The signals showing the most change were not the loudest. They were
the ones on the edge of the developing band opening. The stronger or
peak signals from these stations would occur later as (presumably) the
angle of arrival moved up. The advantage to the water's edge I was
hearing would only last from first hearing to full band opening. To
the extent that the opening was very marginal, the advantage could
persist.
One of the big things in any experiment is to think about all the factors
that can cause a feeling or impression, and just look at the meaningful
numbers.
1.) If you had a non-linear effect based on loss it was probably the common
effect of small changes in threshold signals being most noticeable. This
effect is just a fact of life. We see it without realizing it. Linear loss,
and we know the loss is linear with level, change weak signals exactly the
same as strong signals. They change noise exactly the same as signals.
2.) If you were observing a wave angle effect, you would have had to sort
the signals by wave angle. The irony of this is the most vocal advocates of
high angle propagation, where salt water has no advantage (except a small
one on bounce) over a localized very modest copper screen, are the same
people who claim enhancement.
All of this is measureable if we do a correct and reasonable test. It is not
measureable or observable with poor methods, or by human emotionometers.
It is, on the surface, illogical to claim weak signals are changed in a way
that does not occur on stronger signals. Nowhere in anything except
non-linear circuits will that occur.
When people come up with numbers or observations exceeding the change
possible by moving an antenna from over soil to over an infinite copper
sheet, or invoke some sort of non-linearity based on level, something is
obviously wrong with the observation or reporting.
73 Tom
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|