) as a result of better ducting properties closer to current solar
equator".
What are "better ducting properties"? How about defining some ionospheric
parameters that go with "better ducting properties"? If you can't then all
you have is an unproven theory.
This is where ray tracing with a good model of the ionosphere (one that
properly addresses magneto-ionic theory) will help - to test these theories.
The process should be observations tested against modeling, and modeling
tested against observations. When everything fits, then the truth will be
discovered.
Enough from me.
Carl K9LA
--------------------------------------
R. Carl Luetzelschwab Mail Stop: 25-71
Hughes Defense Communications
1010 Production Rd
Ft Wayne, IN 46808-4106
Phone: 219-429-4338 Fax: 219-429-5585
E-mail: rcluet@most.fw.hac.com
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
Submissions: topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-topband@contesting.com
|