No, it's less attenuation in its normal mode of propagation. It has to do
with the decompression of the magnetosphere on the side of the earth away
from the sun..

Almost all AM radio stations transmit in the vertical polarization, the
antenna beam launch angle is low, it's difficult to get skip.

Horizontal polarized antennas (spaced properly above a ground plane) have a
launch angle that is favorable for skip.

If it was skip, there would be regions of no reception between regions of
reception. AM radio is continuous reception until it just fades out.

You can get AM wavelengths to skip, but it is not as common as in other
shorter wavelengths.

Henriech Hertz


"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:26:05 GMT, "Flounder" wrote
this crap:

AM (600-1600 KHz) is a ground wave. It doesn't skip.

It travels further at night because the ionic concentrations in the
Appleton
layer decrease from lack of sunlight and the solar wind.

Well gee, that's a skip, isn't it?




Ave Imperator Bush!
Bush Was Right! Four More Years!

So, can you explain tropo scatter?
krj

Flounder wrote:
No, it's less attenuation in its normal mode of propagation. It has to do
with the decompression of the magnetosphere on the side of the earth away
from the sun..

Almost all AM radio stations transmit in the vertical polarization, the
antenna beam launch angle is low, it's difficult to get skip.

Horizontal polarized antennas (spaced properly above a ground plane) have a
launch angle that is favorable for skip.

If it was skip, there would be regions of no reception between regions of
reception. AM radio is continuous reception until it just fades out.

You can get AM wavelengths to skip, but it is not as common as in other
shorter wavelengths.

Henriech Hertz


"Horvath" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:26:05 GMT, "Flounder" wrote
this crap:


AM (600-1600 KHz) is a ground wave. It doesn't skip.

It travels further at night because the ionic concentrations in the

Appleton

layer decrease from lack of sunlight and the solar wind.

Well gee, that's a skip, isn't it?




Ave Imperator Bush!
Bush Was Right! Four More Years!

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:20:03 GMT, "Flounder" wrote
this crap:

No, it's less attenuation in its normal mode of propagation. It has to do
with the decompression of the magnetosphere on the side of the earth away
from the sun..

Actually it's the ionosphere,

Almost all AM radio stations transmit in the vertical polarization, the
antenna beam launch angle is low, it's difficult to get skip.

Were we talking about commercial AM radio? I thought we were talking
about SSB.




Ave Imperator Bush!
Bush Was Right! Four More Years!

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:26:05 GMT, "Flounder" wrote
this crap:

AM (600-1600 KHz) is a ground wave. It doesn't skip.

With the proper antenna, such as a dipolar, it will.




Ave Imperator Bush!
Bush Was Right! Four More Years!

Horvath wrote in :

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:26:05 GMT, "Flounder" wrote
this crap:

AM (600-1600 KHz) is a ground wave. It doesn't skip.

With the proper antenna, such as a dipolar, it will.


So that explains why you can get radio in your head so well.


Bertie

Yeah Wally.... 40 nautical miles for a good VHF is possible.

CM

"Wally" wrote in message
...
| Bobsprit claims to have made a VHF transmission of over 40nm. Given that
his
| antenna height is about 50 feet, that would require, for a line of sight
| transmission, that the other antenna be about 800 - eight hundred - feet
| above the water.
|
| I believe that 40 miles is too close for skip, so could his transmission
| have a 'terrain following' effect in the sense that the sea might act as a
| ground plane?
|
| Would anyone care to comment on the veracity of Bobsprit's claim?
|
|
| --
| Wally
| www.makearatherlonglinkthattakesyounowhere.com
| Things are always clearer in the cold, post-upload light.
|
|
|

Yeah Wally.... 40 nautical miles for a good VHF is possible.

And STILL I get no apology from Wally who infered that I was lying.
For shame!

RB

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
| Yeah Wally.... 40 nautical miles for a good VHF is possible.
|
| And STILL I get no apology from Wally who infered that I was lying.
| For shame!

Hang on... I'll cut you a slice from my round of gouda to go with that
whine... err wine.

CM

Bobsprit wrote:
Yeah Wally.... 40 nautical miles for a good VHF is possible.

And STILL I get no apology from Wally who infered that I was lying.

If you think I inferred that you were lying, it would have been because the
evidence empirically presented would lead one to draw such an inference.
However, the word I believe you are attemptng to utilise is not 'infer', but
'imply'. To use 'infer' in place of 'imply' is slack.

I didn't apologise, because I made no such implication. I did question the
veracity of your claim, but did so with the qualification that I stand to be
corrected. This was clearly implied, and the inference thus readily
available to be drawn by the reader, by the title of the thread in which I
enquired into the veracity of your claim, namely, "Radio question" - this
very thread. I invite you to read the original post again. Furthermore, on
the matter of your attempting to troll for a butt-kiss, I responded to your
similar comment regarding this yesterday.

Happy now, battery boy?

Oh, when did you say your next trip is? Let me know - I'll keep my handheld
switched on. Hail me! Channel 9!


--
Wally
www.makearatherlonglinkthattakesyounowhere.com
Things are always clearer in the cold, post-upload light.

I did question the
veracity of your claim, but did so with the qualification that I stand to be
corrected.

Since Morris Cove is a specific distance and you sought clarification about VHF
range, the only alternative would have been that I was lying.
Therefore the inference was clear. You were wrong about VHF range and following
your challenging my claim, were alerted to this.
A good chap might say, "Sorry for doubting you."
Then again....

RB