Reverse Beacon Network: Amazing!

I've often peeked at http://www.reversebeacon.net/, the Reverse Beacon network that uses a network of observers equipped with CWSkimmer to list the heard stations that are calling CQ on CW. If you can find an observer near you, it gives a pretty interesting view of propagation.

During the IntDX competition this past weekend, I thought I might have been picked up, but as a QRP station, I didn't do any CQ'ing during this contest; consequently, I didn't get added to the mix.

So this morning I tested the network: I made a single CQ on a pretty dead 15m, by hand. Sure enough, I was picked up by the K4TD skimmer!

This is nifty in two ways. First, I think the RBN shows how CW continues to have strengths as a mode. It is digital enough that current computing technology can parse it (and, of course, create it); but it is a digital mode that was created for human production and decoding, so we don't have to have a computer in the middle to play with it. Second, and more practically, this is a beacon network that encourages you to make QSOs. You're only going to be picked up if you call CQ!

Comments

  1. ON5ZOFebruary 22, 2012 at 6:35 AM

    There is another benefit to the RBN: every single station that calls CQ is picked up somewhere. On the classic DX cluster, some people might only spot their friends (or themselves).
    I too am surprised by the thoroughness of the system: a single CQ is immediately picked up by a dozen skimmers! The signal strength indication is a nice bonus, especially if you want to make comparisons.
    Thanks for the QSO on 80 this past weekend.
    73 de Franki ON5ZO = OQ5M

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Building and Operating a Transmitter from the Roaring 20s

Image
Radio was booming in the 1920s: transmitters had started using the pure tone of 'continuous wave' signals, replacing signals sent with sparks, and increasingly selective and sensitive receiver circuits offered greater range seemingly by the month. Amateurs, not yet able to tame their simple transmitters with crystal-controlled oscillators, constructed them on simple wooden boards with heavy wiring and large inductor coils in order to keep heating from causing their signals to drift. These homebrew transmitters were ongoing experiments in electronics and engineering. The position of a coil might increase output power but cause the signal to sound like a buzzsaw. If you could find a higher voltage power supply, that too would raise its power, but the increased currents in the rig would add more drift: if the other guy can't find your signal wandering up and down the band, what use is that extra 3 watts? The 1929 QSO Party Every year the Antique Wireless Association holds a tw
Read more

Defining a 49:1 EFHW Transformer's Losses

Image
 End-fed halfwave antennas are so convenient, especially in rapidly deployed setups, and they're easy to build . But how much energy is lost in the 49:1 transformer that makes it possible? Because I operate mainly QRP, and I'm using a rather large core for 5w, I'm not concerned with losses that appear once the transformer's core reaches the Curie temperature. So I can use a nanoVNA, performing a S21 logmag trace on two cores back-to-back, to see how much power my transformer is eating up on the way to the antenna. I used the Fair-Rite 2643625002 core, inspired by excellent results MM0OPX reports in a generously shared spreadsheet of results. Could I get around 0.5 dB loss from 80m all the way to 10m if I used that core in 21:3 turns ratio?  My experience with more donut-shaped ones suggested that such broad-banded performance was a tough order: a 14:2 turns ratio works well on one end of the HF band; 21:3 works well on the other. In the end, Colin's accompanying vi
Read more