Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters

[Tom Haavisto]

Neither of those calls show up in my log on any band.

Tom - VE3CX


On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 7:33 PM Bob W4DR  wrote:

> OK1YQ is actually OK1RD
>
> -Original Message-
> From: donov...@starpower.net
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2018 7:06 PM
> To: topband
> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters
>
>
> JC,
>
>
> I have well over a million QSOs in my computer log but not even a single
> QSO
> with OK1YQ
>
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
>
> On 2018-11-16 13:32, n...@n4is.com wrote:
> > I never heard him on any band but he must be very active on EME
> >
> > ARRL DXCC - 2 Meters -151 OK1YQ
> >
> > http://www.arrl.org/system/dxcc/view/DXCC-2M-20181116-USLetter.pdf
> >
> > 73's JC
> > N4IS
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Topband  On Behalf Of uy0zg
> > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2018 1:41 PM
> > To: Topband@contesting.com
> > Subject: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters
> >
> >
> >
> > ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters -339 OK1YQ .
> >
> > Who is it ??
> >
> >
> http://www.arrl.org/system/dxcc/view/DXCC-160M-20181116-A4.pdf#page=1=a
> > uto,-12,848
> _
> 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: FT8 qrm

[Tom Haavisto]

I think you are missing the larger issue here.  It is not *just* 2.5 Khz
out of 1800-2000.

Consider that many folks have directional antennas that are cut for the
lower part of the band - typically covering 1800-1860 at best.  So - that
2.5 Khz starts to represent at least 4 percent of the available usable band
- possibly more.
Some DX cannot operate below 1805 or higher, which makes the band that much
smaller, and that 2.5 Khz starts to represent an even bigger chuck of prime
spectrum.
For FT-8 users expecting a QRM experience this weekend, I wish them
well...

Tom - VE3CX


On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Greg  wrote:

> Jeez -- enough already...how difficult is it to avoid 2.5 khz of bandwidth
> that is not even in the DX portion of the band!  Leave FT8 alone and fight
> the QRM below 1835.  73, Greg-N4CC
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Dx'ing on the Edge - Numbered and Signed Copies Now Available fro US Topbanders

[Tom Haavisto]

Hi Jeff

You are right - shipping is more than the book...

Will you be offering signed copies at Dayton per chance?  My plan was to
pick up a copy there.

All the best in the New Year!

Tom - VE3CX


On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 9:41 AM, k1zm--- via Topband  wrote:

> Hi Gang
>
>
> Season's Greetings and HNY to All 160m Dx'ers.
>
>
> FYI - I now have on hand a **small** number of signed & numbered copies of
> the SECOND EDITION of DXing on the Edge here with me on Cape Cod.
>
>
> These can be personalized (if desired) and can be shipped relatively
> inexpensively to US addressees.
>
>
> PRICE (SHIPPED) is $25.00 which means NUMBERED, SIGNED, PERSONALIZED &
> SHIPPED - all in.
>
>
> Again - this is an offer I can make to US addressees ONLY!
>
>
> (Overseas shipping is ridiculously expensive and also cumbersome -
> overseas shipping costs alone are more than the book price itself!)
>
>
> Thanks for the bandwidth and CU on Topband soon I hope.
>
>
> 73 JEFF  K1ZM/VY2ZM
>
>
> Email:  k...@aol.com
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Tom Haavisto]

CQ supports the idea of an "X" QSO.  Proper use is "X-QSO"  You prepend
"X-" to leave the QSO in the log so the other guy does not get a NIL, and
you don't claim it as a valid QSO.

That said, I am not sure if the ARRL log processing software is equipped to
handle this scenario.

Another option would be to bust the other guys call (on purpose) in your
log.  You take an extra "hit" - you loose the QSO, plus penalty, but it
gets the job done if that is the intent.

Tom - VE3CX


On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 2:55 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett  wrote:

> If you remove the line completely the other guy gets a busted QSO!  You
> put an X in front of the line.  Not sure about the exact formatting.
>
>
>
> On 12/5/2016 12:25 PM, Ward Silver wrote:
>
>> If the web upload app for log submission finds something in a QSO: line
>> it can't deal with...
>>
>> > The ARRL submission AP tells you to correct the mistakes rather than
>> remove or unclaim them and that is NOT RIGHT!
>>
>> Point of clarification - the app does not really know anything about a
>> particular call.  It just knows that the data it found in what it thought
>> was a call sign field did not look like a call sign.  (You would get a
>> similar error if the Sent Call data is bad or the RST isn't an RST.)  It is
>> up to the log submitter as to what to do about that.  If the QSO: line is
>> just mis-formatted, rearranging the information to satisfy the Cabrillo
>> format is perfectly OK.  If the call sign is busted (from typo, mis-copy,
>> or whatever), my suggestion would be to remove the line entirely. Same
>> thing if the the section abbreviation is not valid.
>>
>> 73, Ward N0AX
>> _
>> 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: VK0EK confirmation

[Tom Haavisto]

Hi Andy

If it helps - I did not make an advance donation.  Once I saw how well
their web site worked, I made OQRS request, and received an LOTW
confirmation shortly after.  As I made additional QSO's, LOTW confirmations
followed quickly.  If you did not get your LOTW confirmation within a day
(at the latest), I expect something went wrong.

I would also add - making an extra donation is not in everyone's budget,
and that is fine.  For those that can afford it - great.  For those that
cannot - it should not be a deal breaker.

If you did not receive your confirmation, I have two suggestions:
Made a second $5.00 donation, and try again.  Since the first time did not
work, the second may also fail, assuming there is a problem with their
log.  Keep this possibility in mind if you try this.

OR - send an email to the team, and ask them to look into the issue.  I am
sure they have a bunch of emails to work through, so be patient.  They are
a first-class operation, and I am sure once the issue is resolved, your
much anticipated confirmation will follow :-)



Tom - VE3CX






On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 5:56 AM, Andrzej_SP6AEG 
wrote:

> Courtesy of my friend  Wlodzimierz Herej SP6EQZ paid a donation of $ 10
> for
> VK0EK.
> On the application was entered in my SP6AEG call sign and address in
> accordance with QRZ.COM.
> To this day I have not found confirmation of my QSO on LoTW?.
> I sent the payment on April 12, 2016
> Is the donation has been sent too late and the previous procedure does not
> work, can I do something wrong?.
> I guess I will have to again make fee to confirm my QSO using the form:
> https://shop.vk0ek.org/
> Thank you very much for having responded to my call, and especially to 160
> m
> what  gave me 263 entities to 160 DXCC.
>
>
>
> Andy
>
> SP6AEG
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: CW160

[Tom Haavisto]

One small request would be to NOT mention callsigns - at least during the 5
day "waiting period" for log submissions to be completed.

Some folks may not be running assisted, may bust the odd call or two, or
whatever.  No point in giving out corrected callsigns at this point.

Thanks

Tom - VE3CX


This
email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com

<#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Tim Shoppa  wrote:

> I felt conditions were "OK" to various parts of Europe throughout the
> night. Yes, things would seem good to one location or another for a few
> minutes, then just evaporate.
>
> That station from Haiti 4V1TL had huge huge signal probably louder than any
> Florida guy I heard.
>
> A "new band greenie for me" on 160M was ER4A.
>
> CW5W had a nice signal but had a hard time hearing - never got further than
> "N3?" with me - and he was often near or under "other DX" (including 4V1TL
> who had a kc cop who was trying to stop me from working CW5W).
>
> Tim N3QE
>
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV 
> wrote:
>
> > I felt like the SE US was under a propagation blanket. A look at RBN, NA
> > spotted by EU nodes made us notable by our absence, K3ZM the notable
> > exception of course. EU would pop in for a few minutes and then go away.
> No
> > clue as to the prop mechanics doing that. The on again off again
> > propagation blanket no help copying QRP either.
> >
> > 73, Guy K2AV
> >
> > On Saturday, January 30, 2016, Jim Brown 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat,1/30/2016 11:19 AM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
> > >
> > >> But let's be clear headed about what QRP lays on the other end and
> what
> > >> the
> > >> dB realities are.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Like Dave, you have articulated the issues pretty well. BTW -- I called
> > > you several times last night, but prop wasn't very good (I heard a half
> > > dozen NC stations, none of them very loud).
> > >
> > > 73, Jim K9YC
> > > _
> > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent via Gmail Mobile on my iPhone
> > _
> > 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: CW160

[Tom Haavisto]

This is only part of it.

Just one example from a few years ago in a 160 contest;  There was a very
loud station in the Caribean, and he was running EU, and doing quite well.
Many NA stations calling him - he was 20 over S9, and deaf as a post.
Later on, he was like S3, and running NA like mad!  The secret?  His
beverages work very well!

Last night, I was having trouble hearing stations from the west coast, but
things got better later on.  I am pretty sure I worked some QRP guys, but
even some QRO guys were a tough go.  We tend to assume  symmetrical
propagation, but I am sure that is not always the case.  From past
experience - in the ARRL DX on 20 meters for example,  I have worked some
very loud QRP stations (or they at least claim to be running QRP), and
working some QRO stations can be difficult.  I am sure we have all seen the
same on 160 in some cases.

Hang in there.  Many of the "easy" Q's are out of the way, and you should
have better luck in the pileups, now that they should be thinned out a
bit.  Last, but not least - QRP has to be tough in any contest.  160
especially so.  But - if it wasn't a challenge, folks would not be doing it.

Tom - VE3CX


This
email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com

<#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Gary Smith  wrote:

> Interesting conditions here last night. I
> heard a whole lot of DX that simply could
> not hear me. I'm running QRP and don't
> expect to work everything I hear but one
> thing for sure, the overall conditions
> were really nice. It was fun to take a
> break and listen to EU working other EU &
> SA and hear both ends of the QSO on 160.
>
> Not sure how good the conditions were for
> everyone though, Herb & I worked but he
> was one of the very few Caribbean stations
> I was able to get a Q with. OTOH, I worked
> several California stations as well as OR
> & WA so the band was selectively open.
>
> An interesting experience is to hear
> stations who have one of the loudest
> signals but are unable to hear me. You
> have to figure their Rx must be difficult,
> either that or they are running power
> beyond their ability to hear. I
> encountered that quite a bit and again,
> running QRP, often my signal not going to
> be heard but when someone has such high
> signal levels here and can't hear me at
> all, they might want to cut back on their
> power or, get better a better Rx ability.
> Maybe their Rx antennas were pointed in
> another direction?
>
> Absolutely not pointing a finger, I just
> saw that happen so very often. I know if I
> were running more power, I'd make a whole
> lot more Qs. Conversely, if they heard
> better, they would have made a lot more
> Qs.
>
> I'd really like to have the chance to work
> a 160 at an excellent location with and
> excellent Tx/Rx set of antennas. Wires in
> not tall trees are the best I can do and I
> have so much fun with them. However, it
> would be nice to experience competition
> with everything stacked in my favor. I'm
> sure we all feel that way. Its been years
> since I was at a super station and I'm
> ready for that experience again; that was
> back in 1986 and so long ago that they had
> just started running CT by K1EA which was
> first released the year before.
>
> Another have at it tonight so maybe I'll
> pick up some of those stations I couldn't
> break last night?
>
> 73 & good luck,
>
> Gary
> KA1J
>
> > Good luck to all!
> >
> > 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: CQ 160 CW Contest

[Tom Haavisto]

This came up last year, and I pointed out it is a game changer.  A station
can now operate full duplex by having a remote receiving site.

A few folks indicated they came close to being able to do this within the
confines of their own property, but it looks like they decided to proceed.

It is only available to SOA(HP), but it will be interesting to see what the
final outcome is.


Tom - VE3CX


On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Jorge Diez - CX6VM 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Just reading the rules, don`t like this, how they can control it?
>
> A new rule is added to allow the use of one and only one remote receiver
> located within 100KM of the main transmitter site. WebSDRs are OK, but must
> be located within the 100KM limit. The rule is designed to accommodate new
> technology, and for those who experience high noise levels at the
> transmitting site.
>
> Will not hurt nobody here, but for those that are playing for top scores
> maybe is a problem
>
> 73,
> Jorge
> CX6VM/CW5W
>
>
>
> 2016-01-27 14:51 GMT-03:00 Tree :
>
> > Just a reminder that the biggest 160 meter contest is coming up this
> > weekend.  It starts at 2200 UTC on Friday and runs for 48 hours.
> >
> > Full rules can be found at http://www.cq160.com/.  Exchange is RST and
> > your
> > QTH for US/VE stations.  For DX - it is RST + CQ zone.
> >
> > One fairly new rule is that logs need to be submitted within 5 days of
> the
> > end of the contest (unless you ask for a waiver).
> >
> > Hope conditions are good.  The VP8 operation will likely resume either
> > during or after the contest.  I remember working VP8ORK during the 2011
> CQ
> > 160 contest - so it is possible to work DX during this contest.  ;-)
> >
> > 73 Tree N6TR/7
> > Hillsboro, OR
> > _
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 73,
> Jorge
> CX6VM/CW5W
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Stew Beef

[Tom Haavisto]

One really needs to look at the contest rules before deciding to not send
RST.  If it is the rules, please send it.

A few years ago, there was a bit of a blow up on the CQ Contest reflector
over this very issue.  A high scoring station decided to not send RST.  He
did this in order to shave a few seconds off his contest exchange, and some
folks cried fowl.  In the end, he decided to submit his log as a checklog.
So - instead of a big score, he scored zero...

So - do whatever you like.  SP does not require RST, so no problem there.
But - be aware that some contests require RST, and may lead to a DQ for not
following the rules...

Tom - VE3CX





On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Doug Renwick  wrote:

> What I often do during a phone contest exchange is omit the signal report
> and only give out the section, serial number, etc.  Very few operators
> request the signal report and when they do I reply 'my report to you is
> already in your logging program, there is no use in repeating it.'  I could
> say a lot more but it would be deemed 'not politically correct.'  Have we
> hit bottom yet?
> Doug
>
> I wasn't born in Saskatchewan, but I got here as soon as I could.
>
> -Original Message-
>
> I completely agree with Don on this.  the incessant and utterly
> meaningless "599" or "59" because it is programmed in and the operator
> too lazy to think about a real signal report makes the minimal value
> of contests sink to zero.
>
> They have become nothing more than a vehicle to keep the ham radio
> economy running and the "play" part, after consumer hams have done the
> plugging.
>
> 73
>
> Rob
> K5UJ
>
>
> << that
> your RST is likely to be "599" regardless, even when the other op can just
> barely dig you out of the noise.  Same with contests on other bands, both
> phone
> and CW.  That nonsensical practice has eliminated what was erstwhile
> perhaps
> the most useful function of contesting, and IMHO, diminishes the worthiness
> of
> contests altogether.  Back when the signal report was a real part of the
> exchange and contesters tended to exchange honest reports, a major contest
> could be an opportunity to determine how well your station got out, and
> into
> what localities you put the best and worst signal strength, providing some
> insight to improvements you might wish make to your transmitter and antenna
> system. >>>
> _
> 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

Re: Topband: K1N On Line Log

[Tom Haavisto]

The way I look at it, I got them on 80/160, so anything else is a bonus.

There is still lots of time, so it might be best to wait for a day or two
before looking for insurance Q's while Clublog gets sorted out.

For me, I would really, really hate to have an insurance Q end up costing
someone else their one any only chance at putting K1N in the log.

Tom - VE3CX


On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Doug Renwick ve...@sasktel.net wrote:

 Tonight the K1N on line log came back on.  For me I lost a bunch of Qs that
 were there before, and some Qs I had made previously still didn't show.  So
 I decided to work them again on 80 and 160 just to make sure.  I am not
 sure
 what the problem is but a lot of folks are unhappy.  In time it will be
 sorted out but in the meantime it does not cast a good light on an
 excellent
 operation.

 Doug

 There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual or lawyer could
 believe them. - George Orwell, 1984



 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 http://www.avast.com

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

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

Re: Topband: K1N and JA

[Tom Haavisto]

 So let me interpret.  KK6ZM contacted you and by doing so all is well.
 I don't agree.  It would take much more than a contact to make it well
 again.
 So is that all that took place?  Or are you hiding the details.  Or are
you
 at fault?

 Doug


If it helps - I don't know the guy, but we leave him in peace already?  Or
do we need to drum him out of the hobby just to make a point?

I am sure he is not the first - nor the last, and probably not the worst
offender.
He made a mistake.  Its over now.  No point in going on and on about it.
Lets leave it at that, and be done with it.

Thanks


Tom - VE3CX
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: CQWW160 Remote receiver rule

[Tom Haavisto]

The more I think about this, I have come to realize the FULL impact of what
is being proposed.

Now, consider this:  We keep talking about remote RX, and the attendant
problems of getting full SDR data back to the main station where the
operator is located.  Lets flip this around.  Lets move the operator to the
receive site, and move the transmitter 100 miles away.  That way, we only
need low bandwidth - keying data, TX audio, and perhaps TX antenna
switching.  Does THIS change things at all?

In other words - use the full receiving capabilities of your current
station, and take away transmitter hash.  Poof!  No longer an issue,
because the TX is now 100 miles away...

This is a serious game changer in my books, and needs a serious rethink
before we say hmmm - OK - old guys need this - no problem - sounds fine...

Tom - VE3CX


On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Milt -- N5IA n...@zia-connection.com
wrote:

 Tom,

 Thank you for a very well thought out and expressed opinion that mirrors
 my thinking on the subject.

 As tom has expressed re his station, I also have constructed the NI5T/N5BG
 station for full duplex operation on 160 M.  We are able to use the mult
 stations within approximately 15 kHz of the run station with full legal
 power in most RX azimuth selections.  With LP the spread drops to about +-
 7 kHz.  At QRP it is down to just a bit more than a kHz; similar to a BIG
 GUN station within a couple of hundred miles.

 I have run full duplex many years when operating QRP in the SPDC.

 So, the concept is not new; it is just now readily available with a
 different set of tools.

 I am in agreement that remote listening sites for 160 M contests, ala
 SPDC, is the correct direction to go.  It will enhance the capability of
 many stations who will put out the effort to do so.  Result; more activity
 and more stations to work.  And that is what it is all about.

 I suggest a 100 km radius as the limit for deployment of a RX site which
 would be legal in the 160 M contests.  Grid Squares are rectangular, vary
 in size according to latitude, and limits the capability if your TX
 location is near the edge of a GS.  The 200 km diameter circle drawn around
 the TX location IMHO would be a very good selection.

 Mis dos centavos.

 Milt, N5IA, and sometimes operator of fully remoted N7GP
 

 -Original Message- From: Tom W8JI
 Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:52 AM
 To: TopBand List
 Subject: Re: Topband: CQWW160 Remote receiver rule

 Organized RR sites are not an issue.

 Remote Radio does not allow new DX members, although a few are
 grandfathered
 in before that policy started. Those few who are members are watched, and
 any operating without signing W? / DXcall, or using a receiver in a contest
 (which costs $.49 per minute), are banned from future use of RR.

 You have to be in the 48, or you have to use portable, or you are banned.

 This is absolutely no different than anything that ever went on since the
 ARRL and others began allowing DX contacts to count no matter where you
 operate or where you move in the USA. Many people have operated here as a
 guest, for example, and worked new countries or worked contests under their
 calls, and counted the countries. The ONLY difference between them logging
 in via link and operating, or driving here and operating, is the physical
 transportation time.

 If we don't like that as a collective group, the thing that needs changed
 is
 taking DXCC and other credits with us when we move or when we operate at
 another site.

 As for duplex, I can pretty much duplex here on 160 in most directions and
 in any direction at any signal spacing on higher bands. For example, I can
 receive noise floor Europeans on 40 meters just 10 kHz below or 5 kHz above
 the SSB transmitter with virtually no interference. Allowing remote
 receivers within a small distance would not affect large stations at all.
 It
 would only let some limited resource stations have more fun. In my view,
 complaining about letting someone work around local noise with a remote
 local receiver is nothing but sour grapes.

 DXCC and other things (like ANY contest) will never be fair or level
 between
 stations. It always has been that way, it always will be that way. No
 matter
 what the rules, a few with a disadvantage will not like the way it is,
 and
 a few with an advantage will not want a change.

 One example is keeping DXCC when someone moves from one coast to another. I
 remember when W2EQS/W9NFC had to start his 160 DXCC over from zero from
 Indiana because he moved from NJ to Indiana. Today, he could move from
 California to Maine and keep his totals.

 The important thing is to not make imaginary problems where none exist, and
 to understand how things really work before suggesting changes.

 73 Tom




 -
 No virus found in this message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 2015.0.5645 / Virus Database: 4273/9020 - Release 

Re: Topband: CQWW160 Remote receiver rule

[Tom Haavisto]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Glenn Wyant va...@sympatico.ca wrote:

 Assuming that someone could easily travel to a remote site ,
 without actually discussing this matter with them , seems
 wrong.

 In   NF  the WX can get very nasty in a big hurray.
 60 mph winds and blowing snow is common.

 Since many of us are over 65 or  approaching the big
 senior status plateau , there are restrictions that would
 prevent us from driving out to the RX site. If you cant
 think of any, then you must be under 50


I think you have missed the point I tried to make, so here goes:  I get it
- travelling to a remote site is hard.  Age plays a part in this.  However,
once you get there, you are faced with the same limitations as everyone
else with all their equipment in one location.

However, consider this for a moment:  At a multi-multi contest station,
they can and do operate two radios in the same band.  Its hard, but its
being done.  With current technology and some good engineering, you can get
your second radio within about 10 khz of your transmitter.  Imagine for a
moment that problem goes away.  You can listen at the same time as you
are transmitting.  Call CQ, and hunt for multipliers..  Imagine you can
look for multipliers 100 hz away from your run frequency - while
transmitting.  In theory, you could run your transmitter *continuously* -
ie QSK, and still keep working folks, because you can hear them as soon as
they call you..

Now - imagine opening up this style of operation on a wide scale.  Some
will be able to do it right away, other will follow in their footsteps, and
others will be left to suffer with their (current) noisy sites.

This is the point I am trying to make.  I am not saying it is a good or bad
thing, but before we go helping out some old timers,  we need to be
careful of unintended consequences of what *else* becomes possible,  It IS
a game changer on a pretty large scale.  I am urging caution, and we need
to think about this...


Tom - VE3CX
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: CQWW160 Remote receiver rule

[Tom Haavisto]

 So one can use their favorite SDR remote to enjoy the contest, and you can
 submit the score it to 3830. The downside is that the contest sponsor does
 not have a contest class that accepts the remote RX arrangement.

 The real issue is to persuade the contest organizers to allow that in some
 contest class. Good luck on that. Organizers have always been WAY behind
 the technological possibilities, most likely because certain advancements
 give such a large advantage to someone who is able to construct them. On
 160 meters, the MAJORITY of contest entrants would describe their location
 as noisy.

 73, Guy.


I would urge caution before we start asking contest sponsors to allow
remote RX sites.  There are some lucky folks where noise is not a huge
issue.  Consider what I could do with a remote RX site - aways from the TX
hash, essentially being able to run full duplex.  To me, this is a pretty
serious game changer.  I do understand the advantages, and how it could
help someone who lives in a noisy location.  But - be careful of granting
an advantage to folks who are blessed without that issue.

Tom - VE3CX
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 160 Worked All States

[Tom Haavisto]

KL7RA has built a great contest station/is a great operator.  If he is on,
it should be no problem to work him.
He does use LOTW - I have many confirmations from Rich.

Same think for HI.  KH6LC has built a great station, and uses LOTW for
confirmations.

GL with the chase!

Tom - VE3CX




On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Joe K2UF j...@k2uf.com wrote:

 Don,

 Me too,  also I hope whoever it is has a great receive antenna and the
 condx
 are excellent.  I have been waiting for an AK QSO on 160 for several years.
 Have never even heard any here in upstate NY on my contorted inv V.

 Good luck to both of us,

 73  Joe K2UF

 -Original Message-
 From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Goldtr8
 (KD8NNU)
 Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 9:03 PM
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Subject: Re: Topband: 160 Worked All States


 I hope an AK contact that uses LOTW shows up and I can work them from MI.
 That would give me WAS on 160m CW.


 ~73
 Don
 KD8NNU
 2014 3905CC Top Gun :-)
 -.- -.. ---.. -. -. ..-
 -Original Message-
 From: George
 Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 6:28 PM
 To: Henk PA5KT ; topband@contesting.com
 Subject: Re: Topband: 160 Worked All States

 Hello Jim etal

 This has probably been mentioned?   But CQ 160 CW Contest coming up in two
 weeks is an excellent venue to finish those Topband WAS quests.

 Also the ARRL CW DX contest in mid February.

 GL

 73  George  W8UVZ

 -Original Message-
 From: Henk PA5KT
 Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:50 PM
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Subject: Re: Topband: 160 Worked All States

 Hi,

 I completed WAS 160 in 2010 and worked most of the states during the
 2008 and 2009 seasons.
 Band was almost open to the full USA every night.

 Working all states with the current propagation is a real challenge.
 You might consider to wait some years till the sun calms down.

 Good luck hunting.

 73 Henk PA5KT

 James Bennett schreef op 1/9/2015 om 6:50 PM:
  Hi folks - I'm trying to complete my WAS on 160 and need a confirmed QSO
  with anyone in the following five states: LA, MS, SC, WV, VT.
 
  I run an Elecraft K3/KPA500 into an Inverted L with a K2AV-designed FCP
  under it. Got a limited amount of real estate so I can't lay out much in
  the line of radials of receiving antennas, but. I have been able to
 easily

  work into the Canadian Maritime provinces (plus the remainder of the New
  England states), so I know I can hit those states. Problem is that I've
  never heard anyone from there on Top Band!
 
  So - if you can get on some evening while we have relatively good
  propagation, I'd love to arrange a schedule. If we connect I can QSL via
  LoTW or direct with my card and an SASE.
 
  Thanks,
 
  Jim / W6JHB
  Folsom, CA
  _
  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

 -
 No virus found in this message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 2015.0.5645 / Virus Database: 4257/8899 - Release Date: 01/09/15

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

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

Re: Topband: TX relay assemblies

[Tom Haavisto]

Hi Larry

If/when you get this going, I too would be interested in this.  All my
antenna switching is now done via remote coax switches, and I have a bunch
of remote controls by my operating position that I would like to
eliminate.  My thinking is - use the band data from the radio or computer
to drive an SBC, and let it select the correct antennas.  I will also need
a four port controller of some sort that I would also see typing into the
SBC.  I have several antennas per band - this input would allow me to
select the appropriate antenna in a one of four.  Some form on on-screen
notification would also be helpful to let me know which antenna I have
selected.

Tom - VE3CX


On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Larry Gauthier (K8UT) k...@charter.net
wrote:

 A few weeks ago there was a helpful, spirited discussion of antenna relays
 here on the reflector. Can we extend that conversation to pre-built relay
 assemblies?

 As background: I have recently become involved in writing software for
 these new SBCs (single board computers) like the Arduino and Raspberry Pi.
 My latest project is a band decoder - a UDP-based CAT decoder that
 interprets rig-to-logging-program frequency traffic and selects relays to
 drive my remote antenna switches. The band decoder collects UDP CAT data
 via wi-fi, which means that it could be anywhere within wi-fi range -
 including outdoors at the location of the remote antenna switches. Hmmm...
 what if the Band Decoder and Remote Antenna Switches were consolidated and
 the Raspberry Pi were to directly drive the antenna selection? Then the
 question becomes whether these relay assemblies are capable of handling 1
 KW RF.

 These relays assemblies are: inexpensive, SPDT, opto-isolated from the
 CPU, include reverse diode protection on the coils, rated for 220VAC at 10
 amps, and the PCBs have been notched to physically isolate the relay common
 from the two outputs (hard to see that from the photos).

 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0057OC5WK

 Will these work? How would I test them?

 -larry (K8UT)

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

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

Re: Topband: Hi-Z RX antennas

[Tom Haavisto]

Hi Tim

Congratulations on the new position.

Sounds like a great retirement job compared to the pressure cooker I am
sure the olther job was.
Sounds like more exciting stuff coming from DX Engineering as well - good
news indeed!

Tom - VE3CX





On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Tim Duffy k...@k3lr.com wrote:

 Hello Pete:

 Yes, I started at DX Engineering in early June this year. After 28 years in
 the cellular and wireless internet business joining the team here at DX
 Engineering is a tremendous opportunity for me to help build one of the
 premier Amateur Radio companies in the world. Look for many more exciting
 announcements soon.

 Now that I am living back at the K3LR station full-time (spent 13 years
 living and working in Oklahoma) - I am sure I will see you more often on
 the
 Topband!

 73,
 Tim K3LR


 -Original Message-
 From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Pete
 Smith N4ZR
 Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 6:27 AM
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Subject: Re: Topband: Hi-Z RX antennas

 What I find more interesting was this line in the press release - Tim
 Duffy K3LR, Chief Marketing Officer and General Manager of DX
 Engineering.  Say what?

 73, Pete N4ZR
 Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
 http://reversebeacon.net,
 blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
 For spots, please go to your favorite
 ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.

 On 10/29/2013 12:15 AM, Tree wrote:
  It appears that Hi-Z will no longer have any legal issues:
 
 

 https://plus.google.com/103804812034174225774/posts/WNoNTNirK9N#103804812034
 174225774/posts/WNoNTNirK9N
 
 
 
  And a 10% off sale! Expires Wednesday night!
 
 
 

 http://www.dxengineering.com/search/product-line/hi-z-antennas-eight-element
 -array-systems?autoview=SKUkeyword=hi-z
 
  Tree
  _
  Topband Reflector
 

 _
 Topband Reflector

 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: 160M Rhombics

[Tom Haavisto]

W0AIH has a Rhombic, and it is pretty amazing.  Mostly used on 20.
Its quieter than the stack, and its louder.  Steerable, but NOT
rotateable :-)

Installing one is NOT a simple task.  Took Paul a few tries to figure
out how to hang it.  Its up about 100 feet, and requires a significant
amount of real estate.  I could not imaging what it would take to make
one for 160, buts its a safe bet that a 4-square will be a lot easier
to install/require less real estate.  Paul has a 4-square for 160
among other antennas for Topband.


Tom - VE3CX



On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Shoppa, Tim tsho...@wmata.com wrote:
 Anybody on this list have a Rhombic for 160M?

 W1AW used to use one for bulletins and code practice on 160M but I think it 
 came down years ago (1989?)

 I seem to recall pics in CQ of a big California desert DX'er who had what was 
 essentially a radial array of rhombics for maybe 160M or 80M.

 Tim N3QE

 -Original Message-
 From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Grant 
 Saviers
 Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 11:03 AM
 To: ZR
 Cc: g...@ka1j.com; topband@contesting.com
 Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Inv-L Joy

 Posted on towertalk yesterday was the link to the free download of the
 1952 text Radio Antenna Engineering
 http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/edmund-laport/radio-antenna-engineering/ebook/product-17560294.html


 Some fascinating stuff since much of the focus is high power
 broadcasting LF/HF and point to point reliable RF links with high gain
 HF wire antennas.  (many pictures of amazing arrays).  A quick peruse
 found in a later chapter how to build high power non-inductive
 terminations for rhombics etc.  Make an open wire feeder of the needed Z
 from iron or stainless wire and as long as the db's you wish to absorb
 and with wire heavy enough to handle the current.  Clever stuff,
 invented when HF was a primary long distance communications technology.
 The formulas are there for resistivity and ferromagnetic losses.

 Of course some of the content is now pretty irrelevant since we have
 cheap great coax, ferrite, and NEC software and a billion times the
 worlds 1952 total computing power on every desktop.

 Grant KZ1W


 On 7/25/2013 8:17 AM, ZR wrote:
 On a side note WD-1A conductors are a copper/cadmium alloy; whatever
 that means in RF resistance. Fine for a Beverage but what is the loss?

 Carl
 KM1H

 - Original Message - From: Gary Smith g...@ka1j.com
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:22 AM
 Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Inv-L Joy


 Had a more difficult time getting the antenna up there this time. The
 first spud snapped away from the fishing line  in the dense thicket
 I was unable to find where it landed. Had to make another  the
 mosquitos were so thick they posted a LUAU sign on my forehead.

 Till I get something better I retrieved my WD-1A military field phone
 wire that was left out in the marsh as my old beverage wire. and
 after a comedy of errors I finally got the antenna up.

 I was earlier getting a SWR of 1.1 on 160 before and now am getting
 1.1 on 1.74365 MHZ

 1.74365mhz
 R=51 X= 6,7,8
 swr 1.1

 At the desired frequency to match the antenna I've aimed for 1.8MHZ
 here's the information I was able to get at my desired frequency:
 1.8025 mhZ
 Coax loss 6.3db
 C=4193  XC=21
 L=1.970  X1=21
 r=41 x=21 swr 1.6

 So this is what the antenna is giving me at this moment. I need to
 get back down and add the broken wire to the radial bed and I should
 also trim some length to bring my values to 1.1 at 1.025MHz.

 Given the info above from the MFJ 259B any idea how much I might
 nibble off and more, is there anything in this info that tells me I
 should look to do anything differently?

 Hopefully the coax loss will be mitigated by a friend bringing me
 350' of hardline. Can't wait!

 Thanks,

 Gary
 KA1J
 _
 Topband Reflector


 -
 No virus found in this message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3209/6019 - Release Date: 07/25/13


 _
 Topband Reflector


 _
 Topband Reflector
 _
 Topband Reflector
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: 24th Annual Top Band Dinner in Dayton

[Tom Haavisto]

Last time I was at Dayton 2 years ago, there was a webcam set up in
the Contest Supersuite.  Not sure what the plan is for this year, but
if so, it may be a chance to check out what you are missing out on.

Then again, time to start planning for next year :-)

Tom - VE3CX

On 5/8/13, Gary Smith g...@ka1j.com wrote:
 I can never seem to get away as I'm parent wrangling  have no
 back-up to help out at this time. If anyone takes some photos/videos
 of the dinner  your think of it, please post them online, I'd like
 to see some of the doings and faces to go with the calls.

 Thanks,

 Gary
 KA1J

 The annual Dayton Top Band Dinner is always special. 24 years in a
 row.

 If you have not made your reservations yet, now is the time.

 N6TR and K3UL will give a special Top Band program for 2013.

 All of the Top Band Dinner information is here:

 http://topbanddinner.com

 Four days of Dayton fun is here:

 http://contestsupersuite.com

 73,
 Tim K3LR

 All good topband ops know fine whiskey is a daylight beverage.
 _
 Topband Reflector




 All good topband ops know how to put up a beverage at night.
 _
 Topband Reflector

All good topband ops know how to put up a beverage at night.
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: DX WINDOW

[Tom Haavisto]

From the contest rules:

6.1.  The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only.


--

So, while the window might not officially exist, one is specifically
mentioned in the rules.


Tom - VE3CX





On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Carol Richards n...@comcast.net wrote:
 That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed for many 
 years.


 Carol
 ___
 Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
___
Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com

Re: Topband: NH8S or KH8S

[Tom Haavisto]

Hi Herb

NH8S was on this morning (1200Z).  Not strong, running split, and was
busy putting NA into the log.  After I got him on 160, then on 80.  I
expect he will be on for a few more mornings, so you have a few more
chances (fingers crossed).

Tom - VE3CX





On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Herb Schoenbohm he...@vitelcom.net wrote:
 Jiim, Nice work with 5 watts. I can't hear a peep here in the Eastern
 Caribbean on TB with three Beverages pointed that way.  I did work N8S in
 2007 without any problem.  Summer time DX is problematic (whatever that
 means). But D64K was not a problem last month on TB although I don't believe
 nay other NA was able to hear them well enough for a contact. they were in
 here 589 peaking night after night.  it is very funny since my shot to KH8
 is almost totally over sea water with no hill no mountains in between, just
 the narrow portion of Central America.

 Well as the old-timer says, You pay your money and you take your choice.

 Now with all these super Dx-pedition types all converging on American Samoa
 for RR, I just can't understand why they don't take a few minutes to fire
 up on TB.  I think more like myself need that compared to Swains.  At least
 it has escaped me for decades.

 Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ


  On 9/11/2012 1:13 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

 On 9/11/2012 5:51 AM, Jim WA9YSD wrote:

 Is NH8S the on line Log for KH8S.  WHAT IS GOING ON?


 The confusion is that KH8-S is the prefix designator reserved for Swains,
 and will show up in logging software like DXKeeper as the prefix. As I
 recall, an earlier operation (2007?) used KH8S, and that operation is in my
 log confirmed on 160M.

 BTW -- I worked them last night on the fifth call with 5 watts from near
 San Francisco.  I guess the new 160M array is working!

 73, Jim K9YC
 ___
 UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK


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

Re: Topband: 160m from 5X

[Tom Haavisto]

Hi Nick

Like many others, I am very glad to hear you will be QRV on Topband.

A few suggestions if I may:

Operating on Topband has a bit of a learning curve.  Not steep, but a
few things that may help:

Code speeds tend to be more moderate than other bands.  On 20, a
DXpedition can zoom along at 30+ - On topband, it is best to slow down
a bit.  25 is probably more common.

Chances are you will not be loud, and I would suggest operating split
as much as possible,  The DX Window is 18025 to 18030 - transmit in
here, and listen outside the window.

You will see some enhancement around sunset/sunrise.  You see this on
other bands as well, but the effect is more pronounced, and as you may
have noticed, there is more emphasis on these times for working
different parts of the world.

Putting out a decent signal is (usually) not the biggest hurdle -
hearing is.  Others have already suggested good transmit antennas, and
it sounds like you already have some good ieas (K9AY) for RX in place.

Once last thing I would add as far as receive is concerned - ignore
signal levels.  The biggest obstacle is hearing.  Period.  Who cares
if the signal is S2 or S9.  A BOG may produce low signal levels/not be
very effecient.  If it helps you hear, that is all that really
matters.  If it is rolled up during the day, perhaps it can be rolled
out in different directions at night to favour different parts of the
world.

Good luck with the operation!!

Tom - VE3CX



On 8/28/12, Nick Henwood n...@henwood.demon.co.uk wrote:
 I have been v QRV from 5X in past 5 years. Returning this Oct for 8 weeks
 and considering how best to get 160 on the air as it is the only band I have
 not worked and reckon there must be un-met need!
 I go to work (pro bono) at a community university so not a dxpedition but
 solo so plenty of time to get on the air. I carry all my gear with me.
 I am looking for help/advice in erecting a simple antenna which you guys can
 hear!  I have access to roach poles (30 footers) and can get max height of
 about 50 feet. No high trees locally and insufficent room for beverage
 antennas. Contemplating a 50 ft vertical with capacity top loading and some
 induction at the feed point. I will get grounding as good as possible within
 local constraints(small site, vehicles near the house etc). What do you
 think?
 Grateful for advice on antennas. I would only work CW - lots of experience
 on HF (110k QSOs from 5X on the other bands) but novice on 160 dx - advice
 (polite) also invited on operating.
 73 Nick G3RWF/5X1NH
 PS Yes, I use LOTW
 ___
 UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

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

Re: Topband: 5 -IRC's wanted

[Tom Haavisto]

Yuri - VE3DZ sells them.  I am sure there are other QSL managers as
well who would be happy to sell them as well.

Tom - VE3CX




On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:01 PM,  all...@dejazzd.com wrote:
 I've worked some DX who will not accept green stamps, but will accept IRCs.

 I checked many post officesin our local area and no one has them anymore.

 When I tried to go to USPS I couldn't get it to accept my credit card info 
 even though I have used it well over a hundred times on line without a 
 problem.

 Does anyone have 5 to sell or can you procure them for you local post office? 
  I will send an sase plus a check for 5 x 2.20, $11,

 Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 Thanks.

 Allan W2TN
 ___
 UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK