Managed to download that info on suggested aerials for meteors (BAA radio astronomy group PDF file on aerials for meteor radio scatter). The 3 element Yagi aerial would of course out-perform the Moxon as it would have extra gain, however it would be much bigger and have a much greater visual impact, whereas the design of the tiny Moxon is so compact. Another thing i noticed as i scanned thru was that the Yagi was mounted vertically when before it was suggested that it should be horizontal? That’s why we mounted ours horizontally. In any case, ours seemed to work very well mounted horizontally. However, if they now suggest vertical polarization. For vertical polarisation the 5/8 wave vertical aerial I have made would be perfect!
Now…..i meant to comment in my last message that I would not be happy using the program that you use….spectrum lab. This is why:
Number one……….I am convinced that when attempting to resolve any meteors from Graves (149.050MHz), there should be no carrier seen. If there was any carrier on the QRG, then no ‘ping’ would be heard. When using ‘WSJT – 9’ there is no carrier……no carrier whatever on the screen/waterfall and there definitely should not be. !
Unlike the Wrotham beacon (144.430 MHz) – now that’s totally different there will always be a carrier of some sort running, as it’s designed to always be there…….but Graves……….definitely not.
What i think is happening is that you are probably using Spectrum Lab with possibly, too much gain, which would probably make the display look like some sort of carrier on the QRG. If WSJT-9 has too much gain, then the display can look like a signal of some sort running. That’s why ( as I have said ) it is vitally important that the input signal (as shown on WSJT-9) is 0 dB gain. Then nothing whatever is displayed……..only ‘pings’ from meteors
This is very important.
Bye for now