Topband: sunrise peak

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi I have never yet observed a sunrise peak from HS0ZIA. In fact the band 
usually goes completely dead here to EU (to my NW) about an hour before my 
local SR. 
73 Bob
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: VU2GSM webSDR use

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

 Thanks for posting this Steve - much that has been puzzling me is now clear. 
Remote SDRs, bizarre DXCC "entities", lists, skeds, FT8 etc are why I stopped 
pursuing awards a long long time ago. But to each his merry own...73
On Sunday, January 14, 2018, 11:00:15 PM GMT+7, Steve Babcock 
 wrote:  
 
 I have been "sitting" on this for a few weeks wondering if I should share this 
information, but after seeing some spots yesterday for VU2GSM on 160m, I 
decided that others may appreciate it.
I know I would. 

If you have worked Kanti, VU2GSM recently on the low bands...40, 80 or 160 you 
should be aware that he was most likely RX using a NA webSDR. The links below 
are PDF copies of email correspondence with Kanti confirming that this is 
routine for him.The emails are between both VE5UA, myself and VU2GSM. (Please 
read the email threads from the "bottom up" to be chronological.)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15n35-1wHPOdWi2Xib7QAQgxkg-hrOujs/view?usp=sharinghttps://drive.google.com/file/d/15n35-1wHPOdWi2Xib7QAQgxkg-hrOujs/view?usp=sharing
 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MdZFLJrwcBs-vHh0PNZc2DSevu3lrwcg/view?usp=sharing
 


To be clear, I do not judge Kanti for his desire to augment his rx, and do not 
think it is wrong. If he chooses to use Ham radio this way that is his choice. 
However, I myself do not wish to include a "half" QSO toward my own (personal) 
DXCC count, and perhaps others will feel the same hence this email. I also 
don't judge others that are good with such webSDR QSOs since each has his own 
goals and objectives.

Here is some background. I have been working VU2GSM frequently and with ease on 
40m in the morning and evening. He would respond almost immediately to my calls 
which seemed odd. More typical is Rakash VU2RAK who has a great signal but 
usually can't copy me, though we have QSOd a few times when conditions are 
exceptional.
While at a local ham lunch, I mentioned this, and Don VE6JY said that Kanti is 
often logged into his webSDR. The following week I copied VU2GSM on 80m in the 
evening with very light copy with my 2el Yagi and 1000' beverage (diversity rx 
with K3). He answered immediately and we had a QSO. I was suspicious. I emailed 
Don VE6JY and he confirmed that at that time Kanti was indeed logged into his 
SDR.
I deleted the QSO from my log.
This then precipitated the e-mail correspondence which I share on the attached 
links.

There is little doubt this is going on all the time, and we will never know. We 
can't undo the technology that makes webSDR possible.
There are those who who feel that this destroys the “integrity” of the DXCC. 
However, not everyone cares about DXCC.
Kanti is not a villan. He is doing nothing wrong. He is not “cheating”. In his 
email correspondence he is very open and transparent and makes it clear he 
doesn't chase DXCC, and could care less about it. Why should he?
From Kanti's perspective, using a webSDR enhances his enjoyment of the hobby 
living in RFI polluted Bangalore. For others, a "half-VU" QSO is better than 
none and they are happy. 

Like others, I spend a great deal of effort optimizing both rx and tx and 
someday when I do make the QSO with VU on 80 and hopefully 160, it will be a 
true two-way contact. The “buzz” for me is not getting the country counter in 
the log, its about knowing that my station made the contact via radio….both 
ways…all the way.

The purpose of this email is simply to inform those who have worked Kanti 
recently that it is possible/likely that your TX signal was not actually heard 
in VU.

73, de Steve ve6wz
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: HS0ZIA

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi HS0ZIA is now CL until May. I logged 294 unique calls in the last 6 weeks of 
part time activity (I do not live at the station) on 160m outside of any 
contest activity and those who seem to want another QSO every day, mostly in EU 
and AS. I spent most of the SP test listening for the big stations but the only 
NA I was able to hear or work this year was located in western USA using a full 
size 8 circle TX array. The HiZ monoband 8 circle RX array here appears to be 
working very well but I hope to improve our RX capability in the propagated 
tropical QRN soon with 2 HWF arrays that I will try to phase with each other as 
well as work in diversity with the HiZ 8 circle using the fabulous Flex 6700 
RX. Hopefully low band conditions will improve as we approach the bottom of the 
solar cycle and we can QSO more NA stations on topband this coming fall...
73 Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Looking for call history / prefill file for Stew Perry

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

 As in pre-filling the grid square?
On Tuesday, December 19, 2017, 7:48:14 AM GMT+7, Richard (Rick) Karlquist 
 wrote:  
 
 Looking for call history / prefill file for Stew Perry

73
Rick N6RK
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: FT8 - the end of 160m old school DXing? (long)

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Agree completely Steve. I was going to build a 2m EME station until I learned 
that computer to computer Qs were the only thing going on there these 
daysnot for me. 
73 Bob HS0ZIA



  From: Steve Ireland 
 To: Topband reflector  
 Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 3:50 PM
 Subject: Topband: FT8 - the end of 160m old school DXing? (long)
   
G’day

As a committed (yeah, that’s probably the right word - complete with white 
jacket that laces up at the back) topbander since 1970, I’ve never been so 
intrigued and disturbed by anything on the band as the emergence of the 
Franke-Taylor FT-8 digital mode.

For me, radio has always been all about what I audibly hear. I love all the 
sounds that radio signals make - and even miss the comforting sound of Loran 
that I grew up with around 1930kHz as a teenager in south-east England. Yeah, I 
am one sick puppy.

With the emergence of high resolution bandscopes through SDR technology over 
the last decade, I embraced that as it meant that I could find what DX stations 
I wanted to hear and contact quicker and more easily (and, in particular, 
before those stations who didn’t have the same technology). 

It was really exciting and enhanced the sensual experience of radio by being 
able to see what I could hear (and no dinosaur me, I was an SDR fan boy!).

During this period, there has also been an extraordinary development in digital 
radio modes, in particular by Joe Taylor K1JT. 

As a topbander I could see that these modes in which you ‘saw’ signals through 
the medium of computer screen or window as being a remarkable technical 
achievement, but had relatively little to do what I and the vast majority of 
active radio amateurs practiced as radio on 160m, as it had nothing to do with 
the audible.

The good thing was that I could see that good old CW and Silly Slop Bucket (you 
can see where my prejudices lie) that I like to use were still the modes of 
choice for weak signal DX topband radio contact as these fancy digital modes 
were either very slow or, if they weren’t, were not good at dealing with 
signals that faded up and down or were covered in varying amounts of noise.  

While some amateurs seemed to have lost the pleasure of actually hearing 
signals in favour of viewing them on their computer screens, I felt secure that 
these digital modes were just a minor annoyance and any serious DXer or 
DXpedition was never going to seriously going to use them, particularly on my 
first and all-time love topband, for other than experimentation.

Then, out of the blue, along comes FT-8. Joe and Steve Franke K9AN have quietly 
created the holy grail of digital operation with a mode that can have QSOs 
almost as fast as CW and SSB and over the last eight weeks 160m DXing has 
changed, perhaps for ever. 

Where once there were a few weak CW and SSB signals (I am in VK6, which is a 
looong way from anywhere with a population so we only ever hear a few), I can 
see that the busiest part of the band is 1840 kHz – FT-8 central.  On some 
nights I can see FT-8 signals on the band but no CW or SSB.

There are countries I’ve dreamed for 20 years of hearing on 160m SSB/CW (for 
example, KG4) regularly appearing on DX clusters and I can see the heap of FT-8 
activity on my band scope. 

Frustration sets in and I even downloaded the FT-8 software but, when it comes 
down to it,  I just can’t use it. My heart isn’t in it.  

My computer will be talking to someone else’s computer and there will be no 
sense of either a particular person’s way of sending CW or the tone of their 
voice (even the way some my SSB mates overdrive their transceivers is actually 
creating nostalgia in me). The human in radio has somehow been lost.

I think back to my best-ever 160m SSB contact with Pedro NP4A and I can still 
hear the sound of his voice, his accent, when he came up out of the noise and 
to my amazement answered me on my second call, with real excitement in his 
voice. Pure radio magic!

So I am sitting here, feeling depressed and wondering if overnight I have 
become a dinosaur and this is the beginning of the end of topband radio as I’ve 
always enjoyed it.  

Now, over to you other topbanders, especially those who have dabbled with FT-8 
and live in more populous areas. Has the world really turned upside down and 
what do you think the future holds? 

Vy 73

Steve, VK6VZ/G3ZZD


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

   
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Top-Beam Systems

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi does anyone know if Top-Beam Systems is still a going concern? I placed and 
paid for an order over 6 months ago and the company has not responded to my 
email inquiring about the status of my order.
Thanks 73 Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 160 4 square

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Well I ordered one about half a year ago so if it ever comes I will be able to 
compare it directly with my HiZ 8 circle array and get a definitive answer. We 
have no local noise here only propagated tropical QRN.
73 Bob HS0ZIA

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 18:56, JC wrote:   Hi Lee

Good question, The HWF has a deep null on vertical signals, propagated noise
like ground wave can be attenuated over 80 db. The tower on the center of
the WF does have little effect adding noise into the HF. Actually the WF
load the tower and lower the resonance as result.
I detained my tower in 2006 when I started to use my vertical WF, called Big
Waller Flag by Doug. I never noticed any interaction with the HWF from 2009
to 2015. I used a local BC signal as reference to detune the tower and take
polar plot diagram. 
The noise during the day on my WF is always zero. It means below the
sensitivity of my receiver system  near 1 db NF. Two year ago I had a power
line noise very close to my home, 500ft or less, I posted a video about the
contest under that kind of QRM.  With that QRM I noticed some noise during
the day. Pete N8PR come to help me to check it and we adjust the tuning
capacitor and I was able to remove 6 more db of noise fining de-tuning the
tower, Just a reference I was using 35 pf and after I removed it, 0pf) I got
-6bd of noise reduction, Whiteout the strong local QRM I was not able to
notice it before. 

Detuning the tower can bring -20 to -30 db  noise re-radiation, but
re-radiation is not zero, Some HF antennas sharing the same mast with a WF
can interact with the WF on the same frequency, balance is the name of the
game. Unbalanced loops cannot cancel 100% of the noise, but the interaction
in most case are not severe with HF beam and good performance is expected in
most installations. However Inverted V and re-radiate almost 2 s units of
noise and must be detuned open fiscally the wires near the coaxial feed line
or balun.

The advantage of a horizontal antenna besides noise is the horizontal
propagation on low bands, Refraction is more intense on 160m than 40m, it
means the signal bent more on the topband, as a result the path for
horizontal signal is not the same as vertical polarized signals, It is
common to see signals from deep Asia, Nodir as example EY8MM signal direct
is 10 degree here but several times I can hear only between 60 and 90 degree
when there is no copy from 10 degree. 

Long path or really SSW SSE propagation is another propagation mechanist
that brings the signal horizontal most of the time. On 80m I can hear south
Asia HS0 XU 9M2 almost every day during the DX season, 160 is very common
SSE SSW as well. I can compare the difference with my Vertical WF and also
with other folks in Florida , like Doug NX4D that's uses only vertical pol,
during 2010 when the SSE SSW was very strong I could hear XU7ACY 80% is the
time and Doug only 5 % of the time.

Vertical signals are always strong, as well the noise. Sometimes there are
not horizontal signals as well. However I manage to work almost  DX
expeditions like VK0,E31,H40,FT4, 3D0A, ET, VP8's,EP FT5ZM, 9M0 , I missed
only H44 due QRN. I was not able to work YB, BY  JT XX9 XV XW and few others
SSE/SSW path on 160m, 80m is so easy SSE SSW that signals can be hear 2
hours after sunrise, and sometime 2 hours before sunset.

Regards
JC
N4IS



-Original Message-
From: Lee STRAHAN [mailto:k7...@msn.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 2:03 AM
To: JC ; 'GaryK9GS' ; 'Greg'
; 'topband' 
Subject: RE: Topband: 160 4 square

 Hello All
    JC, Greg knows quite a bit about receiving on 160 meters as he has had a
Hi-Z 8 element array for some years now. Actually he has done quite well
with it. Especially when he was neighbors with our dear departed friend N4NN
in Florida.
  JC, I have a question. If the Waller flag does not respond to vertical
signals why do you have to detune your vertical tower? The second part of my
question is if you do not have any local power line noises covering vertical
signals what advantage would a horizontal RX antenna be?

Lee    K7TJR

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of JC
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2017 8:05 PM
To: 'GaryK9GS' ; 'Greg' ; 'topband'

Subject: Re: Topband: 160 4 square

HI Greg

You need to detune the tower and the 4 square will work fine. But if you
want to have a good RX you need a Horizontal Waller Flag at 140ft or more.

You can  see the two webinars about Waller Flag at  www.wwrof.org archives

http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/n4is-waller-flag-construction/

http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/high-performance-rx-antennas-for-a-small-lo
t/

Doug NX4D 160m DXCC is # 304 confirmed, from a 1/5 acre lot, I started 3
years later with a Waller Flag and am at 

Re: Topband: Relocation to mountainous area

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi Mark
Put down as many non resonant ground or elevated radials as you can. You can do 
nothing about the far field pseudo Brewster angle. The Hi Z manual states the 
recommended deviation in element elevation but I suspect it will work OK. 73  GL

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 9:51, Mark Lunday wrote:   My 
current QTH in the Piedmont of Central NC, although not ideal for propagation, 
has some advantages.  I have a 1.4 wave inverted L on 160 plus a HiZ 
four-square receiving array.  These have served me well.  Although I am not a 
big-gun, it is quiet here and I have had my share of DX in the past 7 years.  
Soil is moist clay, terrain flat.

I am preparing to relocate to the western part of NC.  Mountains (well, hills 
compared to Western USA).  I understand the importance of propagation and 
terrain, and I have been following Rich/KY6R and his adventures.  I have also 
looked at HFTA for more info.

My question is this: the soil will be less conductive at my new QTH.  But what 
about the near field reflections and pseudo-brewster angle?  Sure, there's 
nothing I can do about that...just try to put down some radials to minimize 
near-field loss.  But what can I reasonably expect?  What have others 
experienced/attempted and achieved success with?  I am looking to save myself 
some time and frustration by avoiding those approaches which will produce 
less-than-optimum results.

I am thinking elevated radials for the inverted L, due to poor soil conditions. 
 Should I run those at two per band if I want to use the inverted L as 
multi-band?  How should I orient them?  How do I prevent common-mode coming 
back through the remote coupler?

Will the HiZ array be useful?  What if it's not located on perfectly flat 
terrain?

Thanks in advance.

Mark Lunday, WD4ELG
Greensboro, NC  FM06be
wd4...@arrl.net
http://wd4elg.blogspot.com
SKCC #16439  FISTS #17972



_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: tower vertical

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi I have decided to put up a 40m tower to use as a transmitting vertical for 
1.8mHz out away from in between our other towers and where I can run 1/4 wave 
radials all the way around, and will probably use locally available 12" steel 
sections with a conical-type pin base. I would like to insulate the base in 
order to make it easier to detune on receive (this will be located in the exact 
center of our 8 circle rx arrays). Has anyone used HDPE or similar to make a 
homebrew base insulator for a tower monopole? Any other comments about the need 
for a base insulator also welcome.
73 Bob HS0ZIA

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 60' or 70' spacing on Hi-Z 4/8 element RX array

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi Gary
We plan to set up ours with 60' spacing for best 40m performance, and with just 
10' elements.. When it is done we will be able to compare the performance on 80 
and 160 with our monoband 8 circles. I agree that power gain is not important, 
particularly in our high QRN environment. AFAIK 70' spacing is not an option 
however I could be wrong. We hope to have it done before the CW test because we 
lost our 80m 8 circle relay box due to water damage and a replacement won't be 
ready in time so we should have some info for you soon...73 Bob HS0ZIA
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 17:29, StellarCAT wrote:   I 
just purchased a HiZ 8 element array ... and am trying to decide which way I 
want to go. I want a bit better performance on 40 than the standard 80’ spacing 
provides (lobes are quite high angled) ... and going down to 70’ improves 40 a 
good bit – going to 60’ even more so (and improves, from an RDF standpoint, 
both 160 and 80!) ... I’ve modeled all conditions. I see the Total power 
however suffers a good bit when going down in size due to lost ‘aperture’ 
effect ... on 160 meters going from 80/20 (height of vertical) down to 70’/20 
is a –3db loss in total power ... going to a 60’/20 is –6.6db. Lee assures me 
that this won’t have any real effect here unless my ... if I understand him 
correctly, local noise is very low – which it isn’t it turns out ... and I was 
wondering how others using smaller spacing, either 60’ or 70’, like the overall 
performance on 160 especially as well as 80? 

thanks for your time,

Gary 
K9RX

[this is not to second guess Lee, this is rather just a ‘comfort’ request ... I 
am still at a bit of a loss when he says it will be a loss of –6.6db going from 
80 to 60 foot and yet I won’t notice the difference! Not sure what the real 
world implications of that are in the headphones. This will be using their new 
Plus6 preamps]
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: IC7300 Hack

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

So it would appear. TKS!

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:30, Victor Goncharsky via 
Topband<topband@contesting.com> wrote:   
http://radioaficion.com/cms/ic-7300-wide-band-modification/  
hope this helps


>Среда,  7 сентября 2016, 6:11 +03:00 от Bob Kupps via Topband 
><topband@contesting.com>:
>
>Hi guys the Thai NBTC has allowed a special factory version of the IC 7300 
>with 6m tx disabled to be legalized for use in HS (the first modern radio in 
>decades) but I just discovered that this version also has the bottom 10 kHz of 
>160 disabled tx as well per EU I guess. Anyone know if it is possible to 
>reopen this segment in the field? We only have the first 25 kHz as it is...
>TNX 73 Bob HS0ZIA
>
>Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>_
>Topband Reflector Archives -  http://www.contesting.com/_topband


-- 
73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E.
UARL Technical and VHF Committies
DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone)
DXCC card checker (160 meters).
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: IC7300 Hack

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi guys the Thai NBTC has allowed a special factory version of the IC 7300 with 
6m tx disabled to be legalized for use in HS (the first modern radio in 
decades) but I just discovered that this version also has the bottom 10 kHz of 
160 disabled tx as well per EU I guess. Anyone know if it is possible to reopen 
this segment in the field? We only have the first 25 kHz as it is...
TNX 73 Bob HS0ZIA

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: HiZ 8 circle array 1st impression

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi we finally got our HiZ 80 and 160m arrays up and running and the performance 
appears to be as advertised. We used 6m guyed steel tubes mounted on PVC 
insulators for the 160m elements and 3m wires inside PVC for the concentric 80m 
array. Each element has a 1m copper clad ground rod in good soil. The base 
preamps are inside plastic pop bottles and the feed lines are inside PVC tubing 
for rodent protection. The rest of the hardware sits in a plastic storage bin 
at the center on top of the big rolls of delay cable. We used the wireless 
remotes for control and voltage injectors for power that required 22 VDC at the 
shack through 100m of RG6 feed line. We ended up not using the included feed 
line preamps due to our outrageous noise levels but did use a band or low pass 
filter at the antenna output and the supplied impedance transformers at the 
shack.
The closest element is about a half wave from the transmit vertical that we did 
not detune after hearing no change in noise levels with it open or grounded. 
HS0ZEE is a few dozen wavelengths away but in between two main directions; S9 
from the front 2 and S4 off the back 2 directions was the only objective test I 
could really make. Most DX signals in the Stew could not be heard past one 
direction either side of peak.

I haven't used the 80m array much yet but its performance appears to be roughly 
on a par with our 3 el yagi. I am hoping to see an improvement since the yagi 
is up 3/4 wave and so has a very strong high angle second lobe absent on the 
vertical array, and a wider beam width. We will see...it's sure easy to check 
the path compared against a 1/2 RPM beam anyway and it will be interesting to 
try them in diversity.
Listening on either of these arrays on a second K3 while transmitting on the 
160 vertical was impossible due to overload, even cross band although maybe 
because we only have a high pass filter for the 80m array. We also have issues 
with computer and monitor noise getting into the rx path on this system. 
HS0ZKX will be operating the station 4 weeks from now in the CQ 160 so we hope 
to see you in the log. 
73 and good DX in 2016 Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: safely sharing an RX antenna

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi I was thinking about using a 3dB splitter and tuning the band with our 
second K3 using our HiZ monoband 8 circle while we were calling CQ in the Stew. 
The center of the array is located 105 meters from the xmit vertical, uses 20' 
elements, the included preamp and 100m of RG6 transmission line. 
Could dangerously high signal levels appear at the unmuted second radio antenna 
terminal? What about if the second radio is inadvertently tuned to the xmit 
frequency? It would seem impossible if the external antenna preamps are not 
damaged...but I'm still a 1R op so I better ask first!
TU 73 Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: HS0ZIA tonights noise levels

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

On a K3/P3 pan display 2 kHz wide 8:30pm LT
BAND           ANT                        NF
160          XMIT VERT                 -9580            3 el yagi @ 60m         
 -11040            3 el yagi stack             -11020            5 el yagi 
stack             -12515                  "                            -13510   
               "                            -135
Peter HS0ZKX and I will be active in the W1BB test using about 9 dB of 
amplitude processing into our 30m top loaded vertical and our new HiZ 8 circle 
RX ant - hope to work you...73 Bob
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Noise levels on 160

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

My daytime noise level from the 160m xmit vertical using your settings is -100 
dBm. The S meter on the K3 reads S7 (absolute)... 
73 Bob HS0ZIA
  From: Dave Olean 
 To: topband@contesting.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2015 3:30 AM
 Subject: Re: Topband: Noise levels on 160
   
I am somewhat new to 160 meters. I converted an old VHF tower at my house to 
a 160 M 1/4 wave radiator in late 2013 and have been active since then on a 
casual basis. Recently I started showing symptoms of the 160 Disease, and 
have been looking for ways to improve things. The XYL has nixed anything big 
(no more towers) so I am stuck with a single radiator, but I can still work 
on the receiving side. I just built up an Africa beverage (100 degree az) 
and was happy with the noise level on that antenna. It seems extremely low 
and about as good as my Europe beverage. Recently, I tried measuring each 
beverage and the vertical antenna to nail down the noise floor using my K3 
and P3 panadaptor. I wonder if these numbers are good and how they compare 
with other setups.  For the record, I set the P3 at the narrowest span, 2 
kHz. I used the preamp ON for the beverages and the preamp off for the 
vertical. I recorded these levels on late Saturday evening during the ARRL 
160 contest, and then again, the following Monday during the day.  I 
recorded the following numbers...

ANTENNA          NOISE LVL    DAYTIME
JA  330 deg            -133                -138
West 270 deg        -125                -130
SW  220 deg          -125                -132
Africa 100 deg        -136                -144
Europe  45 deg        -138                -142
Vertical Antenna      -115                -123

All measurements were taken with the P3 panadaptor set at 2 kHz span. That 
is important. K3 preamp is ON.  These numbers taken at night are a moving 
target. The noise can vary from hour to hour. I looked across the 2 kHz span 
of the P3 and averaged what I saw. I seem to hear reasonably well with the 
vertical, and in the past used it quite often. Now that I have a few 
beverages, I hardly ever listen on the vertical anymore. Both the 220 and 
270 degree beverages suffer from power line noise and are 10 dB noisier than 
the wires aimed East.  I am thinking about maybe nulling out the power line 
noise. I am sure that noise is killing my receive.
    I guess I should make a real measurement of my noise floor at a 
specified bandwidth of the receiver. That would require more work! I took 
the easy way and set the P3 at minimum span and looked at the "grass level". 
What numbers do others see on 160?
    I live in a rural area in Maine near the NH border.  I have a neighbor 
across the street and another two about 1000 to 1200 ft away. I think my 
location is pretty quiet, but I do often see interference that comes and 
goes. I always hear two electric fences. One is a single snap every second 
or so. The other is a pulsing burst of noise that lasts maybe 300 ms that 
repeats every second or so. There is also a rather broad drifting signal to 
my NE that is about 20 kHz wide and drifts around 1820 kHz. It is about 5 dB 
above the normal noise. I suspect it is a mile away, but have not found it 
yet.

Dave K1WHS

_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


 
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Why do rodents eat coax?

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi Dave
I am currently rebuilding the RX antennas after rodents chewed meter-long 
sections of flooded RG6 away to the center wire before it was even operational. 
Now putting all the cables into PVC pipe laying on top of the ground -  over 
300 meters of flanged pipe sliding over the cables one section at a time...
73 GL Bob HS0ZIA
  From: Dave Olean 
 To: topband@contesting.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 2:38 AM
 Subject: Topband: Why do rodents eat coax?
   
I was transmitting on 160 last week, and after calling a CQ I noted that the 
background noise from one of my beverages dropped to almost nothing. Something 
obviously broke right then. All checks pointed to something external to the 
shack. I finally got out in the woods and checked the antenna system. All 
looked great. I used my new SARK-110 vector network analyzer and saw very 
believable results when connected to my 1100 ft long Europe beverage: about 75 
ohms impedance and a VSWR that fluctuated between 1.5 and maybe 1.8:1 across 
the freq range. I double checked the entire beverage run for shorts or 
anomalies, and even took apart the termination box to make sure all was OK. The 
last thing left was the 1000 ft run of flooded RG-6 coax. I had run the cable 
on the ground back to the house about 2 years ago. It was mostly invisible now, 
being covered with leaves and moss etc etc. A TDR check showed gross "bad" 
things and a VOM test across the center pin to ground showed a resista
 nce of 35 ohms while the far end was terminated in a 75 ohm load. Obviously 
the cable was compromised. I made a quick inspection and found a few spots 
where small animals had chewed on the coax enough to break through the outer 
plastic covering and into the braid and aluminum foil shield. Water and gunk 
have caused a low resistance between center pin and the shield.
    What are my options now? I don't want to spend another $150 for another 
roll of coax just so a squirrel can feast on the PVC. Should I route the coax 
in the air and away from small mouths? That is one option.  It seems that 
digging a 1000 ft trench thru the woods and burying it would work, but it would 
be an awful big chore for a 70 year old doofus. I doubt that I could manage 
that. If I run the coax above ground, I run the risk of picking up noise etc. I 
also worry about falling limbs and old dead trees falling on it. With a few 
beverages in the woods, I can't afford to spend $150 each time an animal feasts 
on it. I need to do something different! 
    Incidentally, the beverage still has great directivity, but signals are 
very weak with the bad cable. It is barely useable now as a result.
73
Dave K1WHS
 
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: vertical balun

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi we have a 30m top loaded monopole with the feed point about 2m above a large 
ground radial field. Right now we are feeding it through a 4:1 balun (not a 
unun) with 12.5 ohms on the balanced side, and the SWR is 1.4 with no matching 
network. Is this balun acting as a common mode choke? Do we even need a choke? 
Would an unun be better?

Thanks 73 Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Snap and seal F connectors

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi unfortunately our rx array was destroyed by rodents chewing away the RG6 
cable so It's going to need rebuilding with PVC conduit. Does anyone know if 
snap and seal F connectors can be re-used?

TIA Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Speculating via Stew posted scores

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

LOL here's another # for your analysis - our Q/pt = 12
Maybe it just means there's nobody on anywhere close to you
73 Bob HS0ZIA
  From: James Rodenkirch rodenkirch_...@msn.com
 To: Top Band Contesting topband@contesting.com 
 Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 5:56 PM
 Subject: Topband: Speculating via Stew posted scores
   
 Is there a way via Stew results to measure the concentration of Qs... with 
relation to the distance of the Q?

For example, looking over the scores posed at the 3830 web site one finds 
N9FT's QSOs to point ratio is 3 pts. while K5GO has a ratio of 8.1.
 
On the surface, one would draw the conclusion.. that K5GOs Qs were farther 
away, suggesting an antenna system geared to lower elevation of radiation while 
N9FT's antenna may favor shorter hauls?
 
Also, propagation and local noise enter into the discussion as welland, 
can't discount more QRP Qs for K5GO, perhaps.  

My QRP friend, WC7S, and I consider all of this one of the joys of working the 
Stew...one can draw/speculate loose conclusions from the scores... sorta. Then 
one goes to QRZ.com to see f the stations of interest list equipment and 
antennas and them MORE speculation crops up  all of this should be 
undertaken during happy hour!
 
72 to all, Jim Rodenkirch  K9JWV  
 
                         
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


  
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: 9 kHz heterodyne BCI

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Hi we just got QRV on 160 right before the SP and noticed AM BCI at 1800 kHz 
and every 9 kHZ  up from there. Since 9 kHz is the BC channel spacing here I 
suspect two adjacent stations are mixing. Somehow somewhere. Maybe here in my 
station, one of the BC stations or somewhere else?
Unfortunately our new HiZ 4/8 array was rendered inop before we could finish it 
due to rodents chewing away sections of the feedlines. We rigged up 2 2-way one 
wave Beverages and these heterodynes were the same strength from all 4 
directions on them. Opening our tx vertical had no effect.
Anyone know the likely cause/cure for these observations?
TIA 73 Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Rig Question

[Bob Kupps via Topband]

Well I have one of the earlier K3s ~#1000, that was never modified, never had a 
software upgrade and got quite a few unsolicited reports of good audio, the few 
times I ever went on SSB outside a contest. Using the Heil headset they sell 
with it. It's finally gone back to the factory since for all the hardware and 
software upgrades but I haven't put it back on the air yet. Love the radio.
73 Bob HS0ZIA
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: DXCC Desk?

[Bob Kupps]

Yeah DXCC stopped being interesting for me back when the the UN HQ building in 
NYC was declared to be a country; maybe it isn't even on the list anymore I 
haven't checked for decades...



On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 4:02 AM, Herb Schoenbohm he...@vitelcom.net 
wrote:
 
Gents... Amateur radio is supposed to be devoid of politics as much as 
possible. but the more you dig the worse it gets.  I once attended an 
IARU Region II meeting in Jamaica and was amazed by all the wheeling and 
dealing going on with DXCC accreditation at the core. That was nearly 50 
years ago and it seems not much has changed.  I had even heard that the 
ops at 706T where banned from working any 4X4's but the sharp ops with a 
wink and a nod just logged VX4*** rather than mentioning anything on the 
air. Would the ARRL DXCC Desk discredit a single 4X4 in need of this 
one?  I sort of doubt it. At times there are bona fide reasons to make 
exception.  Also the creation of private DX preserves by the ARRL for 
certain Radio Societies is legend. In fact KP5 (Desecheo) should never 
have been granted DXCC status when Mona Island which permits visitors 
was refused.  Additionally Water Island, which KP2A fought for for 
years, was clearly not part of the USVI and until recently administered 
solely by the U.S. Department of interior.  But so the story goes that 
hams in Puerto Rico had decided to join the IARU as a distinct and 
unique entity apart from the U.S. and the creation of a private DXCC 
location was the price the ARRL paid to halt those plans.  The DXCC 
rules have been anything but consistant and have been bent and twisted 
like a heavily gerrymander congressional district to purposely include 
or exclude  voters of certain just to satisfy some.


Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ






On 11/18/2013 3:47 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

 Len,

 Why, you might ask after all this suffering, is that this nation
 still is not recognazid as a separate entity to this very small
 world  of the global assembly that Ham radio really is?

 Ask the Serbs and Russians why they blocked Kosovar membership in the
 UN and prevented ITU from assigning a callsign block, dialing prefix
 and internet TLD?  If the Serbs and Russians recognize the Palestine
 they could certainly allow Kosovo similar international privileges.

 Kosovo is recognized by the US as an independent state (see:
 http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm) and like the EU the US
 maintains diplomatic relations with Kosovo.  Unfortunately, the
 DXCC Rules (see: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/DXCC/DXCC%20Rules.pdf)
 do not include the US DOS Independent States in the World listing as
 a qualifying option for a Political (Rule 1) Entity.

 73,

    ... Joe, W4TV



_
Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: HS0ZKX QRV

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I just heard from Peter HS0ZKX now QRV with 500W to a vertical and a couple 
of reversible beverages, and he reports top band is open to the East coast 
around 1200Z. And he's an easy QSL! GL 73
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: arriving wave angle

[Bob Kupps]

Hi Bob thanks for the reply. My question wasn't as clear as it could have been 
so let me try again. Say we have 2 stations with isotropic transmitting 
antennas and receiving antennas with good angular discrimination at each end of 
a certain path. VOACAP predicts that X% of the openings will be at 1 degree, X% 
at 2 degrees etc. My question is - when a path is open at an angle of say 14 
degrees does anyone have an idea what the angular variation in signal strength 
might be around the peak wave angle being propagated at that time? 

73 Bob

Hi Bob
I haven't seen any answers from the experts, so I'll give it a try.
 or is that the angle at which a theoretical elevation sampling antenna
 would receive the highest strength signal?
Yes,and I think that:

You can think of the transmitted signal as having many rays above and
below the maximum angle of the lobe, all in phase.  So the outgoing signal
has that angular width.  Each of those rays enters the ionosphere at a
slightly different point, so will refract differently; probably optimum
communication will occur if the receiving antenna has a similar lobe,
although some of the signal will miss the receiving site altogether.
If the transmitted lobe is angularly narrow, and it arrives at the
receiving location, the incoming lobe will appear to be narrow.  If the
transmitted signal has broad angular width, there is a better chance of some
of it arriving at the receiving location, but the strength will be less than
in the case of matching angular lobes.
This is complicated by the probability of the signal being dispersed
(spread) during passage through the ionosphere (broadening the emerging
lobe) , by the effect of non-symmetrical ducts, and by the effect of
multiple hops.

All this is intuitive logic, and although it is a very interesting
question, there are so many variables that the advantage/disadvantage of
wide or narrow lobes at Tx or Rx changes with every individual case.  You
have to decide whether you want very good strength from the few signals that
arrive, or so-so strength from a greater number of signals.    Same goes for
the Tx lobe;  A wide angular lobe will get to more distances, but at the
expense of lesser strength at any given spot.

73
Bob VE7BS
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: Fw: Are stacked verticals feasible?

[Bob Kupps]

Say Paul I am going to try the same setup except ground the 80m vertical as a 
close (5') coupled radiator and see what the feed impedance of the 160 vertical 
is on 80. It models well...

On 09/06/2013 09:26 AM, ZR wrote:
 I would think that at 6-12' spacing from the tower it would minimize 
 interaction on 160 or 80?

I don't know, Carl. I'll leave it to the experts. What I do know is 
I have made several attempts to erect a vertical for 80 meters near 
my 160 meter tower, using the same radial system. At 10 foot spacing 
from the tower, the base resistance of an 80 meter quarter wave 
vertical was less than 5 ohms. That to me suggests significant 
interaction with the tower. At 5 foot spacing the base resistance 
was less than 2 ohms! I don't have the data handy but I seem to 
recall having to adjust the length considerably from a quarter 
wavelength to cancel a reactive component.

73,
Paul N1BUG
_
Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: 160 meter activity

[Bob Kupps]

Well I applaud your making the effort at giving an honest report. It seems to 
me that 599 is reported far too casually these days and I certainly attempt to 
give honest reports even in a (non contest) pile up. Although R reports are 
fairly easy - I give 3 if I'm struggling, 4 if I have to pay attention and 5 if 
it's easy. But S reports, especially on the low bands where we are often using 
preamps, attenuators or both make an objective report a bit tougher.

The other night I was chatting with my pal W6YA on 20. My 100 watts to a 5/5 
stack always gets a better report on his K3 than his 1500W to a 4 el gets on my 
K3 until he finally said that he always uses his preamp on the high bands 
because the K3 S meter is factory calibrated with the preamp on, and he like I 
strive to give meaningful reports.

Anyway, I would be interested in how other ops (who care) try to give 
meaningful reports - objective vs subjective. Also my compliments to N4ZR and 
the RBN guys who are providing a great service to the ham DX community in this 
regard.

73 Bob HS0ZIA



 From: John Harden jh...@bellsouth.net
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 9:17 PM
Subject: Topband: 160 meter activity
 

160 is really picking up here.

I called CQ on 1824.5 this morning here in Atlanta at 1030 Z. VK3ZL came 
back to me with a 599 report and I gave him an honest 579. The band has 
been open for some time at this QTH. However, the RX antenna is the Hi-Z 
4-8 PRO, 8 vertical array (with 4 antennas active at any time). No doubt 
I hear signals others cannot hear. I do HIGHLY recommend it..

73,

John, W4NU
_
Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Tree losses....

[Bob Kupps]

Very nice study and IMO neither small nor inelegant. Thanks


From: Roger Parsons ve...@yahoo.com
To: Topband topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2013 7:29 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: Tree losses


I just did a small and inelegant piece of modelling with EZNEC.

I took a wire 128' vertical, and it showed a gain of about 1.7dBi over a 
particular ground. 


Keeping everything else the same, I introduced a 'tree' 3ft away from it, with 
no branches, exactly parallel, also 128' high and initially with zero 
resistance. This changed the gain to 2.0 dBi with a 0.7 dB front to back ratio.

I then introduced series resistances at 20 equally spaced points in the 'tree', 
and looked at the effect of varying these.

With 1R resistances (20R total) gain was about 0.6dBi and 0.6dB f/b.
With 2R resistances (40R total) gain was about 0dBi and 0.5 dB f/b.
With 3R resistances (60R total) gain was about -0.1dBi and 0.3 dB f/b (the 
minimum gain modelled)


and so on, until with 10R resistances (200R total) gain was about 0.7dBi and 
0.1 dB f/b

and so on again, until with 100R resistances (2000R total) gain was back to 
1.7dBi and 0dB f/b.

Of course this is highly unrealistic in many respects, but I would be amazed if 
any 128' high tree under any conditions of sap would have a total end to end 
resistance of only 2000R.  And bear in mind that this is a self resonant tree 
selected to couple very strongly indeed to the main radiator.

I then repeated the process with a non-resonant tree only 64' in height. No 
value of series resistances produced even 0.01 dB change in gain. (Of course at 
this point the wire vertical was being supported by an invisible sky hook.) 

I do believe that trees can affect things in at least two ways - as others have 
said, high voltage points adjacent to foliages can definitely cause losses - 
and these are very hard to quantify. My own past experience with tree supported 
inverted L and T antennas has been that quite small changes in the position of 
the element can cause big changes in feed impedances - but that is not quite 
the same thing at all.

73 Roger
VE3ZI
_
Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: (no subject)

[Bob Kupps]

How close are the trees to the verticals Carl?



 From: Carl Jonsson carl.jonss...@gmail.com
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 3:21 PM
Subject: Topband: (no subject)
 

Every autumn (when the fluid is leaving the trees) and every spring (when
the fluid is coming up again) I have to go out and adjust the phasing in my
2 el phased vertical for 160m. So some kind of effect does high trees have
on the antenna.
73 SM6CPY
_
Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Tree conductivity

[Bob Kupps]

Yes I am no doubt in that group. So do good conductors in the near field 
re-radiate most of the coupled energy (eg a parasitic element) while poor 
conductors dissipate it as heat? I would think poor conductors or lossy 
dielectrics like trees would not couple much energy from the field, whether 
they re-radiate it or dissipate it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tIZUhu21sQ


73 bob


 

What we have is an inability to understand the difference between very good 
conductors, poor conductors,  and or lossy dielectrics. We'd have a difficult 
time powering something through saltwater conductors, or having resonance 
effects with saltwater jets at low frequencies. At the same time, even crummy 
soil has a profound effect on EM fields and other things when cross sectional 
area is large enough.

There is a danger that people will not understand the big picture, and write 
more seawater antenna or tree antenna articles.

73 Tom
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: Signal attenuation from foliage near 160m antenna

[Bob Kupps]

Interesting study which suggests not placing a 160m vertical closer than 12' to 
a tree, if feasible. There are certainly lots of vertical radiators working 
well amongst towers. We won FD 4 years in a row using 5 watts to a random 
vertical wire hoisted up the aluminum mast of a sailboat amongst all sorts of 
other vertical rigging wires, but like 99.99% of all hams, have no way to 
conduct a meaningful comparison.
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Lightning QRN season?

[Bob Kupps]

Soon if you are in North America, where the inter tropical convergence zone is 
near its closest approach and beginning to move south.

Be happy you don't have to receive in the tropics. The inverted vee here at 40m 
has been repaired (failure of new coax center conductor) and the 8 circle rx 
elements are up. I want to observe the paddy for flooding before I put the 
preamps out there but plan to be QRV on top band by the fall season.

73 Bob HS0ZIA


 From: Mike Waters mikew...@gmail.com
To: topband topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 11:26 AM
Subject: Topband: Lightning QRN season?
 

Anyone have a guesstimate as to when the QRN will begin letting up a
little on 160?

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
_
Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: Out of phase verticals

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I am installing an 8 way rx array and will be taking down the nearby 
unfinished xmit 4 square. I plan to relocate one of these tx verticals about 
100m from the nearest rx element as an omni tx ant. After thinking about it I 
have room to put another one back up too, anywhere from about 130-160' apart in 
the direction of EU and VK/ZL from here, but maybe 10m closer to the rx array. 
On modeling, this array fed out of phase looked like I could get 3 dB tx gain 
in those directions, a 4 deg elevation angle drop plus the null would be facing 
the rx array (if it works that way in the near field). Since this is solely a 
tx ant it looks easy to feed with 1/4 and 3/4 lines. The radiators are 10 X 
100' aluminum tower sections with a 40' tubing T hat.
Does anyone have any experience with out-of-phase arrays? How significant are 
differences in current return efficiency between the 2 elements due to 
different ground conditions (eg one being flooded the other dry) or different 
radial field dimensions in an array of this type? Really worth doing??
TIA and 73 Bob HS0ZIA
All good topband ops know how to put up a beverage at night.
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: HS0ZEE

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I'm afraid that Sheridon has a huge local QRN problem at his suburban QTH, 
although he told me the other day that he now has some type of noise cancelling 
device that has improved things somewhat. I have a HiZ RX 8 circle and hope to 
have it set up by next winter, but doubt I will be QRO like most of the others 
here who can get out better than they can receive on all bands. 73 and GL.
 
Bob HS0ZIA

--- On Fri, 2/1/13, Mike Greenway k...@bellsouth.net wrote:


From: Mike Greenway k...@bellsouth.net
Subject: Topband: HS0ZEE
To: TOPBAND TOPBAND@CONTESTING.COM
Date: Friday, February 1, 2013, 5:53 AM


Anyone on the East coast had any luck working HS0ZEE on Top?  I have listened 
to him often on 30 M and he seems to have some trouble hearing and wondered if 
his RX was any better on Top.  Any details appreciated if a QSO was made.  73 
Mike K4PI
_
Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: QRP/Poor antenna stations ARRL160

[Bob Kupps]

Outstanding idea Dave!  Set a minimum number of QSOs/Watt to qualify and the 
Cuthbert Cup will become a coveted award.



 From: DAVID CUTHBERT telegraph...@gmail.com
To: ZR z...@jeremy.mv.com 
Cc: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 4, 2012 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: QRP/Poor antenna stations ARRL160
 
Carl, Tree and all the rest I find it fascinating how just about any piece
of random metal and low power will yield top band contacts.

For the Stew Perry I propose an award for *lamest antenna* or something
to that effect. I'll sponsor the plaque if some such award becomes part of
the Stew.

     Dave WX7G
___
Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
___
Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com

Topband: corona noise

[Bob Kupps]

Hi would a static discharge wick mounted on the lightning rod be helpful? They 
seem to work well for aircraft AM radios.
___
Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com

Topband: feed choke

[Bob Kupps]

Hi thanks for all the replies I have decided to put the dipole up at the 45m 
level.  One more question - I will run the feed line up inside the tower so is 
a choke still needed at the feed point? Thanks and hope to be QRV on 160 for 
the WW CW.
___
Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com

Topband: ground characteristics

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I have no idea if it is a fact but on page 9-18 in ON4UNs book it is stated 
without any further explanation - 

It is impossible to make a direct measurement of ground characteristics.
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: intersecting ground radials

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I would like to place monopoles for 160 and 80m bands 30m apart causing 
their ground radials to intersect. The radials are #20 bare copperweld (since I 
happen to have 4000m) that would be laid out on top of the soil before turf was 
placed on top. These antennas would be used for transmitting only and never at 
the same time. Is it necessary to solder the intersecting wires together where 
they cross for any reason like they recommend for phased arrays? Naturally I 
hope not...

TIA  73 Bob
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Re: Topband: RX epiphany?

[Bob Kupps]

Hi thanks to all for the replies. Sorry I wasn't clear my QTH is northern 
Thailand. The point I was trying to make is that even though it is a noisy part 
of the season it is apparently less noisy at the European latitudes. 
Unfortunately I don't have enough land to put up a 160m Xmit 4 square and an RX 
array, it will have to be one or the other



 
Bob--  


Just curious -- How is your reception around sunrise, when most of the 
thunderstorms in the Americas are in daylight, and therefore their QRN probably 
isn't reaching you?  


Art, KB3FJO
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Re: Topband: RX epiphany?

[Bob Kupps]

Hey Dave! (he was my first QSO as a novice 43 years ago) I am located at 20 
degrees N. Actually my choice is between a 160m Xmit 4 square and concentric 
80/160m 8 circle RX arrays.



 From: DAVID CUTHBERT telegraph...@gmail.com
To: donov...@starpower.net 
Cc: Bob Kupps n...@yahoo.com; topband topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: RX epiphany?
 

Bob,

with US and European stations operating top band during the winter only you 
will only work them during your summer. So, you will always be subject to 
higher noise at your end of the path.

   Dave


On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:12 PM, donov...@starpower.net wrote:

Bob,

If you have a choice of one or the other the choice is easy: the transmit 
4-square as an excellent transmit array as well as an excellent receive array.

Good luck!

73
Frank
W3LPL

 Original message 
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:56:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Kupps n...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Topband: RX epiphany?
Cc: topband topband@contesting.com

Hi thanks to all for the replies. Sorry I wasn't clear my QTH is northern 
Thailand. The point I was trying to make is that even though it is a noisy 
part of the season it is apparently less noisy at the European latitudes. 
Unfortunately I don't have enough land to put up a 160m Xmit 4 square and an 
RX array, it will have to be one or the other




Bob-- 


Just curious -- How is your reception around sunrise, when most of the 
thunderstorms in the Americas are in daylight, and therefore their QRN 
probably isn't reaching you? 


Art, KB3FJO
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: RX epiphany?

[Bob Kupps]

Hi well I've only been QRV since June here but the QRN level seems noticeably 
worse than my previous QTH in the W6 desert even though my current QTH is also 
quiet, limited by only propagated QRN. Many times I cannot copy stations 
answering my CQ on 80 so it either means they are running less than my 99W 
(unlikely) or else they have a lower RX noise floor than I do, either due to 
lower ambient levels or a more directive RX antenna (although one of the local 
big guns claims that observations on the high bands going back 20 years show HS 
consistently getting out better than we can hear, and has even mapped out a 
region where this one-way propagation seems to occur. I happen to think that 
electromagnetic waves should behave the same way in antennas, the ionosphere 
and the ground regardless of whether they are being transmitted or received but 
we all have our pet theories...) I just read a USN study that monitored noise 
levels throughout the year at 20, 35
 and 65 degrees latitude and at times the noise was up to 12 dB stronger at 20 
(my latitude) than 35, where most of our QSOs are with. 

Anyway to the point of this post I have decided to take down my half-completed 
160m 4 square and use the available land to put up a RX 8-circle array. I can 
shunt feed a 21m top-loaded tower for Xmit that could be located about 5/8 wave 
from the nearest RX element and around which I could put a somewhat better 
ground system than I could around each 4sq Xmit element as well. It seems to me 
I could easily make up the 3-5 dB loss on Xmit with an amp if desired. Since 
the 80m yagi up 3/4 wave has a strong high angle secondary lobe I think our 80m 
RX would improve as well.

I have a couple months to think about it before it dries enough to do any work 
so would appreciate any comments on this rather radical change in plan, 
especially by you guys at tropical latitudes.

73 Bob
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: electrical wavelength

[Bob Kupps]

Hi it's still flooded here but I wanted to fire up one of my verticals by 
itself on 160 and feed it with a half wave of Comscope RG6 since I don't have 
enough 50 ohm line to reach it. I have a AIM 4170 to cut the line with but my 
question to the group is - how much variation from published nominal velocity 
factors have you encountered in practice when cutting lines to length? How 
accurate do we need to be for 1/4 wave lines?

73 Bob
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: Fw: Missing Buried Radials for a Monopole

[Bob Kupps]

That's a very interesting study. What about elevated counterpoise systems using 
a similar number of radials e.g. 20-30 and a perimeter wire? Are common mode 
feed line currents still difficult to suppress as with the 2 and 4 wire systems 
in your study, and is it even possible to resonate such a counterpoise?

snip

About 20-30 radials flattened off the 160 meter system using 1/4 wave 
verticals.

The 120 radials being perfect thing is obviously a myth, just like the 
idea it takes a special counterpoise to reduce losses better than a dozen 
other methods the same size.

I'm still hammering away at the counterpoise thing off and on:

http://www.w8ji.com/counterpoise_systems.htm

73 Tom 

___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: RX 4 squares

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I would like to put up a RX 4 square array for 80/160 but the only place 
(just) over a half wave away from resonant verticals on those bands would be 
surrounding (15m out from) a 70' tower with 2 large yagis on top. Does anyone 
have any experience with RX 4 squares near or surrounding non-resonant towers?

Thanks Bob
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: HiZ 4 squares

[Bob Kupps]

OK thanks for all the replies. I looked at the HiZ 4 square manual and they 
have some detailed phasing info for a specific frequency but it's not clear to 
me how this works on multiple bands. Could you guys using these on both 80 and 
160 explain how this works?

Thanks this is a great forum.
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: Fw: FCP model

[Bob Kupps]

Very interesting discussion. Can't we quantify our ground systems by placing RF 
ammeters at the feed point? It would seem to me that once the current in the 
ground wire - whether it be attached to a ground stake, ground radials, 
elevated counterpoise, resonant radials or whatever - is equal to the radiator 
current no further improvement is possible. 

- Forwarded Message -
From: Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com
To: topband reflector topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2012 5:57 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: FCP model
 
Let me throw this out for comments.

I think I found a valid test for the theory the FCP does not radiate, and 
thus does not have ground loss.

My countering statement was it cannot be a counterpoise, and cannot have 
current, without E and H fields. Even if we null farfield radiation (which 
is an electromagnetic field, as opposed to E and H induction fields near the 
conductor) we still must have local fields, or current will not flow out 
along the conductor.  Counterpoises only work because they have fields.

I modeled an FCP with enough spacing to not violate segment rules. I made 
two FCP's at right angles, with one foot spacing, 90 degrees from each 
other. I connected them at the normal feed terminal to form a dipole of 
sorts, using one as the counterpoise for the other. I used lossless wire in 
the model.

Resistance at the current maximum in freespace is  0.03 ohms. This very low 
resistance indicates very deep cancellation of farfield radiation. 
Efficiency was 99.2 percent. This indicates a very small model error of some 
type (probably because of close spacing between wires or failure to align 
segments) , because it should be 100%.

I moved the wires over real earth at 45 feet height. Resistance now changed 
to  0.04 ohms and efficiency changed to 20 percent. This indicates 
nearfields are impinging on lossy soil, because that is the only source of 
loss beyond the initial 0.8% error.

I moved the wires to 10 feet, and current maximum feed resistance increased 
to 1 ohm. Efficiency was then 0.4%. This indicates severe ground losses.

Now the points of this are:

1.) 10 feet is too close to the soil used in this model. Elevated radials 
at 10 ft are not going to be good if soil acts like the model.

2.) 45 feet could be high enough to be reasonably isolated from wire E and H 
fields in this model.

3.) Cancelling radiation is the farfield has very little to do with local E 
and H field levels that cause loss.

4.) We can't make local fields go away or it will no longer be a 
counterpoise. Those are the fields that allow current to flow out on the 
open ended conductors. For example, nylon rope would be a good non-radiating 
counterpoise with no local E or H fields, unless we rub a furry cat along 
the rope.

5.) We reduce ground loss by spreading the fields out as evenly as possible 
over the largest possible area of lossy media.

What we should not conclude is that fields are distributed the same when an 
antenna is connected. They are not. The E field in particular  will move 
toward the antenna open end.

(That's why we should put counterpoises below the flattop wires, so fields 
are less intense on lossy earth. When I was 12 or 13, I knew to put a 
counterpoise below the flattop wire. :-)

This test does not quantify losses. It does not quantify anything. It only 
shows trends. It shows relatively intense E and H fields surround the wires, 
even though someone 20 miles away might not hear the radiation field.

I think a test like this shows the difference between EM radiation, electric 
induction, and magnetic induction fields.

73 Tom 

___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Re: Topband: elevated counterpoise and lightning

[Bob Kupps]

Yes we will put 2 ground rods below each element and a spark gap but the only 
galvanic connection to earth for the stubs (and through them the elements 
themselves) will be back through the 1/4 wave feed line shields to the center 
control box ground unless I add a choke at each element base.



 From: DAVID CUTHBERT telegraph...@gmail.com
To: Bob Kupps n...@yahoo.com 
Cc: topband topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:40 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: elevated counterpoise and lightning
 

Bob, do you have ground rods for lightning?
The stub should be ok for static discharge but not for near or direct strikes.
Dave WX7G
On Jul 29, 2012 7:04 PM, Bob Kupps n...@yahoo.com wrote:

Hi in this thread I mentioned using a 1/4 wave shorted stub at the feed points 
of our 4 square for static drain. Since we want to farm the paddy land we will 
use a non-resonant counterpoise of 48 radials connected to a perimeter wire 
about 1.5m above the flooded ground. The only galvanic connection to earth 
would be back through the RG6 feed line to the center control box. So would 
adding an RF choke to the earth ground at the element base be a good idea in 
this case? Does anyone have any experience with the behavior of elevated 
radials in a lightning strike?

73 Bob HS0ZIA
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: elevated counterpoise and lightning

[Bob Kupps]

Hi in this thread I mentioned using a 1/4 wave shorted stub at the feed points 
of our 4 square for static drain. Since we want to farm the paddy land we will 
use a non-resonant counterpoise of 48 radials connected to a perimeter wire 
about 1.5m above the flooded ground. The only galvanic connection to earth 
would be back through the RG6 feed line to the center control box. So would 
adding an RF choke to the earth ground at the element base be a good idea in 
this case? Does anyone have any experience with the behavior of elevated 
radials in a lightning strike?

73 Bob HS0ZIA
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: Fw: Choke Construction Info Needed

[Bob Kupps]

Hi Phil

I'm no expert but plan to use a quarter wave shorted stub of RG6 at the feed 
point of my verticals for static drain and harmonic reduction, along with a 
spark gap in the event of a close strike.

73 Bob

- Forwarded Message -
From: Phil Clements philcleme...@centurylink.net
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 2:03 AM
Subject: Topband: Choke Construction Info Needed
 
I need to construct a heavy-duty choke to be installed from the feed point
of my 160 meter vertical to ground, for static drain and for lightning
protection. How large does the wire, form, and inductance need to be?



Thanks in advance for your expertize!



(((73)))

Phil, K5PC



___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: ground radials

[Bob Kupps]

Hi this study might be of interest to those wishing to optimize their ground 
system for various constraints.

http://www.ncjweb.com/k3lcmaxgainradials.pdf
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: HS top band allocation

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I have confirmed that the 160m allocation for Thailand is presently 
1800-1825 kHz, CW only and 200W max power output. There is legislation in 
progress to expand the allocation to the entire 200kHz segment but not yet 
approved. 

73 Bob HS0ZIA
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: PL 259 for RG6

[Bob Kupps]

Hi I will be using Comcast RG6 for my 4 square feed lines and the controller 
uses UHF connectors. Would crimp-on PL259 plugs sized for RG59 cable be 
suitable or is there a better way to go?
Thanks Bob
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Re: Topband: tower vertical

[Bob Kupps]

Hi John

The concrete is not an insulator. Connect a wire to the top and run it down 
about 2-3 feet out from and parallel to the tower and feed it with an L network 
against ground radials at the base. You will get RF in your rotor cables if you 
run them outside the crank up tower so be sure to bypass them with caps to 
ground at both ends and use common mode chokes on all feed lines.

GL!



From: John j...@all-the-facts.com
To: topband@contesting.com topband@contesting.com

Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 105, Issue 29

I would like some advice of using my crank up US Tower pole as an antenna for 
160. The pole is mounted on top of a concrete block that has 4 threaded iron 
rods on which the pole is set . the block is 5 feet deep. 

Does the concrete block insulate the pole from ground? 

From each of the 4 rods from the base I have a #8 copper wire to an 8 foot 
copper clad ground rods. There is also a 30 foot copper tubing that is sunk 
vertically into the ground.  I start getting water at  about 10 feet. 

So any ideas as of what to in this situation. Best 73 John NS5Z

Sent from my iPhone
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Topband: coax cable counterpoise

[Bob Kupps]

Hi when I lived in the Mojave desert I fed my 70' crank up tower as a folded 
monopole on 160m and used 8 radials made from electric 1/4 waves of old coax 
cable laying on top of the ground. The center conductors of the radials were 
fed with the shield of the feed line and the radial shields all connected back 
at the center to the DC tower ground. The far ends of the radials were left 
open and therefore reflected a direct short back at the center ends. This 
seemed very effective and I had good results even running 5 watts in contests.

Anyway I now live in northern Thailand and am planning a full size 4 square 
array built over a flooded rice paddy which is about the opposite to my 
previous QTH in ground conductivity. I want to farm the land as much as 
possible however so am considering some type of elevated counterpoise instead 
of ground radials, possibly using only 1-3 tuned coax radials as a counterpoise 
for each vertical.

Any thoughts on this approach?

73 Bob HS0ZIA
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'

[Bob Kupps]

Hi Dave,
I'm not asking you (as a group I am taking the your usage of us to mean) to 
believe anything. My personal opinion is that ethics, integrity and honor are 
individual rather than absolute values. I have no idea what the current DXCC or 
any other award/contest rules are but if they are violated then that 
participant should be disqualified; however the OP made no mention of the QSOs 
using this method being used for credit in any awards program or contest 
results. So I reiterate my opinion that in the absence of any legal or rule 
violations the ethics and merit of making a contact using this method, just 
like using DX helper nets, cluster spots, remote control super stations, 
QRP/QRO etc. are a matter for the individual to judge for himself.
73 Bob HS0ZIA

--- On Sat, 2/12/11, Dave Heil k...@frontiernet.net wrote:

From: Dave Heil k...@frontiernet.net
Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
To: Bob Kupps n...@yahoo.com
Date: Saturday, February 12, 2011, 11:54 AM

Bob,

Would you have us believe that ethics, integrity and honor are optional? 
  People have been disqualified from the DXCC program for less.

Dave Heil K8MN

On 2/11/2011 03 21, Bob Kupps wrote:
 Seems to me like just another step from DX U work em nets and packet 
 cluster spots.
 Why do we need to have an ethical position on this? Unless this technic is 
 used to gain an advantage in a contest or award program where it is 
 prohibited by the rules then like all activities where no one is being harmed 
 the ethics are up to the individual.

 If you personally think this activity is improper then just don't allow it on 
 your machine.
 73 Bob HS0ZIA
 --- On Fri, 2/11/11, Brendan Minishei6iz.bren...@gmail.com  wrote:

 From: Brendan Minishei6iz.bren...@gmail.com
 Subject: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Date: Friday, February 11, 2011, 3:38 AM

 Hello all

 I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am
 not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected
 to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well
 Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it.
 the latency is alos very low with sdrradio.

 I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy
 using internet connected SDR's provided by others

 last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was
 listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station
 utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and
 was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup.
 Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to
 hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here)
 But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling.

 What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me






-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3436 - Release Date: 02/11/11




  
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK