[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

(meteorobs) 2nd Perseids [RADIO] rprt (LONG)



First, my sincere apologies to those on this list with no interest in the
radio activity of meteors; please hit the DELETE key now! 

But I've seen some indication lately that many on MeteorObs are interested
in some of the info below, so am taking the chance and forwarding the
report anyway. The following is an attempt by Shelby Ennis, operator of
amateur radio station W8WN in Elizabethtown, Kentucky, to collate some
initial reports of the Perseids radio activity; the reports were forwarded
to him after a plea for same on several ham meteor-scatter reflectors. If
you need explanations of any of the technical terms below, ask and I'll
provide those by private e-mail. BTW, almost all of these reports concern
operation on the 144 MHz amateur band using high-speed morse code (typical
speeds up to 1500 words per minute...yes, no typo: 1,500 WPM...). You may
also contact Mr. Ennis privately for more definitive information; his
e-mail is included below as <w8wn@ne.infidot net>.

Clear skies,

SteveH
Shrewsbury MA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>X-Sender: w8wn@ne.infidot net
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16)
>Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 17:45:28 +0000
>To: skywayinc@aol.com, 72124.2734@compuserve.com,
peter@danlon.physics.uwodot ca,
>        w3ep@arrl.org, kd5bur@gtedot net, ko0u@os.com, dougf@sk.sympaticodot ca,
>        W0AH@aol.com
>From: "Shelby Ennis, W8WN" <w8wn@ne.infidot net>
>Subject: 2nd Perseids rprt
>
>(Peter - note E-mail address change)
>
>We now have about 15 specific reports from NA & Europe, plus about that
>many additional "schedule results" reports.  Most say the same thing as my
>first report, but together they add a little more.  The following are
>individual notes pulled from longer messages.  (The entire messages, or
>longer summaries, and "result" reports, can be forwarded if anyone needs
>them).
>-------------------------------------------
>I think the conds during this years perseids was "no-good".  --  SM5SJR,
>Sweden
>------------------------------------------
>The first peak was very sharp. Activity started at 1200z and peaked around
>1430z here. After 1500z very few reflections. This first peak seemed to
>support only short distances (<=1500km).   --  W1FIG, FN41, Rhode Island
>--------------------------------------------
>(Comment from 35-year-Perseid veteran W0AH, ex-W2CRS, CO):
>Perseids meteors are not as high velocity as some other showers.  The shower
>also doesn't favor east-west paths which are usually the longest paths
>attempted.  
>The peak is also not the best time for working long paths.  The larger
>meteors, which cause significant ionization at a higher elevation, therefore
>providing longer paths, tend to lag the peak.  
>We had a very good "traditional" peak here in Colorado this morning from
>1430-1600. 
>------------------------------------
>(Comment on Doug's comments, by me):
>Agreed.  But the Perseids has (since 1955) been the shower for most long
>distance skeds.  And compared with the past few years, this seemed poorer
>for them.  --  W8WN
>-----------------------------------
>Heaviest activity from my log was between 1430 and 1500z. Cassette tape
>recording of this time shows almost 2 minutes of continuous ionization at
>1442z.
>A very definite peak observed here between 1430 and 1500z. Every frequency
>I was monitoring got busy during this time.  A two minute period at 1442z
>made 144.200 sound like a huge widespread Es breakout. I heard and worked
>stations to the WNW, East, and ENE (total of 6 in this two minute period). 
>Also noted (and new to me) was the frequency of backscatter burns from
>stations almost within tropo range of me.   --   KM5PO, AR
>-----------------------------------
>for me the paek was very obvious from abt 14:30 to 16:30 and more precisely
>from 15:00 - 15:50 UTC.   Last year I noticed very little N-S action
>and mostly NE-SW NW-SE but this year it seemed the other way around... A
>SHARPER peak than I have noticed in previous years.  --  VE2SWL/VE6, W.
Canada
>-----------------------------------
>The first sign of increased activity started at 1115z, at this level I was
>hearing burns about every 5 minutes (at least 5 seconds long). This level
>stayed fairly constant until about 1415z at which time I was hearing burns
>at least one per minute until about 1435z. From 1435z to 1520z I was
>hearing at least 3 burns per minute that were 5 seconds or longer. From
>1520z until about 1630z the burns thinned out until only 1
>or 2 per minute.
>The most notable number of burns occurred between 1435z to 1450z and
>1505z to 1515z. During those time frames there were almost continuos
>signals. Most were very weak and short but readable.  --  K5IUA, LA
>-----------------------------------
>FWIW, the peak here (DO61) *may* have been about 15:30.  That's when the
>backscatter from nearby stations peaked but the peak itself was somewhat
>of a non-event.  Compared to 1997 - dismal.  --  73  Doug  VE5UF  in DO61ov
> south central Canada
>------------------------------------
>Definitely the peak occurred in the 1400-1500z range. 144.200 was a zoo
>with random meteors coming from the east and west. N5JHV in New Mexico was
>very loud and had some really long burns during the period [this is a good,
>long one.  W8WN] . This shower was better than last year from this qth.  --
> KA9CFD, IL (?)
>-------------------------------------
>I believe the peak of the Perseids occurred at around 1500z 12 august. This
>is based on monitoring the european SSB and CW MS calling frequencies on
>144.200 and 144.100 which are the best benchmark in Europe.  --  73 Dave
>G4RGK, England
>-----------------------------------
>Perseids peak seems passed over and  I had a good HS-CW MS QSO with BY1QH
>on 144MHz this morning.  -  JA9BOH, Japan.  {Waiting for more on peak &
>conditions from over there}.
>-----------------------------------
>-----------------------------------
>>From W8WN, KY (EM77):
>Note that these are comments on the time and intensity of the peak (and
>shower) only, in some cases pulled out of context.
>In spite of a poorer shower, some completed a good number of contacts,
>picking up a number of new grids.  Many of these were due to the several
>HSCW grid "expeditions" going on.
>
>However, in summary, the shower was poorer for most than the past two
>years, and the peak was less intense (expected).   (Before the last two
>years, the new, early peak got everybody "spoiled", I'm afraid; so didn't
>dare ask for any comparisons farther back).
>There were fewer long, overdense burns than the past two years.  But there
>were as many or more very short, weak, underdense pings on the Peak day.
>More backscatter was noted.  (Why?  Simply more operating?  And lots of
>schedules posted on the HSCW and WSVHF Reflectors, or made on the real-time
>Hot Rocks Web page?  Or a difference in the shower?)  But several noted the
>increased backscatter.
>The peak was about 1430 Z, as seen from Western Europe and all of North
>America.  A number were on during the times of the other predicted peak(s),
>but reported no enhancement at those time (or maybe there actually weren't
>enough on.  OH5IY's 88 MHz automatic graph should be interesting when it
>arrives).
>>From the comments, and from some of the completed-contact reports, it
>appears that there were fewer signals propagated over even "normally-long"
>distances (i.e., about 1200 miles or so) than in previous Perseids.  (I
>personally was disappointed to not even hear a ping out of three long, but
>certainly possible, Rocky Mountain portable operations).
>
>Watching the reports from Europe (compared with our own) this summer has
>caused several fellows to dig into the Effectivity section of OH5IY's
>MSSoft program.  Before the peak day of the Perseids (as all this summer),
>the Europeans were reporting much better results than we were getting.
>This was not due to their higher density of operators, etc., for this often
>took the ping/burst count into consideration.  Now a couple of fellows are
>planning to reset the .INI file and compare Effectivities of different
>directions in northern Europe vs. North America.  For they seem to be
>stealing all of our rocks!  None of the long-time ping jockies have a
>handle on this one yet.  But it's becoming disturbing when they report
>random contacts and schedules with totals of hunderds of pings, while those
>same days we get only a few.  It appears that some of the Propagation
>Wizzards may have to dig into this one.
>
>We expect a few more reports from around the world.  This will be updated
>ONLY if there are major changes seen or something is requested.
>
>Interestingly, after a VERY long session (and lack of sleep 3 other
>nights), this "day after" is the best I've felt on this day in years.  It's
>so much more relaxing with HSCW, as well as making contacts possible when
>they would have otherwise been impossible.  It also made the occasional SSB
>sked a welcome (tho frustrating) change.  But even the HSCW didn't help
>when there weren't enough meteors at the right time and place to give even
>a single ping!  Hi.  Am anxious to read reports from the western
>mountaintop expeditions, since they as a group apparently did not do as
>well as was expected.
>
>73, Shelby, W8WN
>Shelby, W8WN - EM77bq
>w8wn@ne.infidot net
>
>

Follow-Ups: