Marc - I've used  a BOG here for several years now on 160M.  Soil is red clay down several feet, generally damp during 160 season.  The BOG is 350' long, terminated with a resistor to 4' ground rod, no radials.  Fed via transformer and 72 ohm coax.  There was no particular reason for choosing the 350' length - that was the longest I could fit in the available space.  There is clearly front/back, but have never tried to measure it.  The BOG is pointed towards Europe and when compared to my inverted L transmitting antenna, the S/N ratio improves enough that I can copy signals solid that are just barely audible on my L.  The biggest advantage is noticed when thunderstorms are active.  QRN is usually reduced to a level that allows me to copy through the noise.  Performance is similar on 80M.  I found that the BOG performed slightly better than my old K9AY antenna in the favored direction.

73, Floyd - K8AC

Not all switching supplies are noisy and unwanted signals they generate can be discrete signals, not just "hash".  I've not had a switching supply that raises the noise level at all.  But, I've sure had some that generated discrete signals in places that caused problems.  See the QST articles from a few years back that compared switching supplies and showed spectrum graphs of their noise output.

73, K8AC

The SoftRock input is anything you want it to be.  It doesn't know the difference between a signal coming from an antenna and one coming from an IF output.  Using the IF output to the SoftRock would allow you to drive panadaptor software with the IF signal. 

I don't own an FT-101E, but took a look at an online manual regarding your question.  I believe you are in error in talking about the RF output jack.  That provides RF output from the driver stage of the transmitter.  There's also an IF output jack for the 3.180 MHz IF signal and that's the one you want to use.  But - there doesn't appear to be a tuning range option on the SoftRock RX Ensemble II that covers 3.180 MHz. 

At any rate, you won't have any problems overloading the SDR front end since you'd just be sampling the IF signal.  If you were using an outside antenna with the SoftRock RX Ensemble II  and were running substantial transmit power, then your concern would be valid.  There are commercial boxes, such as that by KD9SV, that offer front end protection by doing just want you want to do.  The relays in that box are fast enough to support full QSK if necessary.  I use one of those boxes with my Beverage receive antennas for 160M.

73, Floyd - K8AC

Hi Bruce.  We're located in the NC mountains near Fleetwood, 15 miles outside of Boone.  Checked your location and we almost bought a house on 197 up on the ridge where the road turns back to pavement from gravel.  At our location, the woods are thick and I'll be using an inverted Vee cut for 40M on 40M and above.  Coax to an automatic tuner mounted under the eaves and ladder line to the Vee.  I've used the same setup many times on vacations and had no problems working DX on CW.  Our place is at 3,200 feet with some 5,000 foot ridges not far away. 

73, Floyd - K8AC

The CAT interface in any brand transceiver does one basic thing - it provides a physical external interface to the processor in the transceiver and a set of commands for setting or reading parameters.  The first interfaces provided commands to read and set the VFO frequencies, mode and bandwidth.  Later refinements provided access to dozens of other functions including reading S-meter values, etc.  The main purpose for all this was to allow logging programs to communicate with the rig to obtain frequency information and to set the rig frequency/band from DX spots.  With all the later additions, it's now possible to completely control many transceivers remotely using PC software.

The "band scope" interface is something else entirely and separate from the CAT functions.  The scope requires sampling a wide portion of the band, usually by tapping the signal at the first IF of the transceiver prior to any filters.  The higher end Icom HF rigs have a reasonable and useful implementation of the scope with no other software or hardware required.  The Elecraft K3 does the scope function in a separate hardware add-on (the P3), again requiring no other software.  Some other rigs, such as Yaesu and Tentec, offer a rather poor band scope function that's of limited use.

The best results are had from an approach that taps the first IF of the transceiver and provides the signal to an jack to which you can attach an external device which converts the signal to a form useable by PC software.  The external device is essentially a receiver that is tuned to the frequency of the first IF of the transceiver and it converts the RF signal to a complex audio signal which is then fed to a PC sound card (in some cases, the sound card is integrated into the device).  N8LP's LP-Pan is one such device that processes the IF signal and passes it to a high-quality PC sound card.  Special software (NaP3 is maybe the best) is then used to process that sound card signal and produce the band scope display.  With this approach, the user has control over many display parameters (averaging, buffer size, etc.) that are not available in purely hardware implementations.  In this case, the NaP3 software uses the CAT interface to exchange frequency information so it can sync what you're seeing with what you're hearing.

Another approach is to use a separate software controlled receiver, such as the SDR-IQ, which shares the transceiver receive antenna line via a hybrid splitter so that it's hearing the same things that the transceiver is.  The software for this receiver uses the CAT interface to slave the SDR-IQ frequency to that of the transceiver so that when you tune one, you are tuning the other.

There are a couple of problems to consider.  First, the Mark V Field does NOT have an output for the first IF and even if it did, the LP-Pan or SDR-IQ couldn't handle it because the IF frequency is somewhere around 70 MHz and those units do not handle that high a frequency.  But, you can use the SDR-IQ in the mode of sharing the receive antenna and I've done that using the Mark V. 

The second problem is that CAT interfaces are designed to talk to one program at a time and the PC operating systems don't support sharing of the serial port used to communicate with the rig.  So, if your logging program is already using that interface, the software handling the band scope function can't access it.  Today there are good ways around that, and I use a free program called VSPE to create virtual ports which allow me to share the CAT interface access among multiple programs.

Here I use DXLab for logging and NaP3 for the scope function (rig is Orion II) and successfully share the com port with no problems.

The net of this is:  If you want a first class band scope, get a rig with a low first IF frequency (usually in the 9 MHz range).  The company that makes the SDR-IQ receiver (RFSpace) also sells an interface for some Yaesu rigs (such as FT-2000) that converts the high first IF down to the 9-10 MHz range).  LP-pan, originally designed for the K3, is a fairly low cost approach that works very well for rigs with low first IF.

I think it's a good idea to approach this with specific needs in mind (such as - you want a good spectrum scope).  Many folks install a generalized rig control program, such as Ham Radio Deluxe, and end up with a compromise.  Why anyone would want to simply control all the rig functions from a screen that's only a foot away from the rig front panel escapes me.  Controlling the rig remotely from another location is another matter.

73, Floyd - K8AC

I suggest you look into the rules regarding use of amateur band equipment on the CB frequencies. 

With just the info from this quote, I'd strongly advise AGAINST an amplifier.  Clearly you're going to have an antenna that's low and close to your house.  The fact it's a historic district tells me the lots are small and the houses close together.  The amplifier will insure that everyone nearby knows you're a ham and your XYL will soon feel the pressure of complaints about you getting into the neighbor's TV, stereo, washing machine, dish washer, etc.  It really doesn't matter that the true fault is the neighbor's electronic equipment - all they'll know is that they didn't have the problem before you got that amplifier.  If you're an attorney, you may be able to deal with what's going to happen, otherwise, you're in for a rough sail.

73, Floyd - K8AC

Common sense should always prevail.  If this minor thing bothered your new ham, suggest that he spend a day monitoring 40M SSB and 75M SSB.  That will probably result in his head exploding.

73, K8AC

Do you mean for PCs WITHOUT serial cards?  Just about any USB/serial converter cable should work. 

73, K8AC

The problem here is with the devices that are being affected by the RF.  This isn't "stray RF", it's your fundamental signal being radiated by your antenna so close to the house and these devices  (probably exacerbated by the OCF dipole, improperly choked, but that's another subject).  Think about it - none of the devices you mentioned were designed to receive radio signals and so they should no be reacting to an RF field, but they are.  One approach would be to get the antenna away from the house wiring and the devices.  Another approach would be to address each of the devices separately and solve the problem with that device before moving on to the next.  Touch lamps are a well known problem - you may never be able to solve that one.  But, chokes on the AC line to the amp may  help.  For the wireless internet router, try chokes on the power supply lead near the router and on any other cables connected to it.  For the speakers, you should first determine how the RF causing the problem is getting into the amplifier or receiver being used.  Lot's of possibilities there ranging from poorly shielded cables to disconnected ground shields, or the RF could be entering through the speaker leads themselves.  Chokes on the offending leads may solve the problem. 

There used to be a good booklet from the FCC that did a good job of addressing how to deal with RFI problems - see if you can find that.  I believe the ARRL distributed it at one time.

73, K8AC

You didn't mention lightning ground at all, but I suggest that, if you haven't already done so, you tie your equipment chassis/cabinets (including PCs) to a common ground point at the operating desk.  I wouldn't depend on the fact that everything is grounded to the electrical service through the plug pin.  The important thing here is to minimize or eliminate the difference in potential between units when a strike hits nearby.  This isn't the only lightning ground consideration of course, but one that, if overlooked, can have unpleasant consequences.

73, Floyd - K8AC

Hard to say which might be best for you as you didn't mention anything about what modes or bands you operate.  I've owned an FT-1000MP Mark V and Icom Pro III and liked both very much for DXing on CW.  The Pro II, I believe, includes 6M as the Pro III did so there's an advantage if you have 6M interests.  The Field has a built-in power supply so there's something in its favor.  You can spend a lot of money on filters for the Yaesu, depending on the modes you want to operate, where the Pro II has no optional filters.  I believe that Inrad makes a roofing filter for both the rigs, but no need for that unless you plan on doing serious contesting on CW on crowded bands.  The Yaesu will exhibit key clicks and there are a couple of mods available to help minimize that problem.  The Pro II has a spectrum scope that is rather useful, and far better than the one in the Tentec Orion II or the Yaesu FT-5000 (housed in speaker/scope cabinet).  Both rigs are quite capable and I think the choice boils down to one of personal preference and/or which of the features I mentioned you want.

73, Floyd - K8AC

Ignoring the philosophical questions you posed, it wouldn't make much sense to me to spend the time and money rebuilding a receiver that wasn't all that good to begin with.  I built an HRB-16 from scratch not long after the article first appeared in QST.  I was able to order just about every part from the Allied Radio catalog.  Fellow hams were raving about the HRB-16 at the time and I didn't know enough to be able to form my own opinions of the design.  When I was finished, I was disappointed to discover that it wasn't a very good CW receiver - the passband was too wide for CW work, and when built as described, was too narrow for SSB.  The 100 KHz IF stages had to be detuned to arrive at a bandwidth suitable for SSB and AM.  The tuning rate with the National dial was simply too fast and the Eddystone dial was just out of the price range of most builders.  If I came across one of these receivers today, I'd replace the electrolytics and then play around with the receiver as-is. 

Anyone who believes the HBR-16 to be the zenith of receiver design  either hasn't built one, or has a very weak technical knowledge  base.   But - it was fun to build and offered a real sense of accomplishment when you finally got it to work.  By the way, I think my total cost of construction was around $135.  If I saw one today, I might offer $100 for it for nostalgic reasons.  The one you referred to on eBay looked like a very high quality build that hadn't been stored in a garage or basement for the past 45 years. 

73, Floyd - K8AC

While some logging programs offer support for both everyday logging (that means DXing for me) and contest logging, I find that a separate contest logging program is more suited to that task.  Lucky for us all, the best of both are free and well supported.  I'm talking about N1MM Logger for contesting and the DXLab Suite for everything else.  Contest logs can be easily exported from N1MM after a contest and imported into DXLab.  From an awards standpoint, I've found DXLab to be the best at tracking DXCC and WAZ.  Some other popular logging programs use a constantly changing DXCC database (maintained by an outside party) that resulted in my DXCC totals changing slightly each time the database was updated.  I think that's a wrong-headed approach - the logging program should NEVER change your logged information and certainly shouldn't do it without your knowledge or permission. 

Both N1MM and DXLab are on the complex side, but the simpler programs just don't get the job done.  I'd go back to using paper before I'd use some of the other popular programs (which I've used at length and rejected).  I've rarely, if ever, had any problems resulting from updating the DXLab suite.  I've often had problems with N1MM after a major update and not having used the product for some time.  Now, I always test the new N1MM version a week before a contest so I can get all my problems (and often they're just MY problems) resolved before the contest. 

73, Floyd - K8AC