2m EME

2m ground gain


For sale

The QTH  

Low band HF frontend

VHF map


ON6BG-antenna coupler




Worked JT65B stations on 2m EME, mainly on moonrise (some on moonset) :


After every single JT65B QSO, the screenshots of the vital QSO information and the waterfall traces as a  view out of the attic window, corresponding to the antenna position
and a picture of the "monster" antenna are sent to the worked station, by Email.
Most stations kindly return their antenna system when requested.
Before, we showed these pictures and the JT65B QSO info on this page.

With more than 250 different initials in the log, the size of this page has outgrown the free capacity provided by the network provider Belgacom.
So we abandoned this approach and in the future we'll just provide the full log content as before in Excel format.

Some remarks:

For  JT65B-operation, we usually log in onto the N0UK logger. From here, we usually note the activity frequencies of initials. (these are new, never worked 2m EME stations). 
Usually, these stations are called  on "random", i.e. without notifying the other station, I'm calling the other station or that I'm receiving on the QRG!! (or vice versa with a CQ)  
This can differ for specific reasons.

With CW, all QSO's in the log, below, were truely random! This used to be different back in the early eighties or nineties.

Some milestones:

Exactly 10 months, after starting counting my JT65B EME initials, I achieved the goal of working 100 different stations on moonrise with the single 2.87 WL, 12M2. (98% of them on random!)


The entire and updated 2007 to 2011 JT65B & CW EME-log can be found, here.


On 01/07/2011, we worked 4Z5LY on Es on a full band.

This was our country # 100; finally DXCC on 2m.


We're especially glad since this was achieved, mainly from a residential QTH with:

-a good number of neighbours (not rural)
-modest output power (250W)

-modest antenna gain (<13dBd)

-a relatively low antenna. (not on a hilltop but just 9m agl or at 31m asl)
-a reactive operating style (in order not to interfere with the family) 

-a minimum of interactivity to achieve the QSO (if any)






After more than 120 2m EME QSO's ( WSJT but also CW) since settling down at our new QTH, an evaluation was made and compared to the theoretical prediction (based on ideal ground )
by means of YO 7.5. (simulation courtesy by Lionel, VE7BQH).

The results are surprising pointing to the superb ground properties at this QTH.


For every valid 2m EME QSO, the azimuth and elevation position of the moon were recorded and put in a spreadsheet.
A scatter diagram does not reveal much:



However, most EME QSO's have been performed between azimuths of about 45 (northeast) ato close to 160. (beyond southeast, close to southern heading)

The former azimuth has always been very clear and relatively unobstructed, the latter has much improved since a neighbour cut a long row of about 20 to 30 tall trees.
At highly northern declinations, this 160 azimuth corresponds to:

-about 2.5 hours of moontime after moonrise, a period after which I usually quit for:

        - family reasons

        - the laptop battery being empty

        - supposed too high elevations (beyond 20 )
In between both extremes, there is a farmer cottage (azimuths of 100 to 110 ).
At first sight, this brick and metalwork and fruit trees do not seem to affect the statistics!.

Our garden house heading of 125 was already outlined to be too far from the reflection point to of importance.

A more comprehensive analysis is provided by counting the occurances by elevation:



On the X-scale, we count the amount of occurances for a certain elevation angle (in degrees). (Y-scale)

The amount of occurances corresponds with the amount of valid QSO's that were made for the specified (moon) elevation angle.


The following distinct elevations can be read from the column diagram:





With the relatively low amount of samples (number of QSO's per elevation angle), the correlation with the theoretical, predicted values is astonishing;


Yagi Optimizer 7.5 predicts, over ideal ground and with the given height over ground of the 2M12 (2.87λ long, 12el antenna) pretty much the same values,

as observed during the more than hundred 2m EME QSO's!

Even the 4th ground gain lobe predicted to be around 20 of moon elevation, is not far off reality!


This remarkable result points to the relative accuracy of the antenna simulation program (with ideal ground) and the excellent reflecting ground properties at the Brussels airport plateau.