Re: Topband: J28MD, conditions

[Chortek, Robert L.]

That’s standard F/H. 

 If they put your call in the queue, and your transmission times out (or you 
quit calling), the software activates your transmitter.  In effect you had 
already worked him (you just didn’t know it yet) - not really but sort of.

73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Nov 6, 2022, at 6:09 PM, Wes  wrote:
> 
> ALERT: This email is from an external source.
> 
> Here is an example of what I talked about below.
> 
> I've been chasing P29RO on all bands and modes as part of our club 
> competition.
> 
> A few minutes ago they were on 10M FT8 F/H with a huge signal.. I worked them 
> on
> one sequence.  They continued to call CQ  for several minutes without answers,
> even though I spotted them. Shortly after they quit.
> 
> I anticipated that they moved down a band and sure enough they were on 12M, 
> also
> with a big signal (+20 dB).  I called them again just for the hell of it since
> already had them in the log.  When they didn't answer right away, I figured 
> they
> knew I was in their log and weren't answering.  So I halted my transmitter and
> left the shack.  When I returned I was on their frequency and had completed 
> the
> exchange.
> 
> Wes  N7WS.
> 
>> On 11/5/2022 4:02 PM, Wes wrote:
>> Perhaps. But I (my computer) was calling one of the expeditions a night or 
>> two
>> ago on FT8 F/H when I decided that I needed another beer.  I walked out to 
>> the
>> kitchen and when I came back I had "worked" him.
>> 
>> I have on occasion quit calling a station only to have them active my
>> transmitter and move me to their frequency and complete the contact.
>> 
>> Wes  N7WS
>> 
>>> On 11/5/2022 12:06 PM, Lloyd - N9LB wrote:
>>> You guys don't know what you are talking about.
>>> 
>>> The WSJT Modes, including FT8 and FT4, require a live operator ( not someone
>>> sleeping ) to initiate each contact.
>>> ( There is also a time-out timer that limits the number of times it
>>> calls/replies before going back to standby )
>>> and
>>> The ARRL requires at live operator ( not someone sleeping ) to initiate each
>>> contact before they will consider the contact legitimate.
>> 
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Ukraine, Russia, and Ham Radio

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hi Bill,

Agree 100 percent

Politics has no place here.   And while also I certainly have opinions on the 
current topic, and many others, can you imagine what a mess this would be if we 
all started sharper political opinions here - even if only related to ham radio?

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Beverage Combo

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I have 300 foot unterminated beverage mounted at 3 feet on the fence behind my 
yard which extends behind two neighbors’ properties.  Works GREAT!

Due to certain complications, I will need to turn antenna into a combination 
standard beverage, and beverage on ground. 

The antenna will remain at 3 feet for 110 feet behind our property, then drop 
down 3 feet vertical, run another hundred feet horizontal on the ground, then 
up 3 feet vertical for the and then the final 100 feet at 3 feet on a 
neighbor’s  fence. 

Does anybody have an opinion as to how much degradation I’m likely to get from 
this new antenna?

Thanks and 73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: FW: 43’ 80 Meter Vertical

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Thanks everyone!  I’ve order some Wireman 26 GA for the top hat wires and 
should be all set.

Much appreciated everyone!!!

73 es DX,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Apr 11, 2021, at 6:46 AM, r...@dj0ip.de wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> Aha, Joe is right!
> Sorry, I assumed Low Band.
> Sometimes it helps when one can READ!  ☹
> 
> NO PROBLEM:
> https://www.dj0ip.de/vertical-antennas/80m-on-12m-pole/
> Here you will find the typical lengths for 80m.
> Of course lengths vary slightly from one QTH to the next.
> The Top-Hat wires are about 20 ft. long.  Same rules.  Use thin wire for the 
> top-hats.
> 
> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
> May the Sunspots be with Us!
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Topband  On Behalf Of Joe 
> Subich, W4TV
> Sent: 11 April 2021 14:36
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: 43’ 80 Meter Vertical
> 
>> On 2021-04-11 5:25 AM, r...@dj0ip.de wrote:
>> Let's put this in perspective:  for the short pole Bob is using, the
>> top-hat wires are going to be in the neighborhood of 100 ft. long.
>> So we do need a lot of space for this.
> 
> That is for 160 meters.  Bob is building for 80 meters (3545 KHz) so use the 
> info here:
><https://www.dj0ip.de/vertical-antennas/80m-on-12m-pole/>
> 
> 73,
> 
>... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
>> On 2021-04-11 5:25 AM, r...@dj0ip.de wrote:
>> I agree with Rick; its better to use 4 top-hat wires.
>> 
>> On my Vertical Antenna page, I originally showed plans for verticals with 2, 
>> 3, and 4 top-hat wires.
>> I now only show the 4-wire version, except for the Inv.-L.
>> 
>> Let's put this in perspective:  for the short pole Bob is using, the top-hat 
>> wires are going to be in the neighborhood of 100 ft. long.
>> So we do need a lot of space for this.
>> 
>> The more top-hat wires, the shorter they need be.
>> But try to keep them equally spaced around the pole and at equal heights.
>> 
>> And, if space is an issue, the only solution is a longer pole.
>> For instance, with the 60 ft. Spiderpole, the 4 top-hat wires are only about 
>> 82 ft. long.
>> And with the 85 ft. Spiderpole, the wires are about 23 ft. long.   (If not 
>> for darn HOA's . . . )
>> 
>> With these longer poles, the top-hat wires should not exit from the top; 
>> these poles are too thin.
>> Drop down one segment and connect the top-hat wires there.
>> 
>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>> (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>> May the Sunspots be with Us!
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Topband  On Behalf
>> Of Richard (Rick) Karlquist
>> Sent: 11 April 2021 00:35
>> To: Chortek, Robert L. ; TopBand List
>> 
>> Subject: Re: Topband: 43’ 80 Meter Vertical
>> 
>> 
>>> On 4/10/2021 1:16 PM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
>>> Hoping to get some guidance from the antenna gurus here.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Can someone tell me if I added two top hat wires 16 GA THHN sloping at 45 
>>> degrees “about” how long they would need to be to resonate at 3.545 MHZ.
>>> 
>>> Bob/AA6VB
>>> Robert L. Chortek
>> 
>> After SWR, the most overrated goal for ham radio antennas is resonance.  You 
>> should use the amount of top loading that maximizes the radiation 
>> resistance.  Then put an appropriate reactance in series with the antenna to 
>> provide a resistive load to the transmitter at 3545.  The reactance may be 
>> turn out to be inductive or capacitive.  You will also want to make the 
>> series reactance variable somehow unless you only ever want to operate on 
>> 3545.
>> 
>> You would also be advised to use 4 top loading wires instead of just
>> two.  There is a substantial advantage for 4 vs 2.  Beyond
>> 4 top wires (say 8) the benefits aren't worth the trouble.
>> This is explained by the fact that 4 is the maximum number of top wires that 
>> don't couple to each other.
>> 
>> It is also advantageous to pull out the top loading wires to a more gentle 
>> slope if you can.
>> 
>> You can use bare aluminum electric fence wire to reduce weight and wind 
>> loading on the vertical.
>> 
>> 
>> 73
>> Rick N6RK
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> 
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: 43’ 80 Meter Vertical

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I would like to thank everyone who responded.  It’s all very helpful.

43’ was chosen for a variety of limitations associated with my 12,000 sq. ft. 
lot.

I already have a 60’ top loaded vertical for 160 and had a 40’ Spiderbeam pole 
laying around which I mounted on a 3’ pole. 

While 66’ would certainly be better, I have to live with my neighbors and since 
I also have an elevated BigIR 3 and a 3 El SteppIR with 30/40 trombone I feel 
“enough is enough”.

Again, thanks for the information.  I have everything I need.  

Top loading will certainly greatly improve the performance (efficiency) of the 
antenna compared to base loading so while it may not be optimum, it’s a 
compromise I’m willing to live with.


73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Apr 10, 2021, at 3:35 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist  
> wrote:
> 
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: 43’ 80 Meter Vertical

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hoping to get some guidance from the antenna gurus here.

I’ve just built a 43’ vertical (14 GA THHN) supported by a Spiderbeam pole.  
It’s base loaded and my RigExpert shows total loss, not counting Rrad, of 33 
Ohms.  It’s roughly 33 efficient.

Can someone tell me if I added two top hat wires 16 GA THHN sloping at 45 
degrees “about” how long they would need to be to resonate at 3.545 MHZ.  

I want to get “in the ballpark” before I start trimming.

Any help would be appreciated!

73 e DX,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Portable transmit antenna suggestions?

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Oh, and I should have added it’s critical to mount the hose clamps correctly 
and NOT to over-tighten them.  They can place tremendous pressure on the 
fiberglass and cause failure if not installed properly.

73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Mar 10, 2021, at 9:29 AM, Chortek, Robert L.  
> wrote:
> 
> I’ve got multiple (4)Spiderbeam fiberglass poles up to 60’ tall.  With 
> proper guying, I’ve never had a failure.  I also find the poles to be very 
> well balanced. I was able to erect a 60’ pole to make a top loaded 160 meter 
> antenna by myself.  I think they are a great product.  Proper buying is 
> required, of course.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Bob/AA6VB 
> Robert L. Chortek
> 
>> On Mar 10, 2021, at 9:23 AM, Ken Claerbout  wrote:
>> 
>> [External Email]
>> 
>> We installed an 18 meter Spider Pole at ET3AA, which supports a wire
>> Inverted L for 80 and 160.  It blows around pretty good at times.
>> While I don't discount Jim's experience, it's been up for 2 plus years
>> and is still going strong.
>> 
>> 73
>> Ken K4ZW
>> 
>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Jim Brown  
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 3/10/2021 4:25 AM, S57AD wrote:
>>>> Spiderbeam sells 160m antenna kit (top loaded 60' vertical - telescopic
>>>> fiberglass pole, all the wires, etc,
>>> 
>>> Their fiberglass is not to be trusted structurally. I speak from experience.
>>> 
>>> 73, Jim K9YC
>>> _
>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Portable transmit antenna suggestions?

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I’ve got multiple (4)Spiderbeam fiberglass poles up to 60’ tall.  With proper 
guying, I’ve never had a failure.  I also find the poles to be very well 
balanced. I was able to erect a 60’ pole to make a top loaded 160 meter antenna 
by myself.  I think they are a great product.  Proper buying is required, of 
course.

73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Mar 10, 2021, at 9:23 AM, Ken Claerbout  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> We installed an 18 meter Spider Pole at ET3AA, which supports a wire
> Inverted L for 80 and 160.  It blows around pretty good at times.
> While I don't discount Jim's experience, it's been up for 2 plus years
> and is still going strong.
> 
> 73
> Ken K4ZW
> 
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Jim Brown  
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 3/10/2021 4:25 AM, S57AD wrote:
>>> Spiderbeam sells 160m antenna kit (top loaded 60' vertical - telescopic
>>> fiberglass pole, all the wires, etc,
>> 
>> Their fiberglass is not to be trusted structurally. I speak from experience.
>> 
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: CQ Zones

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Actually, it is ham radio.

Have you spent any time with the mode?

For example,

1. Have you identified a country you need for a bond slot or ATNO?

2.  Have you determined the best time of year, time of day, and band to see if 
a station from that country is on?

3. Have you searched the decodes daily for a station from that country?

4. After spending days hunting that DX, have you FINALLY managed to be there 
when the propagation was favorable?

5.  Have you then, after all that, called that DX and made the contact?

If that does not qualify as ham radio, I’m not sure what does.

73,

Bob/AA6VB
Robert L. Chortek

On Mar 9, 2021, at 8:04 AM, ok1tn  wrote:



[External Email]

FT4 FT8 is just a computer game. It's not a ham radio
OK1TN
--
73 Slavek Zeler


-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Chortek, Robert L. 
Komu: Joe Subich, W4TV 
Datum: 9. 3. 2021 16:31:21
Předmět: Re: Topband: CQ Zones
THANK YOU JOE! That pretty much captures the debate.

73,

Bob/AA6VB
Robert L. Chortek

> On Mar 9, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV  wrote:
>
> [External Email]
>
> Oh PLEASE! You sound just like AM phone operators when SSB came
> along. And spark operators when CW started to replace it.
>
> The first DX was nothing more than single letters ...
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>> On 2021-03-09 10:10 AM, Karel Matousek wrote:
>> I agree wit Martin OK1RR.
>>
>> I cannot endorse FT4, FT8 for the ARRL DXCC Program.
>>
>> IMHO, this should NEVER be allowed unless qualified in a separate rules
>> category!
>>
>> Karel OK1CF
>> __
>>> Od: "Martin Kratoska" 
>>> Komu: topband@contesting.com
>>> Datum: 09.03.2021 15:37
>>> Předmět: Re: Topband: CQ Zones
>>>
>> Oh, FT8 should be proclaimed as illegal for DXCC (WAZ, WAS etc.) in
>> mixed categories.
>> This "mode" should be counted completely separated from traditional
>> modes like CW or SSB.
>>
>> 73,
>> Martin, OK1RR
>>
>>
>> Dne 09. 03. 21 v 15:16 Ian Fugler napsal(a):
>> > Hi, Dave
>> >
>> > Zone 23 - JT5DX will be your man. He is active in contests and puts
>> out a good signal.
>> >
>> > Zone 24 - will be more of a challenge. I have worked XX9D and a
>> couple of BY stations. But you may need to use FT8 for the BY stations,
>> since they seem strongly to prefer that mode.
>> >
>> > 73 and GL!
>> >
>> > Ian G4iiY
>> >
>
>
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: CQ Zones

[Chortek, Robert L.]

THANK YOU JOE!  That pretty much captures the debate.

73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Mar 9, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> Oh PLEASE!  You sound just like AM phone operators when SSB came
> along.  And spark operators when CW started to replace it.
> 
> The first DX was nothing more than single letters ...
> 
> 73,
> 
>   ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
>> On 2021-03-09 10:10 AM, Karel Matousek wrote:
>> I agree wit Martin OK1RR.
>> 
>> I cannot endorse FT4, FT8 for the ARRL DXCC Program.
>> 
>> IMHO, this should NEVER be allowed unless qualified in a separate rules
>> category!
>> 
>> Karel OK1CF
>> __
>>> Od: "Martin Kratoska" 
>>> Komu: topband@contesting.com
>>> Datum: 09.03.2021 15:37
>>> Předmět: Re: Topband: CQ Zones
>>> 
>> Oh, FT8 should be proclaimed as illegal for DXCC (WAZ, WAS etc.) in
>> mixed categories.
>> This "mode" should be counted completely separated from traditional
>> modes like CW or SSB.
>> 
>> 73,
>> Martin, OK1RR
>> 
>> 
>> Dne 09. 03. 21 v 15:16 Ian Fugler napsal(a):
>> > Hi, Dave
>> >
>> > Zone 23 - JT5DX will be your man.  He is active in contests and puts
>> out a good signal.
>> >
>> > Zone 24 - will be more of a challenge.  I have worked XX9D and a
>> couple of BY stations.  But you may need to use FT8 for the BY stations,
>> since they seem strongly to prefer that mode.
>> >
>> > 73 and GL!
>> >
>> > Ian G4iiY
>> >
> 
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Return Loss Question?

[Chortek, Robert L.]

How much return loss is acceptable certainly does “depend”. 

I’ll throw in another consideration to further complicate matters:

The higher the VSWR, or lower the return loss, the more power is lost in the 
cable due to the mismatched condition. 

How much power is lost depends on the type of cable, the cable length, the 
quality of the cable and of course the frequency.

The higher the frequency the more power will be lost in the cable due to the 
mismatch.

So while your transmitter and or antenna tuner may well be able to operate into 
an increasingly high VSWR (or low return loss) the price you will pay for that 
is more power loss in your cable. 

Thus, return loss becomes more important as you operate higher in frequency or 
use longer cable runs.

Not too important at 160 meters but probably very important at VHF.

73 es DX,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Jan 17, 2021, at 9:07 AM, Wes  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> Ted,
> 
> In a nutshell, return loss is just another way to describe the mismatch in a
> device, usually a transmission line/load combination.  We usually measure 
> VSWR,
> which is defined as the ratio of the maximum to minimum voltage on a 
> loss-less line.
> 
> (V)SWR, reflection coefficient and return loss are all scalar quantities that
> are related by formulas:
> 
> Reflection coefficient p (Greek letter rho) is defined as:
> 
> p = (VSWR -1) / (VSWR + 1)
> 
> So p varies from 0 for a perfect match to 1 for a total mismatch.
> 
> Return loss (RL) is defined as:
> 
> RL (dB) =  - 20 * log10 * p   where (p>0)
> 
> Some common numbers:
> 
> VSWR = 1.02RL = 40 dB
> 
> VSWR = 1.22RL = 20 dB
> 
> VSWR = 1.92RL = 10 dB
> 
> VSWR = 3.01RL = 6.0 dB
> 
> To answer your question about what is acceptable the answer is, it depends.
> Most modern transmitters want to see SWR below 2:1 so 10 dB RL is probably OK.
> Some transmitters with internal tuners claim a matching capability for loads <
> 3:1., so 6 dB RL is OK.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Wes  N7WS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .On 1/15/2021 1:01 PM, Salvatore ["Ted"] K2QMF wrote:
>> Hello All,
>> At the risk of asking a dumb question,
>> What is return loss and what is considered acceptable Return Loss on an 
>> antenna??
>> Inquiring Minds want to Know!!!
>> Many Thanks and 73,
>> Ted  K2QMF
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
> 
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 217, Issue 5

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I’ve got a 330’ unterminated beverage 3’ high which is a fabulous performer!

As Gary (NI6T) said, “whatever the limitations, put up a beverage”.

73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Jan 5, 2021, at 3:34 PM, Jim Brown  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
>> On 1/3/2021 12:01 PM, w3...@roadrunner.com wrote:
>> anyone with experience using a 300' BOG? Suggestions based on your
>> experience?
>> 
>> ie are they worth it?
> 
> In the words of NI6T, a very wise topbander, any Beverage is better than
> no Beverage. My 500 ft and 550 ft reversibles using DX Eng hardware are
> quite effective as low as the middle of the AM broadcast band and as
> high as 20M. Before I had aluminum in the air for 20M, I often used the
> EU Beverage for RX.
> 
> 73, Jim K9YC
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: OT - Bonding Radials at Intersections

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I just finished installing a two element vertical array on 40M.  The 
instructions say to bond the radials from one vertical where they intersect 
with a radial  for the other vertical.

My question is, is this really necessary and what effect would doing so (or 
not) have on the performance of the Array?

Much appreciated.

73,

Bob AA6VB

Bob
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Good Conditions, Little Activity

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Also Gentlemen,

These modes are NOT mutually exclusive.

During the Fall/Winter/Spring I spend a lot of time on 160 and 80.  My station 
is located in the City of San Jose on a 1/4 acre lot.  Much local noise so 
while my signal is pretty decent I don’t hear very well.  

I tune the band looking for stations I can hear above the local noise and then 
I call CQ.  I work the stations I can hear.  Back and forth - tune - CQ - time. 

Then I run off to FT8 to see if there is any action there.  Back and forth. 

I’m having a great time (while being “hard of hearing” can be very frustrating 
(and sometimes depressing) listening to the Big Boys works stations I can’t 
hear :-))

Both modes work for me.  I much prefer CW but I’ll take what I can get!

YMMV!

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Oct 9, 2020, at 9:03 AM, VE6WZ_Steve  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> Hans…
> I’m sorry but I agree with Bob K3UL, perhaps we should stop the whining about 
> lack of CW and get on the band !
> 
> If I look at my log for the 2 months since August, I have SM4DHF X13  QSOs, 
> SM5EDX X5, SM2EKM X2, SM2LIY X2, SM7BIC X2.
> SM6CVX zero QSOs.  I doesn't seem like everyone in Sweden has gone QRT ???
> 
> Have you been QRV at all yet???
> 
> 
> steve VE6WZ
> 
>> On Oct 9, 2020, at 2:27 AM, Hans Hjelmström  wrote:
>> 
>> SORRY Roger
>> FT 8 has killed Ham radio ,when you need your own skill and not trust
>> a computer to make your connection.  I will NEVER use that 
>> mode.Unfortunately MNI MNI Sweden Hams have  almost gone QRT for 
>> good,because of this FT-8 and lack of activity on hearing modes.
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> 
>> Hans SM6CVX
>> 
>> 
 9 okt 2020 kl. 10:20 skrev Roger Kennedy :
>>> 
>>> 
>>> It's such a shame that 160m Conditions for DX have been pretty good over the
>>> past week or two . . .
>>> 
>>> Yet there are so few CW stations coming on the band !
>>> 
>>> I hear lots of us Europeans putting out endless CQ DX calls . . . but often
>>> getting no replies, despite good RBN Reports confirming the band is open.
>>> 
>>> Roger G3YRO
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _
>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>> 
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Fw: Some experiments with a short beverage, not

[Chortek, Robert L.]

“How does a 250 ft long,  BI-directional beverage even  work?   Thats only  .5 
wavelength   long on  160m,
and only  1 wavelength long on 80m.“

At my QTH a 300’ unterminated beverage at 3’ is FABULOUS on 160 meters.  It’s a 
true marvel.  I can hear signals buried in the noise on my other RX antennas 
and, of course, my vertical.  Overall and on average it is by far the best rx 
antenna I have!

Sure if it were longer it would be better.  If it was terminated it would be 
better still but then we all have our limitations and must do the best we can 
with what we have to work with.

73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Jul 1, 2020, at 9:57 AM, Jim Thomson  wrote:
> 
> ##  How does a 250 ft long,  BI-directional beverage even  work?   Thats only 
>  .5 wavelength   long on  160m,
> and only  1 wavelength long on 80m.
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Comtek Com-LI-11140

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Does anyone know the choking impedance of the line isolator?  Can’t find it on 
the web and the dealer refused to tell me.

Tnx es 73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Ground Conductivity

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Thank you all for your very helpful  and informative responses.  

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to respond.

Much appreciated!

73,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Ground Conductivity

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hi Dave,

I’m (just) starting to play with EZNEC and want to know what type of ground I’m 
dealing with when I’m running various models. 

I live on the second fairway of a.golf course and the way it’s configured I 
have literally 1/2 to 1 1/2 miles of grass in certain directions.

It’s watered several times a week during the dry season and during the winter 
there is a fair bit of rain.

Don’t know what’s underneath.  It’s fertilized twice each year.

Thoughts on quality of the ground for 10-20 meters?  30-40 meters? 80/160?

Thanks!

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Mar 23, 2020, at 3:45 PM, Artek Manuals  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> On 160M the " skin depth" of ground goes beyond the grass ...so it
> depends on more than just your yard but also the type of soil
> underneath, how often it is watered , fertilized etc etc.
> 
> What are you trying to do that you need to know?
> 
> Dave
> NR1DX
> 
>> On 3/23/2020 6:01 PM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
>> A quick question for the collective wisdom on this esteemed reflector:
>> 
>> How would one categorize the quality of ground consisting of grass.
>> For example, if you live next to a large (many acres) open space made
>> entirely of well watered grass, would that qualify as �average
>> ground�, �above average ground� or something else?
>> 
>> Haven�t been able to find the answer anywhere.
>> 
>> Thanks for your input, as always!
>> 
>> 73 es DX,
>> 
>> Bob/AA6VB
>> Robert L. Chortek
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
> 
> --
> Dave
> manu...@artekmanuals.com
> www.ArtekManuals.com
> 
> 
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Ground Conductivity

[Chortek, Robert L.]

A quick question for the collective wisdom on this esteemed reflector:

How would one categorize the quality of ground consisting of grass. For 
example, if you live next to a large (many acres) open space made entirely of 
well watered grass, would that qualify as “average ground“, “above average 
ground” or something else? 

Haven’t been able to find the answer anywhere. 

Thanks for your input, as always!

73 es DX,

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: EZNEC

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Thanks for the reply.

I actually, finally, found what I was looking for in the manual.

The answer is you click on any open cell under End 1 in the wires box and then 
right click. That brings up a dialog box which allows you to edit the 
connections.

It’s easy once you know where to look!

Bob
Robert L. Chortek

On Mar 9, 2020, at 8:07 PM, Mike Waters  wrote:



[External Email]

There are some .ez antenna files included. One of them is a vertical with a 
ground plane, which you can customize.

73, Mike
W0BTU


On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, 10:03 PM Chortek, Robert L. 
mailto:robert.chor...@berliner.com>> wrote:

I’ve just downloaded the demo version of EZNEC and I am working through the 
tutorials.   I’m trying to model a vertical with four elevated radials on 160 
m. The problem I’m having is I can’t figure out how to separate the radials 
from the vertical and put the source at the base of the vertical and the 
radials. All five wires are connected and I can’t separate them.

 I spent a great deal of time reading through the manual and using the help 
function but for the life of me I simply cannot find where the manual discusses 
how to modify (edit) the “connections”.  Can somebody point me to the right 
place?  I certainly can’t find it.


Bob AA6VB
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: EZNEC

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Good Evening,

I’ve just downloaded the demo version of EZNEC and I am working through the 
tutorials.   I’m trying to model a vertical with four elevated radials on 160 
m. The problem I’m having is I can’t figure out how to separate the radials 
from the vertical and put the source at the base of the vertical and the 
radials. All five wires are connected and I can’t separate them.

 I spent a great deal of time reading through the manual and using the help 
function but for the life of me I simply cannot find where the manual discusses 
how to modify (edit) the “connections”.  Can somebody point me to the right 
place?  I certainly can’t find it. 

Thank you,

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Radiation Resistance

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the reply.

The antenna is fed at 3’ off the ground.   The radials slope up at about 45 
degrees to the roof (at about 10’).

It’s resonant at about 1.9 MHZ so I use about 2 turns of a 5.5” diamanté’s coil 
made of very heavy gauge copper wire.

I’m using an 1 to 1 Balun Designs isolation transformer at the feed point and a 
32/50 UnUn to match the impedance of the coax. Another isolation transformer is 
used at the shack.

Thanks for your input!  Much appreciated

Bob
Robert L. Chortek

On Mar 7, 2020, at 11:39 AM, Dave Cuthbert  wrote:



[External Email]

Robert, some questions:

Does the 55 ft vertical begin 10' above earth for a total radiator length of 45 
ft?
What frequency?
The 45 deg angle doesn't work with the length and radial end height.

At 1.83 MHz a 55' radiator/top wires with the base 10' above earth, and eight 
67' radials at 10 ft, the radiation resistance is 8.7 ohms. I believe it should 
measure closer to 9 ohms than the 29.7 ohms you measure (implying GND loss of 
21 ohms). Are the radials decoupled from earth GND with a high-Z feedline 
choke? I'm using EZNEC the NEC-2D engine.

For a 45' radiator/top wire with base 10' above earth and eight 67' radials at 
10' the radiation resistance is 5.3 ohms.

73, Dave KH6AQ

On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 8:59 AM Chortek, Robert L. 
mailto:robert.chor...@berliner.com>> wrote:
Good Day!

Does anyone know the radiation resistance of a 55 foot vertical #12 wire, top 
loaded with 2 41 foot #14 wires sloping at 45°, with their ends at 35 feet?

I’m curious about the efficiency. The fee point impedance is 29.7 ohms, and I’m 
using eight 1/8 wave elevated radios at 10 feet.

Please and thank you!

Bob
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Radiation Resistance

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Good Day!

Does anyone know the radiation resistance of a 55 foot vertical #12 wire, top 
loaded with 2 41 foot #14 wires sloping at 45°, with their ends at 35 feet? 

I’m curious about the efficiency. The fee point impedance is 29.7 ohms, and I’m 
using eight 1/8 wave elevated radios at 10 feet.

Please and thank you!

Bob
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: .TX Mica Caps

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I live in California (and have for my entire life). Practiced law for nearly 35 
years.

 The California legislature is filled with decent, and well intentioned public 
servants who are also naive, lack perspective and business sense, and don’t 
have a clue about the big picture or unintended consequences.

This Proposition 65 issue is a perfect example.  The warnings now apply to so 
many things and are seen so often they lose their impact and are largely 
ignored.  People don’t pay attention because they seem to be everywhere and are 
on everything.

Too much of a good thing ceases to be a good thing or even becomes a bad thing.

IMHO.

73 es DX,

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Feb 8, 2020, at 8:47 AM, Mark Schoonover  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> Hey I'm in 6 land the fruits & nuts are in the legislature too! Don't cheat
> CA! :)
> 
> 73! Mark KA6WKE
> 
> Website: https://www.ka6wke.net
> 
>> On Sat, Feb 8, 2020, 05:34 Wes  wrote:
>> 
>> They provide a link to this nonsense:
>> 
>> https://www.allelectronics.com/cms/ca_warning/ca-warning/1.html
>> 
>> All you need to know is that it's from the California legislature, which
>> is just
>> like granola.  (Take out the fruits and nuts and you're left with the
>> flakes.)
>> 
>> Wes  N7WS
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2/7/2020 8:34 PM, Roy Morgan wrote:
>>> I looked at the picture and description.  Can anyone guess how that
>> thing "could cause cancer or reproductive harm" ??
>>> 
>>> Roy Morgan
>>> K1LKY Western Mass
>>> 
 On Feb 7, 2020, at 9:16 PM, HP  wrote:
 
 FWIW -- I was looking at All Electronics website last night
 
 Reduced Price
 0.0004 UF, 5000 VOLTS MICA CAPACITOR
>>> _
>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> 
>> 
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: New Modes, Systems, etc

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Cecil,

I’m just shy of 62 and agree with you 100 percent!

73,

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Jan 11, 2020, at 8:55 AM, Cecil  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> That’s all fine and good but that’s clinging to the assumption that these are 
> mindless younger hams that at some point will get bored with the digital 
> stuff, drop out of the hobby and fade away.
> 
> Actually most of these folks are just adding the digital modes to their tool 
> bags in their quest to work more DX...and aren’t the younger crowd for the 
> most part either.
> 
> I’m 63, been a ham since the early 70s, I’ll work CW, RTTY, SSB and the 
> digital modes, where ever the fun takes me.
> 
> So guys like me aren’t going away bored we’re just adapting as time passes.
> 
> One thing we won’t do is sit around and be poked and prodded and belittled 
> for it by a group of narrow minded individuals who call themselves gentlemen.
> 
> We will move forward...
> 
> Cecil
> K5DL
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On Jan 11, 2020, at 10:31 AM, for...@siol.net wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Roger,
>> 
>> yeah, you are my man..could not be
>> said better..
>> 
>> Nermin S58DX
>> 
>> -Izvorno sporočilo- From: Roger Kennedy
>> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2020 3:32 PM
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Topband: New Modes, Systems, etc
>> 
>> 
>> It's easy to appreciate why many people - who are passionate about the hobby
>> - get upset about some of the things they see as being very negative to the
>> hobby.
>> 
>> Here in Britain there were LOTS of well-respected Amateurs who were actively
>> involved in Jamming the VHF Repeaters when they first came on the air in the
>> 1970s. I would never have done such a thing, but I appreciated why those
>> people were concerned about it having a negative effect on the hobby.
>> People could now not bother to put up a decent antenna for 2m, yet work
>> stations 50 miles away.
>> 
>> However, most new amateurs that did that very quickly got bored with the
>> hobby, as there was no sense of achievement, no reason to self-improve . . .
>> and disappeared off the air.  Those that got the satisfaction of working
>> stations further away through their own efforts were usually the ones that
>> sustained interest in the hobby.
>> 
>> (It's interesting that there is almost NO activity on the various Repeaters
>> here in Britain these days . . . which kind of confirms my point!)
>> 
>> I think it's the same logic that many of us apply to the computer-based
>> modes/protocols . . . that there is no skill involved, and so no real sense
>> of achievement, like there is when puling a really weak DX station out of
>> the noise . . . with the result that those people will very soon lose
>> interest in the hobby.
>> 
>> So those of you who are so keen on them, please at least understand our
>> motives . . . it's because of our passion for the hobby that we are against
>> these computer-based modes . . . in the same way as I personally am against
>> VHF Repeaters or accessing remote Transmitting or even Receiving sites.
>> 
>> Roger G3YRO
>> 
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Temporary antenna suggestion for 160

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Sure,

I mounted the bottom of the pole onto a 6’ piece of 3” PVC Pipe buried 3’ into 
the ground,  I then extended the first two (or was it three) sections of the 
pole and attached it to the Eave of the house.

At that point I went onto the roof and extended the pole one section at a time 
-  starting with the top section. As each section was extended I twisted the 
sections to lock them in place and tightened the hose clamp. 

I repeated the process until the entire 60’ pole was extended.

The pole is so well designed and so perfectly balanced it stood straight up, 
only attached at the base and the Eave, while I attached the guy wires at the 
anchor points and put out the top loading wires to their tie off points.

I raised and lowered the antenna three times by myself without incident.  It’s 
actually very easy!

My prior vertical was made of aluminum tubing and took 4 people to erect, with 
considerable effort, stress and cussing (on my part).  The spiderbeam was a 
“piece of cake”!


73,

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Dec 15, 2019, at 7:51 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist  
> wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
>> On 12/15/2019 6:52 PM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
>> Easy!
>> 
>> Get a 60’ Spiderbeam Fibeeglaas pole. Run a wire up the side and top load it 
>> with two 44’ wires running out at 45 degrees or less.
> 
>> Mine was so easy to install I was able to it alone with any trouble at all 
>> in a few hours.
>> 
> 
>> Bob AA6VB
>> Robert L. Chortek
> 
> So Bob, tell us the technique you used to erect the pole
> easily by yourself.
> 
> 73
> Rick N6RK
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Temporary antenna suggestion for 160

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I meant 45 degrees or more

Bob
Robert L. Chortek

> On Dec 15, 2019, at 6:52 PM, Chortek, Robert L.  
> wrote:
> 
> Easy!
> 
> Get a 60’ Spiderbeam Fibeeglaas pole. Run a wire up the side and top load it 
> with two 44’ wires running out at 45 degrees or less.  
> 
> Use an isolation transformer at the base and 
> Run it against 8-12 1/8 wave elevated radials.  Match with a 32/50 Ohm UnUn.
> 
> Mine was so easy to install I was able to it alone with any trouble at all in 
> a few hours.
> 
> Spiderbeam poles are extremely well  balanced and very strong.
> 
> My antenna is installed at the side of our 11,300 sq ft lot and all the 
> radials are laid on the roof.
> 
> Performs very well.
> 
> 73
> 
> Bob AA6VB 
> Robert L. Chortek
> 
>> On Dec 15, 2019, at 5:04 PM, thoyer via Topband  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> [External Email]
>> 
>> With only 9 more to go for DXCC on 160 and all of the recent posts about how
>> good the band has been recently "best in years) I find myself with no
>> antenna for the low bands and cringing after each post on how good the band
>> has been.
>> 
>> I had some construction done in the yard (started in Sept) which required me
>> to take down my Battle Creek Special so the construction equipment could get
>> in and out if the yard and the workers wouldn't get tangled up in the
>> support lines. Funny - I came home one day after they started the excavation
>> and the builder asked what all the wire was he was digging up! Lost about
>> 25% of my radials to construction.
>> 
>> They recently finished construction and I'm looking at what to do antenna
>> wise. My time is limited and the weather is starting to get cold. The tilt
>> base for the vertical was torn out and I'm afraid my feedline to the base
>> may be damaged also.
>> 
>> Options - I have a 45' tower with TH6DXX, 6m and 2m yagis. I could easily
>> string a makeshift inverted L with about 45' vertical and around 100'
>> horizontal. This I could string up in a few hours. the Horizontal portion
>> would be pointed south. Not the best of configurations but that's what I
>> have to work with.
>> 
>> Or should I put the BCS back together? This would probably take the better
>> part of a couple weekends (inbetween having other distractions). I'd need to
>> make a new base and probably lay in a new feedline and a bunch of new
>> radials.
>> 
>> I think I know the answer - go with the BCS as it's performance would be
>> better then the inv L but figred I'd ask around.
>> 
>> I know Murphy is lurking too - just waiting for me to get an antenna up then
>> he's going to pull the plug on the good condx.. (or bring back that
>> 20 over noise I had last year)
>> 
>> Tom
>> W3TA
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Temporary antenna suggestion for 160

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Easy!

Get a 60’ Spiderbeam Fibeeglaas pole. Run a wire up the side and top load it 
with two 44’ wires running out at 45 degrees or less.  

Use an isolation transformer at the base and 
Run it against 8-12 1/8 wave elevated radials.  Match with a 32/50 Ohm UnUn.

Mine was so easy to install I was able to it alone with any trouble at all in a 
few hours.

Spiderbeam poles are extremely well  balanced and very strong.

My antenna is installed at the side of our 11,300 sq ft lot and all the radials 
are laid on the roof.

Performs very well.

73

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Dec 15, 2019, at 5:04 PM, thoyer via Topband  
> wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> With only 9 more to go for DXCC on 160 and all of the recent posts about how
> good the band has been recently "best in years) I find myself with no
> antenna for the low bands and cringing after each post on how good the band
> has been.
> 
> I had some construction done in the yard (started in Sept) which required me
> to take down my Battle Creek Special so the construction equipment could get
> in and out if the yard and the workers wouldn't get tangled up in the
> support lines. Funny - I came home one day after they started the excavation
> and the builder asked what all the wire was he was digging up! Lost about
> 25% of my radials to construction.
> 
> They recently finished construction and I'm looking at what to do antenna
> wise. My time is limited and the weather is starting to get cold. The tilt
> base for the vertical was torn out and I'm afraid my feedline to the base
> may be damaged also.
> 
> Options - I have a 45' tower with TH6DXX, 6m and 2m yagis. I could easily
> string a makeshift inverted L with about 45' vertical and around 100'
> horizontal. This I could string up in a few hours. the Horizontal portion
> would be pointed south. Not the best of configurations but that's what I
> have to work with.
> 
> Or should I put the BCS back together? This would probably take the better
> part of a couple weekends (inbetween having other distractions). I'd need to
> make a new base and probably lay in a new feedline and a bunch of new
> radials.
> 
> I think I know the answer - go with the BCS as it's performance would be
> better then the inv L but figred I'd ask around.
> 
> I know Murphy is lurking too - just waiting for me to get an antenna up then
> he's going to pull the plug on the good condx.. (or bring back that
> 20 over noise I had last year)
> 
> Tom
> W3TA
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: COSMIC RAY UPDATE

[Chortek, Robert L.]

On Dec 15, 2019, at 3:32 AM, Bill Tippett  wrote:
> 
> ”... the great conditions of 2009 were
> actually SLIGHTLY AFTER the cycle 24 minimum in December 2008.  If the new
> minimum is as forecast in April 2020, it could be that the best conditions
> will be slightly past that minimum (i.e. during the upcoming 2020-2021
> season).  Time will tell.
> 
> 73,  Bill  W4ZV

I hope you are right!  That would mean at least two great seasons back to make. 
 Wouldn’t that be nice after the tough years we’ve had!?!

Worked two more EU this morning.  Good for me!

73,

Bob AA6VB 
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: COSMIC RAY UPDATE

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Please don’t laugh at my puny numbers.

This season I have worked 5 European stations from my noise challenged postage 
stamp lot in San Jose.  The last time I was able to hear and work a European 
station at my QTH was 2009.  

I’ve worked more DXCC entities on 160 this year than I have in any single year 
since 2010/11.

For me, this has easily been the best year in about a decade.  

That’s not to say there have not been periods of poor propagation this year but 
overall, it been good for me!

73 es DX,

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Dec 14, 2019, at 12:16 PM, K9FD  wrote:
> 
> This morning conditions were close to, not quite as good as 2008 era

> On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 10:24 AM Bill Tippett  wrote:
>>> 
>>> This could account for relatively poor conditions on 160 despite the low SF
>>> and K indices
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: BOG Beverage on Ground Help

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I don’t think it matters what label we use as long as we correctly understand 
its electrical properties.

AA6VB 

Bob
Robert L. Chortek

> On Dec 2, 2019, at 3:13 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA  wrote:
> 
> [External Email]
> 
> K2AV says ".BOG is not a Beverage. So don't think about or treat a BOG like
> a Beverage."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You seem pretty adamant about that Guy.
> 
> What *SHOULD* we be calling it then please?
> 
> 
> 
> Mike VE9AA
> 
> 
> 
> Keswick Ridge, NB
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Saturday night

[Chortek, Robert L.]

> On Nov 24, 2019, at 10:47 AM, David Olean  wrote:
> 
> . until my sunrise arpund 1200, I did a fair amount of
> listening but heard very little in the way of Pacific DX.  I was
> operating un assisted so do not know who was QRV, but tuning across the
> band produced only two HI stations heard from the Pacific. No KL7, no
> islands, and no VK/ZL. A few CQs produced no QSOs for points.  Very
> disappointing morning.

I operated S on 80 and 160 from San Jose, CA.   80 was very good to N. Africa 
, SA, Caribbean, Asia and ZL .  Lots of Qs.  Great fun.  No EU.

160 had “much” less activity (from here)! I worked a bunch of JAs - which was 
fun - but little else.  If I only had a 160 antenna it would have been a sad 
affair for me.

73,

Bob AA6VB 


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

Re: Topband: Rx Antenna System

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Short beverages can do absolute wonders!  I’ve got one 300’ long and 3’ 
high running N/S and have worked dozens of station I could not hear on any 
other antenna!

73,

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Nov 22, 2019, at 1:37 PM, fmoeves  wrote:
> 
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Some notes from the moderator

[Chortek, Robert L.]

> On Nov 19, 2019, at 10:58 AM, Tree  wrote:
> 
> ”In other news - the band has been open to Europe the past few mornings here
> in Oregon.  Likely - these openings will be good for the next couple of
> months.  They only occur during low sunspot activity - so get on the air
> and enjoy them.”

Agreed.  Even I was able to hear and work three European stations last night 
from my postage stamp lot in San Jose, California.  That’s pretty rare (in my 
experience” so make the most of it

73 es DX,

Bob AA6VB 
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Beverage length

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I’m not arguing the point that longer is better to a point.  I’m limited to 
300’. I’d love it it I could extend to 400’ 500’ or longer.  But I can’t.

  I’m just saying, well, what I said.

73,

Bob. AA6VB
Robert L. Chortek

On Aug 1, 2019, at 12:59 PM, Chuck Dietz 
mailto:w5prch...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I previously had 4 Beverages with 3 of them being about 300’  They definitely 
worked! However, the 650’ was better… On my new property, I hope to compare 
Beverages, SAL-30 and an 8 circle. First, I have to get it cleared and fenced…
Sigh!

Chuck W5PR

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Chortek, Robert L.<mailto:robert.chor...@berliner.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2019 2:40 PM
To: Drew Vonada-Smith<mailto:d...@whisperingwoods.org>
Cc: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Beverage length

I’ve got an unterminated 300’ foot beverage about 36” high.

WorkS GREAT so I respectfully disagree with the implication a beverage much 
shorter than 1-2 wavelengths means you should use something else.

I’ve got multiple rx antennas and that short beverage is the best one,on 
average, in its favored direction based on years of comparison.

That said, I’ve never been sorry I had multiple options.

Bob AA6VB
Robert L. Chortek

> On Aug 1, 2019, at 12:27 PM, Drew Vonada-Smith 
> mailto:d...@whisperingwoods.org>> wrote:
>
> Joe,
>
>
> For a simple Beverage, you just point the antenna (unfed end) at the target.  
> For length, "longer is better" is approximately true, but the ideal lengths 
> are about 1 to 2 wavelengths.  Much longer than that, and phased shorter 
> Beverages work better.  Much shorter than that, and you might as well use 
> some other type of RX antenna.  One Bev can work pretty well on both 160 and 
> 80, and will occasionally be useful on other bands also.  During 
> spring/summer precip static, common in KS, the Bev is often my only usable RX 
> antenna on ANY HF band!
>
>
> A Beverage has negative gain.  But you don't care about absolute strength, 
> you only care about S/N, as any modern radio has enough gain on 160M for the 
> smallish Beverage signal to be fine.  Some, like me, use a preamp just so the 
> various RX antenna gains are approximately equal when switching between them. 
>  A 15 dB preamp brings my 600 ft Bev signal strengths to the level of my TX 
> Inv-L on 160.  But you don't need it.
>
>
> Beverages are not in the great favor they once were, mostly due to the advent 
> of excellent vertical arrays.  But they still have the big advantage of being 
> the simplest RX antenna one can imagine, that nearly always works as 
> described without difficulty, assuming you have the space.  And cheap!
>
>
> Reversible Beverages are only slightly more complicated and give you another 
> direction with no more space required.  Lots of good articles out there for a 
> Google.
>
>
> 73,
>
> Drew K3PA
>
>
> 
>
> --
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:25:25 -0500
> From: Joe mailto:n...@mwt.net>>
> To: Wes mailto:wes_n...@triconet.org>>, 
> topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: BOG height
> Message-ID: 
> mailto:cb0a992a-8c3a-ebf7-6925-180fae8c0...@mwt.net>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> beverages have always fascinated me. But I have never had the property
> to have one.
>
> I might now, BUT, how do you know how long and what direction to lay it
> out to maximize signal to the desired direction?
>
> I assume the longer it is, the higher gain it has and more towards the
> ends the lobe is?
>
> Joe WB9SBD
>
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

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

Re: Topband: Beverage length

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I’ve got an unterminated 300’ foot beverage about 36” high.

WorkS GREAT so I respectfully disagree with the implication a beverage much 
shorter than 1-2 wavelengths means you should use something else. 

I’ve got multiple rx antennas and that short beverage is the best one,on 
average, in its favored direction based on years of comparison.

That said, I’ve never been sorry I had multiple options.

Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek

> On Aug 1, 2019, at 12:27 PM, Drew Vonada-Smith  
> wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
> 
> For a simple Beverage, you just point the antenna (unfed end) at the target.  
> For length, "longer is better" is approximately true, but the ideal lengths 
> are about 1 to 2 wavelengths.  Much longer than that, and phased shorter 
> Beverages work better.  Much shorter than that, and you might as well use 
> some other type of RX antenna.  One Bev can work pretty well on both 160 and 
> 80, and will occasionally be useful on other bands also.  During 
> spring/summer precip static, common in KS, the Bev is often my only usable RX 
> antenna on ANY HF band!
> 
> 
> A Beverage has negative gain.  But you don't care about absolute strength, 
> you only care about S/N, as any modern radio has enough gain on 160M for the 
> smallish Beverage signal to be fine.  Some, like me, use a preamp just so the 
> various RX antenna gains are approximately equal when switching between them. 
>  A 15 dB preamp brings my 600 ft Bev signal strengths to the level of my TX 
> Inv-L on 160.  But you don't need it.
> 
> 
> Beverages are not in the great favor they once were, mostly due to the advent 
> of excellent vertical arrays.  But they still have the big advantage of being 
> the simplest RX antenna one can imagine, that nearly always works as 
> described without difficulty, assuming you have the space.  And cheap!
> 
> 
> Reversible Beverages are only slightly more complicated and give you another 
> direction with no more space required.  Lots of good articles out there for a 
> Google.
> 
> 
> 73,
> 
> Drew K3PA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 18
> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:25:25 -0500
> From: Joe 
> To: Wes , topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: BOG height
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> 
> beverages have always fascinated me. But I have never had the property
> to have one.
> 
> I might now, BUT, how do you know how long and what direction to lay it
> out to maximize signal to the desired direction?
> 
> I assume the longer it is, the higher gain it has and more towards the
> ends the lobe is?
> 
> Joe WB9SBD
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: FCP vs Gull Wing Elevated Radials

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I am going to add what may be a meaningless post to this thread.

I live on a 1/4 acre lot in the black hole of San Jose California. Until very 
recently I was using a base loaded 1/8 wave vertical for 10 years. The vertical 
is on the side of the house 10 feet from the property line. I run eight 1/4 
wave radials from the base of the vertical 48 inches high to the roof at about 
10 feet where they make a 90° bend and run in various directions. The radial 
system forms a U shape.  

The system is highly asymmetrical and far from optimum. I run legal limit. This 
system has allowed me to work in excess of 150 countries on topband. The point 
I’m making is a dedicated top and operator can have what I would consider a 
high degree of success with even a compromise in antenna system.

Don’t lot perfect, or even good, be the enemy of the best you can do. You might 
be surprised at what you can accomplish.

73,


Bob AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: FCP versus loaded or "T" radialsradials

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Pete,

I’m using a a top loaded vertical with 12 elevated 1/8 wave radials with an 
isolation transformer at the feed point.  I have no basis for comparison BUT I 
have no trouble being heard in JA, VK, DU, etc. running legal limit.  Resonant 
elevated radials (counterpoise) are not required for good performance.

I’ll duck now

73,

Bob
AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 4, 2019, at 9:23 AM, N4ZR  wrote:
> 
> At the risk of setting off a food-fight, I'm interested in opinions on 
> shortened radials (T or loaded) versus the K2AC/W0UCE folded counterpoise 
> design.  W8JI has an interesting unfinished page 
>  attacking the FCP.  Tom's a 
> combative fella, but he's also very smart.  I am putting up an inverted L, 
> trying to avoid having to lay down 6000 or even 750 feet of on-the ground 
> radials, and don't really have room for resonant elevated radials on 160.
> 
> -- 
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
> at , now
> spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
> For spots, please use your favorite
> "retail" DX cluster.
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hi Mike,

I respect that, but I’d guess the aging population of Topband Ops only explains 
a small part of the lack of CW activity.

73,

Bob
AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 22, 2019, at 1:56 PM, Mike Waters 
mailto:mikew...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 3:50 PM Chortek, Robert L. 
mailto:robert.chor...@berliner.com>> wrote:
 ... Seems like most CW ops have lost interest of late.  I’m about to pull the 
plug ...

Some of us CW ops have not lost interest at all. Our advancing age is like a 
brick wall sometimes.

When and if we can, then we will.

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com<http://www.w0btu.com>
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I’ve been calling CQ almost every morning from the black hole of California.  

Propagation to EU from here has been very poor this year but the RBN shows I’m 
being heard in JA, Asia and Oceania but I rarely get a reply.  Granted, I don’t 
hear well (since I live in a subdivision in San Jose with lots of noise) but I 
know there are lots of JAs and other stations who put out signal I can easily 
hear. 

Seems like most CW ops have lost interest of late.  I’m about to pull the plug 
since I don’t see much point in getting up early to call CQ only to see how I’m 
doing on the RBN.  FT8 does not do it for me.

73,

Bob 
AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 22, 2019, at 1:28 PM, Roger Kennedy  
> wrote:
> 
> Well as far as I'm concerned Mike, FT8 would just be my computer having a
> contact, not me personally . . . so it's not something I would ever be
> interested in.
> 
> But if that's the case, it's even more daft . . . as there's LOTS of people
> who complain about the lack of DX activity on CW these days.  But if more
> people came on, there would be more CW activity !
> 
> Roger G3YRO
> 
> 
>> Hi Roger
> 
>> Did you look up in the FT8 band?  That is where everyone is.
> 
>> Mike va3mw
> 
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Counterpoise

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Fellow Topband Aficionados -

Question about wire layout in a elevated counterpoise system. 

My top loaded vertical stands right next to the house on the far side of our 
tiny suburban lot. The radials slope upward from the base at 3’ feet to the 
roof at about 10 feet, make a 90° turn and then run over the top of the house 
creating a giant U shape.

I’m wondering whether adding additional radials would improve the performance 
of the system, given that those additional radials will have to run pretty 
close to the existing 12, none will run in a straight line. 

Thoughts? 

Thanks for your input Xcode

Sent from my iPhone
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: NA activity CW topband ....................

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Sadly, I think I get out better than I hear, but then again, I’m stuck on a 
11,800 sq. ft. lot in San Jose, CA!

Bob
AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 13, 2019, at 8:08 AM, Wes  wrote:
> 
> I'll be on too, although I never call CQ.  No RX antennas here to worry 
> about.  Still seem to hear better than I get out with 500W.
> 
> Wes  N7WS
> 
>> On 4/13/2019 7:57 AM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
>> I plan to be on 160 all Spring so if you are DX please answer my CQ!
>> 
>> Bob
>> AA6VB
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Apr 13, 2019, at 7:55 AM, Mark K3MSB  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Joel is right;  all my 160M antennas went down 2 weeks ago.Grass to mow
>>> etc.
>>> 
>>> 73 Mark K3MSB
>>> 
>>>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 10:41 AM  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Greetings Nick,
>>>> 
>>>> With spring here in the south I have begun taking down all of my  RX
>>>> antennas in preparation for hay cutting in the fields plus the severe
>>>> lightning we have from spring and summer storms pretty much destroys the
>>>> RX antenna components if left out through summer. The QRN/noise level is
>>>> high on the TX antenna so my focus has moved to other bands/activity.
>>>> 
>>>> I'm sure that's probably the case with a few other "regulars" on the
>>>> band as well.
>>>> 
>>>> 73 Joel W5ZN
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2019-04-13 03:31, uy0zg wrote:
>>>>> Hi
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> What happened ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> One NV3N from all over America.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> No electricity?
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: NA activity CW topband ....................

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I plan to be on 160 all Spring so if you are DX please answer my CQ!

Bob 
AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 13, 2019, at 7:55 AM, Mark K3MSB  wrote:
> 
> Joel is right;  all my 160M antennas went down 2 weeks ago.Grass to mow
> etc.
> 
> 73 Mark K3MSB
> 
>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 10:41 AM  wrote:
>> 
>> Greetings Nick,
>> 
>> With spring here in the south I have begun taking down all of my  RX
>> antennas in preparation for hay cutting in the fields plus the severe
>> lightning we have from spring and summer storms pretty much destroys the
>> RX antenna components if left out through summer. The QRN/noise level is
>> high on the TX antenna so my focus has moved to other bands/activity.
>> 
>> I'm sure that's probably the case with a few other "regulars" on the
>> band as well.
>> 
>> 73 Joel W5ZN
>> 
>>> On 2019-04-13 03:31, uy0zg wrote:
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> 
>>> What happened ?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> One NV3N from all over America.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> No electricity?
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Correction - VI9NI

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Not enough coffee this morning - yet!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 10, 2019, at 6:24 AM, Chortek, Robert L.  
> wrote:
> 
> VK9NI had a very nice signal on the West Coast today and lots of stations 
> made it into the log on 160.  
> 
> Very good propagation this morning.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Bob AA6VB 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: VK9NI

[Chortek, Robert L.]

VK9NI had a very nice signal on the West Coast today and lots of stations made 
it into the log on 160.  

Very good propagation this morning.

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: The DXpedition FT8 quandry

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I’ve made a few FT8 Q’s and really enjoyed setting up the system and getting it 
to work. That was great fun!  Now I find it very unsatisfying and the “click 
and wait” to see if I worked the station pretty dull.  

I have nothing against the mode and don’t want to “fight the future” but, for 
me, it’s not very bright.

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> “ And the very concept of clicking on the screen with the volume turned down 
> and
> waiting for the CFM message to appear, just doesn't do it for me.”
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Awesome 160 Meter Vertical

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I was our for a bike ride up to Mt. Hamilton Observatory today in the East 
hills of San Jose and came upon an antenna on a ridge made of what appeared to 
be Rohn 25 maybe 100 feet tall with three top loading wires slipped down at 
about 30 degrees.

The antenna looked absolutely fabulous.

Anyone know the call sign of the owner?

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Top Loading Advice

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Fellow Topbanders,


I just finished replacing my damaged base loaded vertical and have a question 
about the optimum amount of top loading.


A bit of background - my new vertical is a 55' #12 wire supported by a 60' 
Spiderbeam fiberglass pole.  At the top there are 2 -41' top loading wires 
running roughly at 180 degrees from each other, angling down at about 45 
degrees.  The ends are at about 25' . Since the resonant point is about 2 MHZ, 
I am still using an air core base loading coil 6" in diameter made of No. 8 
solid copper wire to bring it to resonance at 1825 MHZ.


I could lengthen the top loading wires somewhere between  4 - 10' each (and 
reduce the amount of base loading needed), but it will bring the ends to within 
about 15' and  20' of the ground.


My question is this:  At what point will lengthening the top loading wires and 
bringing the ends closer to ground offset the improvement gained by reducing 
the amount of base loading?


As it is, the antenna is a HUGE improvement over my base loaded vertical (on 
the order of 6-9 db from stations in the RBN within the ground wave).


Should I leave it alone and be satisfied with the improvement or lengthen the 
top loading wires. If so, by how much?


Thanks in advance from any advice.


73,


Bob/AA6VB
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: When is coax 'contaminated' beyond use?

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hi Terry,

It seems to me that it ought to be fine to use the coax.   The fact the coax 
has more loss than non-contaminated coax shouldn’t matter, since the whole 
point is to dump the wattage as part of the 4 Sq. System.  Using lower loss 
Coax would only mean more power would get to the dummy load where it would all 
be dissipated anyway.  Total loss should be the same.  To my way of thinking it 
should not matter UNLESS the contamination is such that coax acts as an open 
circuit.

Others may disagree, but it seems logical to me.  OTOH, if it were me, and I 
was only using a very short length, I would spend a couple of extra bucks and 
use good quality components throughout my system.

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 3, 2019, at 7:55 PM, terry burge  wrote:
> 
> Hi Folks,
> 
> 
> A few years back some 9913 I was using apparently got water in the coax. I 
> say this because of fluctuating SWR issues and I noted the shield when cut 
> into was almost 'black'. So for my minor purpose of using spare coax for my 
> dump power on an 80 meter 4-square can some of this coax be used? When I 
> scrap the shield after exposing it with a knife will reveal the shinny copper 
> again so is that sufficient to use some for reading dump power on my 
> wattmeter at the shack? Seems if I try and get readings like what I had with 
> the LMR-400 then it could be used. Coax is so expensive these days I want to 
> use my valuable LMR-400 elsewhere if possible. And having a convenient way of 
> reading dump power is of course important too.
> 
> 
> Terry
> 
> KI7M
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Rx splinter

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I’ve also used KD9SV products with great success.

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 1, 2019, at 1:00 PM, Jorge Diez - CX6VM  wrote:
> 
> FOR SURE KD9SV PRODUCTS
> 
> https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/svp-sv-rsc
> 
> 73,
> Jorge
> CX6VM/CW5W
> 
>> El vie., 1 feb. 2019 a las 17:50, WW3S () escribió:
>> 
>> What’s the best way to split one rx antenna between 2 transceivers?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 73,
> Jorge
> CX6VM/CW5W
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvements - Part 3 (now with data)

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Exactly!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 22, 2019, at 7:25 PM, Grant Saviers  wrote:
> 
> Al Christman K3LC thoroughly sliced and diced the tradeoffs of number vs 
> length for given total wire investment is his Mar/Apr 2004 NCJ paper.
> 
> N6LF also has a lot to say.
> 
> Grant KZ1W
> 
>> On 1/22/2019 16:11 PM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
>> “Wes cut his radial length to match the vertical L section height (see N6LF
>>> reference).  He didn't reduce the number of radials.”
>> I didn’t think it was the “shortening” OF the length of the radials that 
>> would improve performance e.g. going from 10 125’ radials to 10 55’ radials 
>> (in the case of a 55’ vertical); rather, it was the fact that 10x 125’ of 
>> wire could be better employed to increase the number of radials, albeit 
>> resulting in shorter radials, that decreases the ground loss (since most is 
>> nearer the base of the vertical).  If I’m correct, then shortening a given 
>> number of radials should decrease loss or improve performance
>> 73,
>> Bob AA6VB
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvements - Part 3 (now with data)

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Meant to say “should not decrease loss ...”

Sorry!

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 22, 2019, at 4:11 PM, Chortek, Robert L.  
> wrote:
> 
> “Wes cut his radial length to match the vertical L section height (see N6LF
>> reference).  He didn't reduce the number of radials.”
> 
> I didn’t think it was the “shortening” OF the length of the radials that 
> would improve performance e.g. going from 10 125’ radials to 10 55’ radials 
> (in the case of a 55’ vertical); rather, it was the fact that 10x 125’ of 
> wire could be better employed to increase the number of radials, albeit 
> resulting in shorter radials, that decreases the ground loss (since most is 
> nearer the base of the vertical).  If I’m correct, then shortening a given 
> number of radials should decrease loss or improve performance
> 
> 73,
> 
> Bob AA6VB
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvements - Part 3 (now with data)

[Chortek, Robert L.]

“Wes cut his radial length to match the vertical L section height (see N6LF
> reference).  He didn't reduce the number of radials.”

I didn’t think it was the “shortening” OF the length of the radials that would 
improve performance e.g. going from 10 125’ radials to 10 55’ radials (in the 
case of a 55’ vertical); rather, it was the fact that 10x 125’ of wire could be 
better employed to increase the number of radials, albeit resulting in shorter 
radials, that decreases the ground loss (since most is nearer the base of the 
vertical).  If I’m correct, then shortening a given number of radials should 
decrease loss or improve performance

73,

Bob AA6VB 
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Condx for Stew Perry!

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Wow!  33 EU stations.  That’s an incredible accomplishment!

I made exactly 0 EU contacts - didn’t even hear a single one.  Did manage to 
work a few Asiatic Russian stations and the usual Pacific stations from my 1/4 
city lot in San Jose, California.

HNY

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 31, 2018, at 10:53 AM, Jim - WS6X  wrote:
> 
> Topbanders,
> 
> In spite of constant heavy QRN throughout the contest, I had a personal best
> for the number of EU worked in one evening/night. Before this weekend my
> best was 19 EU worked in a local evening / night. This weekend, Saturday
> evening from  to 0514 when I went to bed, I worked 33 EU stations,
> representing 17 countries!
> 
> Because of family comings and goings I didn't get out to the shack until
> about 2210. I turned on the radio and heard DR5X calling CQ! He was in the
> log after one call. I did a few minutes of S & P-ing to check out the band.
> At ~2230 I began calling CQ. The very first station to call me was UW2M! I
> knew it was going to be a good night!
> 
> Generally, I don't like to call CQ on 160 because of my paranoia of being an
> alligator. But after 5 or so EU stations called, I got a new shot of
> "CQ-itis" and spent most of my time running. There were several stations I
> simply could not separate from the QRN, and I'm sure there numerous others
> that I never heard at all. So I apologize to those who tried but didn't make
> it.
> 
> I experienced another first... A DK0 started calling "CQ test" zero-beat on
> my run frequency. I tried my best to shoo him with the "QRL, pse QSY"
> routine, all to no avail. He was loud enough that I could not have heard
> weak stations, so I moved on. How's that for humiliation? Giving up a run
> frequency to a DK while blasting with 1.5 kW!!
> 
> Speaking of alligators... There were a few out there. One HB9 simply could
> not hear any of the EC major contest stations calling. On Sunday morning,
> near my SR, there was an N7 (with a WC grid locator) CQ-ng with a 20 over
> signal. I could not even get a hesitation from him!! Then there are the CQ
> Machines that don't pause long enough to even get a "WS" out the door!
> 
> Once again, the SP proves to be a great contest. Thanks for all the Qs, and
> a special thanks to all whose patience allowed me to ride out the static
> crashes to get you in the log.
> 
> 73 es HNY!
> 
> Jim - WS6X
> 
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: new style PL-259's with screw on back INSTRUCTIONS

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I also use the DXE style compression/solder PL-259s.  They are relatively 
expensive but work well and avoid the all too common “shield solder” problem.  
They are well worth the cost.  I just wish I had shifted to them earlier.

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 6, 2018, at 7:47 AM, terry burge  wrote:
> 
> Hello again,
> 
> Just and FYI of why I asked about these new 'PL-259's'. I don't remember ever 
> seeing them before and thought I had found perhaps a better style connector. 
> With my hit-and-miss soldering especially on things like PL-259's I was 
> actually thinking 'EUREKA!', something I can make a solid connection to the 
> shield with. Once I even had a run of coax work on all bands but 10 meters on 
> one of my multi-band beams. Tracked it down to not having the shield soldered 
> good (or at all). Anyway, I've got 10 of these new units to try out from 
> China and hope for better success. Can't begin to tell you how many times it 
> seem I just can't get a soldering iron hot enough or it's too hot and the 
> solder drips off. A compression style joint may be the ticket.
> 
> Terry
> KI7M
> 
>> On December 4, 2018 at 9:34 PM Pete Michaelis - N8TR  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> EBAY item 192225630585 looks similar to the Multicomp clamp 
>> connector  discussed on
>> Towertalk early in 2011.   See:
>> http://lists.contesting.com/_towertalk/2011-02/msg00214.html
>> 
>> 73, Pete - N8TR
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> At 09:45 PM 12/4/2018, terry burge wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Gary
>> Take a look at ebay 'UHF PL259 male clamp Plug lot connector for 
>> LMR400 RG8 RG213 RG214 Coax cable' from 'superstore_dan'.
>> Terry
>> KI7M
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Loss Question

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I think Frank misspoke and meant this calculator was oversimplied:


https://www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm

Types of Coax Cable and Line Loss Calculator - 
qsl.net<https://www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm>
www.qsl.net
Here's a quick line loss calculator to use Note that the simple program used 
for this web page gives a very close approximation for additional losses due to 
SWR.






From: Topband  on behalf of Wes Stewart 

Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:33 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Loss Question

Whoa.   I said no such thing. The AC6LA calculator is definitely not simplified
and/or inaccurate.

Wes  N7WS


On 10/25/2018 11:07 AM, donov...@starpower.net wrote:
>
> Hi Bob,
>
>
> As Wes points out, the AC6LA calculator is overly simplified and not
> very accurate. Despite that, the answer to your question remains the same:
>
>
> The additional loss caused by a 50 ohm coaxial cable feeding a 36
> ohm load is insignificant at 1.8 MHz.
>
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Robert L. Chortek" 
> To: donov...@starpower.net
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:00:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Loss Question
>
>
>
> That's a GREAT calculator Frank. Thanks again!
>
>
>
>
> From: Topband  on behalf of 
> donov...@starpower.net 
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 10:52 AM
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Loss Question
>
>
> This is an alternative calculator:
>
>
> www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm<http://www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm>
>
>
> For 200 feet of RG-213 terminated in a 36 ohm load,
> the additional cable loss at 1.8 MHz is only 0.026 dB .
>
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
>
>
>
> On 10/25/2018 10:24 AM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
>> Does anyone know how much power would be lost if a resonant antenna with an 
>> Impedance of say, e.g. 36 Ohms is fed with 50 Ohm coax? Is there a good 
>> source where I could look up this kind of information?
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>> Bob/AA6VB
>> _
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>

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

Re: Topband: Loss Question

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hi Mike,


That just goes so show you how little I know!  I assumed, apparently 
incorrectly, that there was some loss IN ADDITION to the transmission line loss 
(which I know how to calculate).  In other words, I thought that if my 
transmitter was connected directly to the antenna there would be some mismatch 
loss and that as soon as I added coax, then ADDITIONAL transmission line loss 
would be added and the TOTAL loss would be the sum of the two components.  I 
infer from the responses that the loss is only the transmission line loss 
(aside from whatever efficiency losses are in the system due to the type of 
loading, resistance between connections, conductor loss, ground loss, etc., 
etc.).


Thanks for your reply!


73, es DX,


Bob/AA6VB



From: Mike Waters 
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 10:43 AM
To: Chortek, Robert L.
Cc: topband
Subject: Re: Topband: Loss Question

It is impossible to answer you without knowing the length and type of coax. :-)

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com<http://www.w0btu.com>
WØBTU's Radio Communication Technical Articles and File 
...<http://www.w0btu.com/>
www.w0btu.com
Amateur radio technical information by Mike Waters, W0BTU




On Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 12:24 PM Chortek, Robert L. 
mailto:robert.chor...@berliner.com>> wrote:
Does anyone know how much power would be lost if a resonant antenna with an 
Impedance of say, e.g.  36 Ohms is fed  with 50 Ohm coax?  Is there a good 
source where I could look up this kind of information?


Thanks!
Bob/AA6VB

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

Topband: Loss Question

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Does anyone know how much power would be lost if a resonant antenna with an 
Impedance of say, e.g.  36 Ohms is fed  with 50 Ohm coax?  Is there a good 
source where I could look up this kind of information?


Thanks!


Bob/AA6VB
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Mixed RF grounds

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I looked into this some years back and was advised NOT to mix ground and 
elevated radials.  Can’t recall why.

My elevated radials are bent in every possible direction, and cover only about 
120 degrees of the compass. Still,  I’ve managed to work 147 countries on 160 
and over 200 on 80 from a 11,200 square foot lot in San Jose, CA.  The point 
being, you can do reasonably well with a compromise set up.  Just do the best 
you can with what you have to work with and maximize your receive capability.

Good Luck and 73,

Bob  AA6VB 
Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 19, 2018, at 3:02 PM, "g4...@justfans.co.uk"  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> In my limited garden I can get away with an 17 high inverted-L with 2 very
> bent elevated radials and very odd angles. One of them in the farmers field.
> 
> It has certainly got me out but I have been told if I sick some copper rods
> down at the base and connect to the radials (coax shield and radials) this
> is not going to be beneficial.
> 
> This seems counter-intuitive.
> 
> Before I get digging (cos I got to try it anyway and take some analyser
> readings) can anyone comment on this?
> 
> Iain G4SGX
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: making a bev seem longer

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Not to hijack the thread, but...

My Hi-Z Array works reasonably well in 160 (despite being only 40’ per side) 
and very well on both 80 and 40.  It has allowed me to work many countries on 
80 and 160 I would not otherwise have been able to hear.

To me, it was worth the effort.

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 6, 2018, at 4:17 PM, WW3S  wrote:
> 
> I put a 3 ele hi z array up last fall, and it's not worth a tinkers damat 
> least to me.may be some local noiseit certainly has directivity, at 
> least on the bcb, so so on 80, but on 160, which was my primary interest, 
> never worked well, never better than my reversible ewe, which is probably 
> going back up this fall
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On Aug 6, 2018, at 6:20 PM, Tim Childers K9CQ  wrote:
>> 
>> I have been using the Hi-Z 3 element at 50 foot spacing that Lee designed. I 
>> can tell you that the results for me were amazing and it gives you 6 
>> directions.  It works quite well on 40, 80 and 160.  You can also find them 
>> at DX Engineering.
>> 
>> Tim, K9CQ
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message- From: l...@k7tjr.com
>> Sent: Monday, August 6, 2018 4:32 PM
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: making a bev seem longer
>> 
>> First let me apologize if you get this e-mail twice as I have been having
>> problems with MSN.com.
>> 
>> Hi JC,
>> Not all vertical arrays are mono band. A well built 4-square on a 60 foot
>> per side can do a stellar job on 160, 80, and 40 meters while extending well
>> down into the broadcast band. The 3 element as well as the 4-square based 8
>> element on an 85 foot diameter circle will do the same thing.
>> 
>> Lee   K7TJR
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> https://www.avg.com
>> 
>> _
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Baker Island DXpedition on 160

[Chortek, Robert L.]

A short top loaded vertical over an excellent ground will put out a fabulous 
signal on 160!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 13, 2018, at 11:29 AM, C Allen Baker via Topband 
>  wrote:
> 
> Glad the  are going at this time.
> A group of experienced ops and the great preparation will ensure beau coup 
> qsos are made despite the current sun spot cycle nadir.
> I bet the 160 meter  cw signal will amaze.
> Good luck to the team for a safe and successful trip.
> 73 de Al, W5IZ
> Committed to working all the dx I can hear, repeat hear ;-), 
> 
>On ‎Wednesday‎, ‎June‎ ‎13‎, ‎2018‎ ‎12‎:‎24‎:‎04‎ ‎PM, Ed W0YK 
>  wrote:  
> 
> Team members leave Saturday. 
> 73,Ed W0YK
>  Original message From: Rob Atkinson  
> Date: 6/13/18  9:55 AM  (GMT-08:00) To: topband@contesting.com Subject: 
> Topband: Baker Island DXpedition on 160 
> I respectfully suggest the Baker Is. dxpedition be postponed for a few
> years until band condx improve.  It makes no sense to me to mount this
> costly undertaking to a limited access location when propagation is in
> the toilet.   If USFWS is managing access, they've lately shown that
> they'll only approve trips to islands under their custodianship every
> 10 years or so.  If this is the case with Baker Is., then this trip
> will make another one in a few years impossible.
> 
> Another point I'd like to make is that a later trip might afford a
> chance to renegotiate what I consider a ridiculous antenna limit,
> which seems to be based on a ridiculous antenna design, namely the "43
> foot all-band vertical."Such a height with top loading might work
> okay on 80 meters but on 160 its efficiency will be poor.
> 
> 73
> 
> Rob
> K5UJ
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Fwd: Re: Baker Island DXpedition on 160

[Chortek, Robert L.]

A short vertical with top loading over  an effective ground can be in this 
extremely effective antenna 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 13, 2018, at 10:33 AM, F Z_Bruce  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As in ARRL literature, even as short antenna in  a great ground plane  can be 
> very effective.  The Baker Island  group has  indicated that  they were going 
> to use the salt water..
> 
> 73
> Bruce-k1fz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:14:01 +, jon jones  wrote:
> 
> Back in the 90's -  KH6ND was active from Kure Is on 160M during July. He was 
> very workable in North America in the early morning hours before NA sunrise. 
> I logged Mike with 100 w and my balloon supported vertical. QRN from 
> thunderstorms may be lower at that time.
> 
> 
> Europe may well have some short windows of opportunity as well.
> 
> 
> A safe trip to the KH1/KH7ZZ team.  - Jon N0JK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hello TopBanders,
> KH1/KH7Z will be active on 160 from Baker Island from June 27 to July 6
> (note that dates are tentative and may change -- please visit
> http://baker2018.net/ for updates).
> GL and CU,
> George,
> AA7JV
> 
> PS: Donations are the life-blood of DXpeditions and this one is no
> exception.
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Laser Com introducing a breakthrough Top Band antenna at Dayton

[Chortek, Robert L.]

What do you mean?  This actually works great!  I am a bata tester and have 
worked 297 DXCC Country’s on Topband since February 18th alone!

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 1, 2018, at 1:07 PM, AB2E Darrell  wrote:
> 
> Happy April Fool's Day folks!
> 
> 73 Darrell AB2E
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Topband  on behalf of Steve Babcock 
> 
> Sent: Sunday, April 1, 2018 1:03 PM
> To: donov...@starpower.net
> Cc: topBand List
> Subject: Re: Topband: Laser Com introducing a breakthrough Top Band antenna 
> at Dayton
> 
> And in a related story…..Laser Comm is teaming up with Auto Comm Ltd. of Palo 
> Alto California to market to the Amateur radio Community the new Auto-Q radio 
> package.
> 
> This new "radio station in a box" will utilize the best of Laser Comms new 
> antenna system together with a completely stand alone Ham radio transmitter 
> which will utilize the latest in a new digital technology called FT-8. The 
> complete radio package is contained in a box less than 1 sq. foot and runs on 
> the latest Elon Musk battery packs. These radios will make fully automated 
> QSOs, and with a cell internet connection will upload all QSOs to the users 
> DXCC and WAS. Head of computer development at Auto Comm. Jim Q Contact said 
> “the new Auto QSO radio package can be deployed anywhere in the world. It can 
> be set up at very rare DXCC countries, wanted counties or states and be left 
> to run for months to make QSOs”. For those Hams that need a new country that 
> has been difficult to get, they can deploy one of our units and then go home 
> to their base QTH and work the Auto-Q Unit.”
> 
> Early testing has shown that the unit has been able to make over 2,000 QSO’s 
> per month while left unattended. The Li-Ion batteries have a long life 
> because of the very efficient radiation from the Laser Comm antenna. There 
> has been some skepticism in the Ham community about the need for a ground 
> radial system, but Auto Comm has done extensive field testing to proven that 
> their antenna can radiate even better than a dipole at 300 feet.
> 
> When asked about the concern in the Ham community about un-attended QSOs 
> being used for ARRL awards, Jim Contact said “our studies have shown that 
> Hams these days are far too busy to spend the time at their radios to make 
> QSOs. In todays society there are too many other demands on our time than to 
> be stuck sitting at the radio using the old modes. Times have changed, and 
> our studies have shown that today most Hams are more concerned about just 
> getting the award counters rather than spending time trying to copy signals 
> using the old outdated CW and SSB modes."
> 
> Auto-Q will have a table setup beside Laser Comm at Dayton this year so that 
> customers don't need to walk too far through the mud.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Apr 1, 2018, at 10:01 AM, donov...@starpower.net wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Laser Com Announces New Topband Antenna System
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Reported by Woody K3YV
>> 
>> 
>> Laser Com, Inc. of Titusville, Florida recently announced their
>> development of a revolutionary new 160 meter antenna system
>> based on their proprietary laser communications system.
>> 
>> 
>> Dr. Benjamin Dover, Laser Com’s chief engineer, cited their research
>> into laser-based space communications as providing the “happy
>> accident” that led to the discovery of the laser based 160 meter
>> antenna system.
>> 
>> 
>> Dr. Dover said that an accidental connection of the wrong cable
>> led to the discovery. A cable that had been carrying 1.8 MHz
>> signals was inadvertently connected to the modulation input of the
>> laser transmitter that that Ben was testing. “Imagine our surprise,”
>> said Dr. Dover, “when we noticed that 1.8 MHz radio frequencies
>> were being radiated all along the laser beam. This is something we
>> never expected. The possibilities are endless.”
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Laser Com plans to market the laser antenna not only as a commercial
>> product, but also as a low cost 160 meter amateur radio antenna.
>> Dr. Dover set up the prototype as a demonstration of the product’s
>> simplicity.
>> 
>> 
>> The secret to the 160 meter laser antenna is in the base unit’s
>> modulation transformer that directly modulates the Plesseo-Dyminium
>> laser crystal. The user simply places the laser box on the ground and
>> adjusts the laser beam straight up into the air. As the laser beam rises
>> into the sky, the 160 meter signal travels up the laser beam and is
>> radiated all along the length of the optical beam.
>> 
>> 
>> The laser beam shines nearly a mile into the atmosphere. However,
>> due to path losses along the beam, the actual 160 meter radiation is
>> only transmitted by the first few hundred feet of the laser’s beam. The
>> result is an omni-directional vertical 160 meter antenna that is several
>> hundred feet high.
>> 
>> 
>> Acting like a 

Re: Topband: CQ WW CW 160m observations

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I found conditions very poor and even on 80 no EU heard at my station in San 
Jose, California.

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 27, 2017, at 5:57 AM, MR TREVOR DUNNE 
> wrote:

Hi All

First time to give 160 a good go during CQ WW and I was surprised how few NA 
stations I heard,

I feel I was active at the right time 03-08utc but apart from VO1HP K3LR and 
W3LPL I don't think I worked a half a dozen more, worked some Caribbean 
stations as well I don't have a contest winning setup by any means but I was 
expecting a lot more from NA, due to work I'm going to miss the ARRL 160 
contest next weekend which is a pity as it would give me a better chance to see 
how well I can hear NA,
Just wondering how did guys over this side find NA prop and how did the NA guys 
find prop to EU??

Thanks
Trevor
EI2GLB
_
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)

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I rarely weigh in these debates (and don’t even know what these digital modes 
are except in the most general terms) but I don’t see any movement whatsoever 
to (a) require folks to use digital modes, or (b) prevent folks from using the 
traditional modes they enjoy have enjoyed for years.

I just don’t see a problem here.

73,

Bob/AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: UK delivery DXing on Edge from Amazon

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I bought one and read it.  Perfect condition.  I'll sell it to anyone in the 
Continental USA delivered for $20.00. 

73,

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 14, 2017, at 2:16 PM, Doug Turnbull  wrote:
> 
> Dear OMs,
> I just received notification that the second edition of DXing on the
> Edge is being dispatched for delivery to EI from Amazon UK.   The cost was
> £15.85.
> 
> 73 Doug EI2CN
> 
> -Original Message-
> 
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: ET7L DXCC approval

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Their license was apparently approved and issued by the wrong governmental 
department.  

73,

 Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 6, 2016, at 6:42 AM, Johann Bruinier  wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know the reason(s) for ARRL's withholding the approval for the 
> excellent ET7L operation?
> 
> Another unpleasant item is the growing use of remote RXs. It's not difficult 
> to identify the fakers but does ARRL care?
> 
> Seasons' Greetings & 73!
> 
> Jan DL9KR.
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Plasma TV noise

[Chortek, Robert L.]

You need to add a "no plasma tv" clause to your lease!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 18, 2016, at 1:24 PM, Will Angenent  wrote:
> 
> I happen to be his landlord also.
> Now back to the farther neighbor who has a "growing" light. hi
> 
> Will
> K6ND
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:23 PM, Garry Shapiro  wrote:
>> 
>> Will,
>> 
>> You are fortunate to afford such an approach. In my own experience, it has 
>> been a challenge even to get a neighbor to replace a noisy variable light 
>> switch--even if I did the work and supplied the replacement..
>> 
>> Garry, NI6T
>> 
>> 
>>> On 11/18/2016 6:09 AM, Will Angenent wrote:
>>> Yes I did
>>> I bought my neighbor a new TV
>>> 
>>> Will
>>> K6ND
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
 On Nov 18, 2016, at 6:59 AM, William Hill  wrote:
 
 Hello: Has anyone successfully solved this problem? 73,
 
 Bill/W3WH
 
 ---
 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
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> 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 Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 75 ohm RG6 to 50 Ohm radio

[Chortek, Robert L.]

To Tree's point:  have the Hi-Z Triangular Array and use it with the 75/50 
transformer.

After using it for a year or so, and just for curiosity sake I pulled out the 
transformer and hooked the 75 ohm cable directly to the receiver input.  I went 
back and forth multiple times and my ears never noticed a difference.  Not a 
scientific test to be sure, but

73,

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2016, at 7:48 AM, Tree > wrote:

I suppose I need to ask if worrying about impedance at this point in the
system is really worth the trouble.

Once signals have gone through one or two stages of amplification - would a
loss of a db or so in signal strength really matter?

Tree N6TR

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:46 PM, Lee STRAHAN 
> wrote:


Yes Ed, You have the right numbers. It won't matter which windings are
first or last. You can even wind 4 then wind 1 more and use it as an
autotransformer where the 1 turn is added to the 4 for 5. Any of these will
work fine at these TOP Band and higher frequencies. This ratio is not
perfect but will work just fine. It would be 50 to 78 ohms which in our
world is close enough.
Let us know how your new 8 circle works. Maybe even compare it to your
Hi-Z 4-square.
Lee   K7TJR

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ed
Stallman
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 8:35 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: 75 ohm RG6 to 50 Ohm radio

My receive antenna is 75 Ohm RG6 connected to my radio and I want to wind
a 2873000202 binocular core to step 75 to 50 Ohm's . I seen this info on
W8JI web page but can't seem to find it again.

I do remember it's 4 turns 50 Ohm and 5 turns 75 Ohm and all wires come
out the same side of the core . Am I correct so far?

Does it make a difference which winding I wind first ?

Thanks in advance , Ed N5DG



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

Re: Topband: DXE NCC-1 phasing box

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I have always found DXE customer service to be excellent!

I have connection to the company.

73

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 23, 2016, at 7:41 AM, Rob Atkinson 
> wrote:

I just finished speaking with Tim K3LR on the land line with regard to
my problem  We had a cordial conversation and I must say in all the
years I have been a ham, I have never had the president of a company
immediately call me to address my concerns and problems with a
product.   I am confident whatever is plaguing my NCC-1 will get fixed
whether it's the unit, or operator head-space.

I also received a satisfactory explanation for the policy of not
providing a schematic for the NCC-1.   The repair service terms as
explained to me are quite reasonable but I hope I don't have to send
it in for repair.  I certainly appreciate this fast response.   Also,
I mischaracterized the service dept. email as "canned."  It did have
some personalized text in it which I overlooked and I apologize for
that.

73

Rob
K5UJ

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Tim Duffy 
> wrote:
Hello Rob:

Please call DX Engineering. We will help you get your NCC-1 working
properly.

73
Tim K3LR
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 162, Issue 4

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Hi Scott,

It's true there is a lot of pressure on our kids today to build a resume for 
college but your statement is FAR too broad.  I have seen lots of kids 
volunteer in many capacities having nothing to do with their college resume.

73,

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 4, 2016, at 9:57 AM, scott meister  wrote:
> 
> Young people do not volunteer. Only what counts on college applications they 
> ste raising a generation of mercenarys
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jun 4, 2016, at 12:00 PM, topband-requ...@contesting.com wrote:
>> 
>> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
>>   topband@contesting.com
>> 
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>   http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>   topband-requ...@contesting.com
>> 
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>   topband-ow...@contesting.com
>> 
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>> 
>> 
>> Today's Topics:
>> 
>>  1. Re: W8JI - recipient of the Yasme Excellence Award
>> (James Rodenkirch)
>>  2.  modeling BOGs (or whatever we call them) (Guy Olinger K2AV)
>>  3. UHF Male connector for 1/2" cellflex (Bob K6UJ)
>>  4. Re: UHF Male connector for 1/2" cellflex (Greg Zenger)
>>  5. Re: UHF Male connector for 1/2" cellflex (Clive GM3POI)
>>  6. Re: UHF Male connector for 1/2" cellflex (donov...@starpower.net)
>>  7. Re: UHF Male connector for 1/2" cellflex (Bob K6UJ)
>>  8. Re: UHF Male connector for 1/2" cellflex (Clive GM3POI)
>>  9. 259- 1/2"  link (Clive GM3POI)
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:08:13 +
>> From: James Rodenkirch 
>> To: Kip Edwards , 'Top Band Contesting'
>>   
>> Subject: Re: Topband: W8JI - recipient of the Yasme Excellence Award
>> Message-ID:
>>   
>> 
>> 
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> 
>> By the by: if anyone needs a competent web-site design/manager, my nephew 
>> does that sort of thing - he's worked on other sites I'm involved with and 
>> does excellent worth..71.5/72 de Jim R. K9JWV
>> 
>> Here's a representative site he runs: https://www.rmspartnership.org/
>> 
>> 
>> From: Kip Edwards 
>> Sent: Friday, June 3, 2016 7:57 AM
>> To: 'James Rodenkirch'; 'Top Band Contesting'; w...@contesting.com
>> Subject: RE: Topband: W8JI - recipient of the Yasme Excellence Award
>> 
>> Jim,
>> 
>>   The Yasme Foundation website is being completely re-done by the
>> person who did the NCJ website.  Unfortunately our webmaster resigned and it
>> has taken some time and one false start to find someone capable of doing it
>> right.  In the meantime the website is embarrassing and, as you noted,
>> woefully out of date.
>> 
>>   My apologies to all--and I'm glad you were able to find the press
>> release about Tom receiving the Yasme Excellence Award.
>> 
>>   73 Kip W6SZN
>>   Yasme Foundation Director/Secretary
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of James
>> Rodenkirch
>> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 5:19 AM
>> To: Top Band Contesting; w...@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: W8JI - recipient of the Yasme Excellence Award
>> 
>> Based on some snooping around @ the YASME site, it's obvious no one is
>> keeping that site up to date - tnx to Mike, W0Btu, for listing the ARRL url
>> link.
>> 
>> Also, I didn't intend to diss the other current recipients...Tim Duffy (who
>> I believe shows up here once in a while with comments) and Carole Perry (I
>> am not familiar with her efforts)...AND, as I understand from a recent post,
>> our very own Tree has garnered that recognition.BZ to all!
>> 
>> 71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
>> 
>> P.S. Hope to hear and work ya in the summer Stew...and sure HOPE you hear my
>> peanut whistle QRP signal...hihi 
>> From: James Rodenkirch
>> Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 4:07 PM
>> To: Top Band Contesting; w...@contesting.com
>> Subject: W8JI - recipient of the Yasme Excellence Award
>> 
>> No more deserving...good on ya, Tom! I've enjoyed AND miss your technical
>> and "how to operate" posts.
>> 
>> Tom Rauch, W8JI: "The Yasme Excellence Award is made in recognition of Tom's
>> many contributions to the technical advancement of the Amateur Service," the
>> announcement said. "Tom's willingness to provide education and direction to
>> amateurs through his website and other communications is a prime example of
>> hams mentoring, teaching, and training each other in the finest traditions
>> of Amateur Radio."
>> _
>> Topband 

Re: Topband: Pixel vs BOG

[Chortek, Robert L.]

It was not clear the loop was rotated to null the noise.  IF SO, that's a BIG 
improvement in SN

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 25, 2016, at 8:25 AM, Kenneth Grimm  wrote:
> 
> Wow!  The BOG blows the Pixel loop away.  The loop sounds like my
> vertical!  I wonder if there might be a feedline problem?  Surely the loop
> isn't meant to be that noisy.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Ken - K4XL
> 
>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 9:55 AM, K1FZ-Bruce  wrote:
>> 
>> Mixed reviews.
>> 
>> Pixel loop antenna vs 200 foot BOG antenna at   VO1HP.
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTXvcEwgUsU
>> 
>> 73
>> 
>> Bruce-k1fz
>> www.qsl.net/k1fz/bogantennanotes/index.html
>> _
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Heard

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I see quite a few west coast stations made it into the VK0EK log on 80 meters 
via the long path this evening , with some daylight on both ends.  The VK0EK 
was pretty loud here near the Oregon border from about 1:45 - 2:00 utc. Q5 copy!

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: VK0EK Operation From Spit

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Does this mean there will be no more opportunities during the West Coast 
sunrise?

Bob AA

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 29, 2016, at 10:01 AM, Jim Brown  wrote:
> 
> Got this in response to a question to the pilots.
> 
> They were not on 80 or 160 this morning.
> 
> 73, Jim K9YC
> 
>  Forwarded Message 
> Subject: Re: Next 40M CW to W6
> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 04:19:25 +
> From: VK0EK 
> Reply-To: VK0EK 
> To: k...@arrl.net
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> I'm sorry - but there will be no low band ops from spit - its specifically to 
> get ATNO's for those who couldn't hear Atlas.
> 
> Thanks, 73, and Good DX!
> Heard Island Expedition
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Untoward (?) comments on 160

[Chortek, Robert L.]

FWIW -

160 has been a huge challenge for me and whether my equipment/antennas came out 
of a box or required considerable effort to assemble is no matter.  However you 
get on 160 success requires lots of dedication and time in front of the rig to 
catch that 2 minute opening to snag a new one.  That will never change.

73,

Bob/AA6VB

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

Topband: Fwd: Demo of the value of one dB and the cost of sending too fast

[Chortek, Robert L.]

> I agree - I am far more limited by what I can "not" hear than I am by those 
> who can't hear me (though that could use considerable improvement too).


> So, while I would like to be 1 db louder and hear 1 db better if I had to 
> pick only one, it would be to hear 1 db better

No contest!!!
> 
> 73,
> 
> Bob AA6VB
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
>>> From: Topband  on behalf of Bill Cromwell 
>>> 
>>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 5:58 AM
>>> To: topband@contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: Topband: Demo of the value of one dB and the cost of sending 
>>> too fast
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Doubling the power output translates to less than one "S-unit" at a
>>> distant receiver. Maybe most of those hams who preach otherwise ahve
>>> less interest in weak signals. That is a matter of personal interest and
>>> personal taste. Don't forget that all of this applies on receive, too.
>>> 
>>> There is not much chance for me to work DX with antennas that will fit
>>> the space I have available and the power levels I use. I'm happy to work
>>> in the region where I live. But I can hear those DX stations. A peeve of
>>> mine is the 'alligator' station - all mouth and no ears. Mine is the
>>> opposite. We aren't going to work them if we can't hear them regardless
>>> of fill legal power output (or more) and huge antenna arrays.
>>> 
>>> 73,
>>> 
>>> Bill  KU8H
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 02/26/2016 07:35 AM, Mike Waters wrote:
> - its well worth the effort to improve your signal by as little as one dB
 It certainly is! This is quite interesting.
 
 How many hams have we heard over the years preaching otherwise? "But it's
 ONLY a fraction of an S-unit!".
 
 73, Mike
 www.w0btu.com
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>> 
>>> _
>>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>> _
>>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: A35T

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Same thing happened to me with the T88 a few years back. 

Sat in front of the radio for hours for seven days listening to nothing but 
static. On the very last day for less than a minute, they came out of the noise 
and I made the contact.

 It was one of the most exciting things in ham radio!

73,

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> 
> "They hear well but their TX, 339, is weak.  Got a 1 minute opening
> (seriously) around SR and made the contact."
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: A35T

[Chortek, Robert L.]

A35T had a booming signal on 80 meters this morning just south of the Oregon 
Border.

Nil on 160 here though.

GL

Bob/AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: VP8STI rumor

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Anyone know if they were able to go back and retrieve the equipment?

Bob AA6VB
Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 26, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Gary Smith  wrote:
> 
> They're having one difficult time doing this DXpedetion. I'm going to 
> add some extra when I do the OQSL, if that can't do the next stop at 
> South Georgia, this is surely going to be a financial setback for 
> them.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Gary, KA1J
> 
>> *This is from DX-Worldde NK8X*
>> 
>> 
>> *NEWS UPDATE @ 21:20Z *- Nigel Jolly, Braveheart owner, *declared an
>> emergency* and ordered the VP8STI team to cease all operations and return
>> to the ship. A large ice flow that had broken away due to last night´s
>> storm starts to block the entrance to the Bay where they were camped. There
>> was strong potential for the ice flow to prevent Braveheart reaching  them.
>> 
>> The Team is now safely aboard the Braveheart and they are moving away from
>> Southern Thule Is. All equipment and personal gear is still on the island.
>> They hope to return to camp site during next good weather window. Once they
>> retrieve their equipment they could make a determination as to whether they
>> can proceed to South Georgia to do VP8SGI as planned - *VP8STI QRT !*
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: VP8STI from California

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Nil here in San Jose, California (not to be confused with San Jose, Costa Rica, 
hi) on 160 and not quite readable on 80.  Good signal on 40, however!

Maybe tonight.

Bob/AA6VB
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: K5P good job !

[Chortek, Robert L.]

For what it's worth, I would be in favor of a little less tolerance of bad 
behavior. I'm talking about folks who repeatedly make personal attacks.  There 
is a point at which it should not be tolerated. If folks can't behave like 
"gentlemen" on the Gentlemen's Band Reflector" they should be banned.  

73,

Bob/AA6VB


From: Topband  on behalf of Cecil Acuff 

Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 6:14 AM
To: g...@ka1j.com
Cc: Topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: K5P good job !

Hate to say it but when he left the Amps group he never looked back...I expect 
the same here.

There is a dedicated group of haters here...small but they are here.  I would 
imagine their contributions to the group otherwise are insignificant (as are 
mine) and will now probably find little joy in being here without Tom to focus 
their hate upon.

And no I'm not a Tom groupie or cheerleader.  But he did bring great value with 
his accurate technical insight and interest in advancing the technical state of 
the art of 160/80m antennas and radio sport in general.

But he's not the only brain on this group...there are several others and the 
group will go on in one form or another until they get tired of the crap and 
move on as well. (Some no doubt may have already exited quietly)

I personally think discussion of RHR or any commercial look a like should be 
banned from this groupstrictly!  It's a toxic subject best fought over 
someplace else.  As has already been demonstrated, it's not going to be solved 
here and only causes damage and pain.

I'm not driving the bus but if I were it would be straight to the penalty box 
with you if you brought it up or participated in it...second 
offense..ejectionbut that's just my personal opinion...that and a buck 
(inflation) will get you a cheap cup of coffee or maybe a QSL direct.

Cecil
K5DL


Sent using recycled electrons.

On Jan 19, 2016, at 7:22 AM, Gary Smith  wrote:

>> Hoping to see more posts from W8JI.  I'm not remotely qualified to
>> rank his substantial expertise and contributions to this group.
>>
>> 73
>> Joe VO1NA
>
> As am I. Tom leaving will be part of the end of learning about Ham
> Radio as I've always known it to be. When the knowledge bases are
> available no more, what is left?
>
> 73,
>
> Gary
> KA1J
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: strange propagation

[Chortek, Robert L.]

I agree 100%.

Let's have all on this reflector act like Gentlemen.  160 is, after all, the 
"Gentlemen's Band".

We should live up to the name.

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 16, 2016, at 5:53 AM, Louis Parascondola via Topband 
>  wrote:
> 
> Tom, by you leaving would just fuel the egos of those VERY few who want to 
> stir up trouble.  If we get off the discussion things should return to 
> normal.  I am done with the RHR discussion.  When it was a healthy discussion 
> where sensible arguments were presented I see no problem, but when it gets 
> boiled down to comparing them with the  guy who pumped the price of the drug 
> that is the toilet and that's where it will end.  I'm sure others will feel 
> the same.  Hang in there.  
> 
> 
> Lou W1QJ
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom W8JI 
> To: Louis Parascondola ; n1rj ; 
> topband 
> Sent: Sat, Jan 16, 2016 8:37 am
> Subject: Re: Topband: strange propagation
> 
> This reflector has gone down the toilet with personal BS that serves no 
> purpose except to pick fights.
> 
> After 20 years, I'm leaving it.It sure went down the tubes.
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Louis Parascondola via Topband" 
> To: ; 
> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2016 7:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Topband: strange propagation
> 
> 
>> That was not nice.
>> 
>> 
>> Lou W1QJ
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Roger D Johnson 
>> To: topband 
>> Sent: Sat, Jan 16, 2016 7:09 am
>> Subject: Re: Topband: strange propagation
>> 
>> 
>> Sounds a lot like the RHR folks!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A friend of mine at the Georgia State Public Service Training Center 
>>> (right
>>> down my street) says this social trend, made pandemic through Internet, 
>>> has
>>> even been assigned a name now. It is called Homogeneous Clustering. This 
>>> is
>>> where groups of people cluster together and invent their own reality, 
>>> feed off
>>> each other's emotions, and dismiss anyone outside their group as a 
>>> problem and
>>> dishonest.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 73 Tom
>>> _
>>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>> _
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>> 
>> _
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11412 - Release Date: 01/16/16
> 
> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: K5P

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Good Day All!


Does anyone know if K5P will be qrv on 160?  I can't find any information on 
their website.


Thanks,


Bob/AA6VB
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Stew Beef

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Nothing beats a bit of context and perspective

Plus, I love the increased DX  activity a contest brings.  

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 3, 2016, at 11:03 AM, Tree  wrote:
> 
> I guess one point that needs to be kept in mind - if you add up the
> contests that have an impact to normal DX operation - it probably is about
> 10 nights a year.
> 
> In some of these contests - I have worked DX countries that are not active
> outside of contests - or have worked new ones in the preparations leading
> up to the contests.
> 
> That leaves something like 355 nights a year with no contests.   I
> understand some people don't like them and they turn off their radio - but
> if you look at the overall activity level during a contest and compare it
> to outside of contest - there are many more people "enjoying" the band
> during those 10 or so nights.
> 
> Good discussion - but let's keep the numbers in mind.
> 
> Tree N6TR
> 
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Michael St. Angelo 
> wrote:
> 
>> The Stew Perry contest is one of the better ones but I agree with Larry and
>> Joe.  Contests  tend to take over the band and interferes with other form
>> of
>> operation such as DX'ing, QRP and probably Digital operators.
>> 
>> What is missing is that we don't have a "WARC" type MF band which is free
>> of
>> contest operation.
>> 
>> Maybe we could compromise. Is it possible to limit the SP to a portion of
>> the band that does not interfere with the DX, QRP and Digital frequencies?
>> 
>> Mike N2MS
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joe
>> Wilkowski
>> Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2015 3:49 PM
>> To: 'Larry Burke'; topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Stew Beef
>> 
>> Well, since it is a public forum I have to side with Larry on this.  I am a
>> contester and enjoy mostly top band operating but I would have to agree
>> that
>> too much of a good thing gets old quick.  It used to be that you looked
>> forward to the SP, but warm-ups, pre-warmups etc. seem to carry the theme
>> too far.
>> - Joe K8FC
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Larry
>> Burke
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 6:38 PM
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Stew Beef
>> 
>>> Fortunately participation is not mandatory for those who have had enough.
>> 
>> Ah, but that's exactly my point. Those with a limited or no interest in
>> this
>> event DO have to "participate" in it by virtue of the additional weekend of
>> chaos that it causes.
>> 
>> - Larry K5RK
>> 
>> 
>> _
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>> 
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: FCP Antenna

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Thanks to all the helpful replies, but on and off list!

73,

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 11:52 AM, Chortek, Robert L. <robert.chor...@berliner.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> Dear Fellow Topband Enthusiasts:
> 
> 
> I'm hoping to get a little help here:
> 
> 
> Q:  Will I see noticeable improvement if I change my radial system to a FCP 
> and/or raise the base of my elevated vertical?
> 
> 
> Background:  I have a 60 foot tall vertical I use on 80 meters, which I also 
> base load for 160.  The antenna is fed at the base about 3 feet off the 
> ground. The radial system consists of 12 gull wing radials (8 for 160 and 4 
> four 80) which slope up to the roof about 10 feet or so high, then make a 90 
> degree turn and then run roughly parallel to one another but fan out somewhat 
> (6 and 6) The radials essentially form a U shape (base of the U slopes up to 
> the roof and then the legs of the U are on the roof because that is what my 
> lot allows.
> 
> 
> 1.If I were to replace the radials with a FCP system (and raising the 
> base of the antenna from 3 feet to 8 feet), would my transmitted signal 
> improve to the point where anyone would notice?
> 
> 
> 2.If I just raised the base of the antenna from 3 feet to 8 feet and kept 
> the existing radial system would my transmitted signal improve to the point 
> where anyone would notice?
> 
> 
> As a frame of reference, I have worked 144 countries on 160 from a 1/4 acre 
> city lot in San Jose, CA. and worked nearly 200 on 80, so I am having some 
> success.   Just trying to figure out what I could do better.  Please, let's 
> not talk about top loading vs. base loading because that is not my question 
> (I understand the benefits of top loading vs. base or center loading, but 
> have my reasons for using base loading - for now) .
> 
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> 
> 73,
> 
> 
> Bob/AA6VB
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: FCP Antenna

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Dear Fellow Topband Enthusiasts:


I'm hoping to get a little help here:


Q:  Will I see noticeable improvement if I change my radial system to a FCP 
and/or raise the base of my elevated vertical?


Background:  I have a 60 foot tall vertical I use on 80 meters, which I also 
base load for 160.  The antenna is fed at the base about 3 feet off the ground. 
The radial system consists of 12 gull wing radials (8 for 160 and 4 four 80) 
which slope up to the roof about 10 feet or so high, then make a 90 degree turn 
and then run roughly parallel to one another but fan out somewhat (6 and 6) The 
radials essentially form a U shape (base of the U slopes up to the roof and 
then the legs of the U are on the roof because that is what my lot allows.


1.If I were to replace the radials with a FCP system (and raising the base 
of the antenna from 3 feet to 8 feet), would my transmitted signal improve to 
the point where anyone would notice?


2.If I just raised the base of the antenna from 3 feet to 8 feet and kept 
the existing radial system would my transmitted signal improve to the point 
where anyone would notice?


As a frame of reference, I have worked 144 countries on 160 from a 1/4 acre 
city lot in San Jose, CA. and worked nearly 200 on 80, so I am having some 
success.   Just trying to figure out what I could do better.  Please, let's not 
talk about top loading vs. base loading because that is not my question (I 
understand the benefits of top loading vs. base or center loading, but have my 
reasons for using base loading - for now) .


Any help would be greatly appreciated.


73,


Bob/AA6VB
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Diversity-capable transceivers

[Chortek, Robert L]

Hi Roger,

You might have been referring to my comment, which was not intended to say the 
7800 has a "poor" receiver.   

However, I had a 7800 for 6 or 7 years (and loved it).  I then purchased a 990, 
which I had side by side with the 7800 for several months. I can tell you from 
personal experience, from many hours of A/B testing, that the main receiver in 
the 990 is significantly superior to that of the 7800 when it comes to handling 
strong adjacent signals.   That does not mean the 7800 has a "poor" receiver, 
only that the main rx in the 990 is better - at least based on my experience.   

The scope of the 990 is also much improved over the 7800 because the signals 
shown on the 990 are "nails" compared to the "blobs" on the 7800 compared to 
the "needles" on the P3 which is the best. 

This is to be expected and hoped for, as older radios are replaced with newer 
radios with more advanced technology and improved engineering.  

Nothing beats the ergonomics of the 7800/51 which are the best on the market, 
IMHO.

None of my comments really answer the question of diversity, which I do not use 
so my comments are a bit off topic

73,

Bob/AA6VB

From: Topband  on behalf of Roger Parsons via 
Topband 
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2015 8:06 AM
To: Topband Mailing List
Subject: Re: Topband: Diversity-capable transceivers

I am using the IC7800 as a diversity receiving system on 160m and it is 
excellent. Both receivers are identical and are locked to the same Master 
Oscillator. I have been unable to detect any phase drift either with frequency 
or time.


I was surprised to read a comment that it has poor receivers as all the reports 
that I have seen (and my personal experience) have shown it to be superior to 
just about anything other than the K3S (in some respects) and the IC7850/7851. 
The Main=Sub command only occurs as the button is pressed, so I have built a 
litle box which updates via the CI-V bus with any change of frequency (firmware 
by VE3RX).

I wasted a bit of good contesting time this past weekend listening to European 
stations having often identical SNRs on two separate and physically separated 
staggered Beverage systems, but sometimes fading between the two, and always 
enhancing readability on weak signals.

73 Roger
VE3ZI
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Diversity-capable transceivers

[Chortek, Robert L]

Hello Barry,

I have been using the 990 for over a year and use it daily on the Low Bands.  I 
find it an exceptional performer. The ergonomics are not quite as good as the 
ICOM 7800, but the receiver performance is much better. The capability of the 
radio is at its best on the low bands, if you look at the ARRL and Sherwood 
engineering receiver performance figures.

You can set both receivers to track one another, but the second receiver in the 
990 is from the Kenwood 590, and is a slightly lower performer, but still very 
good. I do not use it on diversity. 

I have absolutely no regrets.

73,Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 30, 2015, at 5:24 AM, Barry N1EU  wrote:
> 
> A little research reveals that the TS-990S uses a down-converting
> subreceiver on the low bands.  Can anybody comment on the stereo diversity
> capability and performance of the TS-990S and generally how it performs on
> low-band cw?
> 
> Thanks & 73,
> Barry N1EU
> 
>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Barry N1EU  wrote:
>> 
>> I'm not familiar with the Yaesu/Icom/Kenwood offerings.  Other than the
>> K3/K3S and Orion/RX366, do any of the other knobbed (non-SDR) hf
>> transceivers offer a down-converting second receiver that can be used in
>> stereo diversity mode?
>> 
>> Thanks & 73,
>> Barry N1EU
>> _
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: RX PREAMPS

[Chortek, Robert L]

I have both systems. 

The DXE 2 element system is 80 and 100 feet from my transmitter antenna, 
respectively. I have run 1.5 kW for the last several years without any 
problems, and with no sequencer. 

The Hi-Z triangular system is even closer (65') and has never had a problem.

YMMV,

73,

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 15, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Greenway  wrote:
> 
> I  have used the HI Z rx system and also the DXE ones.  HI Z said in the past 
> no need for a sequencer to get power off the amps if the xmit ant was close 
> to the rx system antennas.  Close I would say 60 foot.  DXE has always 
> suggested using a sequencer to get power off the amps during xmit.  I am 
> going to be forced to move a DXE system within 65 ft or so of my 160 vertical 
> and wonder if anyone has had any experience of using the DXE without a 
> sequencer close to their xmit antenna.  Just hate to install one more thing I 
> could get around but will if absolutely necessary.  I know moving it closer 
> is not an ideal situation but you do what you have to.  Any input?  73 Mike 
> K4PI
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Fwd: ARRL Board meets next week - I'm looking for input

[Chortek, Robert L]

People should be free to operate any way they please - within the rules.  I 
understand this discussion is about what the rules should be. 

It's all about having fun!  It's also about striking a reasonable balance 
between the many benefits of remote operation (discussed here multiple times) 
and the disruption caused by the rapid expansion of remote operation (also 
discussed here).  
 
To each his own I say and don't worry about the other guy.  Be satisfied with 
what you accomplished - in the way you chose to do it.

Let's put this into perspective- People are dying out there.  This issue is 
really not important.

73,

Bob AA6VB
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: FT5ZM logs updated

[Chortek, Robert L]

Log through 2/1/14 13:59 UTC 

Sent from my iPhone

 On Feb 1, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote:
 
 This does not appear to have any of the QSOs made tonight their time
 (none of the West Coast QSOs made this morning on 160 or 80 are here).
 
 Tree N6TR
 
 
 On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 1:59 PM, donov...@starpower.net wrote:
 
 https://secure.clublog.org/charts/?c=ft5zm#r
 
 Topband QSOs so far :
 
 Europe: 861
 Asia: 244
 North America: 164
 Oceania: 16
 South America 0
 
 Total 1296
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
 
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Antenna Help

[Chortek, Robert L]

Thinking about a simple 30-160 meter vertical system with minimal compromises:

60 foot tapered aluminum 1/4 wave in 80, plus,

Run two 1/4 wave wires from the base to standoffs mounted at the appropriate 
heights, plus ,

Another wire from the base to the top with a standoff mounted there and three 
top hat wires which double as guys (not connected electrically to the top of 
the 60 foot vertical ).

All four antennas will either be tied together and fed at the base (against 
an appropriate radial field) or switched in one at a time via a remote coax 
switch.

Any reason this would not work as well as any of the verticals would if 
installed separately?

Any thoughts welcome!

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Help!

[Chortek, Robert L]

GM

I worked the HS0 for a new one (139) this morning BUT my log just crashed and I 
forgot his suffix.  Did anyone else work him and know the full call?

Please help.

Thanks!

Bob 

Sent from my iPhone
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Help!

[Chortek, Robert L]

Forgot to add my call - AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

 On Jan 25, 2014, at 7:40 AM, Chortek, Robert L 
 robert.chor...@berliner.com wrote:
 
 GM
 
 I worked the HS0 for a new one (139) this morning BUT my log just crashed and 
 I forgot his suffix.  Did anyone else work him and know the full call?
 
 Please help.
 
 Thanks!
 
 Bob 
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Ground Radials

[Chortek, Robert L]

Thanks Eddy,

Rudy's work is excellent and I've studied much of it in detail!  

My question, in-artfully posed, related to the impact of the house on a ground 
radial system, not elevated vs . Ground radials.

All the best!

HNY

Bob AA6VB 

Sent from my iPhone

 On Jan 7, 2014, at 7:26 AM, Eddy Swynar deswy...@xplornet.ca wrote:
 
 Hi All, 
 
 I must admit that I've been only half-paying attention to the on-going 
 discussions of ground radials here, but I do submit herewith---for your 
 information  enlightenment---that VERY excellent series that was written-up 
 by N6LF, and which was referred to earlier by another poster...
 
 It may be accessed by clicking here:
 
 http://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/2009/12/series-of-qex-articles-on-ground-system-experiments.html
 
 ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Radial Question

[Chortek, Robert L]

Hello Fellow Topbanders -

We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on a 
tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.

It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a large 
number of buried ground radials BUT, they  would only cover about 90 degrees of 
the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a large number of 
radials in our crawl space under the house.

So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the house 
being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under the house?  I 
assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile, sheetrock, etc. (with 
the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and have minimal impact.

If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40  to 120 feet long, 
would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated radials 10 -15 
feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the compass)?   I'm incline to 
proceed IF it would provide a meaningful improvement in my transmitted signal 
strength.

Thanks for any help!

73,

Bob/AA6VB

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

Topband: Detuning TX Antenna

[Chortek, Robert L]

Good Morning,

I am finally getting around to detuning my 160/80 meter vertical on receive and 
plan to use a simple 12v relay to turn off the power to the antenna switch and 
the DXE Time Variable Sequencer to make sure the on/off timing is correct.  

Before I go down that road, does anyone have any suggestions?

Thanks, es 73,

Bob/AA6VB 
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: NOISE CANCELLERS

[Chortek, Robert L]

Tom,

Thank you for providing this information. 

Your time is valuable and we all appreciate your input on these (and countless 
other matter)!

73,

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

 On Nov 17, 2013, at 10:55 AM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:
 
 The most frequent problem (by far) with good noise cancellers is operator 
 related.
 
 The second most common problem is antenna choice.
 
 
 
 Any suggestion on how to use the unit best? Set up another single RX 
 Element? Use 'the tower'?
 
 When you mix antennas to make a null, the signal levels from the antennas 
 have to be equal in the null direction. You really are adding two signals 
 from the null direction 180 out-of-phase together.
 
 Logically, if one antenna has significant response in an undesired direction 
 with problem signals and the other does not, you can reduce signal-to-noise 
 of the good antenna when you add in the poor antenna to form a null. For 
 example, using a small vertical loop to further null a vertical array with no 
 overhead response will add overhead response and high angle horizontal 
 response even while increasing the null. The loop also has a 180 shift for 
 signals from the opposing directions, while a vertical does not. This can 
 create phase problems when adding the two together. You might have increased 
 back null and decreased front signal at the same time.
 
 Another issue is antenna level and phase response with signal angle and 
 direction. A dipole, for example, changes polarization as the signal moves 
 off broadside. It is only perfectly horizontal directly broadside, and has an 
 increasingly tilted pattern as the signal moves toward the ends, where the 
 signal response is vertically polarized at high angles. The tilt is a 
 different rotation direction, depending on which way the signal moves from 
 broadside.
 
 All of this factors in. We have to be careful what we mix together if we are 
 dealing with signals.
 
 If we are dealing with noise alone and not looking for a pattern change, then 
 the noise antenna just has to have much stronger response to the noise than 
 to any signal.
 
 Either way can remove noise, but the functions behind removing noise are 
 different.
 
 If I had a local noise from one source, I would put a small antenna very 
 close to that noise source or next to something conducting a strong, 
 dominant, signal from that noise source. An insulator arc or arcs from one 
 point on a power line that was otherwise pretty clean could be picked up 
 anywhere along that line. Multiple insulator arcs from multiple locations, 
 all radiating to the receive antenna from different directions, are a 
 different story. Getting near the line would not work.
 
 You can null an infinite number of sources if they come from one point, or if 
 they come from multiple points all in the same general direction and that 
 general direction is different than the desired signals.
 
 It is pretty difficult to explain every possible case, but those are a few of 
 the most common situations.
 
 The bottom line is:
 
 Nulling noise from multiple sources in one basic direction, or nulling 
 signals, or changing patternsyou want similar antennas or similar pattern 
 responses (but far from the closest noise source). It is generally easier if 
 we do not mix antennas with grossly different responses.
 
 Nulling a single noise source or multiple noise sources at a single 
 pointyou want a local sense antenna near the source or near something 
 coupled to all the sources so the noise antenna hears way more noise than 
 signal. It doesn't matter what the antennas are.
 
 73 Tom 
 _
 Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: 160m/80m duoband vertical question

[Chortek, Robert L]

Hi Jim

I use a telescoping fiberglass pole with a 34 foot wire inside for 40 meters 
and run a 23 foot wire up the outside for 30 meters with both wires connected 
together at the base and fed there against ground radials.  It works fine.  
Seems like a scaled up version for 160 /80 ought to work and I don't think it 
would matter the 160 portion is sloped.

Good luck!

Bob AA6VB
 On 11/5/2013 10:27 AM, Jim Garland wrote:
 My 160m vertical is 79ft high (wire running up a 26m Spiderbeam fiberglass
 pole), with a capacity hat. Is it workable to put an 80m 1/4 wave wire on
 the same mast join both antennas at the base, in the same way people make
 multiband fan dipoles? The idea would be that when operationg on 80m, the
 160m antenna would present a high Z, and vice-versa when operating on 160m.
 I don't have a feeling for how much interaction there would be between the
 two wires, separated by only a couple of inches. Another option would be to
 electrically isolate the wires and select one or the other with a relay.  If
 possible, I'd like to avoid matching networks and complicated switching
 arrangements, because the antenna is 700 ft from my station. Any advice is
 most welcome.
 
 73,
 
 Jim W8ZR
 
 _
 Topband Reflector
 
 _
 Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Vertical vs inverted L question/opinions

[Chortek, Robert L]

Don,

Others are far more knowledgable than I, but top loading has less loss than 
base loading so the L should perform better, all else being equal.

That said, I have been using a 60' base loaded vertical with 8 elevated radials 
and have 136 countries from a 1/4 acre city lot in the black hole of 
California,  I suspect the total would be a lot better with an L!

Good luck,

Bob

AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 10, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Goldtr8 (KD8NNU) gold...@charter.net wrote:

 I am requesting opinions on what would work best for 160m based on a bottom 
 loaded vertical or inverted L.
 
 I have in the past used and inverted L for 160m using a common feed with my 
 80m vertical.   The 80m vertical has parallel wires for 40m and 20m also and 
 it works real well with 38 radials laid down in the grass.  I like to compare 
 it to a fan dipole but only the vertical section is the multi wire part as 
 the radials are buried.
 
 Anyway I am starting to plan for the winter season and I am wondering if a 
 loading coil on the bottom of the vertical would yield better results than 
 the inverted L.   The L is limited to at best 50ft vertical section and the 
 rest on trees.My thoughts are if I use the 80m vertical section I will 
 have 68 ft of height which may be better than the L.The vertical is not 
 structurally strong enough to add a wire or a cap hat to the top of it.
 
 Clearly I have the ability to try both and play around but I have time to 
 make alternate plans so I am fishing for opinions and or suggestions.   
 
 
 ~73
 Don
 KD8NNU
 -.- -.. ---.. -. -. ..-
 _
 Topband Reflector
 

_
Topband Reflector