144 MHz and 445 MHz dynamic range around here is simply unreal. LNAs have a wide bandwidth on their input, typically. That means you are receiving some VERY weak signals. Unfortunately

Of course, when you are up at 2 meters and above (perhaps even 6 meters to a lesser degree) putting the LNA at the antenna feed point gives you a "free" dB of noise figure reduction.

For my 2 cents worth, having a UTC based time filter would be a great feature. Rather than seeing all stations at a particular frequency, see only stations that "may" be transmitting at

"Conrad, PA5Y" <g0ruz@...> wrote: I'm not Conrad, you're definitely correct in your earlier statements. Others seemed to be advocating lower noise figures in general, as you say there is a

Hello Brian That is true and unnecessary, perhaps I misunderstand but you seem to be indicating that I am advocating sub 1dB noise figures on 144MHz. I am not and Chris Bartram was absolutely

Yes, CSUB is exactly where I saw/used this concept the first time. I remember back in the day using Ham Radio Deluxe (before it was sold), and it also did not have a filter on the frequency database

"Conrad, PA5Y" <g0ruz@...> wrote: Back in the day (i.e. about 1979/80) Chris Bartam G4DGU of muTek determined that 144MHz system noise figures of less than 2dB for terrestrial signals were

Hi Joanne. Yes sub 1dB noise figures definitely cost dynamic range. They are only necessary for moon-nbounce above 144MHz. Using celestial sources I have a system noise figure of 0.4dB on 432

On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:57 PM, Conrad, PA5Y wrote: I have an XPOL system on 2m and most of the time I do not see much rotation but 6m is a completely different matter.The effect of Faraday rotation

Conrad PA5Y writes: I am thinking about building an XPOL RX for 6m for that very reason this summer. I have the antennas. Of course, I will run out of time! Actually a fully X-pol 50Mhz array will

At one point I considered two horizontal yagis spaced appropriately for stacking. Then let the stacking boom rotate from vertical to horizontal. That keeps the active antenna parts out of

What about the stages that follow? They are also stages that can limit dynamic range. (The most effective trick for the noise figure increase and dynamic range decrease was calculated

Not necessarily. Many are horizontal or mixed. Holland, Ireland are mostly vertical. A n excellent site to use is FM LIst for transmitter info, and you can also see in real time

On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:45 PM, John Dusek wrote: I was hoping SDRC could emulate that current-time filtering bit, my current limited listening station only has one PC screen and is hard to fit a

That is something that I have considered but you really need a rear mounted yagi to avoid antenna degradation or mechanical issues. It is definitely worthy of serious consideration. To see how it

I completely disagree. If you have an LNA that will not overload and has sufficient headroom you can use a step attenuator after the LNA to ensure that the input levels to the subsequent stage are

Get a baby rotator to rotate it from H to V polarization. (Besides, REAL ops use SSB. Short of some recent digital audio work SSB gives best SNR for weak signals.) {^_-} (6

A step attenuator plus LNA is not much of a solution for anything as it guarantees you a loss of dynamic range even for the no net change in noise figure case. It must be nice to live

On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:45 PM, John Dusek wrote: Hi Max - Thanks, yes I am very familiar with that program, I have used it extensively in the past both with my SDR and with my ICOM IC7300Sure no

Hi Max - Thanks, yes I am very familiar with that program, I have used it extensively in the past both with my SDR and with my ICOM IC7300 (which is packed in storage these days due to a move), but on