Re: Topband: E51D on 160 Tonight
Very grateful for your efforts, George. Would appreciate it if you could manage to get on 160m earlier than 1100 - my sunrise is at 10.40! Incidentally, you were a huge signal on 80m at that time today. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Looking for recommendation for cutting tool for RG-6 with CCS center conductor
I did as well (Klein Tools - Canada doesn't seem to recognize the US number) - works very well with no sign of nicking the copper coating on the inner. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: Need Ideas For "Fusing" Beverages From Falling Trees
I have had good success (mostly) following W8JI's recommendations in a similar situtation with over 3 ft of Beverages in very rough woodland: Use electric fence insulators nailed to trees, but allow the wire to pass freely through them; Fix only at the extremes of the antenna; Use a very strong wire - this is where I diverge from Tom because I find that WD1A is perfect for Beverages - but not bidirectional ones. Electric fence wire is probably OK too - and that is W8JI's recommendation. At the end points I use an egg insulator and a length of thin Dacron rope. WD1A has a major advantage for testing purposes - I make each wire off separately to a single connection point, and this allows resistance measurements to be made from either end of the run to confirm its continuity. This arrangement allows the wire to withstand several large trees falling along its length (1000 ft) - and the antennas keep working. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Suggested Frequency
Joe WB9SBD wrote: and Rick N6RK wrote: and there were other naysayers. I have been using a very similar antenna tower to that described by Joe for the past 18 years. (325' with 120 x 1000' radials.) It works noticeably better than my 95' top loaded vertical over 120 x 150'+ radials. For the first few years there was a 30kW AM station beaming straight at me from 1/2m away. A band-stop filter cured that, and I can hear well from the site. Whllst I accept that there have been challenges along the way, it has nevertheless been a very worthwhile project. 73 Roger VE3ZI/G3RBP _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Stainless Steel for coil taps
Tim N3QE wrote: "I would recommend something different for coil tapping for a 10AWG coil: I am a big fan of the Mueller BU-27C copper clip, rated for 40A DC. If you are going onto thick copper tubing, Mueller the BU-27CGW (the "geophone clip") works well." I really wish I had known about these years ago! 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: RX Power over Coax
I just wanted to agree that using coax feeders for power as well as rf can lead to noise. I have a lot of beverages and other receive antennas, some of which are thousands of feet from the shack, and I also use (probably unnecessarily complex) switch units. This has meant that I have had to use 48V to ensure reliable switching. I use CATV hardline for the 'main' lines and flooded RG6 for 'local' lines. I have never had problems on the hardline, but the RG6 has often been noisy. I am of the opinion that this happens at F connections even when the joint is very well prepared and sealed, but this is so far unproven... 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Topband resource
Yes _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Topband resource
K9YC wrote: "But there IS a difference in efficiency that looking ONLY at the pattern misses." Your point is unclear to me. Of course the pattern of a horizontal antenna changes with changing height and with other environmental factors. If the antenna is actually on the ground the efficiency is pretty terrible, but it does not have to be very high before efficiency does not change meaningfully with height - assuming that total radiation is considered rather than just that which is useful. However, I was only describing a horizontal dipole at around 5/8 wavelength high. NR1DX suggested that because the ends are lower than the centre that there was now an additional "significant vertical component". There is not if the included angle is shallow, which in my case it is.* 73 Roger VE3ZI *(I stated that the ends were at 250' - they are at least that, and could be up to about 290' - but I have not accurately measured the tension in the support rope nor allowed for stretch so I cannot be specific about the catenary.) _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Topband resource
NR1DX wrote: "Apples and oranges." regarding my antennas. Not really. There is very little pattern difference between a purely horizontal dipole and an inverted V provided that the angle of the V is not too acute. A horizontal dipole 5/8 wavelength high has predominantly low angle radiation. W4RNL is sadly an SK. However, he designed and described a great many antenna systems one of which is a half wave vertical array for 160m. I have one. Here. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Topband resource
W8JI's experience with a horizontal dipole at 300 ft is often quoted as proof that only vertical antennas are useful for 160m DX. This is not my experience with a dipole with the centre at 320 ft and the ends at over 250'. In its favoured directions it is equal to a W4RNL half wave vertical array over a very large radial system. It is unsurprisingly not as good off the ends, and quite is useless for relatively local communications. I am also inclined to support Roger, G3YRO, in his use of a low dipole, having myself successfully used relatively low horizontal antennas for DX in the past. There are most certainly times when higher angles are useful for DX - and possibly more frequently than we imagine. There actually have to be, otherwise Roger would never work any DX at all. Note, this does not mean that a good vertical antenna is not often or even usually better than a low horizontal one. Finally, the UK is small compared to many other countries, but it is not actually a tiny island. Roger's path to North America is over about 300 km of land, and he is more than 10km from the sea in any direction. 73 RogerVE3ZI/G3RBP _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Topband V84SAA and ARRL Contest
May I politely ask that people do not make duplicate contacts with V84SAA even in the contest. There are many of us for whom this is a marginal path, and even a quick contest QSO could be enough to prevent our 'new country' counter. Thanks 73 RogerVE3ZI _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: WD1-A as radials
I think that WD1-A would be perfect for on-ground radials. (Note that WD1-A is not twisted although WD-1 is.) It lays very flat on the ground, the critters don't like it, and it is immensely strong. I always use crimp terminals but YMMV. I don't think it matters either way whether you use one or both wires - for Beverages I always use both wires but connected separately. That way I can use a simple ohmeter test to confirm that the whole length is continuous. 73 RogerVE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Radial Wire
Joel W5ZN wrote: ... low cost radial wire options got me thinking about WD1A. Anyone have any experience with it as radial wire?? There are two wires that should pull apart easily ... I use WD1A wire mostly for (single direction) Beverages, but also as radials at the ends of those antennas. In my experience it is excellent for both applications BUT only if the two wires remain joined. If they are pulled apart they seem to be self tangling! I think that the wire is actually a very clever design - the two wires appear to have opposite twists - so it lays very flat and straight. (I know this is not the subject of the posts, but I would emphasise that WD1A is horrible for bi-directional Beverages as the loss is excessive in the transmission line mode.) 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: PY1RO
>From the Daily DX today: "PY1RO, Rolf Rasp, passed away yesterday after suffering from a heart attack. He had heart problems for several years. PY1RO was very active on Topband and the Magic Band (160 and 6 Meters). Rolf put on DXpeditions to PY0DVG, ZX0VG, PY1RO/0, PY0FN, PY1RO/5N2, PY0RO, ZX0FOC and PY0TM as well being a DXpedition team member at PW0T and PW2M. He was a member of FOC (# 1237). Our condolences to his wife Sonia and the rest of the Rasp family." I was saddened to read of Rolf's death. He was an important part of 160m history for many years. Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
Perhaps I shouldn't have started this thread! The whole point of my original posting was that I was definitely transmitting more than 500Hz HF of the FT8 tones, so from an 'analogue' perspective there should have been no problem. As others have mentioned, FT8 is received though an SSB bandwidth filter. Where wideband noise is the limiting factor on reception (eg VHF) it is a valid technique to put the ultimate selectivity at the end of the receive chain. It is not valid where there are likely to be strong signals from some other mode within the receiver IF passband. Therefore, my opinion FT8 (and many other digital modes) are not suitable in situations where there is intense activity on nearby frequencies. I think it is unreasonable to suggest that there should be an unused 'guard band' just to overcome receiver and system deficiencies. (And of course I am aware that these limitations could be overcome using SDR architecture, but that is another story.) 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: CQ WW CW 160m observations (high angle)
Interesting observation Guy. I noticed what I am almost certain was very high angle propagation on Sunday evening at sunset when I was only able to hear Europe on my low dipole (very low, about 20' so a real cloud warmer). I could not hear them at all on Beverages, SAL, or receive 4 square or transmit antennas. They could not hear me at all on my transmit antennas which are low angle. After an hour or so of this everything normalised and the 'better' receive antennas became just that. Fairly soon after that the contest was over. I have noticed this sort of effect before but never to this extreme extent. 73 RogerVE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: FT8 on 160m
As we all know, CQWW produces huge activity on all HF bands. This year I was hearing stations up to well above 1850kHz. I have found that trying to run Europe is often more productive in the 1840-1850 segment, presumably because it is less crowded than lower in frequency. Late in the contest I started to CQ on about 1842kHz, and after a while, and several QSOs, was told (on CW): "Please QSY. 1840 is reserved for FT8. Good luck in the contest." Ignoring the fact that nobody has a reserved frequency on any band, I thought OK, don't want to upset anybody, and moved to 1842.9kHz. Shortly, the same message arrived. My (probably incorrect) understanding is that FT8 stations are using USB with a carrier frequency of 1840kHz. So a CW station on 1842.9 should be out of their passband. I did listen carefully and could not hear any FT8 transmissions above 1842.2. (I have multiple receive antennas in a very quiet location.) I believe that FT8 transmissions in principle use a microscopic bandwidth, but it appears they actually need a wide clear channel. Yes? No? 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Keith, G3RPB
I am sad to report that Keith, G3RPB, passed away on the morning of Sunday 9th July. This followed a severe stroke that he suffered last year. Keith was a very well known and accomplished DXer on Top Band. I was honoured to call him my friend for over fifty years, and will miss him greatly. RogerG3RBP, VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: RX ant-Frozen ground
Hi Steve I am fairly confident that Sudbury counts as a cold place... I have found Beverages to be very insensitive indeed to their locale and operating conditions. (I have a total of 15, mostly phased.) I now use 4 x 50' radials at each end, but have previously used 3 x 25'. I do not believe there is any difference, but of course I can't directly compare one condition with the other in real time. I do not generally use ground rods because there is rock a few inches down in most places - where I do the ground rod is buried horizontally. The ground freezes here to at least 4' down, but the performance does not seem to vary from now (when it's hardly frozen) to February (when it's very frozen). Some parts of some Beverages have been completely covered in snow at times and keep on a-truckin. I have been much less succesful with vertical arrays, but that lack of success has not been weather related - I suspect it is plain old fashioned finger trouble. FWIW 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: RBOG - wire fence
"The other question is the susceptibility of the quad shielded RG6 coax cable running on the ground to the shack - do rodents etc like to feed on coax?" My experience is that critters love chewing on coax laid on the ground. I use hardline where possible which seems to be almost but not completely immune, and flooded RG6 elsewhere. The RG6 gets chewed constantly, but it is only occasionally that the chewing shorts inner to outer or breaks the cable. Nevertheless, it is a significant maintenance item. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: WD-1A Dayton
I need to buy some WD-1A ex military telephone wire. At least one and preferably two 2km (6600') drums. Or possibly more smaller reels. I wonder if anybody has any that they would sell to me and could bring to Dayton? Obviously I am happy to pay the going rate. Please contact me privately. Thanks in advance. RogerVE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?
A few more comments seem necessary: I do of course agree strongly with Greg ZL3IX. The only reason I am arguing for a smaller CW segment is that there is very strong entrenched opposition from the contesting community to any change whatsoever, and I am trying to be more than reasonable. Mike N2MS wrote: "The only way this would work is if CQ limits the SSB contest to a certain segment of 160 meters." That is exactly what I have been proposing. Frank W3LPL wrote: "Severe power restrictions above 1850 are very common as are restrictions on SSB operation below 1840." That's why I am suggesting that the great majority of the 'prime' 1810-1850 kHz part of the band remain available for SSB contests. Ed N1UR wrote: "There are really only 3 contests heavy with SSB on 160. ARRL DX SSB, CQ WW SSB, and CQ WW 160 SSB. WPX is zero, FD is essentially zero, and IARU is essentially zero. Maybe NAQP? Not sure, don't really do those." OK, so there is no reason at all from a contester's perspective why all the contests and QSO parties that have low 160m usage should not have SSB restricted to 1820 and above, and I would appreciate your help in achieving this. He also wrote: "Is this really a problem? I don't think so." Clearly it is not a problem for contesters, as they are currently unrestricted, but I assure you that it is a considerable problem for others. I am suggesting a minor change to the rules of applicable contests to allow a very small part of the band to be usable for CW and DX during SSB contests. Some contests already incorporate restrictions on allowable frequency use (I am aware of a number of RSGB contests and I am sure there are more). 160m is supposed to be the Gentleman's Band. In my book that means co-existence, co-operation and respect. How about it contesters? 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Fw: Am I the only one in step?
Hi Don Yes I agree, they usually do. In contests some do and some don't - you know that way better than me. I think that the distinction is that everybody is on the same mode. So that when a potential CQer says 'QRL?' there are a few ms available to say yes. With mixed modes that is not possible. 73 Roger VE3ZI From: Don Beattie <d...@g3bj.com> To: 'Roger Parsons' <ve...@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, 1 March 2016, 11:05 Subject: RE: Topband: Am I the only one in step? But Roger, unless I have missed something, in regards to your PS, do not most of the rarer DXpeditions on 160 work split? I agree the volume of callers should keep the calling channel clear, but it's also necessary to hear the DX! So wouldn't some guard channel be very helpful in those situations? 73 Don, G3BJ / G5W -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Roger Parsons via Topband Sent: 01 March 2016 15:55 To: Tom Haavisto <kamha...@gmail.com> Cc: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>; Contest <cq-cont...@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? Tom Perhaps you are correct in suggesting that only one SSB contest in the whole year impacts significantly on 160m CW activity. Therefore, for all contests and QSO parties other than CQ 160 SSB, the competitors will not be affected at all if the organisers prohibit SSB operation below 1820 kHz. Thank you for clarifying the situation, and I look forward to your support in getting that entered into the rules of each of these events. So now the issue is that I am asking that 7 kHz (or perhaps something less) out of 40 kHz 'prime' international frequencies be reserved for CW operation during one contest. Doesn't strike me as anything that should be terribly difficult for you and other contesters to accept in the interests of co-existence and co-operation on the Gentleman's Band. 73 RogerVE3ZI PS Top Band Expeditions: The majority of expeditions operate only CW on 160m and many have coincided with major CW contests. They only need to make a couple of contacts before they have a stream of callers who will keep any CQ machines at bay. Expeditions made specifically for some particular contest, whether CW or SSB, have little problem on either mode. From: Tom Haavisto <kamha...@gmail.com> To: Roger Parsons <ve...@yahoo.com> Cc: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>; Contest <cq-cont...@contesting.com> Sent: Monday, 29 February 2016, 13:54 Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? Hi Roger Thanks for making me take a second look. For some reason, I thought ARRL had a 160 phone contest - they do not. My mistake.As it turns out - there is only ONE SSB contest - the CQ 160 SSB that can fill 160 meters with SSB signals. ONE weekend per year in which CW activity will be seriously impacted by a phone contest on 160. There are the CQ 160 and ARRL 160 CW contests. Not sure how you protect a DXpedition from contest activity if they were operating CW during a CW contest. Would the DXpedition operate phone that weekend? Not sure how well that would work, as they would be pushed pretty high up the band... ALL the other contests listed have 160 meters as one band of six to conduct contest QSO's. Folks will make a 'quick trip' to 160, look for a few QSO's, then return to higher bands. Even if folks operate phone in the contests you have listed, I really cannot see someone camping out below 1840 for an extended period of time looking for Q's. Good manners and common sense seem to play a huge part in this. Am I missing something? How do we move a world-wide contest, based a DXpedition taking to the air at the last minute, and saying "Gee - wonder if we should operate on 160?" I realize this may seem like an odd question, but this seems what you would like to see happen. The weekend is advertised - years in advance - for any DXpedition to find. Other/most DXpeditions seem to take contest activity in account as part of their planning. Phone operation already takes place higher in the band during every contest, other than the one that just happened. Topband is safe from SSB signals below 1840 for another 51 weeks. Just trying to understand the issue... Tom - VE3CX On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Roger Parsons <ve...@yahoo.com> wrote: Thank you for your comments Tom. The NA band plan has phone at above 1840kHz. My proposal is for phone above 1817kHz (and perhaps below 1810kHz) which seems to me to accept that this is not normal band loading. Please see my previous post regarding antenna bandwidth. I don't know where you get your 'two weekends a year'. I did a quick skim and found the following significant phone contests which include 160m: CQ160, ARRL DX, Russian DX, WPX, ARRL FD, IARU, CQWW. Obviously the effects will vary between contests and between different a
Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?
Tom Perhaps you are correct in suggesting that only one SSB contest in the whole year impacts significantly on 160m CW activity. Therefore, for all contests and QSO parties other than CQ 160 SSB, the competitors will not be affected at all if the organisers prohibit SSB operation below 1820 kHz. Thank you for clarifying the situation, and I look forward to your support in getting that entered into the rules of each of these events. So now the issue is that I am asking that 7 kHz (or perhaps something less) out of 40 kHz 'prime' international frequencies be reserved for CW operation during one contest. Doesn't strike me as anything that should be terribly difficult for you and other contesters to accept in the interests of co-existence and co-operation on the Gentleman's Band. 73 RogerVE3ZI PS Top Band Expeditions: The majority of expeditions operate only CW on 160m and many have coincided with major CW contests. They only need to make a couple of contacts before they have a stream of callers who will keep any CQ machines at bay. Expeditions made specifically for some particular contest, whether CW or SSB, have little problem on either mode. From: Tom Haavisto <kamha...@gmail.com> To: Roger Parsons <ve...@yahoo.com> Cc: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>; Contest <cq-cont...@contesting.com> Sent: Monday, 29 February 2016, 13:54 Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? Hi Roger Thanks for making me take a second look. For some reason, I thought ARRL had a 160 phone contest - they do not. My mistake.As it turns out - there is only ONE SSB contest - the CQ 160 SSB that can fill 160 meters with SSB signals. ONE weekend per year in which CW activity will be seriously impacted by a phone contest on 160. There are the CQ 160 and ARRL 160 CW contests. Not sure how you protect a DXpedition from contest activity if they were operating CW during a CW contest. Would the DXpedition operate phone that weekend? Not sure how well that would work, as they would be pushed pretty high up the band... ALL the other contests listed have 160 meters as one band of six to conduct contest QSO's. Folks will make a 'quick trip' to 160, look for a few QSO's, then return to higher bands. Even if folks operate phone in the contests you have listed, I really cannot see someone camping out below 1840 for an extended period of time looking for Q's. Good manners and common sense seem to play a huge part in this. Am I missing something? How do we move a world-wide contest, based a DXpedition taking to the air at the last minute, and saying "Gee - wonder if we should operate on 160?" I realize this may seem like an odd question, but this seems what you would like to see happen. The weekend is advertised - years in advance - for any DXpedition to find. Other/most DXpeditions seem to take contest activity in account as part of their planning. Phone operation already takes place higher in the band during every contest, other than the one that just happened. Topband is safe from SSB signals below 1840 for another 51 weeks. Just trying to understand the issue... Tom - VE3CX On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Roger Parsons <ve...@yahoo.com> wrote: Thank you for your comments Tom. The NA band plan has phone at above 1840kHz. My proposal is for phone above 1817kHz (and perhaps below 1810kHz) which seems to me to accept that this is not normal band loading. Please see my previous post regarding antenna bandwidth. I don't know where you get your 'two weekends a year'. I did a quick skim and found the following significant phone contests which include 160m: CQ160, ARRL DX, Russian DX, WPX, ARRL FD, IARU, CQWW. Obviously the effects will vary between contests and between different areas of the world. There are also many QSO parties and a great number of smaller contests. CW contests do not preclude phone operation on top band - they just move it further up the band. SSB contests at present leave no space whatsoever for any other modes. Your wonderings leave me bemused. Your question can just as easily be reversed: "Why would somebody plan a 160m phone contest when there is a DXpedition planned?" and make just as much sense. I believe that one of the current DXpeditions is actually a spare time operation of people who are working in the country for a short period. Difficult to change that timing. And why on earth should they be prevented from operating on 160m if that is their pleasure, any more than you should be prevented from operating in a 160m phone contest when that is your pleasure. But the most important fact is that it is entirely possible for CW and phone to coexist during a 160m phone contest. Leave a very small bandwidth (enough for 3 SSB stations) where phone contest operators are not permitted. Write it into the contest rules so that regulations and bandplans become i
Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?
Thank you for your comments Tom. The NA band plan has phone at above 1840kHz. My proposal is for phone above 1817kHz (and perhaps below 1810kHz) which seems to me to accept that this is not normal band loading. Please see my previous post regarding antenna bandwidth. I don't know where you get your 'two weekends a year'. I did a quick skim and found the following significant phone contests which include 160m: CQ160, ARRL DX, Russian DX, WPX, ARRL FD, IARU, CQWW. Obviously the effects will vary between contests and between different areas of the world. There are also many QSO parties and a great number of smaller contests. CW contests do not preclude phone operation on top band - they just move it further up the band. SSB contests at present leave no space whatsoever for any other modes. Your wonderings leave me bemused. Your question can just as easily be reversed: "Why would somebody plan a 160m phone contest when there is a DXpedition planned?" and make just as much sense. I believe that one of the current DXpeditions is actually a spare time operation of people who are working in the country for a short period. Difficult to change that timing. And why on earth should they be prevented from operating on 160m if that is their pleasure, any more than you should be prevented from operating in a 160m phone contest when that is your pleasure. But the most important fact is that it is entirely possible for CW and phone to coexist during a 160m phone contest. Leave a very small bandwidth (enough for 3 SSB stations) where phone contest operators are not permitted. Write it into the contest rules so that regulations and bandplans become irrelevant. Again I ask. Why not? 73 Roger VE3ZI From: Tom Haavisto <kamha...@gmail.com> To: Roger Parsons <ve...@yahoo.com> Cc: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>; Contest <cq-cont...@contesting.com> Sent: Sunday, 28 February 2016, 19:19 Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? I think there is a few things that need to also be taken into account. A bandplan is designed for *normal* band loading. Clearly, when there is a contest on, we are NOT dealing with normal band loading. As has been noted, antenna bandwidth is part of the issue. Phone contests will take up two weekends out of the year on Topband. What happens when there is a CW contest? We move up the band to accomodate the extra activity... With a phone contest, with folks using <1Khz spacing, every little of extra space helps. So yes - folks DO move down into the CW part of the band. But - I cannot help but wonder - why would someone plan a DXpedition (much planning involved), and NOT take a 160 phone contest into consideration? I have seen some DXpeditions go to the WARC bands if there is a major contest on when they are on. Or - they operate the other mode (operate CW when there is a phone contest on, and vice versa). Could a DXpedition not stay off 160 for the weekend they are there (assuming they are not there FOR the contest), and focus on 80 meters instead? Not EVERY serious DXer is on 160, and I am sure more than a few of them would appreciate the extra attention (a weekends worth) to their favorite band/mode/whatever as the DXpedition does not operate on Topband. Just "seems odd" to me. Tom - VE3CX This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. www.avast.com On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Roger Parsons via Topband <topband@contesting.com> wrote: I enjoy contests but... > > >This weekend has seen the CQ 160m SSB Contest. It has also seen CW activity or >attempted activity from a number of extremely rare DX entities. > >Why is it reasonable or even acceptable for the band to be full of SSB >contesters from 1800kHz to about 1960kHz? The vast majority of contacts made >in the contest are same continent, and in the case of NA could and should all >comply with the band plan. Why is the CW part of the band full of SSB whereas >the top (phone) end of the band is almost empty? > > >I have previously suggested to the contest administrators at both CQ and ARRL >that they set in the contest rules a lower operational limit of 1820kHz dial >frequency. That would give contesters 23kHz of the 'prime' international >frequencies between 1810kHz and 1840kHz, and a total 183kHz for many >countries. The CW DX operators would have 7kHz internationally. Neither CQ nor >ARRL have treated this suggestion seriously, nor come up with any alternative. > >Why not? > >73 Roger >VE3ZI >_ >Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?
I have received replies both on the reflector and privately. Several suggest that the problem is that "160m antennas are narrow band". With respect, that is an excuse not a reason. It is perfectly possible to match (almost) any antenna at (almost) any frequency. People seem to manage it on 80m. And gracious, I am only asking that 7kHz out of 200kHz be set aside! Others suggest that the problem is FCC regulations, or the lack of them. Ignoring the fact that the FCC regulates only one country out of the whole world, this is nothing to do with regulations except those that may be imposed by the rules of a particular contest. It is entirely to do with being reasonable and responsive to others. I believe my proposal (or some variation of it) should be considered and adopted by the contest sponsors. Again I ask. Why not? 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Am I the only one in step?
I enjoy contests but... This weekend has seen the CQ 160m SSB Contest. It has also seen CW activity or attempted activity from a number of extremely rare DX entities. Why is it reasonable or even acceptable for the band to be full of SSB contesters from 1800kHz to about 1960kHz? The vast majority of contacts made in the contest are same continent, and in the case of NA could and should all comply with the band plan. Why is the CW part of the band full of SSB whereas the top (phone) end of the band is almost empty? I have previously suggested to the contest administrators at both CQ and ARRL that they set in the contest rules a lower operational limit of 1820kHz dial frequency. That would give contesters 23kHz of the 'prime' international frequencies between 1810kHz and 1840kHz, and a total 183kHz for many countries. The CW DX operators would have 7kHz internationally. Neither CQ nor ARRL have treated this suggestion seriously, nor come up with any alternative. Why not? 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
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
Re: Topband: WD-1A wire
Thanks for all the replies received both direct and on this reflector. The pretty much unanimous opinion seems to be that WD-1A will be good to use as the Beverage elements. I perhaps didn't make it clear that I am not using the wire as a reversible Beverage, but as elements of parallel arrays. (I was upset when I couldn't hear a couple of expeditions last season :-) I already have a lot of Beverage antennas, mostly using copper hook-up wire. Those work well, but I have to regularly repair breaks. I am now using the W8JI technique with the WD-1A with the tensioned wire passing through electric fence insulators. Quite a lot of work in the bush with several billion mosquitoes and black flies helping me, but hopefully it will be worth it. Thanks again to all 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Binocular Cores
I have some binocular cores which I know are FairRite mix 73. I have others which I thought were also mix 73. However, the first ones measure about 50k Ohms with ohmeter prods onto their surface, whereas the others only measure about 1k Ohm. I don't believe that that is a defined parameter, and am aware that the test is not very scientific, but I am surprised to see such a difference. Thoughts? 73 RogerVE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Binocular Cores
Thanks Tom I guess I really should have done that in the first place. They do appear to be the same mix as R ~ X at around 2 MHz in each case. I tested a few of each type and the variations in impedance were quite substantial, but didn't appear to be correlated to the DC ohmeter check. I guess the moral of the story is not to measure a parameter that the manufacturer doesn't specify! 73 RogerVE3ZI From: Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com To: Roger Parsons ve...@yahoo.com; Topband topband@contesting.com Sent: Monday, 1 June 2015, 11:31 Subject: Re: Topband: Binocular Cores You really need to do a single loop through the core windows and measure the impedance with some sort of analyzer. Even an MFJ259B with a short connection to the jack will work well for this. If the resistance equals the reactance down somewhere around 2 MHz, it is 73 material. If R=X someplace much higher, you can be sure it is a different mix. The Q=1 frequency, where R=X or where loss tangent crosses reactance, tells you the material better than anything else you can do. That is how I quickly sort unknown cores. 73 Tom - Original Message - From: Roger Parsons via Topband topband@contesting.com To: Topband topband@contesting.com Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 10:13 AM Subject: Topband: Binocular Cores I have some binocular cores which I know are FairRite mix 73. I have others which I thought were also mix 73. However, the first ones measure about 50k Ohms with ohmeter prods onto their surface, whereas the others only measure about 1k Ohm. I don't believe that that is a defined parameter, and am aware that the test is not very scientific, but I am surprised to see such a difference. Thoughts? 73 RogerVE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4800 / Virus Database: 4311/9916 - Release Date: 06/01/15 _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Beverage on Ice
Many thanks for the comments received on this reflector and privately. A few points: I don't think that the proposed antenna is just another BOG - there is a large non-conductive layer of ice before there is anything conductive. However, here on the Canadian Shield normal ground is not very conductive either. It would be essential to build the antenna from a very thin wire for environmental reasons. A thicker wire could cause all sorts of problems when the ice melts in the spring. There is not that much snow machine activity on this lake - I would be unlucky for the wire to be broken, particularly if I installed it on a Monday - it would be well frozen into the ice long before the next weekend. Perhaps the most interesting observation was from KK9K - what Ron did was pretty close to my intentions. Hopefully I will be able to corroberate or otherwise next season. 73 RogerVE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Beverage on Ice
I think I give up on this project. Firstly, I can think of no way to reliably retrieve the wire in the spring, no matter what gauge it is and as has been pointed out that could be hazardous to wildlife. Secondly, it would seem unlikely that it will work very well, and as I have plenty of space for real Beverages I will concentrate on those. 73 RogerVE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Beverage on Ice
I know that Beverages on Ground have been discussed on a number of occasions, but: I live on the shores of a reasonably large lake, and at this time of year it will be frozen to at least 2' and possibly 4' or 5' deep. I believe that ice is a pretty good insulator, so I wonder about the effectiveness of a wire just laid on the surface? It would be impossible to retrieve the wire in the spring so it would have to be fine enameled copper. Even that may not be very environmentally friendly? If the wire survived the first couple of days it would be frozen into the ice - it would be at risk from snow machines until that happened. This is just speculation from enforced idleness - I cleverly managed to break my leg during a foolish last check of my receive antennas before Christmas - so I can't even get into the shack, let alone onto the lake. I was not very hopeful in any event that EP6T would be workable from here, but I am determined somehow to get there for K1N... 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Teflon Tubing
Just as a matter of interest, I have purchased teflon tubing several times in the past from Active Surplus on Queen St in Toronto. Not been there for a while so I don't know their current stock position, and I rather doubt that they do mail order, but they have had a whole range of sizes - at 10c a foot. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Contest in progress - few signals
This doesn't apply to the contest this past weekend, but each year in CQWW I am very grateful to the Zone 2 VE who answers my call even though he will get no points for the contact. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
I agree with the remarks made by others regarding the DX window in the ARRL contest. I have been more concerned for many years about the various phone contests which take place on 160m. During those contests phone operation takes place right down to the bottom of the band, effectively making any CW operation impossible during those weekends. Last year one ssb contest coincided with a Dxpedtion to 9U - an exceptionally rare country on 160m. Whilst it is true that there are only a few phone contests on the calendar, it is also true that there are only a few weekends where exceptional conditions happen, particularly during sunspot maxima. Frequency allocations on top band vary from country to country, but it is generally true to say that the 'prime real estate' for phone operation is from 1830 - 1850 kHz, with the 1810 - 1830 kHz segment being next most desirable. Very few countries allow phone (or any) operation below 1810 kHz. A significant number of countries (particularly North America) also allow operation all the way up to 2 MHz.. Even in the busiest contests it is rare to hear any operation above 1900 kHz. It would be nice if the regulations were changed (particularly in NA) to limit the permissible frequencies for ssb, but I think we all know that will never happen. However, contest organisers can very easily define the allowable frequency bands for each individual contest, and as has been mentioned by others this is already done for some (particularly European) contests. I would like to propose that phone contests disallow the use on ssb of any frequency below a dial frequency of 1820 kHz. That leaves 8 kHz of international frequencies for CW operation whilst still giving the ssb contesters 32 kHz of the 'prime real estate' - and 150 kHz of the apparently less desirable frequencies above 150 kHz. I did suggest this on the contest reflector last year and was immediately flamed, but I honestly think this would be an attainable and reasonable compromise. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
Ashton Lee wrote: The issue I believe is that many people’s 160 antennas are limited in frequency breadth. There is really just one SSB contest. Many 80m antennas will not cover both the CW and phone parts of that band, and people manage quite fine there. It is entirely possible to make a 160m antenna work all across the band but it's just a little more complicated. I don't see that as a reason, but an excuse. With respect, there are at least two major 160m phone contests - CQWW phone and CQ 160m phone. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Verifying integrity of 75 ohm coax.,
FWIW, the silicone grease that I have used more recently has been Dow Corning MS4. That is specifically described by them as being a lubricant suitable for wiping contacts, as well as multiple other uses. The grease we used in 1961 was probably a 'Radiospares' (now RS Components) in-house brand, but would have been made by one of the major chemical manufacturers. The technician in charge of the TV shop was ex-military - it's way too late to ask him but I would almost be prepared to bet that he had first seen the technique in the forces. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Verifying integrity of 75 ohm coax.
Tom, W8JI wrote: Dielectric grease has been used to preserve electrical connections in low pressure connections and high pressure connections at least since the 1960's or early 1970's. Possibly even earlier than that. I spent a small part of my misspent youth (~1961) in a TV repair shop. The TVs of that era (in the UK at least) had large rotating turrets to select the channel. We used to burnish the contacts with 'Silvo' and then smear silicone grease over them. That part of the set was then much more reliable than as supplied new. The remainder of course, was not! 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Tree losses....
I just did a small and inelegant piece of modelling with EZNEC. I took a wire 128' vertical, and it showed a gain of about 1.7dBi over a particular ground. Keeping everything else the same, I introduced a 'tree' 3ft away from it, with no branches, exactly parallel, also 128' high and initially with zero resistance. This changed the gain to 2.0 dBi with a 0.7 dB front to back ratio. I then introduced series resistances at 20 equally spaced points in the 'tree', and looked at the effect of varying these. With 1R resistances (20R total) gain was about 0.6dBi and 0.6dB f/b. With 2R resistances (40R total) gain was about 0dBi and 0.5 dB f/b. With 3R resistances (60R total) gain was about -0.1dBi and 0.3 dB f/b (the minimum gain modelled) and so on, until with 10R resistances (200R total) gain was about 0.7dBi and 0.1 dB f/b and so on again, until with 100R resistances (2000R total) gain was back to 1.7dBi and 0dB f/b. Of course this is highly unrealistic in many respects, but I would be amazed if any 128' high tree under any conditions of sap would have a total end to end resistance of only 2000R. And bear in mind that this is a self resonant tree selected to couple very strongly indeed to the main radiator. I then repeated the process with a non-resonant tree only 64' in height. No value of series resistances produced even 0.01 dB change in gain. (Of course at this point the wire vertical was being supported by an invisible sky hook.) I do believe that trees can affect things in at least two ways - as others have said, high voltage points adjacent to foliages can definitely cause losses - and these are very hard to quantify. My own past experience with tree supported inverted L and T antennas has been that quite small changes in the position of the element can cause big changes in feed impedances - but that is not quite the same thing at all. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector
Topband: YB0ARA/9
I would like to place on record my gratitude to Art, N2AU, for sending QSLs to N0XA, W1FV and myself for 160m contacts made with YB0ARA/9 some 15 years ago. I hope that Art will not mind my mentioning that I now know that he has been suffering from a severe, progressive and debilitating illness for all of that time. It was not at all a simple matter for him to send these cards. I would also like to thank the many amateurs who offered advice and in particular Ed, K3JJG, who contacted Art on my behalf. 160m is truly still the Gentleman's band. 73 Roger VE3ZI All good topband ops know how to put up a beverage at night. _ Topband Reflector
Topband: CABLE TV HARDLINE
Mike - I suspect that none of the following will apply to you but FWIW: I have had some problems with joints in very long runs (2000') of hardline - using the 'proper' CATV connectors. The hardline that I have uses an aluminium outer and a solid copper inner - most use a copper plated aluminium inner these days. It gets very cold here in the winter, and the copper inner contracts a lot more than the aluminium outer. I have had a couple of occasions (including this winter) where the contraction has been sufficient to pull the inner out of the connector - Bingo! 12 dead Beverages. The first time it happened some years ago I was advised (on this reflector) to bend the hardline into an S shape on either side of the joint. Of course I eventually forgot that good advice and paid the price. The VE1ZZ technique (hose clamps inside an upturned pop bottle) may not be elegant but it does keep working. As would your connection box. 73 Roger VE3ZI All good topband ops know fine whiskey is a daylight beverage. _ Topband Reflector
Topband: Fw: Webinar - The first Top Band DX Contest â? the 1921 Trans
Are T-tops ever used in NA for commercial BCB stations? Tim N3QE The CBC still have a number of 40W AM stations serving small isolated communities. Those stations use inverted L antennas - which are admittedly not exactly a T! 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector
Topband: G3FPQ SK
From the Daily DX: G3FPQ, David Courtier-Dutton, passed away on Sunday February 3rd. He was 79. Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector
Topband: DX WINDOW
The DX window (most unfortunately) does not exist for normal operation. It does however exist for the ARRL 160m contest: 6. Miscellaneous: 6.1. The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only. 73 Roger VE3ZI PS: Sorry, but those needing ONN will have to chase VE3CX. I tried, but just couldn't stand it ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: Spurious Signal on 1810.8
For some while I have been hearing a strong spurious signal on about 1810.8 kHz. I thought it was a local SMPS or similar until I started trying to find it. It is not local to me it - I can hear it on several different antenna systems, and also from my remote station 15 km away. It beams south west and is inaudible during the day. This morning it faded out about 30 minutes before my sunrise, so I presume it is somewhere on the US east coast or in the Carribean. Any thoughts? 73 Roger VE3ZI ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Hi-Pass filter for 160 to reject BC Band
Eddy VE3CUI wrote: Hi George, I'm curious as to how the results might compare, if one were to simply place a series-connected coil capacitor wave trap (resonant to the BC station's frequency, of course) to ground at the receiver input...? Was that tried prior to the inclusion of the high-pass filter? The wave trap could be made even more effective if one were to place a second parallel-tuned trap in series with the antenna lead, and installed between the receiver the series-tuned trap... ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ Hi Eddy You are correct, but obviously this is not the best approach for multiple broadcast stations. When I first built my remote station there was a high power AM station with an 8 element array beaming straight at it from about 1km away. This made receiving difficult as it was inducing literally volts onto my 260' vertical. I built a simple elliptic function filter with a null at 790kHz and high pass-band ripple. This provides better than a 60db null across the modulated bandwidth of the BC station and negligible attenuation on 160m - but very variable attenuation across the remainder of the broadcast band. The filter has only 3 capacitors and one inductor. I think this is a better approach than just a series tuned circuit as all parameters (including the necessary filter complexity) are under the designer's control. Now the other BC station has closed down and I have no AM stations within 150km - by far the best solution! 73 Roger VE3ZI ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: fyi 1820 harmonic
I am certainly not hearing it here this morning so it seems that they have fixed it. Good job Jon. Season's Greetings to all. 73 Roger VE3ZI ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: 1820 BCB
I am over 500 miles north-east of WDOR, and their spurious signal on 1820 kHz is over S9 with me in the past week or so. I do not believe this is intermod as the station modulation is quite intelligible, and it cannot be a coincidence that their fundamental is 910 kHz. It is also extremely unlikely to be generated locally to me as my closest AM broadcast station is more than 100 miles away. I will also send a polite email to the station. 73 Roger VE3ZI ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Noise problem question
Dave The only thing I would mention is that overhead lines of all types can carry medium frequency signals for long distances, and that drop lines and ground wires make great antennas. As you are forced to DF the noise at medium frequencies it is important to be as far away from the line as possible (like 1/2 mile or more) when triangulating. Only move in closer when you are certain you have the right source area, and then if possible go (much) higher in frequency. Excuse me if I'm trying to teach my grandmother to suck eggs! 73 Roger VE3ZI ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Bev. and power lines.
Hi Neil My experience with Beverages and other receive antennas near fairly close (~1 mile) to some 400kV power lines was quite depressing. Whenever the weather was damp, misty or raining (or all three simultaneously as this was in England), I basically could hear nothing on 160m on any sort of antenna. Attempts to null the noise were complete failures as there were multiple sources of corona. When the weather was dry everything was fine. The solution was to move about 15 miles from the closest EHV line and later to move 4000 miles over the ocean! 73 Roger VE3ZI/G3RBP ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
