Re: Topband: Working Europe
Wow...great offer, Brian. I'll promote your offer - if you find more of them - to other reflectors...keep us posted From: Brian Moran Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 5:47 PM To: James Rodenkirch; Top Band Contesting Subject: Re: Topband: Working Europe A few years ago, I offered to send out binocular cores for beverages/flags etc. FOR FREE to people that needed them to just get on 160. Let me see if I have enough left to make that offer again. -Brian N9ADG On Friday, July 1, 2016 4:25 PM, James Rodenkirch wrote: Mike: I would posit we - the "top band community" - need to promote increased operations -- fuggedabout "decent rx antennas" --- just get more hams operating on top band: - emphasize the Maunder minimum - emphasize the rise of efficiency of small lot antennas, as a resulting "benefit" - emphasize the benefits of a new low band rcv arrays It's about encouraging hams to explore top band, as the "minimums" descend on us.not, necessarily, encouraging "ultimate stations" --- i.e., get 'em on the band.. 71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV Guy said: >There is the issue of when people are actually listening on 160. *Sounds* dead because no one is there. ...AND THEN there is the issue of when people *can* actually listen; by that I mean, they have a decent rx antenna at their disposal. I've noticed quite a few locals (W1) with increasing interest in 160. The low-space rx antenna options out there are attracting interest. This is good. Bring on the minimum. Mike N1TA _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Working Europe
I'll attempt to get on more often in the mornings, Mike. A couple of weeks back I was on top band cw every morning for a week...never heard anyone on CW calling CQ or answering me...summer time blues were in full force...hi hi From: mstang...@comcast.net Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 8:45 AM To: James Rodenkirch Cc: Top Band Contesting Subject: Re: Topband: Working Europe I totally agree with Jim. We should use the band and not limit our QSo's to contesting or hunting DX. One of my goals in to work WAS QRP. When I have the time (and willpower) I get up around dawn to operate 160. I usually hear domestic stations calling DX. If they don't have any success I call them running QRP. Sometimes it results in a nice ragchew. We discuss DX, or the lack of it and our antennas. Get on the air. Mike N2MS - Original Message - From: James Rodenkirch To: Top Band Contesting Sent: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:22:43 - (UTC) Subject: Re: Topband: Working Europe Mike: I would posit we - the "top band community" - need to promote increased operations -- fuggedabout "decent rx antennas" --- just get more hams operating on top band: - emphasize the Maunder minimum - emphasize the rise of efficiency of small lot antennas, as a resulting "benefit" - emphasize the benefits of a new low band rcv arrays It's about encouraging hams to explore top band, as the "minimums" descend on us.not, necessarily, encouraging "ultimate stations" --- i.e., get 'em on the band.. 71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV Guy said: >There is the issue of when people are actually listening on 160. *Sounds* dead because no one is there. ...AND THEN there is the issue of when people *can* actually listen; by that I mean, they have a decent rx antenna at their disposal. I've noticed quite a few locals (W1) with increasing interest in 160. The low-space rx antenna options out there are attracting interest. This is good. Bring on the minimum. Mike N1TA _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Working Europe
I totally agree with Jim. We should use the band and not limit our QSo's to contesting or hunting DX. One of my goals in to work WAS QRP. When I have the time (and willpower) I get up around dawn to operate 160. I usually hear domestic stations calling DX. If they don't have any success I call them running QRP. Sometimes it results in a nice ragchew. We discuss DX, or the lack of it and our antennas. Get on the air. Mike N2MS - Original Message - From: James Rodenkirch To: Top Band Contesting Sent: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:22:43 - (UTC) Subject: Re: Topband: Working Europe Mike: I would posit we - the "top band community" - need to promote increased operations -- fuggedabout "decent rx antennas" --- just get more hams operating on top band: - emphasize the Maunder minimum - emphasize the rise of efficiency of small lot antennas, as a resulting "benefit" - emphasize the benefits of a new low band rcv arrays It's about encouraging hams to explore top band, as the "minimums" descend on us.not, necessarily, encouraging "ultimate stations" --- i.e., get 'em on the band.. 71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV Guy said: >There is the issue of when people are actually listening on 160. *Sounds* dead because no one is there. ...AND THEN there is the issue of when people *can* actually listen; by that I mean, they have a decent rx antenna at their disposal. I've noticed quite a few locals (W1) with increasing interest in 160. The low-space rx antenna options out there are attracting interest. This is good. Bring on the minimum. Mike N1TA _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Working Europe
Kevin: I wouldn't disagree with your rationale but...let's emphasize gettin' on top band first, improving rcv antenna(s) second. - BOGs and Beveridges may be a non-starter if space constraints are in play - DX engineering rcv antenna systems may be "out of reach" due to lack of discretionary funds + if technical awareness is low, passing on tips to install a small loop will work + simple rcv loop antenna can "help"and doesn't take up much space + there are several "160 meter antennas for a small lot" web sites that can be "the hook" to give it a try Howeverone size does not fit all.I've been a QRP participant since 2012 and use my transmit antenna for receive - I've done quite well as far as scoring and final "position" in many of the CQ and Stew Perry contests so I maintain -- get 'em interested, get 'em on the air, worry about receive antenna(s) later. Appreciate your comments "fuggedabout "decent rx antennas" Jim, I think the two things are both necessary. We need to encourage then to get on, but emphasize the need for RX antennas. Without them, 160 is a hard sell. I have a buddy that has a perfectly viable TX antenna (better than mine, LOL) who never gets on 160 meters because when he does he never hears anything interesting. I have so far not been able to convince him that RX antennas aren't optional, but a necessary part of 160 meter operating. I would have ended up the same way as my friend did before I put up my K9AY, I suspect, but fortunately my 160 meter type friends convinced me to give it a try. Hopefully, I will get him over one winter night and show him what even a simple 160 m RX antenna can do. Same thing with QRP. I've heard of many new hams whose "buddies" sold them on QRP only to drop out when the call/QSO ratio was dismal. Better to start with a 100w rig and "graduate" to QRP once they have some success and come to understand propagation, etc. I think the s ame concept applies on 160, why start them out with a situation that would frustrate even veteran 160 meter ops? 73, Kevin K3OX _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
