Re: Topband: Testing for common mode noise

[Don Kirk]

 Jim K9YC said :


Second, a common mode choke does not in any way degrade 
the signal nor the performance of the antenna.

 but after more offline discussions with Jim about a posting by W8JI warning 
that a improper value common mode choke can actually make things worse, Jim 
clarified his statement as follows : My advice is based on using a good 
choke -- that is, based on thedata in my RFI tutorial.  For an RX antenna, 
14-18 turns through asingle #31 toroid should be quite effective on 
160-80M.

Thanks to Jim and everyone else that responded to my posting. 

Don (wd8dsb)



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

Re: Topband: Fabricated common mode chokes - Sourcing

[Don Kirk]

Paul N1BUG said : Mouser has the Fair-Rite 2.4 #31 core for $7 each. That is 
the lowest price I have found for small quantities.

--


Last week I purchased the 2.4 O.D. 31 mix cores (Fair-Rite part number 
2631803802) from Arrow Electronics, and the single quantity pricing was
 $5.32 per part.  Shipping was $8.00, but the low piece price more than makes 
up for the shipping cost (I purchased 5 pieces).  Arrow Electronics
 is a Fair-Rite distributor, and they were the lowest price I could find from a 
Fair-Rite distributor.  Arrow Electronics currently has 473 pieces
 in stock.

73's
Don (WD8DSB) 






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

Re: Topband: Flag/Pennant Question

[Don Kirk]

--
Pete W2PM wrote : Im starting to compare a half size pennant now pointing to VK 
from here with a Short bog.  Something  less than 150 ft.  long.  So far casual 
observations areshowing significantly greater output from the bog but I need to 
do more careful and controlled observations.  The half pennant is too low in 
output for the veryweak signals I am experiencing here.  I've used the half 
quite well to Europefor 160 however.
---

This summer I installed 3 small point fed pennants (51.6% the size of full size 
pennants) pointing 40 deg (Europe), 160 deg(Caribbean), and 300 deg 
(Pacific\Asia) from the Indianapolis area, and I am using a W1FB preamp which 
has more than enough gain to match S meter readings equivalent with my 68 foot 
base loaded vertical on 160 meters (looks like my preamp still has 
approximately 12 db of additional gain if needed).  If interested you can hear 
some of my recordings using my pennants on YouTube (just do a search for WD8DSB 
which will bring up a listing of numerous recordings I have done).  I also have 
a simple website that documents my 3 point fed pennant project and the URL is 
http://sites.google.com/site/pennantflagantennas/

I did some slight modifications to the W1FB preamp to prevent failures of the 
amplifier IC when the amplifier was exposed to high signal levels from my TX 
antenna when I was running 100 watts, and I documented this modification last 
year on the topband reflector.  The modification has worked just great, and my 
TX antenna is only 40 feet from the feedpoint of my point fed pennants (running 
100 watts I have not found the need to use any additional front end protection 
devices besides the modifications I incorporated in my preamp).  At some point 
in time I would like to try a couple of very low noise preamps in series (two 
in series due to the gain requirement) to see if a lower noise factor preamp 
offers any advantage on 160 meters compared with the W1FB preamp (I previously 
tried a KD9SV preamp vs the W1FB preamp using a small loop on 160 meters and 
did not notice any improvement in S\N ratio).

Next season I will probably try phased half size pennants in an attempt to 
approach the performance of a full size beverage (similar RDF values) from a 
small suburban lot, but will also probably test out a BOG.

73's
Don Kirk (wd8dsb)
 
 
 
 
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

Re: Topband: QRP Question

[Don Kirk]

Let me play the devils advocate and put a spin on why you might want to sign 
/qrp when calling CQ.


1)  If I work you and you sign /qrp, then I will send you a QSL card that says 
K9JWV/qrp (or whatever your call might be), but if you don't say you are qrp, 
then you will get a card that says K9JWV and no mention that I am confirming 
you worked me while you were running qrp.

2)  You also might want to sign /qrp when calling CQ if you are trying to 
attract other qrp operators.  If I hear someone sign /qrp when they call CQ, I 
often fire up my QRP rig since I suspect they will be able to hear me just as 
well as I am hearing them.

Don (wd8dsb)

 

 


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

Re: Topband: T8CC

[Don Kirk]

Hello Mike,

Here are the last 100 spots for T8CC on the topband, and really not much 
reported in the US (nothing from the East Coast at all).

73's
Don (wd8dsb)
 

N7TK1825.5 T8CC 160M PSE   1145 15 
Dec   Palau
LA3XI   1824.9 T8CC fine operator  2029 14 
Dec   Palau
UA4CR   1824.9 T8CC up 2006 14 
Dec   Palau
NH2T1824.9 T8CC cq qsx UP  1943 14 
Dec   Palau
UA4CR   1825.5 T8CC CQ NA UP1  1446 14 
Dec   Palau
N7TK1825.5 T8CC 160M PSE   1214 14 
Dec   Palau
TF4M1824.0 T8CC was finally getting stronger w 2107 13 
Dec   Palau
DK2CF-@ 1824.0 T8CC up 1.2   tnx QSO   2101 13 
Dec   Palau
SV2GNC  1824.0 T8CC 57 steel cqing up  2035 13 
Dec   Palau
UA4CR   1824.0 T8CC up1-2  1935 13 
Dec   Palau
JA5SWL  1825.0 T8CC CQ UP  1927 13 
Dec   Palau
RU6M1824.0 T8CC QRT?   1909 13 
Dec   Palau
RA3DOX  1824.0 T8CC CLG CQ UP.579  1900 13 
Dec   Palau
UA9YAB-@1824.0 T8CC 599 here   1342 13 
Dec   Palau
JG3IWL  1824.0 T8CC UP 1340 13 
Dec   Palau
W1YY1825.5 T8CC1322 13 
Dec   Palau
JG3IWL  1825.5 T8CC 589  UP1305 13 
Dec   Palau
WL7E1825.5 T8CC up 1   1244 13 
Dec   Palau
IK4NMF-@1824.0 T8CC BIG SIG but you not lsn me :-(((   2041 12 
Dec   Palau
UA4CR   1824.0 T8CC UP 2035 12 
Dec   Palau
LA3XI-@ 1824.0 T8CC up still fine copy 2029 12 
Dec   Palau
JA5BZL  1824.0 T8CC cq up  1936 12 
Dec   Palau
RM8W1824.5 T8CC UP 1350 12 
Dec   Palau
UA4CR   1824.5 T8CC CQ NA UP1  1343 12 
Dec   Palau
JA0SWL  1825.0 T8CC UP 2102 11 
Dec   Palau
JA5SWL  1824.5 T8CC CQ CQ UP   2035 11 
Dec   Palau
9M2AX   1824.0 T8CC up 1145 11 
Dec   Palau
F5NBU   1825.0 T8CC f8eze deja dans le log stop2021 10 
Dec   Palau
OK2ZAW-@1824.0 T8CC up 1 nice sig tnx  2018 10 
Dec   Palau
JA8SWL  1824.0 T8CC CQ up  2003 10 
Dec   Palau
RA4CC   1824.5 T8CC UP1 op.UA4CC   1619 10 
Dec   Palau
UA9YAB-@1824.6 T8CC1613 10 
Dec   Palau
JA1HGY  1824.5 T8CC CQ up  1609 10 
Dec   Palau
UA0SC   1824.5 T8CC up1 op. UA4CC  1345 10 
Dec   Palau
RZ3DJ-@ 1824.0 T8CC very loud up2  1818 09 
Dec   Palau
OK2WM   1824.0 T8CC cq cq good signal QRT  1814 09 
Dec   Palau
RN1NW-@ 1824.0 T8CC TNX QSO ! Up 1.8   1806 09 
Dec   Palau
OH3GIF-@1824.1 T8CC up21805 09 
Dec   Palau
IK4NMF-@1824.0 T8CC @ UA6A I lsn 579 FB on my beverage 1751 09 
Dec   Palau
UA6A1824.0 T8CC ik4nmf-u never heard tropic ra 1740 09 
Dec   Palau
IK4NMF-@1824.0 T8CC Big sig but no ear 1735 09 
Dec   Palau
RA3DOX  1824.0 T8CC CLG CQ 579 1654 09 
Dec   Palau
RK3ZZ   1824.1 T8CC Nice signal !  1716 08 
Dec   Palau
LY7M1824.1 T8CC fb signal up1  1658 08 
Dec   Palau
UA9FGJ  1824.0 T8CC up 1   1645 08 
Dec   Palau
F8EZE   1824.0 T8CC nice cpy today 1638 08 
Dec   Palau
RA3DOX  1823.9 T8CC CQ UP. 579 1637 08 
Dec   Palau
JA1ANR  1824.0 T8CC up 1035 08 
Dec   Palau
DK2PH   1824.0 T8CC up, fb sigs, Ark   1844 07 
Dec   Palau
R7NA-@  1824.1 T8CC UP 1   1843 07 
Dec   Palau
R7NA-@  1824.1 T8CC UP 2   1839 07 
Dec   Palau
RA3QTT  1824.0 T8CC TNX QSO1800 07 
Dec   Palau
RK3ZZ   1824.0 T8CC CQ-ing 

Re: Topband: Where to place a preamp? Switching Beverages?

[Don Kirk]

N4ZR said : I have a 20 dB ARR preamp, My choice is whether to put it at the 
antenna end, incurring the added complexity of sending 12V DC to it via the 
coax, or to put it in the shack.


Per the ON4UN book, In most cases you can put the preamplifier in the shack.  
The signal loss in the feed line is a loss that affects both the signal and 
external noise.  That means that the loss in the feedline does not affect the 
S/N ratio.


I personally have 3 point fed pennants that are very small (51.6% the size of 
full size pennants), and therefore their gain is around -46dbi, and my preamp 
is located in the shack (W1FB slightly modified preamp).  I've done some simple 
tests with my preamp out at the feedpoint versus in the shack and I personally 
was unable to detect any difference in S/N performance but my measurement 
system was not highly sophisticated.

My feedline is 160 feet of RG58/U, and I intentionally have no breaks (no 
connectors) in this feedline (one solid run of feedline from the connector on 
the back of my preamp to the primary of my transformer which is located at the 
antennas (my feedline is soldered directly to the transformer primary), and I 
did this to eliminate any and all weather related connector problems.  

I only use one transformer to feed my 3 pennants, and I do switch the high 
impedance side of the transformer (the transformer secondary), and I switch 
both ends of the secondary (mandatory for multiple point fed pennant systems).

I have 14 turns of my coax run through 3 stacked 2.4 O.D. 31 mix cores to help 
prevent common mode current, and this choke is located approximately 25 feet 
away from the base of multiple pennant feedpoint.  Also have 14 turns of my 
relay control cable (CAT 5 cable) running through 2 stacked 2.4 O.D. 31 mix 
cores which are located on the ground below my antenna feedpoint.
 
73's
Don (wd8dsb)

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

Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 109, Issue 36

[Don Kirk]

Doug (EI2CN) said :

Jack is a gentleman and good operator.   Certainly in EI there are no clicks
but perhaps some have such a strong signal that the problem is in their own
equipment - it can happen.

 

Yep, this often happens to me.  When strong signals are present I often detect 
what I first assume are key clicks from the transmitting station, but then I 
look down and see that my noise blanker is on and this normally is the true 
cause of the problem (not the transmitting station).  I turn my noise blanker 
off, and the key clicks miraculously vanish.

73's
Don (wd8dsb)

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

Re: Topband: Solar Activity Topband

[Don Kirk]

---
Guy Said : Yet, conditions for transcontinental QSOs here during this weekend's 
ongoing running of the CQ 160 WW test  have been very good...so far, anyway.

 

 I too observed very good state side conditions last night from the 
Indianapolis area into Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah (lots of signals 
from these areas were often 20dB plus which was really amazing.)  California 
was decent, but very little going up the West Coast into Oregon, Washington, 
and nothing from VE4, VE5, VE6, and VE7 land.

Also noticed that the actual noise floor was very low.  All in all I was very 
surprised that conditions were so good considering all the recent solar 
activity reports.

73's
Don (wd8dsb)

 



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

Re: Topband: Wellbrook receive loop performance

[Don Kirk]

W2PM said,
 
A comparison of the Wellbrook product which is a magnetic loop is not a good 
one to a AY loop or other low angle directive receive antenna.  Mag loops are 
not directive in the same way they only have a very sharp null to two 
opposite directions and omni directional vertically.  Nice for nulling strong 
local point source noise but that's it. It will enable qsos not possible 
otherwise and some DX I suppose but Wellbrook is not a good choice for any 
serious DX work. No mag antenna is.
-- 


 And so far my testing fully supports the above comments by W2PM, and 
calculated RDF values along with takeoff angle really appears to help predict 
the S/N performance of one antenna system versus another when dealing with 
normal atmospheric noise that's coming in from all directions or at least say 
multiple directions (with a higher RDF value and lower takeoff angle generally 
being desired for DX which is not a strong point of Mag loops compared with AY 
loops, Flags/Pennants, etc.).

For local point source generated noise such as a Plasma TV, the Mag loop really 
helps if the offending signal is 90 degrees (or 270 deg) to the desired signal. 
 Whereas the Pennant/Flag really helps when the offending signal is 180 degrees 
to the desired signal.

I have a gut feeling through preliminary testing I've done that a shielded mag 
loop has less interaction (less distortion of its pattern) due to nearby 
objects when compared with a small rotatable flag, possibly making a well 
balanced mag loop usable where the Pennant/Flag might not be (very small lot 
size, indoor operation, etc.).  Detailed pattern measurements need to be done 
in order to quantify this casual observation.

I should also mention that I only obtain an approximate 2 db improvement (on 
average) in S/N performance using my half size pennants compared with my 68 
foot tall base loaded TX vertical (but in reality I believe this is close to 
what I should expect based on calculated RDF values).  I also notice that the 
S/N difference is much greater between my pennants and TX vertical for stations 
close in versus DX which is likely due to differences in elevation patterns 
between my pennants and my TX vertical.  Contrary to most folks opinion, I set 
my preamp gain on my pennants to provide a noise floor identical to that of my 
TX vertical for S/N comparison measurements (I find it impossible to quantify 
S/N performance between two antenna systems any other way under real life 
operating conditions, and I continuously switch rapidly between the two 
different antenna systems in order to evaluate the average S/N improvement).

I am by no means an expert on this topic, but I wanted to share my 
comments/experiences since I've been doing a lot of testing of shielded mag 
loops and small pennants and flags during the past 3 years. 

73's
Don (wd8dsb)



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

Re: Topband: K6STI low noise receive loop

[Don Kirk]

 

   there is no modeling associated with this effort.

Jim,

I took a look at the article today and also threw together a basic (simple) 
EZNEC model and my generated elevation pattern closely resembles the pattern 
that they published (fig 6) in QST back in 1995.  On 160 meters the elevation 
pattern shows max gain at 44 deg and 43 deg on 80 meters.  RDF is not 
spectacular, but depending on where the noise is coming from (as well as the 
signal of interest) it might do well.  Looks like it does best when noise is 
arriving at a very low angle, or at a very high angle.

After trying lots of things on a small lot, I personally am convinced that I 
need to go with phased flags or short phased verticals (like a Hi-Z system) in 
an attempt to maximize RDF along with a reasonably low angle of radiation (for 
DX).

73's
Don (wd8dsb) 



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

Re: Topband: Spurious Signal on 1810.8

[Don Kirk]

Signal S7 in Fishers Indiana (10 miles NE of Indianapolis) tonight at 8:30 pm 
EDT, and beam heading approximately 100 degrees (equal signal on my pennant 
beaming 40 degrees and my pennant beaming 160 degrees which puts it at 
approximately 100 degrees).  I uploaded recording of signal on youtube at 
http://youtu.be/hAjogeZUxuI

Not able to hear this signal today during daylight hours.

Don (wd8dsb)
 

 

-Original Message-
From: Neal Layman n...@comcast.net
To: topband topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tue, Oct 2, 2012 8:52 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: Spurious Signal on 1810.8


 From FN20ee - Chester County, PA - the noise on 1810.5 +/- is
S9 plus, very little variance. Haven't listened during the day,
but very strong tonight.   N4XU



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

Re: Topband: Spurious Signal on 1810.8

[Don Kirk]

 Now peaking S8.5 at 3:45am EDT (0745 UTC) Oct 3rd, and after more listening I 
would say it's 90 degrees from my location (EM69xx) near Indianapolis based on 
it being just slightly stronger on average on my 40 degree pennant compared 
with my 160 degree pennant (very similar response that I have when copying AA1K 
right now, and he is 93.6 degrees from my location.

Don (wd8dsb)

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Don Kirk wd8...@aol.com
To: topband topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tue, Oct 2, 2012 9:02 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: Spurious Signal on 1810.8


Signal S7 in Fishers Indiana (10 miles NE of Indianapolis) tonight at 8:30 pm 
EDT, and beam heading approximately 100 degrees (equal signal on my pennant 
beaming 40 degrees and my pennant beaming 160 degrees which puts it at 
approximately 100 degrees).  I uploaded recording of signal on youtube at 
http://youtu.be/hAjogeZUxuI

Not able to hear this signal today during daylight hours.

Don (wd8dsb)
 

 

-Original Message-
From: Neal Layman n...@comcast.net
To: topband topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tue, Oct 2, 2012 8:52 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: Spurious Signal on 1810.8


 From FN20ee - Chester County, PA - the noise on 1810.5 +/- is
S9 plus, very little variance. Haven't listened during the day,
but very strong tonight.   N4XU



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

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

Re: Topband: 1810 kHz signal

[Don Kirk]

If someone here could take a map and plot all of the the data points, thearea 
from which the signal originates will become clear.

I did that this morning using Google Earth, and while the data is noisy (some 
stray data points), so far it appears the signal is originating from the half 
of New Jersey State that's south of New York State (somewhere between New York 
City and Atlantic City and within 60 miles of the ocean or out in the ocean off 
the shoreline).  

Additional data might cause the picture to shift slightly up or down the coast.

Don (wd8dsb) 

 
___
Remember the PreStew coming on October 20th.  http://www.kkn.net/stew for more 
info.

Re: Topband: W1AW

[Don Kirk]

I have been looking for them for the past week and I too have not heard w1aw on 
160.  Even did a search on internet trying to find out why but could not find 
info.



-Original Message-
From: w...@w8ji.com
To: Topband Topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tue, Oct 9, 2012 5:39 pm
Subject: Topband: W1AW



Is W1AW missing from 160 now? I use them to calibrate directions.
___
Remember the PreStew coming on October 20th.  http://www.kkn.net/stew for more 
info.

___
Remember the PreStew coming on October 20th.  http://www.kkn.net/stew for more 
info.

Re: Topband: W1AW

[Don Kirk]

 
W8JI asked : Is W1AW missing from 160 now? I use them to calibrate directions.

I just checked with the ARRL, and the 160 meter antenna was damaged in a storm 
and they have been off the air for about 1 week.
Current plan is for contractor to install new antenna on Wednesday Oct 24th.

73's
Don (wd8dsb)




 

 



 

 
 
___
Remember the PreStew coming on October 20th.  http://www.kkn.net/stew for more 
info.

Re: Topband: 1810 spur status and resolution

[Don Kirk]

Full and final details on the recent spurious signal and how it was located can 
be found on the following website.

http://sites.google.com/site/wgymsignal/
 

73's
Rick K2XT  Don WD8DSB


  
___
Remember the PreStew coming on October 20th.  http://www.kkn.net/stew for more 
info.

Re: Topband: DSL Filter

[Don Kirk]

Today I built the ADSL filter today that Rag (LA6FJA) provided the link
for, and it solved my DSL crashing problem.

I fought this problem for numerous years when running 100 watts on 160
meters and previously threw a bunch of toroid chokes at the problem with no
success, but today in the 160 meter contest my internet connection has been
rock solid with the filter in line (but not with the filter removed).  I
also checked my internet upload and download speed with and without the
filter and the results are the same.  For the 6.51uH inductors I used what
I had on hand which were FT50-61 cores.  I wound 8 turns per core and
pushed the turns close to each other in order to get close to the 6.51 uH
value.

My modem is a Siemens Speedstream 4100 Ethernet ADSL modem.

Just FYI, and thanks.
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Antenna terminations

[Don Kirk]

K1PX said,

I've covered my resistors and solder joints with GE Silicone II sealant
 and have never had a problem.


I do the same thing with my pennant termination resistors (just cover them
with GE Silicone II sealant).

73's
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Using GE silicone as antenna sealant.

[Don Kirk]

WA3MEJ said :

be very sure that if you pick GE silicone sealant.. (RTV or whatever you
 call it) DO NOT use the kind that has acetic acid in it.


This is a very good point, and this is the reason I use GE Silicone Sealant
II versus GE Silicone Sealant I.  GE Silicone Sealant II is a neutral cure
silicone whereas GE Silicone Sealant is an acid or acetoxy cure silicone.
  Neutral Cure silicone means no acids are released during the curing
process (note this information was obtained from the GE website).

73's
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: ADSL Filter (simple surface mount design)

[Don Kirk]

In February of this year I built another ADSL filter originally designed by
OZ1CTK, but this time I used off the shelf surface mount components (my
original build used through hole components, etc.).  For my surface mount
build I used a single sided circuit board and a Dremel tool with cutoff
wheel to cut the very simple traces into the board.  The surface mount
version of this filter has been in use since February, and it has worked
flawlessly.

I created a website that documents my surface mount build of this filter.
The website contains pictures of my surface mount filter, parts list, as
well as a downloadable .pdf document which shows the artwork, and parts
placement.  Here is the URL of my simple website for those interested :
http://sites.google.com/site/adsl160filter/

73's
Don (wd8dsb)
All good topband ops know fine whiskey is a daylight beverage.
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Ferrite Source

[Don Kirk]

Dean,

I purchase the 2.4 O.D. 31 mix cores (Fair-Rite part number
2631803802) from Arrow Electronics, and the single quantity pricing is
currently $4.83 per part.
Shipping is $8.00, but the low piece price more than makes up for the
shipping cost.

Arrow Electronics is a Fair-Rite distributor, and they typically are
the lowest price I can find from a Fair-Rite distributor.

73's

Don (WD8DSB)



On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 6:29 PM, dospi...@q.com wrote:





 Hi Folks



 A month or so ago, I inquired of the reflector , for a source for 31
 material ferrite cores.  Many responded both on and off the reflector. I
 thank you all for your input.  You can be sure I checked out your
 suggestions.



 From my point of view the very best suggestion was  Kreger Components
 1360 Roanoke BLvd  Salem, VA  24153.  Or on the web at  www.  krege
 rcomponents.com   Phone is 540 389 6565.   I talked to Sherry  on my
 first contact. She is the inside sales manager.  I  found her to be easy to
 work with, and happy to be involved with a small lot purchase. What is
 small you ask?  Their webpage indicates a hundred dollar minimum.  My order
 was about 225 dollars. It was a combined order with another local ham.



 They have a very extensive stock and update their catalog every day, so
 you wont run into out of stock replies. Specifically?  The large type 31
 core, we commonly know as FT240-31 is priced at $6.25 each in small lots.
 Thats the cheapest I found anywhere.



  Communications were excellent. Shipping was ultra quick and very well
 packed.  It arrived today.



 Kreger Componets was first suggested by Charlie Cunningham . Several
 others followed on and confirmed their great reputation ..as Im doing .



 73 Dean  W5PJR

 Tijeras, NM
 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

Topband: 160 meter interference caused by bad cable on ATT u-verse wireless gateway

[Don Kirk]

This month a beacon like CW signal appeared on 1.816 Mhz at my location (24
hours a day, 7 days a week), and yesterday with the help of my neighbor I
was able to locate the source of the signal which turned out to be a bad
cable (homemade) that was connected to my neighbors ATT U-verse wireless
gateway.

Details of this signal including a recording of the interfering signal can
be found on a simple website I created for documentation of this problem.
Here is the URL of my simple website for those interested :
http://sites.google.com/site/160meteruverseinterference/

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: RX antenna transformer winding (pure resistance transformation issues)

[Don Kirk]

Digging back through the archives I found lots of discussion about the
best transformer to use with flags, pennants and beverages.  The
discussions included material type, and style (toroid vs. binocular), but I
found no mention about problems regarding the use of conventional toroid
cores in which a pure resistive load on the secondary appears to be a
complex impedance (resistance and inductance) on the primary side of the
transformer when having the primary turns on one side of the core and the
secondary turns on the opposite side of the core (which appears to be the
recommended method of winding if using toroid cores for this purpose).

I then noticed that the only recommended transformer configuration I
measured that would provide a pure resistance on the primary when having a
pure resistive load on the secondary was the transformer constructed with a
binocular core as recommended by W8JI and others, and creating a binocular
core using two side by side toroid cores also worked fine in my testing.

I then decided to try spreading my secondary winding (20 turns) on the
toroid core over approximately 330 degrees of the toroid core (FT 114-77),
and then overlay my primary winding (5 turns) on top of the secondary and
again spread it over the 330 degrees of the toroid core.  Doing this fixed
my transformation problem (now my primary was just resistive when the
secondary had a pure resistive load.


Here is some data to help explain the issue (the R and X values is the
impedance measured on the primary side of the transformer with the 1 K
resistance connected to the secondary of the transformer).

FT114-77, Pri = 5 T, Sec = 20 T, primary and secondary separated (opposite
sides of the core), 1K resistive load on secondary.
R = 57 ohms, X = 18 ohms, Freq = 1.8 Mhz
R = 58 ohms, X = 34 ohms, Freq = 3.5 Mhz

FT114-77, Pri = 5 T, Sec = 20 T, primary and secondary over lay (using 330
degrees of the core), 1K resistive load on secondary.
R = 56 ohms, X = 0 ohms, Freq = 1.8 Mhz, insertion loss = -0.54 dB
R = 53 ohms, X = 0 ohms, Freq = 3.5 Mhz
Note : measured capacitance primary to secondary = 5 pf, capacitance not
measured at RF

BN-73-202, Pri = 3 T, Sec = 12 T, 1K resistive load on secondary.
R = 59 ohms, X = 0 ohms, Freq = 1.8 Mhz, insertion loss = -0.30 dB
R = 57 ohms, X = 0 ohms, Freq = 3.5 Mhz
Note : measured capacitance primary to secondary = 9 pf, capacitance not
measured at RF

Has anyone else stumbled upon the above phenomena, and am curious why there
has been no mention of it before (or if there has been it's very hard to
find)?  I'm very happy with the performance of my binocular core
transformers, but I'm technically inquisitive.

73,
Don Kirk (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: RX antenna transformer winding (pure resistance transformation issues)

[Don Kirk]

I had additional offline conversations with Rick (N6RK), and Carl (KM1H),
and below is my official response to my original post about RX antenna
transformer windings and complex impedance measured on the primary side of
the transformer depending on how they are wound.

Rick N6RK said

 The way out of this dilemma is to use a smaller toroid core than the 1.14
inch diameter core you currently have.

But I saw the complex impedance phenomena even with smaller diameter cores
(using different grade of material), and here is my actual FT 50-43 data as
an example.

FT50-43 measured data as follows (windings on opposite side of the core
from each other) :
Pri = 5 T, Sec = 20 T, 1K load resistor
R= 42, X = 25, 1.8 Mhz, Capacitance = 5 pf
R= 51, X = 24, 3.5 Mhz
R= 57, X = 32, 7 Mhz

When I used two FT50-43 cores configured to make a binocular core, I
obtained the following results :
Pri = 3 T, Sec = 12 T, 1K load resistor
R= 38, X = 21, 1.8 Mhz
R= 50, X = 1, 3.5 Mhz
R= 52, X = 0, 7 Mhz

Rick also said :
 the small amount of leakage inductance you are seeing even with the large
core with separated windings is nothing to worry about.

I agree with this unless you are trying to phase RX antennas, and then the
complex impedance becomes a critical factor to deal with, and that's why I
feel it's important to understand (know) that this phenomena exists.

Rick also said :
 I would rather tolerate that and get the benefit of the reduced
capacitance from winding to winding.

Appears everyone agrees that a very low capacitance between windings
(between primary and secondary winding) is near (if not at the very the
top) of the list of desired properties of the RX antenna transformer.  This
is also supported by statements in the ON4UN Low-Band DXing book.

Carl (KM1H) goes to great lengths to reduce the capacitance between
windings on the binocular cores that he uses on his RX antennas per his
following statement : Teflon tubes for each winding and that brought the C
way down by compressing each winding in the smallest tube that I could get
the wires thru and then forcing a toothpick thru to force the most
separation.

Thanks to Rick and Carl for the technical discussions we had.

73,
Don Kirk (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: RX antenna transformer winding

[Don Kirk]

I've been using Radio Shack 30 AWG insulated wire (wire wrap wire) to wind
my binocular cores for RX antennas.  It comes in 50 foot spools, and you
can buy it in Blue, Red, or White.  This insulated wire has made winding of
my binocular cores a real pleasure.  No more worries about scratching the
enamel coating on the magnet wire that used to drive me nuts, and no more
messing around removing the enamel coating on the ends (I just use normal
cheap wire strippers to remove the insulation on the ends of the wires for
connection purposes).  Have never had problems using this wire without the
use of plastic/teflon sleeves (but I was also not attempting to keep the
primary and secondary turns separate (using sleeves) for purposes of
reduced capacitance between the windings in my applications)

Here are the Radio Shack part numbers for the wire I use :
Red : 278-501
White : 278-502
Blue : 278-503

Cost is $5.49 per spool.

73,
Don





On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:46 PM, George Dubovsky n4ua...@gmail.com wrote:

 I have used plastic coffee stirrers from the fast food joints; they start
 out smaller and they cost the same... ;-)

 73,

 geo - n4ua


 On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:48 AM, n0...@juno.com wrote:

  From recent postings:
 
   I started using Teflon sleeves in windings because I ran out of small
  Teflon
  wire wrap wire I was using. Without Teflon on the wires, and with normal
  mag
  wire, the enamel was easily scratched. Not only that, lightning would
  punch
  through from enamel to core, or from wire to wire.
 
  ** Telon is easily nicked, the type of wire used in modern vehicles is
  very
  robust but with the sleeves plain ole magnet wire works well and allows
  even
  smaller winding bundles.
 
 
  RE: binocular cores and sleeving
  I didn't have the right size of Teflon sleeves in my junque drawer, so I
  cut
  appropriate lengths of used soda straws from McD's, slit them lengthwise,
  then cut off the excess (lengthwise).  Then I curled the cut straw
  sections
  and pushed them through the cores.  The result is a near perfect fit
  with a slight overlap at the lengthwise cuts.  The overlaps can
  be oriented toward the outside of the core so the wire won't
  have a tendancy to open up the overlap.
 
  73,
  Charlie, N0TT
  _
  Topband Reflector
 
 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

Approximately 128 deg from WD8DSB (EM69) using small DF loop.


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Mike Waters mikew...@gmail.com wrote:

 A steady carrier from fish net beacons doesn't fit the pattern of the ones
 everyone has heard on 160. That would deplete the batteries fairly quickly.
 All the ones I know of send a short carrier and a CW ID followed by a long
 period of silence. That lets them be unattended for several days.

 If it is a FNB, perhaps it has a large-capacity battery and solar panels,
 or the batteries are manually replaced daily.

 Maybe it's RFI from that floating Google data center barge. ;-)

 73, Mike
 www.w0btu.com


 On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Charlie Cunningham 
 charlie-cunning...@nc.rr.com wrote:

  Seems that I saw something a while back about some fishing beacons on the
  low end of 80m ( or maybe 160m -but I think it was 80m)
 
 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

I'm mapping the data, but nothing to hang my hat on at this time.  The data
from Steve (KK7UV) does not intersect any of the other reports (odd).  A
heading from W8JI or AA1K would be very helpful.

Don (wd8dsb)


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Mike Waters mikew...@gmail.com wrote:

 It's mostly S8 on my SE 580' Beverage here in SW Missouri. Rather fast QSB
 down to S6.

 On the NE 580' Bev, mostly S3 to S6, but I just saw the signal about equal
 on both antennas.

 73, Mike
 www,w0btu.com
 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW -BTW

[Don Kirk]

OK, while we are on the topic another very big factor to think about is
magnetic north vs. true north (I have tried to not bring this up in the
past).  I don't expect any response to this, but this has always been in
the back of my mind and wonder what headings are really being reported
(what is the reference, magnetic north or true north that each station is
using when he reports a heading).

15 to 20 degrees difference for those of you in the New England
states...  Same problem out in the Northwest US, but
opposite polarity 15 to 20 degrees.

Don (wd8dsb)


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:

 My resolution is not as good as some people here, either. But where there's
 a will, there's often a way.  :-)


 Many of the headings are misleading. Having been through this before
 several times, much of the data is always grossly overstated.It is common
 to exaggerate ability to determine direction.

 It's almost impossible to obtain several degree direction accuracy without
 either a rotatable loop with GOOD common mode rejection (some popular loop
 antennas can have a ~20 degree or more skew between what are supposed to be
 180 degree apart nulls, because they have poor feed designs) or an
 interferometer of normal receiving antennas.

 An 8-circle array in a very clear location with proper hardware design and
 good element spacing can get within about 20 degrees.

 Single long Beverages in an array of 8 antennas maybe within 30-35 degrees.

 Broadside Beverages with wide spacing (~5/8th or wider) within about 20
 degrees.

 A three direction array only within about 60 degrees or so, if in a clear
 spot and properly constructed.

 An interferometer with a few wavelengths spacing within a few degrees.

 A calibrated rotatable small loop without common mode skewing and in the
 clear, which is actually a pretty rare case, can be within a few degrees.

 My eight direction 350 ft diameter 8 circle, located out in a field 1500
 feet or so from any re-radiators, can only resolve within +-22 degrees with
 good reliability. When I use it as part of a calibrated interferometer
 against Beverage arrays spaced ~1000 feet away, I can resolve the
 directional difference between two signals 50 miles apart in New England.

 When you draw the lines, be sure to allow for resolution of the antennas,
 and not the absolute numbers.
 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

Having more time this evening I went to an open field with two different
portable DF antenna systems (shielded loop, and terminated flag), and I'm
now going to say the signal is 140 degrees from my location just NE of
Indianapolis (140 degrees True heading).


Don (wd8dsb)


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:09 AM, nekv...@hushmail.com wrote:

 Tim,

 I've been hearing these carriers for several days and confirmed with
 W8VVG and K4IQJ yesterday that they aren't ghosts in my machine. I
 sent the info we gathered to the ARRL (K0BOG), who will enlist their
 Official Observers to track them down.

 73 -- Brian K1LI
 --

 Message: 1
 Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 22:45:14 -0400
 From: Tim Duffy
 To:
 Subject: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW
 Message-ID:
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

 I know this is the TopBand reflector - but there has been a carrier on
 3501.4 for the past few days - that needs some DF work.
 It peaks at 150 degrees from K3LR so South South East. It is S9 this
 evening
 Any ideas on what it is and where it is coming from?
 73,

 Tim K3LR
 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

Oops, I compensated for true north backwards on my last report.  Therefore
I should have said the signal is 130 degrees from my location just NE of
Indianapolis (130 degrees True heading which is very close to the 128 deg
number I said this morning).

Don


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:32 PM, Don Kirk wd8...@gmail.com wrote:

 Having more time this evening I went to an open field with two different
 portable DF antenna systems (shielded loop, and terminated flag), and I'm
 now going to say the signal is 140 degrees from my location just NE of
 Indianapolis (140 degrees True heading).


 Don (wd8dsb)


 On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:09 AM, nekv...@hushmail.com wrote:

 Tim,

 I've been hearing these carriers for several days and confirmed with
 W8VVG and K4IQJ yesterday that they aren't ghosts in my machine. I
 sent the info we gathered to the ARRL (K0BOG), who will enlist their
 Official Observers to track them down.

 73 -- Brian K1LI
 --

 Message: 1
 Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 22:45:14 -0400
 From: Tim Duffy
 To:
 Subject: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW
 Message-ID:
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

 I know this is the TopBand reflector - but there has been a carrier on
 3501.4 for the past few days - that needs some DF work.
 It peaks at 150 degrees from K3LR so South South East. It is S9 this
 evening
 Any ideas on what it is and where it is coming from?
 73,

 Tim K3LR
 _
 Topband Reflector



_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

Paul and Gang,

Based on Pauls heading and a few other headings that intersect Pauls
heading, it looks like the signal is originating from the lower half of NC,
or the NE part of SC that touches NC.

Hard to describe, but an area like Fayetteville NC to the North, Wilmington
NC to the South East, and Myrtle Beach SC to the South (maybe as far South
as Georgetown or Charleston SC if I stretch things a bit).  Still need a
few more data points, but the above describes the general area unless it is
out in the ocean.

Lots of headings that don't intersect Pauls heading which I had to ignore.

Don


On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Paul Ferguson p...@paulferguson.us wrote:

 It peaks at 172 degrees from Raleigh, NC on a Hi-Z 3-element array (6
 directions).

 We need some directions from Florida stations.

 73,
 Paul
 K5ESW



 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

Hi Guys,

K5ESW reported the following : The 3501.5 carrier is audible in daylight in
Raleigh, NC. It is running
 S3-S4 now at 3 pm local. It was about S6-S7 or better at night.

What would be interesting to know is if anyone can hear this signal 24
hours a day, and then DF activity should be done from that area during the
middle of the day.  I will ask K5ESW if he can still hear this signal
between noon and 3pm.

In the Indianapolis area the signal runs S7 to S9 on my TX antenna during
hours of darkness, but lots of fade/multipath.  I noticed the signal was
much more stable in the late afternoon (still light outside and running S)
when I first heard it today (probably less multipath), and therefore
tomorrow afternoon when it first appears I will attempt to update my
headings.

Don





On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:

 Based on Tom's bearing, the source is clearly not in the Carolinas as a few
 have specuilated.

 Charlie, K4OTV


 You can be absolutely sure it is not in or anywhere near NC.

 My heading can't be more than a few degrees off. This closely matches
 Jerry's line, his line is just west of mine and almost parallel.

 The only issue is the multipath the signal had near sunset, but I think I
 got a pretty good average at 130 degrees true from me. (EM73XB or EM73XC).
 A second reading later in time is always best to double check, but the
 signal went away.


 73 Tom
 _
 Topband Reflector

_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

Hi Rick,

The beacon that you mention (what I assume I'm hearing around 3.500.9 this
morning between 1130 to 1200 UTC) is on a lower frequency (approximately
0.9 Khz lower) than what I was previously hearing, it's much weaker than
what I had been hearing, and it's heading is much different from my
previous measurements.  Using my 3 pennants I would say the signal from
what I assume is the w4hbk beacon is a little West Of South from my
location (my first estimate this morning put it around 190 degrees, and
QRZ.com says w4hbk is 186 degrees from my location), and this is much
different than my previous measurements that typically were from 128 to 140
degrees and 150 degrees at the most)

Just FYI,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Steady Carrier on 80 CW

[Don Kirk]

Rick and gang, as a follow up I just contacted Bill (w4hbk) via e-mail, and
the QRSS beacon that you mentioned above was definitely not the signal we
were tracking last week.  Bill said the following today via e-mail.

I was running 1W to a 43' vertical on a frequency of 3500.81.  One Watt is
considered the legal limit in QRSS work and is generally used on the
lower bands for trans-oceanic tests.  The past two nights were my first
tests this Fall and I was definitely not on last week.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector

Topband: 160 meters RFI reduction using RF Choke on neighbors TV power cord

[Don Kirk]

Within the last few months I noticed a raspy signal on 1.824 Mhz 24 hours a
day, 7 days a week.  My 3 pennant RX antennas indicated the noise was
coming from a heading of approximately 135 degrees, and a large portable
shielded loop placed in my yard indicated a signal heading of 124 degrees
(reasonably close agreement).

I then set out on foot using a portable general coverage receiver and a
shielded loop, and tracked the problem down to a neighbors plasma TV set
that generated RFI regardless if it was on or off (signal first tracked
down to the power companies feed on the side of the neighbors house).  The
RFI completely disappeared when the TV power cord was unplugged.  Using
Google Earth the neighbors house is located approximately 350 feet from my
Pennants at a heading of 122 degrees (this house is not next door to my
house, and it's actually located on an adjacent street to mine).

Yesterday my first attempt at eliminating the RFI turned out to be very
rewarding.  I constructed a simple power cord RF choke for the TV using 14
turns of a power cord on a 2.4 OD Fair-Rite #31 mix toroid core (based on
the K9YC hams guide to RFI document).  The RFI at the neighbors house is
considerably reduced using the choke on the TV power cord, and the RFI at
my house appears nearly if not entirely gone.  I will try adding another
choke in line with the first choke to see if additional reduction of RFI at
my neighbors home can be achieved, but I certainly can live with the
results of the single choke.  I will also purchase and try a commercial two
stage power line filter on the neighbors TV to see how it compares with the
simple toroid choke approach.

I tried to document the problem and cure in a video I've posted on
youtube.  If interested the youtube link is :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJYCxJtFv0feature=youtu.be

73,
Don
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: How much ground independence?

[Don Kirk]

Hi Bruce,

I'm using 3 small Pennant RX antennas (51.6% the size of full size
pennants), one pointing 40 degrees, one pointing 160 degrees, and one
pointing 300 degrees (sharing the same feedpoint).  Originally bottom of
them were 2 feet off the ground and then after a year of encouragement from
my wife I raised them up so the bottom are 8 feet above ground.

My buried radial field (55 short radials, average length 60 feet) runs
right under my pennants, and my 68 foot base loaded TX vertical is
approximately 40 or 45 feet (as I recall) from the feedpoint of the
pennants.

No difference in performance between the 2 foot and the 8 foot above ground
mounting positions (no noticeable difference in signal to noise using my TX
vertical as a reference antenna for signal to noise improvement, and no
noticeable difference in front to back ratio).

Originally I took steps to detune my TX antenna during receive, but to my
surprise detuning was not necessary on 160 meters in my installation.  On
the other hand something is destroying the pattern (noticeable on front to
back) of my pennants when used on 80 meters, and detuning of my TX antenna
helps slightly, but the TX antenna is not the main cause of my 80 meters
problem (I even removed (took down) my TX antenna to make sure it was not
the TX antenna causing the problem).  I've always suspected the problem is
the proximity of the RX array to my house and interaction with house
wiring, rain gutters, metal I beams, metal chimney flue, etc, but never
considered the ground radials.  Since my primary interest is 160 meters I'm
very happy with my system (installed summer of 2011).

This morning I recorded AA1K calling CQ on 160 meters and uploaded the
recording to youtube so you (and others) can experience one example of the
directional properties of my pennants.  Since my pennants are not pointing
exactly 180 degrees from each other it's impossible to fully capture the
front to back properties, but you can certainly compare the performance to
the expected plots of my array.  There was a lot of QSB during my
recordings this morning, and suspect (based on the variation in front to
back ratio during the recording) that the arrival angle was changing
considerably over time but the QSB might have also been due to a different
propagation phenomena.

The youtube link for the AA1K recording is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWlBy5ypMIU
(Note : AA1K is 564 miles from my QTH at a heading of 93.6 degrees)

The link to my website where you can see the expected directional
properties (pattern plots overlay) when receiving AA1K from my QTH is
http://sites.google.com/site/pennantflagantennas/

You will definitely see periods where I'm experiencing 18 to 20 dB front to
back directional properties in the AA1K youtube recording (and AA1K is not
lined up exactly with the back of my 300 degree pennant), but then you will
also see times where the directional properties are much less.  My plot
overlays predict approximately 15 dB in directional properties when
receiving AA1K (if arrival angle is 31 degrees), and think the 15 dB is
close to the average experienced in my recording.

Also on my website I show a plot for predicted front to back ratio versus
arrival angle for pennants, and think you will find this interesting (front
to back ratio is very dependent on arrival angle).  On the average I would
say I notice front to back to be 18 to 20 dB if the back of one of my
antennas is close to being lined up with the station I'm receiving (not
exactly front to back since my antennas are not facing exactly 180 degrees
from each other, but close since the forward pattern is so broad).

Sorry for the long posting, but very complicated topic.  I also have lots
of comments about the overall characteristics of pennants (performance
compared with a vertical TX antenna), but won't complicate this posting
with them.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Insulator problems

[Don Kirk]

Greg,

One property you should look at when deciding the material to use for your
insulator (especially if exposed to water) is a property called water
absorption and normally it's listed as a weight percent.  Some nylons are
better than others, but nylon in general absorbs a lot of water and
therefore probably not your best choice of material.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)


On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Greg - ZL3IX zl...@inet.net.nz wrote:

 The Tx antenna I have been using very successfully for the last 8+ years,
 is a top-fed vertical.  This feed arrangement requires the yagi used for
 top loading to be insulated from the mast.  I have been using a nylon
 insert between the two halves of the stub mast as my insulator.  This
 morning I noticed high SWR, firstly only on high power, but then at any
 power level.

 Today I brought the mast down for inspection, and the only sign of trouble
 I can see is in the insulator, which has bubbled visibly. This may (or may
 not) be the problem, but I propose to change the insulator even if only to
 eliminate it as the culprit.  I have a couple of questions for this group.

 1)  Does anyone know if I can upload a jpg file to contesting.com, so
 that guys can see what I am talking about?  Tree, I guess I can't attach a
 photo to a post to the group?
 2)  I always thought that nylon was a pretty good dielectric, and did not
 expect problems, especially at 1.8 MHz.  The gap in the insulator is 7.5mm,
 or about 0.3.  I estimate that there will be around 2 kV across this gap.
  Is nylon perhaps not as good as I thought it was?
 3)  If I replace the nylon with Teflon, will I lose anything in mechanical
 strength?

 Unfortunately this problem means that I will not be able to enter the
 Stew.  We are going away for a week for the festive season, next weekend,
 so won't have time to fix the issue.

 Comments welcome.

 73, Greg, ZL3IX
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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

Re: Topband: To clamp or NOT...that IS the question

[Don Kirk]

Hi Jim and gang,

I use protection diodes on the front end of my W1FB preamps (as well as
before an IC amp in the preamp, and on the output of the preamp) and have
never been able to detect receiver performance degradation on 160 meters
due to the clamping diodes (had to include the diode clamps before the IC
amp in the W1FB preamp to prevent continuous failures of this IC when
transmitting).  On the rare occasion (only happens during a contest) when
I've heard what sounds like ever so slight intermod I switch to my TX
vertical for RX and the odd phenomena has always still been present so I've
never been able to find fault with my added diode protection system.

I have half size pennants feeding my preamp and they have an approximate
gain of -46 dbi, and suspect this is the key to my success with diodes as
clamps (very low input levels from my RX antennas).  Therefore I certainly
don't agree with avoiding diode clamps 100% of the time, as I believe they
should be considered on a case by case basis depending on the gain of your
RX antenna, etc.

I also have W7IUV preamps and don't use diode clamps with them at all since
their front ends appear bullet proof based on the transistor used.

P.S. I only run 100 watts output, but my TX vertical is within 30 or 40
feet of my RX pennants.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: To clamp or NOT...that IS the question

[Don Kirk]

Hi Tom,

You said : What works OK in one place will almost always not work the same
in another

You just confirmed what I was trying to say, and that is in some
applications it just might work.  If I had not tried simple clamp diodes in
my application I would have made my system complicated via relays and
control signals when they really were not needed.

Same thing goes for the W7IUV preamp, if I had not tried using it without a
front end saver I would have gone and spent money and complicated my system
when it was not really needed.  But after reading that W7IUV did not use a
front end saver with his preamp I tried the same and could not be happier
with the results.

I'm suggesting that Jim try clamp diodes if he so desires and if he notices
intermod then he should remove them and try a more
complicated/elegant solution.

Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: To clamp or NOT...that IS the question

[Don Kirk]

Jim,

Getting directly back to your original question, I built a KD9SV preamp,
and it has clamp diodes included in the design (I did not add them, they
were part of the original design by KD9SV).  Does you KD9SV preamp already
have clamp diodes protecting its input, and if so you have already answered
your own question about adding clamp diodes to protect it (no reason to add
them if you already have them).

If you go one step more and follow the advice that others have provided
here, you might consider removing the clamp diodes (if you have them) based
on their comments, but please understand that the gain of you RX antenna is
approximately -36.3 dbi (based on the dimensions you told me), and it's
very possible that you will not encounter the same kind of problems (using
clamp diodes) as those using beverage RX antennas on 160 meters just due to
the greatly reduced signal strength that your RX antenna provides compared
with a full size beverage.

That's all I'm saying on this topic, over and out.

Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: PZ1AA

[Don Kirk]

Worked a station identified as PZ1AA during the CQWW 160 meter CW contest
this weekend, and the zone they reported was 8.

Wonder if this was a valid call, as I believe the zone should have been 9,
and can't find any information on the internet regarding this call sign.

PZ1AA was worked by numerous stations, and looks like they were spotted one
time by WJ2D, and they show up on the W3LPL reverse beacon network numerous
times.

Any information would be appreciated, as this would be a new one for me if
it really is a valid call.

Thanks,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: PZ1AA

[Don Kirk]

Now that the CQWW 160 meter CW contest log submission deadline is past,
here is an update from Ramon (PZ5RA) about PZ1AA.
---
This morning I got a call from the authorities and they told me they have
never submitted this call. So it was a pirate or a fake.
---
73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Rig Question

[Don Kirk]

The one thing that's keeping me from buying a TS590 for use on the topband
is the use of a mechanical relay versus solid state switching between TX 
RX.  Had problems develop over a long period of time with my first HF
transceiver (also a Kenwood) regarding the first character sent being
shortened in length due to the relay and having a hard time buying another
radio that still uses a relay for TX/RX switching.

Would love to see the next generation of TS590 produced that uses solid
state switching but might break down before then and buy a TS590.  Wonder
what others think about the relay in the TS590 and any problems encountered
(especially when trying to run QSK).

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

Re: Topband: Where was everyone last night

[Don Kirk]

On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 2:41 PM, ALEXEY OGORODOV wrote:
 Heard but not worked: K1LT, N5IR, WD8DSB, LU5YF.

Alex I called you a few times too, but no luck.  Only worked 26 stations
during the contest as lightning activity was pretty high in the US which
caused lots of QRN so I just kept waking up to see what I could hear and
only operated a total of a few hours.  Finally worked Herb (KV4FZ) after
calling him numerous times earlier in the event to no avail.  Thanks for
trying, and for all your efforts on 160 meters.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Switching Pennants

[Don Kirk]

Hi Dwight,

I have 3 point fed pennants that share the same feedpoint and use only one
BN-73-202 Binocular Core Transformer matching transformer at the feedpoint
(one pennant pointing 40 degrees, one pointing 160 degrees, and one
pointing 300 degrees) and have been using this system for over 3 years now
with no problems.  I use two relays (located at the common center location
of the pennants to select the active pennant, and disconnect both sides of
the pennants that are not active from the matching transformer.

Switching 3 pennants is very easy as it only requires one isolated 12 volt
supply and a two conductor control cable from the shack out to the relay
box which is located at the feedpoint.  0 volts over the feedline selects
one pennant, +12 volts selects the second pennant, and -12 volts (just
reversing polarity of the power supply connected to the control line)
selects the 3rd pennant.

Here is a link to a simple website I have that documents my 3 pennant
system, and you can see a picture of the inside of my relay box on this
website.
http://sites.google.com/site/pennantflagantennas/

Simple and see no reason to do it any other way if using 3 pennants that
have a common center point location.

73,
Don



On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:

 I would not switch high impedance lines without very special precautions.

 I really do not think it is worth the small parts savings.

 - Original Message - From: DGB ns9i2...@bayland.net
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:38 PM
 Subject: Topband: Switching Pennants


  I am wanting a simple way of switching 3 or 4 pennants. Anyone done this?

 Quote From K6SEE ... All four Pennants would be installed with their
 points all adjacent to each other.  Only one feedline would be necessary
 and only one
 transformer would be necessary, with the high impedance winding of the
 transformer being switched to the feedpoint of the Pennant in the desired
 direction ... 73, de Earl, K6SE

 73 Dwight NS9I
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


 -
 No virus found in this message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 2014.0.4745 / Virus Database: 4007/8063 - Release Date: 08/19/14

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

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

Re: Topband: Switching Pennants

[Don Kirk]

Dwight,

Correction, I should have said 0 volts over the control line (not feedline)
selects one pennant, +12 volts selects the second pennant, and -12 volts
(just reversing polarity of the power supply connected to the control line)
selects the 3rd pennant.

Don


On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Don Kirk wd8...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Dwight,

 I have 3 point fed pennants that share the same feedpoint and use only one
 BN-73-202 Binocular Core Transformer matching transformer at the feedpoint
 (one pennant pointing 40 degrees, one pointing 160 degrees, and one
 pointing 300 degrees) and have been using this system for over 3 years now
 with no problems.  I use two relays (located at the common center location
 of the pennants to select the active pennant, and disconnect both sides of
 the pennants that are not active from the matching transformer.

 Switching 3 pennants is very easy as it only requires one isolated 12 volt
 supply and a two conductor control cable from the shack out to the relay
 box which is located at the feedpoint.  0 volts over the feedline selects
 one pennant, +12 volts selects the second pennant, and -12 volts (just
 reversing polarity of the power supply connected to the control line)
 selects the 3rd pennant.

 Here is a link to a simple website I have that documents my 3 pennant
 system, and you can see a picture of the inside of my relay box on this
 website.
 http://sites.google.com/site/pennantflagantennas/

 Simple and see no reason to do it any other way if using 3 pennants that
 have a common center point location.

 73,
 Don



 On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:

 I would not switch high impedance lines without very special precautions.

 I really do not think it is worth the small parts savings.

 - Original Message - From: DGB ns9i2...@bayland.net
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:38 PM
 Subject: Topband: Switching Pennants


  I am wanting a simple way of switching 3 or 4 pennants. Anyone done this?

 Quote From K6SEE ... All four Pennants would be installed with their
 points all adjacent to each other.  Only one feedline would be necessary
 and only one
 transformer would be necessary, with the high impedance winding of the
 transformer being switched to the feedpoint of the Pennant in the desired
 direction ... 73, de Earl, K6SE

 73 Dwight NS9I
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


 -
 No virus found in this message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 2014.0.4745 / Virus Database: 4007/8063 - Release Date: 08/19/14

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



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

Re: Topband: Switching Pennants

[Don Kirk]

Hi Dwight,

I just added the schematic of my 3 Pennant RX antenna switching system to
my website.
http://sites.google.com/site/pennantflagantennas/

Just FYI,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Bias Tee Measurements (Test Data)

[Don Kirk]

Late last year Pete (N4ZR) reported problems with his home brew Bias Tee
that included radical shifts in measured impedance when DC voltage was
applied to his Bias Tee.  Today I decided to make impedance measurements on
a simple Bias Tee circuit I recently proposed for Dwight (NS9I) who was
looking for a method of switching pennants via the feedline.

I was not able to duplicate the problems that Pete reported, but I did
notice unstable (noisy) impedance measurements when using a DC power supply
on the Bias Tee that had a lot of ripple when under load, and below is my
test data.  My proposed Bias Tee schematic for NS9I is on my Pennant
website at http://sites.google.com/site/pennantflagantennas/

--
*Test Data Using Resistor as the RF load *
66 foot of RG58U coax (measured Zo = 56 ohms)
Test Frequency = 4.545 Mhz (frequency where the coax was an electrical 1/2
wavelength)
RF Load = 50 ohm resistor

No Bias Tee (Bias Tee bypassed) :
R = 49, X = 0

Bias Tee (with 100 ohm 10 watt resistor connected to the Bias Tee DC output
port = 120mA load when 12 volts is applied), and well regulated DC supply :
0 Vdc R = 51, X = 0
+12 Vdc R = 51, X =0
-12 Vdc R = 51, X = 0

Note : when using a DC supply that had 1.5 volts peak to peak ripple the
measured R was jumping around between 46 and 53 ohms
-

*Test Data Using Transformer with the RF resistive load *66 foot of RG58U
coax (measured Zo = 56 ohms)
Test Frequency = 4.545 Mhz (frequency where the coax was an electrical 1/2
wavelength)
RF Load : Transformer BN-73-202 Binocular core (Primary = 3 turns,
Secondary = 12 turns) with 1K resistor connected to secondary

Bias Tee (with 100 ohm 10 watt resistor connected to the Bias Tee DC output
port = 120mA load when 12 volts is applied), and well regulated DC supply :
0 Vdc R = 55, X = 0
+12 Vdc R = 55, X =0
-12 Vdc R = 55, X = 0

Note : when using a DC supply that had 1.5 volts peak to peak ripple the
measured R was jumping around between 49 and 58 ohms

Note : For the above tests I was using an antenna analyzer that I designed
and built last year, and the detector is based on the VK5JST antenna
analyzer.  The diodes used in the detector are germanium which have a high
enough voltage rating to allow impedance measurements on the Bias Tee
without the concern that W8JI had about detector diodes being damaged due
to high voltage exposure when measuring Bias Tees.

I repeated the 1st test shown above (Resistor as the RF load) between 1.4
and 12.5 Mhz and the results were similar (no change in measured impedance
between 0, -12, and + 12 Vdc applied Bias Tee voltage).
-

*Conclusion*
The Bias Tee (concept based on an AD5X Bias Tee design) measured impedance
does not change between an applied voltage of 0 and +/-12 volts DC when
using a well regulated supply (based on the 120 mA load used in my test)
when tested between 1.4 and 12.5 Mhz.

Just FYI,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Bias Tee Measurements (Test Data)

[Don Kirk]

Tom, you said Any test is meaningless, and I don't understand where you
are coming from on that statement.  If you look at my test, I tested with
and without the bias Tee, and I tested with a well regulated bench top
linear power supply, and the results are similar so I don't see how you can
say you can't do that.  I then went and tested with a wall wart power
supply that produced 1.5 volts peak to peak ripple when under my 100 ohm
load on the Bias Tee DC port, and it did indeed produce noisy data as you
said would happen.  I believe my test shows that you can indeed make valid
measurements as long as you are using a well regulated supply.

Please explain in more detail why you said it can't be done?

Thanks,
Don (wd8dsb)


On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:

 We cannot test impedance that way with a DC coupled impedance meter and
 get good data with any noise in the supply. Any test is meaningless. The .1
 capacitor will just couple any distortion or ripple in the AC to the
 analyzer, where it would show as jitter or false readings.

 It would be a valid test if a moderately low resistance 200-500 uH RF
 choke shunted the analyzer (receiver) port.



 - Original Message - From: Don Kirk wd8...@gmail.com
 To: topband topband@contesting.com
 Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2014 10:48 PM
 Subject: Topband: Bias Tee Measurements (Test Data)


  Late last year Pete (N4ZR) reported problems with his home brew Bias Tee
 that included radical shifts in measured impedance when DC voltage was
 applied to his Bias Tee.  Today I decided to make impedance measurements
 on
 a simple Bias Tee circuit I recently proposed for Dwight (NS9I) who was
 looking for a method of switching pennants via the feedline.

 I was not able to duplicate the problems that Pete reported, but I did
 notice unstable (noisy) impedance measurements when using a DC power
 supply
 on the Bias Tee that had a lot of ripple when under load, and below is my
 test data.  My proposed Bias Tee schematic for NS9I is on my Pennant
 website at http://sites.google.com/site/pennantflagantennas/

 
 --
 *Test Data Using Resistor as the RF load *
 66 foot of RG58U coax (measured Zo = 56 ohms)
 Test Frequency = 4.545 Mhz (frequency where the coax was an electrical 1/2
 wavelength)
 RF Load = 50 ohm resistor

 No Bias Tee (Bias Tee bypassed) :
 R = 49, X = 0

 Bias Tee (with 100 ohm 10 watt resistor connected to the Bias Tee DC
 output
 port = 120mA load when 12 volts is applied), and well regulated DC supply
 :
 0 Vdc R = 51, X = 0
 +12 Vdc R = 51, X =0
 -12 Vdc R = 51, X = 0

 Note : when using a DC supply that had 1.5 volts peak to peak ripple the
 measured R was jumping around between 46 and 53 ohms
 
 -

 *Test Data Using Transformer with the RF resistive load *66 foot of RG58U
 coax (measured Zo = 56 ohms)
 Test Frequency = 4.545 Mhz (frequency where the coax was an electrical 1/2
 wavelength)
 RF Load : Transformer BN-73-202 Binocular core (Primary = 3 turns,
 Secondary = 12 turns) with 1K resistor connected to secondary

 Bias Tee (with 100 ohm 10 watt resistor connected to the Bias Tee DC
 output
 port = 120mA load when 12 volts is applied), and well regulated DC supply
 :
 0 Vdc R = 55, X = 0
 +12 Vdc R = 55, X =0
 -12 Vdc R = 55, X = 0

 Note : when using a DC supply that had 1.5 volts peak to peak ripple the
 measured R was jumping around between 49 and 58 ohms
 
 
 Note : For the above tests I was using an antenna analyzer that I designed
 and built last year, and the detector is based on the VK5JST antenna
 analyzer.  The diodes used in the detector are germanium which have a high
 enough voltage rating to allow impedance measurements on the Bias Tee
 without the concern that W8JI had about detector diodes being damaged due
 to high voltage exposure when measuring Bias Tees.

 I repeated the 1st test shown above (Resistor as the RF load) between 1.4
 and 12.5 Mhz and the results were similar (no change in measured impedance
 between 0, -12, and + 12 Vdc applied Bias Tee voltage).
 
 -

 *Conclusion*
 The Bias Tee (concept based on an AD5X Bias Tee design) measured impedance
 does not change between an applied voltage of 0 and +/-12 volts DC when
 using a well regulated supply (based on the 120 mA load used in my test)
 when tested between 1.4 and 12.5 Mhz.

 Just FYI,
 Don (wd8dsb)
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


 -
 No virus found in this message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 2014.0.4745 / Virus Database: 4007/8088 - Release Date: 08/23

Re: Topband: Bias Tee Measurements (Test Data)

[Don Kirk]

Hi Tom,

I also just went and changed the RF load resistor to 200 ohms and checked
readings at various frequencies where the impedance was part reactive.  I
also added a 3rd part to the test in which I physically removed
(disconnected) the DC power supply from the Bias Tee.  All tests done using
my well regulated powder supply set at 12 Vdc for the Bias Tee DC voltage
and 100 ohm load on the Bias Tee DC output port.  Impedance readings are
identical with the Bias Tee connected to the DC power supply versus not
connected to the DC power supply and slightly different when the Bias Tee
is removed from the circuit (all of which we should expect).

Freq : 5.672 Mhz
Without Bias Tee : R = 50, X = 45
With Bias Tee : R = 46, X = 39
With Bias Tee (but power supply connections removed from the circuit) : R =
46, X = 39

Freq : 1.501 Mhz
Without Bias Tee : R = 26, X = 27
With Bias Tee : R = 31, X = 32
With Bias Tee (but power supply connections removed from the circuit) : R =
31, X = 32

The Bias Tee has a slight impact on the impedance but it has nothing to do
with the DC power supply that powers the Bias Tee (as long as it's a well
regulated supply), and the slight change in impedance is what we would
expect with a well designed Bias Tee (the impedance change is real and due
to the component selection within the bias tee).

Therefore I say (based on my tests) that valid impedance measurements can
be made on a Bias Tee using an antenna analyzer as long as the DC power
supply feeding the Bias Tee is well regulated.  I understand your concerns
about the voltage ratings on the detector diodes used in the MFJ antenna
analyzer not being adequate for measuring Bias Tee impedance, but that's an
entirely different issue.

Just FYI, and hope you agree.
Don (wd8dsb)


On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Don Kirk wd8...@gmail.com wrote:

 Tom, you said Any test is meaningless, and I don't understand where you
 are coming from on that statement.  If you look at my test, I tested with
 and without the bias Tee, and I tested with a well regulated bench top
 linear power supply, and the results are similar so I don't see how you can
 say you can't do that.  I then went and tested with a wall wart power
 supply that produced 1.5 volts peak to peak ripple when under my 100 ohm
 load on the Bias Tee DC port, and it did indeed produce noisy data as you
 said would happen.  I believe my test shows that you can indeed make valid
 measurements as long as you are using a well regulated supply.

 Please explain in more detail why you said it can't be done?

 Thanks,
 Don (wd8dsb)


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

Re: Topband: Bias Tee Measurements (Test Data)

[Don Kirk]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the clarification, and I don't disagree with your most recent
posting except I consider a well regulated supply to be one that has low
ripple, but that might be where you and I went astray on this posting
(sorry about that).  My posting was not to tell folks that they should
repeat my same test since my antenna analyzer has diodes that likely have a
higher voltage rating than some of the antenna analyzers commercially
sold.  I was just trying to follow up on the postings earlier this year
regarding Petes Bias Tee problems in an attempt to shed some light on the
topic.

P.S. another ham thought it would be a good idea if I repeated my test
using a battery, so here are the results (same feedline with 200 ohm RF
load and 100 ohm DC load), and the battery yielded the same results as my
well regulated DC supply (well regulated meaning low ripple and stable
average voltage).

Freq : 1.505 Mhz
Bias Tee (+12 Vdc regulated supply) : R = 30, X = 32
Bias Tee (-12 Vdc regulated supply) : R = 30, X = 32
Bias Tee (0 Vdc regulated supply) : R = 30, X = 32
Bias Tee (no power supply, no battery) : R = 30, X = 32
Bias Tee (+13.06 Vdc SLA battery) : R = 30, X = 32
Bias Tee (-13.06 Vdc SLA battery) : R = 30, X = 32
No Bias Tee : R = 26, X = 27

73, and thanks for the lively discussion.
Don


On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:

 Tom, you said Any test is meaningless, and I don't understand where you
 are coming from on that statement.  If you look at my test, I tested with
 and without the bias Tee, and I tested with a well regulated bench top
 linear power supply, and the results are similar so I don't see how you
 can
 say you can't do that.  I then went and tested with a wall wart power
 supply that produced 1.5 volts peak to peak ripple when under my 100 ohm
 load on the Bias Tee DC port, and it did indeed produce noisy data as you
 said would happen.  I believe my test shows that you can indeed make valid
 measurements as long as you are using a well regulated supply.


 I understood your test to be an indictment of using an unregulated supply,
 and that a well regulated supply cures issues. Of course what you intended
 to convey and what I thought you intended to convey might be two different
 things. If you only meant the filtered dc (unrelated to regulation or lack
 of regulation) allowed a reading in that case, I agree. It allows a reading
 in that case, BUT it is still dangerous to use a low voltage diode test
 device on that line to test things.

 Because it can damage test equipment, I do not think it is a valid public
 test protocol for the general population.

 The issue is not regulation. The issue is noise or ripple making it into
 the analyzer port. We can run well regulated dc with ripple, or even
 unfiltered unregulated dc into the line and just clean it up at the relay
 end so the relay does not chatter, and get a valid dc test as long as test
 equipment is not sensitive to low frequency noise.

 We could never test ac, irrespective of filtering, regulation, or
 waveform, without skewing measurements. This means testing a four-way
 system with a bias T and ac, or rippled + or - dc, or with cable ground
 loop ac voltage offsets on the shield, can result in false readings. It
 won't affect the receiver at all, but we might think the system has a
 problem or damage our test gear.

 The best way to improve the test method and increase reliability is to
 make the measurement device insensitive to offset on the output. It is
 better to remove ground loop low frequency bias or coupling through the
 capacitor by making it a highpass filter for low frequencies, although I
 probably still would not switch the relays with my test equipment connected
 unless I confirmed no transients first. :-)

 The problem actually comes from the reactance of the series coupling
 capacitor and the sensitivity of many cheap measuring devices to out of
 band voltages. A solution that reduces low frequency offset from external
 ground loops and allows ac or unfiltered dc operation, is adding a shunting
 choke on the RX port.

 So to clarify, I am saying:

 1.)  the problem is not regulation, it is noise or ripple
 2.) a filtered or regulated supply does not solve the ac mode test issue
 3.) switching can result in a high voltage transient that can damage test
 gear
 4.) low frequency ground loops might still inject ripple on long cable
 runs, or with poor shield connections
 5.) regulation will still not allow an ac switch test

 There is a second caveat I have about switching high impedance lines. We
 have to be very careful about relay contact and wiring capacitance. Just 10
 pF of contact capacitance is 8k ohms on 160 meters. We only have a coupled
 load to leakage path ratio of 10 times if we switch an 800 ohm line. That
 same leakage path to load becomes a 100 ratio if we use a transformer to 80
 ohms at the switch point.

 Now I absolutely understand we will see an empirical good 

Re: Topband: Remote pre-amp power source

[Don Kirk]

Hi Bruce,

Their are numerous methods used for sizing solar panel systems, and using
one of the common methods provides the following for your application as
follows :

Using a battery charging efficiency factor of 120%, and Portland Maine as
the location (winter average = 3.56 sun hours/day) .  And designing for a
reserve capacity of 3 days (3 days of no sun), with a minimum battery
capacity of 50%.

If designing for continuous power applied to the preamp (24 hours per day)
: Required battery capacity = 18.7 Ah, Solar panel = 1.05 amps (almost a 20
watt panel).

If designing for 15 hours of continuous service (using a day/night
controller) : Required battery capacity = 11.7 Ah, Solar Panel = 0.66 amps
(approximately a 10 watt panel).

The above method is somewhat simplistic (does not take into account how
cold temperature impacts the capacity of the battery, etc.), nevertheless
it provides some reasonable numbers to put things into perspective.

I'm sure you will think the panel and battery are large, but that's what it
takes to handle continuous service during the winter when day light is
minimum.

Note : solar panels really operate like a constant current source versus a
constant voltage source, therefore a typical solar panel for 12 volt
battery charging will have an open circuit voltage of around 21 volts but
this is under a zero output current condition.  The maximum output current
of a solar panel is when you have it's output short circuited but it's
current at max power is not much less than its short circuit current.  An
easy way to characterize what kind of panel you have is to measure under
bright sunlight the short circuit current, and the open circuit voltage of
the panel.

Don (wd8dsb)


On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 2:55 PM, k...@myfairpoint.net wrote:


 Hi Don,

 Pre-amp requires 12-18 volts at 130ma. (low band DXing- nightime use)

 This  solar charger puts out 20 volts that could be reduced to 15 volts
 with a three legged regulator.  I was hoping to find a pre-assembled
 charger  battery, but may have to build one.
 http://www.harborfreight.com/15-watt-solar-battery-charger-68692.html

 73
 Bruce-K1FZ

   What is the operating current and voltage of the preamp you plan to
 use?  Since it sounds like the preamp will be powered on all the time this
 information will be key in the selection of the battery capacity and solar
 panel rating.
 Don (wd8dsb)

 On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:30 PM,   wrote:

   Anyone using, or know of a source, for a compact battery with solar
 cell charger, to power a remote antenna pre-amp ?
 73 Bruce-K1FZ
 www.qsl.net/k1fz/pennantnotes.html

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


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

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

Topband: 160 meters RFI caused by low voltage bookcase lights

[Don Kirk]

Late last week I encountered interference on 160 meters which was repeating
at 41 khz intervals, and this morning I was able to track the problem down
to low voltage bookcase lights at my neighbors home which is 430 feet
away.  I created a website to document this case which includes a link to a
youtube video that contains receive audio of the noise, and my simple
website URL is http://sites.google.com/site/bookcaselightsrfi/

The signal was S9 on 160 meters (approximately 15 dB above my noise floor
when using a 500 hz receive filter), and it could be heard up into the 80
meter band.

We (my neighbor and I) will now dig into his low voltage lighting system to
see what we can do to eliminate the interference.

Just FYI,
Don Kirk (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Boradband noise on 160 meters tracked down to apartment complex

[Don Kirk]

Recently noticed an increase in my noise level on 160 meters (in the
direction of my 300 degree pointed pennant), and about 3 weeks ago I
tracked it down to a new apartment complex which is located 0.41 miles
away.  Today I noticed that the signal had a repeating pattern of
approximately 30 minutes on and 5 minutes off when listening at my house,
so I jumped in the car and drove over to the apartment complex to make sure
the signal at the apartment complex had the same repeating pattern and was
in time sync with the noise at my house.  Thankfully it was, and I made
recordings at the apartment complex today showing I could predict when the
signal would go off and come back on based on the time pattern I was
following at my house.

I have created a website documenting my direction finding activities for
this broadband RFI case, and uploaded my prediction recording today.  Here
is the link to my simple website that documents this case :
http://sites.google.com/site/broadbandrfi/

I contacted the apartment complex today notifying them that I was now 100%
confident that the broadband noise was originating from their building, and
will now work with their management to locate the exact source so they can
follow up with the manufacturer of the equipment for resolution.  Based on
what I have heard so far it sounds like a motor (probably a variable speed
motor controller), but that's just a guess at this time (sounds like it's
winding up in speed when it first comes on and you can hear this on the
recording I made at the apartment complex today).

Just FYI, and another very interesting one to track down.

73,
Don Kirk (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Nintendo 3DS After Market Power Supply 160 meters RFI

[Don Kirk]

This past weekend I encountered interference on 160 meters that I tracked
down to a neighbors Nintendo 3DS after market power supply.  Full details
can be found on a simple website I created to document this case.  My
website URL is http://sites.google.com/site/3dspowersupplyrfi/

73,
Don Kirk (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Unknown Pulse Signal Wiping out 1900-1925 kHz

[Don Kirk]

Quick estimate puts the signal at a heading of approximately 75 degrees
from Fishers Indiana which is just NE of Indianapolis

Don wd8dsb

On Sunday, December 7, 2014, Gary Smith g...@ka1j.com wrote:

 North to North East in Groton, CT. Using a
 HI-Z triangular for that info. Could be on
 a path along coastline towards Maine.
 Interesting appearance with the P3.

 Somebody for sure isn't interested in
 their electric bills.

 73,

 Gary
 KA1J


 ---
 This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
 protection is active.
 http://www.avast.com

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

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

Re: Topband: Unknown Pulse Signal Wiping out 1900-1925 kHz

[Don Kirk]

John W1FV,
You and I are in very close agreement on heading because you are 73 degrees
from me and we are both saying approximately 75 degrees.
I can hear it on numerous web SDR receivers that are located in Europe
(England, etc.). Will be interesting to see what time of day we can no
longer hear it in the US versus when it is no longer heard in Europe.
Would be great to get a heading from someone in Europe.

Don wd8dsb

On Sunday, December 7, 2014, John Kaufmann jkaufm...@alum.mit.edu wrote:

 It peaks at a heading of about 75 degrees from eastern MA, as best as I can
 determine on a Hi-Z 8 circle array.  I made a video of its spectrum as
 captured on my Elecraft P3 and posted it on YouTube:
 Mystery signal on 1900-1925 kHz
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwe0zp2XiuY.

 73, John W1FV
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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

Re: Topband: Unknown Pulse Signal Wiping out 1900-1925 kHz

[Don Kirk]

Hi Mike and gang,
I have been monitoring the signal during the early hours of this morning
and on web SDR in England it was there at 3am EST but when I checked again
at 4:20am EST it was no longer being received.
The heading from my house has been very consistent at approximately 75
degrees but somewhat difficult to determine exactly due to the pulsing
nature of the signal.
Signal still S9 at my location near Indianapolis at 7am EST.
Signal is definitely at a heading greater than 45 degrees at my location
based on numerous methods I have available, and estimated around 75 deg.
As I type the signal just about dropped below my noise level at 7:04am (I
thought it abruptly stopped but it is still there but right at my noise
level at 7:10am EST

I currently only have Internet via cellphone due to a large area outage on
ATT DSL and when I get internet coverage back I will plot my heading to the
signal to see what it shows.

Don wd8dsb

On Monday, December 8, 2014, Mike Waters mikew...@gmail.com wrote:

 From SW Missouri, heard on my 580' NE Beverage, pulses to S7 (preamp off),
 1130 UTC (5:30 CST).
 I can hear it from 1.900 to 1.930 on the IC-765's 2.4 kHz LSB filter.
 Switching to AM on 1.915 (over S9), the signal has a rough pulsing tone,
 but I didn't try to measure the tone's frequency.

 @ 1145 UTC, pulses to S4-S6

 Any educated guesses yet about its general geographical location?

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

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

Re: Topband: Unknown Pulse Signal Wiping out 1900-1925 kHz

[Don Kirk]

Copying the signal again this evening from Indianapolis area at 8:45pm EST
(0145 utc)
Heading is again approximately 75 deg.

Don wd8dsb

On Monday, December 8, 2014, Michael Walker va...@portcredit.net wrote:

 There is my recording here:

 https://vimeo.com/113868670

 Mike va3mw


 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Mike Waters mikew...@gmail.com
 javascript:; wrote:

  There seems to be some recordings at
  www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,100298.0.html
 
  73, Mike
  www.w0btu.com
 
  On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:56 AM, K2RS k2rsonl...@comcast.net
 javascript:; wrote:
 
a friend who's in the ARRL Intruder Watch group forwarded me an e-mail
   this morning informing him that IW has received reports about the noise
  and
   they're looking for audio recordings. I'm not sure what IW actually
 does,
   but at least they're aware of it.
  
  _
  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: Unknown Pulse Signal Wiping out 1900-1925 kHz

[Don Kirk]

Hi Doug

Last night I told w1fv that my estimate was 70 to 75 deg from my location
in Fishers IN and a heading of 70 deg from my location clips the bottom tip
of Nova Scotia, while 75 deg runs me through  Cape Cod.  Therefore having
very strong signal in southern part of Maine fits in well with what I am
seeing.

Need some good directional headings from Maine, New Hampshire, and Nova
Scotia.

Just FYI
Don wd8dsb

On Tuesday, December 9, 2014, Doug Grant dougk...@gmail.com wrote:

 1136z and it is 40 over 9 here in southern Maine.

 It is not far away from here.

 On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:41 AM, Rich C rich_k...@gphilltop.com
 javascript:; wrote:
  I just did a check with the HI Z 4-8 and it is DUE EAST of here at S8-9
  here in Grants Pass Oregon. It drops off each side of due east when I
  switch it.
 
  Rich K7ZV
 
  On Mon, December 8, 2014 10:00 pm, Doug Grant wrote:
  0350z it is back and loud again (40dB over s9) and has QSB.
 
 
  This site shows how Codar systems work
  http://www.ims.uaf.edu/hfradar/how_it_works/
 
 
  the sound clip on that page has audio that is higher-pitched than the
 one
  on 1915 but similar in structure.
 
  73,
 
 
  Doug K1DG
 
 
  On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Ray Benny rayn...@cableone.net
 javascript:; wrote:
 
  Guys,
 
 
  I am hearing something between 1910 and 1925. Its a rapid, raspy, pulse
   tone, but its coming from the SE in Central AZ (SA direction). It is
  just above my noise level, currently S4, so not strong. Do not hear it
  on my TX vertical. Don't know if this could be the noise reported or
  some local garbage in my area.
 
  Using a HI-Z RX 4 SQ.
 
 
  Ray,
  N6VR
 
 
  On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Doug Grant dougk...@gmail.com
 javascript:; wrote:
 
 
  From: k...@myfairpoint.net javascript:;
 
 
  Monday? 9;45 AM
  Unable to hear the 1900-1925 Khz. interfering signal this morning.
  Propagation change, or is the signal gone ?
  Anyone still hear it?
 
 
  I checked a few times during the day on Monday and did not hear it.
 
 
  At 0200z I checked again and it was there and very loud...40dB over
  s9. Definitely louder on my NE antenna, but only by 10 dB or so. Maybe
   it is close enough that it is arriving at a high angle. But 30
  seconds after I tuned in, it stopped!
 
  The signal characteristics are almost identical to CODAR sea-surface
  radar. There are three of those installations in Maine and VE1 that
 are
  easy to hear on 4.8 MHz. Maybe they are trying smoethign new there. Or
  maybe is it in TF or even shipboard somewhere  off Newfoundland...the
  CODAR system uses fairly small antennas and low
  power, so it is possible.
 
  I placed a phone call over the weekend to the Operations Manager for
  one of the projects using those sites and left a message asking if
 they
  had something running at 1.9 MHz, but no answer yet.
 
  73,
 
 
  Doug K1DG
  Long Island, ME  FN43
  _
  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

Topband: Boradband noise on 160 meters tracked down to apartment complex

[Don Kirk]

Mfj Nuller will not work because the signal is in the same direction of my
300 deg pointing pennant.

My guess is that we should be able filter and shield properly at the source

Don
On Sunday, December 14, 2014, W2PM via Topband topband@contesting.com
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','topband@contesting.com'); wrote:

 Sounds like a job for the MFJ nuller. The good news being its a point
 source and should be easily handled. It may cost you several months of
 frustration for no good outcome otherwise but perhaps it's worth a try if
 there is a simple bonding issue there.

 Sent from my iPad

  On Dec 14, 2014, at 01:08, Jim Brown j...@audiosystemsgroup.com wrote:
 
  On Sat,12/13/2014 5:35 PM, Don Kirk wrote:
  Now going back to the contractor that installed the equipment in an
 attempt
  to better understand the hardware in the unit
 
  That smells like a Variable Speed Drive, the heart of which is a
 switching power supply that generates pulses in the 10 kHz range, the width
 of which are varied to control the speed of the motor. Lots to go wrong
 here -- switching power supply, square pulses of big current running a
 distance between the controller and the motor, often with supply and return
 conductors widely separated from each other, and with controller and motor
 widely separated, so the current flows in a large loop. Can you say train
 wreck?
 
  73, Jim K9YC
  _
  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: Boradband noise on 160 meters tracked down to apartmentcomplex

[Don Kirk]

Hi Tom,

Thanks, and my statement was too broad.  In my case I am unable to meet the
conditions you mentioned (my sense antenna would not be much closer to the
noise, and it would not pick up the noise much better than the listening
antenna which is pointed in the direction of the noise source).

Thanks as always,
Don (wd8dsb)


On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote:

 Mfj Nuller will not work because the signal is in the same direction of my
 300 deg pointing pennant.


 There are a lot of popular misconceptions about this. The noise does
 always not have to be a different direction, or even just one source.

 The MFJ nuller and other similar systems will remove noise when:

 1.) The sense antenna is much closer to the noise, or picks up the noise
 much better compared to signals than the listening antenna does. This is
 true no matter what the desired signal direction. In this case you are
 eliminating a source by having a sense antenna hear the noise much stronger
 than the sense antenna hears desired signals.

 2.) The noise is one or multiple sources from the same direction and the
 sense antenna is reasonably close to the RX antenna and the correct
 direction from the RX antenna. The noise has to be a significantly
 different direction than the RX direction. You are just eliminating the
 general noise direction in this case.

 3.) The noise can be from multiple sources radiating from the same point.
 A long power line with multiple insulators arcing that is passing by close,
 and conducting emissions to that point,  might be an example. You are
 nulling the point of coupling, rather than the noise generator's location.



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

Re: Topband: Followup on the 1915kHz radar signal

[Don Kirk]

Hi Doug,

Thanks for the follow up.  I was saying 70 to 75 degrees, and 70 degrees
from my location puts me right where the W1FV 75 degree line passes below
the location you have identified.  Interesting stuff.

Thanks,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Doug Grant dougk...@gmail.com wrote:

 After some Googling and educated guessing, I have determined (and
 received confirmation of) the following:

 - It is a high-frequency surface-wave radar (HFSWR) system, developed
 by Raytheon Canada for the Canadian military. It seems to be a new
 version of the SWR503 MK2 HFSWR system. It is intended to detect ships
 up to 200 miles from a country's coast (EEZ) to protect against
 terrorists, smugglers, and unauthorized fishing vessels as well as
 locate vessels in distress. The present system has been detected at
 1915, 3250, 4400, and 5300 kHz.

 - It is located at Hartlen Point, NS, near Halifax
   (point Google Earth to   44 35 29.47 N   63 26 49.68 W  )

 and if you zoom in you can see the 500M long cleared area for the
 towers and the guy anchors.

 - W1FV was pretty close with his estimate of a heading of 75 degrees
 (it is actually 67 degrees from John's QTH).

 - ARRL, RAC, and Industry Canada (Canada's FCC) have been made aware
 of the interference that this signal is causing to amateurs.

 - The frequency band 1850-2000 is a shared allocation in Canada, among
 amateur, radionavigation, and radiolocation services.

 - A previous version of this system was installed in several other regions.

 1915 kHz is not the primary operating frequency for the system. The
 higher frequencies generally work better for the intended purpose.

 So the mystery is solved...at least as far as the source is concerned.

 73,

 Doug K1DG
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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

Re: Topband: Preamplifiers

[Don Kirk]

You might consider building a W7IUV preamp.  It is a very easy to build
boradband preamp that you can build using double sided circuit board in
which you can easily cut in the pattern on one side of the circuit board
using a Dremel tool, and the opposite side is the ground plane.  I created
a website to document my builds of this preamp, and here is my website URL
in which I provide the artwork for the circuit board, along with parts
placement.  On my website I also provide a link to the W7IUV website where
you can find the most current schematic.

http://sites.google.com/site/rxpreamps/

This preamp can handle very strong input signals without being harmed.

Gain approximately 20 to 22 dB.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)


On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andy YO3JR andyru...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,



 Can someone recommend me a good  preamplifier for the beverage antennas on
 80/160m?

 I found on the market a few like Z10043 Norton Amplifier, KD9SV dual band
 preamp, RPA-1 from DX Engineering.

 Anyone familiar with this preamps?

 Looking forward for replies.

 Thanks in advance!

 Best regards, Andy YO3JR





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

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

Re: Topband: K1N On Line Log

[Don Kirk]

Hi Charlie and gang,

It is not that simple and I am a guilty party of early on dupes on 160
meters with K1N because of the following.

Early on 160 meters the jamming was horrible so it was impossible to hear
the confirmation.  Early on K1N was responding so fast that they were
beating my cw break in even though I have it just set so it does not drop
out when sending my call to prevent weak dots (I have a lot of dots), and
impossible to hear the front of my call so could not tell if they had it
right.  Early on sounded like they we using paddles going way too fast for
conditions (and making sending mistakes) and/or had amp keying problems
which made it sound like busted calls, and without clublog no way of
knowing you were good in the log (not a busted call).  I had discussions
early on with the pilot station (first time in 38 years I had ever
contacted a pilot station) about some of the above topics because I felt
horrible that I was going to attempt another contact on 160 meters due to
the above issues.

Things have since improved and they are doing great.

What I learned as a w1aw/9 op was that sending speed much above 26 to 28
wpm was not really much of a time saver, repeating a stations call twice
often helped the other station know I had his call good, and sending the
stations call twice also made the band go silent by others because they
could hear exactly who I was responding because folks with longer calls or
slower sending speeds would still be sending otherwise during my response
to a station and they were clueless about my sending/response status.

I again apologize for being a dupe in the K1N log (only on 160 meters), it
was just due to perfect storm conditions mentioned above and the fact
that my call is just so dang tough for folks to copy.

Sorry and 73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Charlie Cunningham 
charlie-cunning...@nc.rr.com wrote:

 And another more important point, Kevin in the case of such a massive need
 as K1N. Several of the operators were complaining about the number of
 dupes in the logs. That's caused by guys not knowing if they  had a good
 QSO and just continuing to call. I Tune around in the CW pileups a LOT to
 find where the stations are calling that the DX is working and to find  a
 slot where I can insert my call. I have personally heard a number of guys
 that were worked by K1N and went right on calling in the pile because they
 simply didn't know they had worked them!! What's wrong with that picture??
 In those cases the operators just weren’t adept enough to enact the simple
 procedures that I outlined, and they just continued to  add to the
 pandemonium in the pile-up and making things more difficult for everyone!
 That just adds to the QRM and slows everyone down!!

 73.l
 Charlie, K4OTV



 -Original Message-
 From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com javascript:;] On
 Behalf Of kol...@rcn.com javascript:;
 Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2015 1:36 AM
 To: topband@contesting.com javascript:;
 Subject: Re: Topband: K1N On Line Log


 Charlie, I don't think many here  didn't know if they made a contact or
 not. The question was if  K1N had lost their QSO from the computer log.
 No matter how sure you are you made the contact, if it's not in their
 computer log, for whatever reason, it can't be confirmed.

 Kevin K3OX


 - Original Message -

 From: Charlie Cunningham charlie-cunning...@nc.rr.com javascript:;
 To: Eddy Swynar deswy...@xplornet.ca javascript:;,
 topband@contesting.com javascript:;
 Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 12:46:02 AM
 Subject: Re: Topband: K1N On Line Log

 Well, we did survive just fine, Eddy and lots of folks mad the Honor Roll,
 5BDXCC etc..

 All this nonsense about the online logs is just so much Bull!!!  Can all be
 avoided if folks would do the following:\

 1.0COPY your own call!!!  No guesswork, no fragments, no bluffing
 etc.

 2.0 Copy your report

 3.0Reply with your call, followed by an  acknowledgement  of DX
 Station
 Report (TU or thanks) and Send report to DX station followed (or preceded)
 by Thanks or TU

 4.0LISTEN for the DX operator to acknowledge your report

 5.0 Thanks or TU -or even dit-dit

 Do those things completely and there won't be much guessing or wondering if
 you had a legitimate QSO that's logged!! We may have to have some patience
 and perseverance  to work through the jammers, and QRM and the packet-rats
 tuning up on the DX QRG!

 It may be reassuring to see the online logs, but we should KNOW if we had a
 good contact or not!  WITHOUT  a computer to tell us we did!!

 I KNEW that my 7 QSOs with K1N were there BEFORE the logs came out! And NO
 DUPES or INSURANCE CONTACTS!Just my $0.02.

 73,
 Charlie, K4OTV

 -Original Message-
 From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com javascript:;] On
 Behalf Of Eddy
 Swynar
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 3:17 PM
 To: topband@contesting.com javascript:;
 Subject: 

Re: Topband: Out-of-Turn Callers

[Don Kirk]

Hi Jim,

As of the last log updates for K1N, NA was 89.8% (not 99.5%) and Europe was
7.8% of their 80 meter contacts.  Also suspect the Eu numbers will continue
to rise as less and less NA stations will need K1N.

As a side note on 160 meters Europe is currently 8.0% of the K1N 160 meters
contacts.

I have also heard numerous times where they are calling only JA or EU.

Don't give up (they are really are just getting started, and now that Club
Log is up that will help reduce the number of repeat QSOs which will
benefit everyone).

73,
Don (wd8dsb)



On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Jan Erik Holm sm2...@bdtv.se wrote:

 Sorry if I´m a PITA right now but why even bother to
 have this debate about K1N on 160, it´s not even DX
 to NA, like a local station almost.

 Jeez how difficult can it be from the US, anybody with
 100W and a wet noodle for an antenna can work it. On
 80 I´m sure at least from the east coast they can be
 worked all day long.

 I don´t know about 160 since so far they haven´t been
 stronger then S2 due to geo mag storm and poor propagation
 66 degs north where I´m at but so far I´m very disappointed
 in their 80m operation, they never listen for EU or any other
 area, they work 99,5% NA, it is the USA/Canadian QSO party.
 I would have expected a totally different action by that
 bunch of operators, I´m very very sad and sorry to see
 where it all has went to.

 Now this might not be the case on 160, if I´m lucky propagation
 might get better and I might get a shot at it.

 73 Jim SM2EKM
 

 On 2015-02-04 01:15, Hardy Landskov wrote:

 I got up last night for my nightly bathroom ritual and just for grins
 listened to 160. They were calling CQ and I worked them on 2 calls. Not
 many trying to get them. This was 1035Z.
 N7RT

 - Original Message - From: Richard (Rick) Karlquist
 rich...@karlquist.com
 To: ws6x@gmail.com; topband@contesting.com
 Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 4:51 PM
 Subject: Re: Topband: Out-of-Turn Callers


  Why not call around 0700Z after the
 band closes to EU and before it opens
 to JA?  A bunch of us in CA got them
 in the log last night fairly easily.

 Rick N6RK
 _


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

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

Re: Topband: Elimination of Treadmill RFI on 160 meters

[Don Kirk]

Treadmill combination filter update.

Today I replaced the 10 amp commercial filter with the 20 amp version of
the filter, and the results are similar.  Below are a few measurements on
160 meters and 80 meters showing how effective the combination of the two
filters are (14 turn toroid choke, and commercial filter model 20DRGG5 made
by Delta) in reducing my treadmill RFI.

*1.8068 Mhz*
No Filters : 19db over S9
With Filters : S7 which is my noise floor

*1.8291 Mhz*
No Filters : 15db over S9
With Filters : S7 which is my noise floor

*3.5250 Mhz*
No Filters : 28db over S9
With Filters : S6 which is my noise floor


*3.5475 Mhz*
No Filters : 25db over S9
With Filters : S6 which is my noise floor

The 3.5250 Mhz readings indicate the filter is knocking the signal down at
least 46db (and probably more).

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Don Kirk wd8...@gmail.com wrote:

 For many years my wife's treadmill caused strong interference on 160 meters
 when it was in use, and yesterday I was able to completely eliminate the
 RFI using a combination of two different filters (a commercial line filter
 that provides both common mode and differential mode filtering, and 14
 turns of the power cord on a 2.4 OD Fair-Rite #31 mix toroid core based on
 the K9YC hams guide to RFI document).

 I created a simple website that documents my tests and the filters used,
 and for those interested the website URL is
 http://sites.google.com/site/treadmillrfi/

 The website contains a link to a video on youtube where you can actually
 see the effectiveness of the filters.

 73,
 Don (wd8dsb)
 _
 Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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

Re: Topband: Elimination of Treadmill RFI on 160 meters

[Don Kirk]

Hi Brad,

Great to hear you had similar results.

The 20VR1 and the 20DRGG5 filter appear to be of very similar design (two
stage filters, and component values not vastly different).  The 20VR1 looks
to be double the price of the 20DRGG5, but it might offset some of the
additional cost if it allows elimination of the additional Toroid core
choke.  Since all cases are different I would have to test the 20VR1 in my
application to see if it would indeed allow elimination of the Toroid core
choke, but I doubt I would be able to eliminate the Toroid core choke for
the following reason that Jim K9YC mentioned on another reflector : What
the power industry calls common mode is NOT what we call common mode.
They are talking about the voltage between neutral and the green wire. We
are talking about current that is flowing in the same direction on three
conductors.  In my case the additional Toroid core choke had a very
noticeable impact, and I now can't tell when the treadmill is on when using
the combination of both filters.

P.S. I sent an e-mail to the manufacturer of our Treadmill, and they never
responded.  I am now going to call them on the phone in an attempt to get
in touch with their design engineers, and likely will also file a complaint
with the FCC regarding treadmills in general.  There are a couple more
treadmills near my home that generate very strong RFI, but fortunately they
normally use their Treadmills during the day, and I operate mostly at night.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)




On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Brad Rehm bradr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Don,

 FWIW, today, W5UJE and I dealt with a treadmill problem similar to yours
 by installing a commercial line filter between the line and the treadmill
 electronics.  A Corcom/TE Connectivity 20VR1 filter reduced the 40m and 75m
 noise at his receiver from S9+10db to less than S2 (his noise floor this
 morning).  The 20 Amp rating was needed because the manufacturer's
 published current requirement for the treadmill was 15 Amps.

 In measurements we'd made earlier, we found that this was a common-mode
 problem and that the noise spurs were about 20 kHz apart when the treadmill
 was operating under a moderate load.  The spectrum scope on his radio
 showed 20 kHz-spaced broadband noise up through 29 MHz, peaking between 1.8
 and 15 MHz.  The line filter we chose offers 10-20 dB of supperssion below
 50 kHz and 60-80 dB of suppression between 300 kHz and 29 MHz.  No
 additional filtering with torroids or capacitors was needed.

 In other words, our results were similar to yours, and one wonders how
 manufacturers can say these things meet Part 15 requirements for conducted
 emissions.

 Brad  KV5V

 On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Don Kirk wd8...@gmail.com wrote:

 Treadmill combination filter update.

 Today I replaced the 10 amp commercial filter with the 20 amp version of
 the filter, and the results are similar.  Below are a few measurements on
 160 meters and 80 meters showing how effective the combination of the two
 filters are (14 turn toroid choke, and commercial filter model 20DRGG5
 made
 by Delta) in reducing my treadmill RFI.

 *1.8068 Mhz*
 No Filters : 19db over S9
 With Filters : S7 which is my noise floor

 *1.8291 Mhz*
 No Filters : 15db over S9
 With Filters : S7 which is my noise floor

 *3.5250 Mhz*
 No Filters : 28db over S9
 With Filters : S6 which is my noise floor


 *3.5475 Mhz*
 No Filters : 25db over S9
 With Filters : S6 which is my noise floor

 The 3.5250 Mhz readings indicate the filter is knocking the signal down at
 least 46db (and probably more).

 73,
 Don (wd8dsb)


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

Re: Topband: Elimination of Treadmill RFI on 160 meters

[Don Kirk]

Data from another treadmill RFI success story.

A few days ago Lionel (N5LB) added filters to his treadmill based on what I
had done to eliminate RFI from my wife's treadmill, and below are his very
successful results.


Don

I want to tell you my results with the treadmill and the delta filter.

Before the filter:

160m   - 91 dbm
80m -77 dbm
40m -97 dbm
20m -93 dbm
15m -97 dbm
12m -110 dbm
10m  nil

After the Delta install

160, 80, 40, 20 m  below the mds at - 131 dbm
15, 12m -110 dbm

After adding a FT240-61 with 7 turns of #12 stranded in the line side of
the Delta.

160 - 10m not measurable,  mds is ~ -131dbm.  Not visible on Flex 5000
waterfall.

All of the dbm readings are from the Flex 5000 meter.  S7 = ~ -90 dbm so
the RFI was really bad.

So like you case I needed additional filtering. For me it was higher in
frequency so the Delta attenuation must drop off above 20m.  I was able to
fit the Delta and the toroid inside of the treadmill motor and control
housing making for a neat install.

Thanks for the excellent suggestions.  I bought the Delta from Digikey and
had it 36 hours later, incredible service.

Lionel

Note that Lionel used the same Delta Filter that I used (model : 20DRGG5).
He used an FT240-61 core which he had on hand with 7 turns of the Hot and
Neutral wires passing through the core (ground wire die not pass through
his core) whereas I used 14 turns of the power cord on a 2.4 OD Fair-Rite
#31 mix toroid core (Neutral, Hot, and Ground wires passing through the
core).

Just FYI, and glad to hear others are having success using filters on their
treadmill similar to what I used which have provided excellent results.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Elimination of Treadmill RFI on 160 meters

[Don Kirk]

For many years my wife's treadmill caused strong interference on 160 meters
when it was in use, and yesterday I was able to completely eliminate the
RFI using a combination of two different filters (a commercial line filter
that provides both common mode and differential mode filtering, and 14
turns of the power cord on a 2.4 OD Fair-Rite #31 mix toroid core based on
the K9YC hams guide to RFI document).

I created a simple website that documents my tests and the filters used,
and for those interested the website URL is
http://sites.google.com/site/treadmillrfi/

The website contains a link to a video on youtube where you can actually
see the effectiveness of the filters.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Boradband noise on 160 meters tracked down to apartment complex

[Don Kirk]

Hi Jim,

Thanks, and I have shared a lot of documents with the folks that cover the
major points your section on variable speed drives covers, but found that I
still had to make a recommendations list for them (taking into account
simplicity of install, cost, and highest probability of success), while at
the same time telling them that I was not liable for anything they opted to
do.

Actually sounds like the technician is now trying to get approval to move
the drives up into the attic which would put them very close to the motors
(which are roof mount) and at the same time he would do a much better job
on the conduit run between the drives and the motors.  Currently the drives
are around 50 feet away from the motors with very questionable conduit runs
(and the current conduit runs are impossible to access).

Note : Previously one simple option I suggested was the use of common mode
cores on the output of the drives (similar to what George AA7JV suggested),
but the original technician that was working on the job did not contact me
for assistance and he installed the cores incorrectly which caused drive
faults, so they abandoned that approach (I'm giving them some time and
space before I bring up the common mode cores again).  I also want to
develop a better working relationship with the current technician (I have
offered to be onsite with him when he makes changes, but he has yet to take
me up on my offer).

I would like to make one comment about your section on VFDs.  It does not
mention shielded cable that is now available specifically for use on the
output side of variable speed drives, and these cables offer some major
advantages over the use of metal conduit (but at much greater expense).

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Jim Brown j...@audiosystemsgroup.com
wrote:

 On Wed,5/13/2015 11:14 AM, Don Kirk wrote:

 The local technician is now planning on additional changes since the input
 line filters have not totally mitigated the problem (but they sure
 helped),
 and will provide an update when I have new information to share.


 Hi Don,

 You might want to refer the people working on the problem to this Power
 Point for a tutorial workshop that I've taught to pro audio and video
 people. The principles are no different when the interference is at RF.

 http://k9yc.com/InfoComm-Grounding2012.pdf

 Henry Ott's excellent text on EMC includes a sub-chapter on these very
 nasty RFI sources. His book is widely used as an EE text, and considered
 the EMC bible.


 http://www.amazon.com/Electromagnetic-Compatibility-Engineering-Henry-Ott/dp/0470189304

 73, Jim K9YC




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

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

Re: Topband: Boradband noise on 160 meters tracked down to apartment complex

[Don Kirk]

I've not reported on this issue in a long time, but finally making progress
with interference that's originating from an apartment complex 0.4 miles
away.  Back on Dec 11, 2014 we (myself and the apartment complex
maintenance manager) tracked the problem down to the variable speed drives
that are part of their kitchen air makeup system.  In this system there
are two drives that operate together, with one being a 3 HP drive for the
kitchen hood exhaust fan, and the other is a 5 HP drive for air makeup.
Here is a link to a video I uploaded onto youtube that captures the
interference when the drives start up (really an interesting video using an
RTL-SDR receiver and upconveter).   http://youtu.be/LIWd2Dd-Fa0

On Jan 30th of this year I made a list of recommendations, with the
understanding that the apartment complex and their suppliers were fully
responsible for any changes made to their system (I assumed no liability
for their actions to mitigate the interference).  After a long period of
time and no action, I called the FCC (March 3rd) and was told I should file
an official online complaint with the FCC which would then initiate action
by the FCC enforcement division.  I passed this info onto the apartment
complex regional maintenance manager, and that is when things started to
move forward.  The out of state firm that designed the kitchen air makeup
system hired a local mechanical/electrical firm to work on the problem,
and the local technician has been very proactive.

3 weeks ago input line filters manufactured by the variable speed drive
manufacturer were installed on both drives, and this definitely reduced the
level of interference.  Start up peaks spaced 4 khz apart were originally
15 dB above my noise floor and after installation of the input line filters
they are now 5 dB above my noise floor.  The very broad band white noise
that develops a short time after start up is now very hard to detect
whereas it was previously 4 to 6 dB above my noise floor.

The local technician is now planning on additional changes since the input
line filters have not totally mitigated the problem (but they sure helped),
and will provide an update when I have new information to share.

For more in depth details see my website that's documenting this case
http://sites.google.com/site/broadbandrfi/

73,
Don (wd8dsb)


On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Don Kirk wd8...@gmail.com wrote:

 Recently noticed an increase in my noise level on 160 meters (in the
 direction of my 300 degree pointed pennant), and about 3 weeks ago I
 tracked it down to a new apartment complex which is located 0.41 miles
 away.  Today I noticed that the signal had a repeating pattern of
 approximately 30 minutes on and 5 minutes off when listening at my house,
 so I jumped in the car and drove over to the apartment complex to make sure
 the signal at the apartment complex had the same repeating pattern and was
 in time sync with the noise at my house.  Thankfully it was, and I made
 recordings at the apartment complex today showing I could predict when the
 signal would go off and come back on based on the time pattern I was
 following at my house.

 I have created a website documenting my direction finding activities for
 this broadband RFI case, and uploaded my prediction recording today.  Here
 is the link to my simple website that documents this case :
 http://sites.google.com/site/broadbandrfi/

 I contacted the apartment complex today notifying them that I was now 100%
 confident that the broadband noise was originating from their building, and
 will now work with their management to locate the exact source so they can
 follow up with the manufacturer of the equipment for resolution.  Based on
 what I have heard so far it sounds like a motor (probably a variable speed
 motor controller), but that's just a guess at this time (sounds like it's
 winding up in speed when it first comes on and you can hear this on the
 recording I made at the apartment complex today).

 Just FYI, and another very interesting one to track down.

 73,
 Don Kirk (wd8dsb)

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

Topband: HC1PF doing a great job with his Inv-L and FCP

[Don Kirk]

Things are pretty slow on the topband reflector, so thought I would take
the opportunity to comment about, and thank Luis (HC1PF) regarding his
great signal on 160 meters using his Inverted L with FCP.  I've often heard
Luis this year on 160 meters and he certainly has a signal that stands out.

Luis has also improved his receive capabilities (earlier this year he was
not able to copy me even when he was running S8 to S9), but the last two
times I called him he had no problems copying my 100 watt station.

Check out his website for details on all the antenna work he his has done
at HC1PF.

P.S. I just uploaded a recording on youtube I made early this morning of
Luis on 160 meters, and the URL of my recording is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAe07mbYhq8 for those interested.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Bandpass filters for receive antennas

[Don Kirk]

Hi Mike,


Here is a link to a simple website I created that describes a high pass
filter I built earlier this year that rejects both the LW & MW band.  It
was originally described in a Feb 1978 QST article. I use it in front of an
SDR receiver, and really happy with its performance.

Don (wd8dsb)

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Mike Waters  wrote:

> Where can I find a schematic for a good high pass filter that rolls off at
> 1700 kHz?
>
> Yesterday,  I installed a preamp --that I made over 20 years ago-- right at
> one of my 2-wire Beverage antennas. Even in the reverse direction (NW)
> where losses are the greatest, it easily overloads from out-of-band
> signals. Today, I even noticed it oscillating.
>
> It uses an MRF5812 NPN bipolar. I built it over 20 years ago, before I knew
> some things I've learned since then (such as being more careful about
> separating the input and output).
>
> I just took it out of line and brought it back to the house. It's the one
> on the right near the bottom of
> www.w0btu.com/W0BTU-broadband-preamps.html on the Radio Shack proto board.
> Not shown in the photo is an RF choke between the input and output that
> passes the 12 VDC through the coax, so it can power the relay that switches
> from SE to NW. Also, the back-to-back diodes and the input circuit are
> slightly different.
>
> There are some other things I want to do to it, but I think a HP filter
> should be near the top of the agenda. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Tom W8JI  wrote:
>
> > Bandpass filters do nothing for in-band signals -- their only function is
> >> to reject OUT OF BAND signals. The primary reason for using bandpass
> >> filters IS for RX. A good 160M bandpass filter would be effective at
> >> reducing overload from AM broadcast stations. So would a high pass
> filter.
> >> There is a survey of bandpass filters for contesting at this link.
> >> http://k9yc.com/BandpassFilterSurvey.pdf
> >>
> >
> > I use a high pass filter for rejection of the AM BCB band. Between 70 and
> > 80% of the net power (or voltage) into my RX system comes from distant AM
> > BCB signals.
> >
> > Without a small 5-pole highpass that starts to roll off at 1700 kHz, I
> can
> > connect a  miniature 12V 50 mA incandescent lamp (like the MFJ 1025 uses
> as
> > a fuse) and it illuminates a dull red.
> >
> > This is with no attempt at matching power to the filament cold
> resistance.
> >
> > My system can be bothered by the sum of all those thousands of signals, I
> > add a BCB high pass, and then I can run 1500 watts and not bother my own
> RX
> > when transmitting on 80 or 40 while receiving on 160. Of course I have
> > 500-2000 ft separation on antennas, but this still shows how a bunch of
> > small signals can add up to disaster if they hit something non-linear
> > before being filtered.
> >
> > Always remember there are two problems. One is the absolute limit of
> > in-band signal a receiver system can take. The other is the absolute
> limit
> > of the sum of all the signals entering an overload sensitive point in the
> > system.
> >
> > Less than one volt peak line voltage is not enough headroom to prevent IM
> > products in a reasonably good system. Back-to-back parallel diodes are
> fine
> > for Sky Buddy receivers and FT101's. A single diode opposing another
> diode
> > in parallel will clamp at about 6 dBm if your receiver looks like 75
> ohms.
> > Almost all receivers will conservatively take 15-20 dBm, or 2-4 volts
> peak,
> > at the antenna port in band.
> >
> > If you have a good system, you'll want something other than back-to-back
> > diodes.
> >
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Bandpass filters for receive antennas

[Don Kirk]

Oops.

Forgot to include the link.  Here is the link.
http://sites.google.com/site/lwmwbandrejectfilter/

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Don Kirk <wd8...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
>
> Here is a link to a simple website I created that describes a high pass
> filter I built earlier this year that rejects both the LW & MW band.  It
> was originally described in a Feb 1978 QST article. I use it in front of an
> SDR receiver, and really happy with its performance.
>
> Don (wd8dsb)
>
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Mike Waters <mikew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Where can I find a schematic for a good high pass filter that rolls off at
>> 1700 kHz?
>>
>> Yesterday,  I installed a preamp --that I made over 20 years ago-- right
>> at
>> one of my 2-wire Beverage antennas. Even in the reverse direction (NW)
>> where losses are the greatest, it easily overloads from out-of-band
>> signals. Today, I even noticed it oscillating.
>>
>> It uses an MRF5812 NPN bipolar. I built it over 20 years ago, before I
>> knew
>> some things I've learned since then (such as being more careful about
>> separating the input and output).
>>
>> I just took it out of line and brought it back to the house. It's the one
>> on the right near the bottom of
>> www.w0btu.com/W0BTU-broadband-preamps.html on the Radio Shack proto
>> board.
>> Not shown in the photo is an RF choke between the input and output that
>> passes the 12 VDC through the coax, so it can power the relay that
>> switches
>> from SE to NW. Also, the back-to-back diodes and the input circuit are
>> slightly different.
>>
>> There are some other things I want to do to it, but I think a HP filter
>> should be near the top of the agenda. Any suggestions would be
>> appreciated.
>>
>> 73, Mike
>> www.w0btu.com
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Tom W8JI <w...@w8ji.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Bandpass filters do nothing for in-band signals -- their only function
>> is
>> >> to reject OUT OF BAND signals. The primary reason for using bandpass
>> >> filters IS for RX. A good 160M bandpass filter would be effective at
>> >> reducing overload from AM broadcast stations. So would a high pass
>> filter.
>> >> There is a survey of bandpass filters for contesting at this link.
>> >> http://k9yc.com/BandpassFilterSurvey.pdf
>> >>
>> >
>> > I use a high pass filter for rejection of the AM BCB band. Between 70
>> and
>> > 80% of the net power (or voltage) into my RX system comes from distant
>> AM
>> > BCB signals.
>> >
>> > Without a small 5-pole highpass that starts to roll off at 1700 kHz, I
>> can
>> > connect a  miniature 12V 50 mA incandescent lamp (like the MFJ 1025
>> uses as
>> > a fuse) and it illuminates a dull red.
>> >
>> > This is with no attempt at matching power to the filament cold
>> resistance.
>> >
>> > My system can be bothered by the sum of all those thousands of signals,
>> I
>> > add a BCB high pass, and then I can run 1500 watts and not bother my
>> own RX
>> > when transmitting on 80 or 40 while receiving on 160. Of course I have
>> > 500-2000 ft separation on antennas, but this still shows how a bunch of
>> > small signals can add up to disaster if they hit something non-linear
>> > before being filtered.
>> >
>> > Always remember there are two problems. One is the absolute limit of
>> > in-band signal a receiver system can take. The other is the absolute
>> limit
>> > of the sum of all the signals entering an overload sensitive point in
>> the
>> > system.
>> >
>> > Less than one volt peak line voltage is not enough headroom to prevent
>> IM
>> > products in a reasonably good system. Back-to-back parallel diodes are
>> fine
>> > for Sky Buddy receivers and FT101's. A single diode opposing another
>> diode
>> > in parallel will clamp at about 6 dBm if your receiver looks like 75
>> ohms.
>> > Almost all receivers will conservatively take 15-20 dBm, or 2-4 volts
>> peak,
>> > at the antenna port in band.
>> >
>> > If you have a good system, you'll want something other than back-to-back
>> > diodes.
>> >
>> _
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>
>
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: rx preamps

[Don Kirk]

Hi Jim,

You might want to check out my website that shows my builds of the W7IUV
preamp and the URL is http://sites.google.com/site/rxpreamps/.  You can
download my simple artwork for the circuit board on my website (at the
bottom of the page), and I just used a Dremel tool to make the traces.

Don (wd8dsb)



On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Jim wa3...@comcast.net wrote:

 Martin is the latest incarnation of the infamous W7IUV preamp?  and do you
 know anyone that has PC boards before I reinvent the wheel and make another
 one?
 Jim  WA3MEJ

 - Original Message -

 Message: 10
 Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 23:53:10 +0200
 From: Martin Kratoska  mar...@centrum.cz 
 To: topband@contesting.com
 Subject: Topband: W7IUV preamp
 Message-ID:  55e0d846.3070...@centrum.cz 
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed

 The latest version 6

 http://www.okdxf.eu/files/preamp_r60.pdf

 73,
 Martin, OK1RR

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

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

[Don Kirk]

Hi Rob (and gang),

I would like to make one point that should be considered in this discussion.

A true vertical which is what I use (not an inverted L) on 160 meters is
sometimes horrible on 160 meters for skywave that originates from close in
(200 miles or less as an example).  During contests I sometimes can't hear
a station calling me on my vertical since it's deaf to NVIS signals
(signals arriving at a very high angle), but when I switch to one of my
pennants suddenly I'm hearing the station 18dB to 38 dB over my noise floor
(really an amazing phenomena).  The pennant RX antenna gain is only 5 dB
down on NVIS (for signals arriving directly overhead) compared with the max
gain of the pennant which is at 31 degrees above the horizon.  In
comparison my 68 foot base loaded vertical has a gain of -20 dB or worse
for NVIS at an angle 85 degrees or higher above the horizon compared to its
max gain at 22 degrees.

Therefore while I don't disagree that a vertical on 160 meters is a great
antenna especially for DX work, for working stations in close it sometimes
can be a disadvantage.  Based on modeling it looks like a dipole only 15
feet off the ground on 160 meters would perform much better than my
vertical for signals arriving at very high angles (as an example).

Therefore depending on Gary's goal, a true vertical on 160 meters may or
may not be in his best interest (but an inverted L might be).

Just one of the many things to consider.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)



On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Rob Atkinson  wrote:

> Hi Gary, It would make a nice receiving antenna.
>
> Let's start with a question:  Would you put up a loop for 20 meters
> that is 6 feet off the ground?  Height for horizontal antennas must
> always be thought of in terms of _wavelength_.  There is only one
> effective transmitting antenna for medium wave, assuming you do not
> have 200 foot tall supports for stringing up a horizontal wire
> antenna, and that is some sort of monopole over a good ground system.
> Period.  And good ground system means a lot of radials.  A lot.  Not
> 10 or 20.  You don't get to cheat on the laws of physics.  You have to
> bite the bullet and do the work.  The excited vertical part has
> options.  T, inverted L, or an insulated tower are all fine provided
> the vertical part is at least 50 feet tall (more is better).
>
> Don't take this personally--it's just that I get tired of piss weak
> signals on 160 from hams who seem to think they have an exemption from
> Mother Nature.  A dead giveaway that a ham is using a low dipole, 20
> feet or so, is rapid deep QSB.  Even 50 feet is too low.  Inverted Vs
> are worse.  the effective height is halfway between the apex height
> and the height of the ends.  A big horizontal loop on transmit does
> nothing for you but cause more of your RF to get lost to ground
> coupling.
>
> 73
>
> Rob
> K5UJ
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

[Don Kirk]

Hi Tom,

You said "Compared to a vertical, there could be 10-30 dB difference in
favor of a low dipole (less than 150 ft high) within a few hundred miles.",
and I was pretty much trying to make the same point but indirectly since I
don't have a dipole on 160 meters.

The original poster mentioned relatively short distance work on 160 meters,
and that is why I mentioned that a true vertical may not actually be his
best choice (he might actually go backwards in performance if he is trying
to work stations in adjacent states as an example).

Don (wd8dsb)





On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Tom W8JI  wrote:

> You are misinterpreting the model data by looking at the shape of the
>> pattern rather than the relative strength of the pattern at angles of
>> interest. Example -- the so-called "take off angle" simply shows the
>> vertical angle where the signal is the strongest. FAR more important to
>> look at the field strength at various angles as the height is varied.
>>
>
> Many people talk about and look at TOA, and it causes them to pick
> antennas that are actually worse just because the TOA is at the correct
> angle. :)
>
> If you look at a low dipole, it has just about the same gain as a low
> loop. Being a loop helps moderate impedance on harmonics, but not much else.
>
> I have 300 ft of height here. For the most part, a vertical did as well or
> better than a dipole at any height and distance. The exceptions were at
> sunrise or in magnetic storms, or within 50-200 miles (where a dipole below
> 150 feet works much better).  Compared to a vertical, there could be 10-30
> dB difference in favor of a low dipole (less than 150 ft high) within a few
> hundred miles.
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: ARRL book on short antennas for 160 meters

[Don Kirk]

Hi Jim,

Check out the following review by Guy (K2AV) that was on the topband
reflector back in September of 2012.
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00177.html

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 6:49 PM, James Rodenkirch 
wrote:

>
>
> Anyone read "Short Antennas for 160 Meter Radio" and can/care to comment
> on its "usefulness"?
>
> '
>
> 72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Weatherproofing F-type connectors

[Don Kirk]

Tim,

$3.18 a piece at McMaster-Carr (18-8 stainless), part number 91862A318
.

Don (wd8dsb)


On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Tim Shoppa  wrote:

> Wow, stainless 3/8-32 panel nut from Grainger, part number 1JLU9, $15 for
> 2. Maybe I can find something cheaper :-)
>
> Tim N3QE
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 2:36 AM, Tom W8JI  wrote:
>
> > My one concern, is the F-connector chassis-mount jacks. The jacks
> >> themselves seem rather impervious to moisture when a good F-plug with
> >> O-ring is kept plugged in. But the nuts for the jacks seem to rust
> really
> >> fast, really surprisingly fast, I end up replacing the jack and nut
> every
> >> year or two wherever they are exposed to weather.
> >>
> >
> > Use stainless steel nuts. Throw the steel nuts that come with the
> > connectors away.
> >
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 160M EWE Problems Part 2

[Don Kirk]

Hi Mark,

I modeled your antenna last night, and have some comments.

There is almost as much reactance as resistance at the feedpoint of your
EWE based on your dimensions and termination resistor, but sounds like
that's typical (per the ON4UN low band DXing book).  The back null is also
not as deep compared with Pennants and Flags that I work with.
Nevertheless the RDF value of your design is not much different than the
Pennants and Flags I work with.

I use 3 very small pennants on 160 meters, and their signal to noise ratio
is never worse than my 68 foot base loaded TX vertical (so you have a
reference point regarding what I would expect from your EWE, as Pennants
are considered to be part of the EWE family and they have similar RDF
values).  During every QSO I make on 160 meters (as well as casual
listening) I compare signal to noise performance between my TX vertical and
my pennants, and the pennants have never lost (your situation might be
slightly different due to the horizontal section of your Inv-L, but more
times than not when working DX I would be surprised if a properly working
EWE type RX antenna was not equal or slightly better than your Inv-L).

I wonder why you went with a classical EWE versus a Flag or Pennant  The
Flag and Pennant are ground independent (no connection to ground), which is
a very nice feature and makes them very easy to construct as well as easy
to rotate in the direction you desire.  The Pennant is nice because you can
drop the feedline directly to ground from the feedpoint.  Something else I
like about Pennants or Flags is the fact that their feedpoint impedance is
almost pure resistive when using a termination resistor that provides a
nice pattern (deep null off the back) with peak RDF performance.

I am not suggesting you abandon your classical EWE design, but I did want
to share some off the cuff comments which may or may not help you down the
road.

Here is a test I would recommend (typically I would do this during the
middle of the day when there is no skywave).  Connect a 50 ohm dummy load
to your preamp in place of your EWE and its feedline, and tell us what your
S meter reading is, and then connect your EWE with its feedline to the
preamp and tell us what your S meter reading is.  Hopefully the S meter
reading is much higher with the EWE versus the dummy load.  If you can
repeat this same test but with the dummy load out at the EWE feedpoint
(disconnect the EWE from the end of the feedline and connect the 50 ohm
dummy load in its place), as this might also shed some light regarding your
situation.

I should also mention that I would not expect a Hugh improvement in Signal
to Noise ratio when using a EWE to work DX compared with a Vertical if the
Noise is arriving equally from all directions (versus a point source
noise).  Based on my experience I only achieve 1 or 2 dB of improvement in
Signal to Noise for stations 4000 miles or more away as an example (but
this can often be the difference between a solid QSO and no QSO at all on
160 meters).

I do have Toroid Chokes installed on my pennant feedline (per the K9YC
design) to help with common mode noise, and in my installation I have never
observed common mode noise issues (I have run tests with my HF rig and
pre-amp right at the feedpoint of my pennants and operated them with a
battery to see if the noise level was much less than in the shack, and
thankfully it is not).

As others have said you may be experiencing pattern distortion which I have
not addressed above.  For starters I would float your inverted L at it's
feedpoint to see what happens to your noise level, and I would also connect
it direct to ground at it's feedpoint to see what happens to your noise
level and I would do all of this while also listening to AM radio stations
as high up in the AM broadcast band as possible during the middle of the
day.  I would do this listening to AM radio stations that are at various
headings from your location to see if you can detect pattern distortion on
any of them depending on the configuration of your inverted L (grounded
versus floating).  If the AM radio station signals change when listening on
the EWE when changing the configuration of your inverted L (grounded versus
floating), then this might provide a clue regarding the need to detune the
inverted L when receiving on the EWE, etc.

Just some long winded thoughts from my end.

73, and Happy New Year.
Don (wd8dsb)

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Mark K3MSB  wrote:

> Good Morning!
>
>
> Last night was the second night in a row with nice conditions between the
> east coast and Europe on 160M.I took the time to get a cup of coffee
> and spend a few hours comparing the Inverted-L and EWE, and recording my
> observations.
>
>
> All Inverted-L data was recorded with the Icom on-board preamps OFF.
>
>
> All EWE data was recorded with the 20 dB external preamp ON.
>
>
> The external preamp is an Advanced Research Receiver P1-30/20VD
>
>

Topband: Sad news N5IA SK

[Don Kirk]

Hi Jon,

Thanks for passing this along, and how very sad.  I had a nice brief chat
with Milt on 160 meters CW early this Wednesday morning just as Milt was
heading to bed (his Tuesday night) and will cherish our last QSO
together forever.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Thursday, June 9, 2016, Jon Zaimes > wrote:

> N5IA's son posted this on Milt's QRZ.com page:
>
>
>
> "Hello to all of Milt's Amatuer contact, friends, acquaintances and others,
>
> "I am Milt's oldest son Jason, some of you know me, most of you probably
> don't.  I have been with him for 47 years, he was my hero.  Today, June 9,
> 2016.  Milt was on was of his many tower climbing adventures, and by no
> choice of his, it became his last.  It is with great sadness that I report
> to all of you that today we lost one of the greatest men I know.  He was my
> hero.   He left behind Rulene, his loving wife of 49 years, 7 children, 30
> grandchildren, 4 great grandchildren and so many, many friends.  His legend
> will live on for generations to come.  He loved to help others, especially
> in his chosen hobby, Amatuer radio.  He truly cared about his hobby and
> took
> every aspect of it to heart.  Those of you who knew Milt, know how
> intelligent he was, and how he loved to share that intelligence with
> others.
> Please feel free to share with anyone who might not read this short post,
> of
> his passing."
>
>
>
> And here's a news story:
>
> http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/32187315/man-dies-in-fall-from-tower-on-m
> t-lemmon
> 
>
>
>
> Rest in peace Milt.
>
>
>
> 73/Jon AA1K
>
>
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Stew Beef

[Don Kirk]

Especially on 160 meters I don't think the S in RST has a lot of scientific
value since there is no real numerical standard as it relates to true
signal strength.  In my own mind I have come up with a standard in which
the S is directly related to the S meter reading on my radio (so I don't
have to guess on what S value I should assign to a signal), but on 160
meters when my noise floor is typically S 6.2, that only leaves me with the
ability to send a 6, 7, 8, or 9 for the S value (sometimes I will send a
value of 5 for the S value when the the signal is right at my noise
floor).  Others might consider a value of 9 for when a persons signal is 30
dB over S9.  So no matter what a person sends you for the S value, what
does it really mean, not much (regardless if you are in a contest or not on
160 meters).

Contests have a lot of value regarding improvement in technology to handle
nearby strong signals, improve or maintain operator proficiency under
difficult conditions, motivation to improve your stations efficiency
(including the ability to multi-task), justification of spectrum (increase
activity on our bands which often are under utilized), provides an event to
look forward to and often social interaction, etc.

I would have no problem getting rid of RST reports in contests as they
really are meaningless (based on my above comments), but I have come to
find contests (especially on 160 meters) a great way to evaluate and
improve my station and my own skills.  I often go back to the reverse
beacon network after a contest to compare my signal with other nearby
stations to see how well the signal level from my station stacks up.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Rob Atkinson  wrote:

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

Re: Topband: K5P good job !

[Don Kirk]

I was holding back on posting a comment on this topic of continuous calling
(I actually typed out a response but deleted it twice yesterday) but
thought I would finally hit the send key in an attempt to should shed some
light on part of the problem as well as a partial solution (not a complete
solution as there are many different reasons for the problem which includes
deep fading, as well as just being totally clueless, desperate, etc).

As a W1AW/9 centennial station and operator (all CW), I found the biggest
cure for the problem was sending the call sign of the station I picked out
of the pile up 2 times.  My best guess was that operators that have longer
calls (like myself), and/or send slow, or run "semi break in" often don't
hear the DXpedition station respond to someone else because they are still
sending (or muted), and this gets worse when everyone gets out of sync
(they would really get out of sync from each other when I could not pick
out even a partial call the first time around and this caused stations to
start repeating their calls in hopes of being the "chosen one", etc.).  I
would not always use the "sending calls two times" technique, but when the
problem started to impact my receive capabilities (or just drove me nuts),
I would implement this technique with great success.

I've heard a few DXpedition operators on 160 meters use the "sending calls
two times" technique under certain conditions (but not often), and the
results are normally very impressive.  This technique is not often
discussed (as far as I know), and probably frowned upon by some who might
think it slows things down, but I certainly found this technique useful
(and often the most efficient method).

Just some thoughts from my end based on my experience last year.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Roger D Johnson 
wrote:

> The big problem is that this "system" works! It's simple statistics. The
> more times you
> send your call, the better chance of the DX picking it out of a pileup.
>
> I don't think the people that do this give a rats behind if they're
> calling on top of
> someone else. They are like people who cut in line ahead of you. It's all
> about them!
>
> 73, Roger
>
>
> On 1/18/2016 10:00 AM, mstang...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>>
>> When someone is doing something wrong we should not "out" or embarrass
>> them.
>>
>> You should try to settle the situation offline without leaving any bad
>> feelings.
>>
>> If you know the offender you should discuss it with him (or her) person
>> to person. Be diplomatic.
>>
>> Don't lecture to them, discuss it with them. You have noticed they are
>> doing something which interferes with good operating practices and also
>> mention that other listeners have noted the fact.
>>
>> If you cannot contact the person you can mention the offense on a
>> contesting or DX'ing forum such as this
>>
>> I find it is better to show them the way.
>>
>> Mike N2MS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Fading

[Don Kirk]

Hi Kris,

If you belong to the shared apex loop Yahoo Groups click on the file tab
and then look for my call sign.  You will see plots that I generated
looking at the front to back ratio versus elevation angle, and I think
these plots might help answer some of your questions.


Don (wd8dsb)

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Kris Mraz  wrote:

> I know that fading can be caused by phase rotation of the arriving signal.
> Can fading be caused by the signal changing arrival angle over time
> (1-3 seconds)?
> I ask this because of something I observed while attempting to tune my
> Shared Apex Loop (SAL)
> antenna the other night.
>
> In the forward direction I tuned in a strong, distant AM broadcast
> signal that was fairly steady
> strength-wise. It would vary less than an S unit as seen on my radio
> S-meter (FTdx5000). Then I
> switched to the reverse direction. From the SAL backside the signal
> experienced rapid fading
> from S0 to S8.
>
> Looking at the elevation pattern of the SAL (or just about any RX
> antenna design) it can be seen
> that the forward direction has a broad gain pattern around the 20
> degree arrival angle. In the reverse
> direction there is a deep steep null near that reverse angle. From
> this I assumed that the signal was
> changing arrival angle, moving into and out of that deep null. Is this
> the correct analysis?
>
>
> Kris N5KM
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Summer in the Northern Hemisphere

[Don Kirk]

Hi Gary,

As far as I can tell, it's all lightning related (regardless time of
year).  I suggest you look at one of the world wide real time lightning
maps on the Internet (if you don't already) and that might help answer your
question.  When I hear static crashes I know there must be a thunder storm
somewhere in or near the US (I often hear static crashes from as far away
as 1500 miles or more).  Everyday evening I look at the real time lightning
map of the US (http://thunderstorm.vaisala.com/explorer.html) to see how
bad the QRN will be on 160 meters and from what direction (regardless of
Summer or Winter).

Just my take on the situation.

Don (wd8dsb)

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Gary Smith  wrote:

> Something that has always puzzled me is summer operation on 160 in
> the northern hemisphere.
>
> Here in Connecticut 160 in the summer is so full of crashes that
> picking out any DX is next to impossible. But, during the winter the
> crashes are sometimes totally absent and the band is almost dead
> silent except for ham operation. However, summer here is winter in
> the southern hemisphere. I'll just use Argentina as the southern
> example.
>
> Quoting from Wikipedia on Argentina:
> "Argentina has four seasons: winter (June-August), spring
> (September-November), summer (December-February) and autumn
> (March-May), all featuring different weather conditions. The hottest
> and coldest temperature extremes recorded in South America have
> occurred in Argentina."
>
> So what is amazing to me is how difficult it is for me to hear
> southern hemisphere DX in Connecticut, in July, yet they are hearing
> our winter 160 contest signals, wonderfully in the middle of what is
> their summer. The two recent VP8 DXpedetions were in their local
> summer yet they were knocking NA & EU off one after another on top
> band.
>
> My HI-Z Rx is so very helpful on 160 (& other bands as well) but it
> sure doesn't let me hear SA DX in July. I'd like to have a clear
> picture of how it is that Southern Hemisphere 160M DX can hear so
> well in their summer when I'm deaf as a doorknob in mine.
>
> 73,
>
> Gary
> KA1J
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: VP8STI 160 Meter Path

[Don Kirk]

Larry said "propagation was interesting" and Tree said "W4ZV reported on
the topband chat page that the signal seemed to be coming in from the
North!" in regards to VP8STI last night.

At times I could hear VP8STI in the Midwest (Indianapolis Area), but just
barely, but while listening to them and watching my high definition SDR
based pan adapter I saw the band come alive (like someone turned on a
switch, but I probably missed when the switch was first turned on).  I then
dropped down in frequency (at 0530 UTC Jan 21st), and the band was very
hot, but with very deep and rapid fading.  I then worked UK0LL, UX1UA,
CX6VM, LY7M, SM4CAN, and DF1TL over a 1 hour time span (running 100 watts
into my 68 foot base loaded vertical).

CX6VM was easy copy during this entire 1 hour period of time which was kind
of curious since CX6VM is in the general direction of VP8STI from me, but I
never heard VP8STI much above my S6.2 noise level whereas CX6VM was often
peaking S8 to S9 (but with rapid and deep fade mentioned above).

I have never tried to correlate this phenomena before, but I felt it had to
be related to some kind of geomagnetic storm and I notice the Kp index
spiked early this morning (EST) which correlates well with the 0530 UTC
point mentioned above, and the Kp index was high enough to register as a
geomagnetic storm (as far as I understand it).  Kp index peaked at 6.

Just FYI from someone that really has never looked at the Kp index before
as it relates to this type of phenomena and pretty clueless what it all
means.

Don (wd8dsb)


On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Larry Burke  wrote:

> Propagation was interesting. It felt a bit like being on 6 meters. N5DG,
> who
> is only 80 miles NW of me, and I had been listening most of the evening. At
> best we were hearing peeps. Then at 0336z Ed not only starts hearing him
> well, but logs him. Still nothing here. It's a full 20 minutes later before
> I heard and worked him. He came out of nowhere. Signals improved
> considerably after we worked, built to about 569 and stayed that way for at
> least the next 30 minutes.
>
> Ed and I experienced the same situation on 75 meters -- only they built to
> true 5x9 there.
>
> Like Joel, I tinkered with various directions. But they definitely peaked
> SE
> for me. Never heard much, if anything, in other directions.
>
> Larry K5RK
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of MU
> 4CX250B
> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 7:42 AM
> To: w...@w5zn.org
> Cc: topband
> Subject: Re: Topband: VP8STI 160 Meter Path
>
> Not a peep from them all evening into New Mexico. Frustrating!
> Jim w8zr
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jan 21, 2016, at 5:54 AM, Joel Harrison  wrote:
> >
> > Tonight on 160 VP8STI had a good signal. Here in Arkansas their signal
> > arrived from the NE from around 0115z until around 0200z peaking
> > around 5 dB above my noise floor. Around 0200z they went "QRX" for a few
> minutes.
> > When they returned their sig was much weaker and finally faded.
> >
> > As the evening went on their sig returned around 0330z here and was in
> > and out of the noise, still peaking to the NE and somethings shifting E
> to
> SE.
> > Right About a half hour before their SR the signal peaked to the SE
> > and remained their until they faded into the sunrise.
> >
> > Best signal level here was 10 dB above my noise floor.
> >
> > Just wanted to pass that on for the folks (K9LA, W4ZV, etc) that keep
> > track of these paths for us.
> >
> > 73 Joel W5ZN
> >
> >
> > www.w5zn.org
> >
> > _
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: K5P 1/25/16 on 160 meters

[Don Kirk]

Hi Lou and gang,

Lou thanks for the link to your K5P recording, and below is a link to a
youtube video I made on Jan 16 while copying K5P on 160 meters that also
includes comparison of my approximate half size pennant versus my 68 foot
base loaded TX vertical for copying K5P (with noise floor set equal on them
so you can instantly see the improvement in signal to noise ratio when
using the pennant).

I was copying K5P just fine around 09:45 UTC today (6 dB above my noise
floor), but they could not hear my 100 watt station (they kept on calling
CQ with numerous stations calling them but it was apparent they were not
hearing a majority of them).  Normally if a Dxpedition is 6 dB above my
noise floor I don't have a problem working them running 100 watts, but that
has not been the case with K5P (probably partly due to the big pile ups,
but that was not the case this morning).

Unfortunately I leave the house at 1100 UTC for work, so I always miss
happy hour (sunrise enhancement).

Youtube Link to wd8dsb recording of K5P:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbyXcyatsYs

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Louis Parascondola via Topband <
topband@contesting.com> wrote:

> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Lou+w1qj
>
>
> Enjoy, Lou W1QJ
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: K5P

[Don Kirk]

K5P was very strong on 160 meters this morning around 0830 UTC and QRN was
very low (no static crashes due to the lack of thunder storms in the US),
and I finally got into their log running my 100 watts and 68 foot base
loaded vertical.  I uploaded another recording of them calling CQ this
morning to document just how solid they really were on 160 meters, and here
is a link to the video for those interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDUK4CsJb9g=youtu.be

Looking at my pan adapter there were numerous stations calling K5P during
this recording which K5P apparently did not hear.

Thanks to the entire K5P crew, and based on clublog it looks like I owe
K9CT a big hug (shows him as the operator I worked).

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Mike Waters  wrote:

> I heard K5P and a JA a little over an hour ago (but didn't try and work
> them). Nice signals, both of them, on 580' Beverages SW and NW.
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Stan Stockton  wrote:
>
> > Conditions must be pretty good right now.  I just worked them using an
> > inverted L with no radials, 20 over line noise (in SSB filter position)
> and
> > 100w.
> >
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: What have I done?

[Don Kirk]

Hi Carl,

Does not appear anyone has answered you, so let me give it a quick shot
while between flights in Japan.  I'm somewhat confused with your final L
network configuration because you mentioned one capacitor, and then a
second capacitor without mentioning if you still had the first capacitor in
your configuration, etc.  You also did not mention what L network
configuration you used (see below).

Therefore I started from scratch to see what a 64 foot vertical wire would
look like at 7.050 Mhz to see what kind of L network would be required to
convert its impedance to a pure 50 ohms resistance.

Using EZNEC demo, I approximate a 64 foot vertical wire on 7.050 Mhz has an
input impedance of approximately 1274 +j1436 ohms when just using a ground
rod with medium soil (because this antenna has such a high input impedance
it really does not matter what I use for ground conductivity).

Then using an online L network calculator I come up with the following two
different L network configurations you could use to match to a 50 ohm
resistive source.

*L network with inductor between bottom of 64 foot vertical and ground.*
L = 10.18 uh
C = 59.9 pf

*L network with capacitor between bottom of 64 foot vertical and ground.*
L = 8.5 uh
C = 67.6 pf

Not sure what L network configuration you used, but does it sound like I
closely replicated what you have based upon one of the above mentioned L
network configurations?  If not, then please better describe your
configuration.

Please advise so we can better answer your question, and hopefully I have
not messed something up with my quick analysis/approximation.

Don (wd8dsb)




On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Carl Braun 
wrote:

> I have revised my question to correct the length of the antenna in question
>
>
> Topbanders
>
> In the past, I've posted some questions related to making my 80 meter
> verticals (64' tall ground mounted) work on different bands.  The pair is
> spaced at ¼ wl on 80m and then I switch in base loading to resonate the
> same pair on 160m which are then effectively spaced at 1/8 wl.   Now I want
> to make them work on 40m which would have them resonate as ½ or 5/8 wl and
> would have an effective spacing at ½ wl.
>
> So this is what I did...I installed an L network off of the vertical
> effectively tuning a 64' stick of aluminum to 7.050.  It took me a couple
> of tries as the first 1500pF (monster) variable capacitor wouldn't get down
> low enough to get me flat.  I had another 50-150pF Johnson variable cap
> available so I tried that and got the antenna to tune to 46 ohms at j+0.
> Inside the shack I see 1.0:1 Vswr from 7.000 to 7.290...wow!
>
> I measured the cap and it came to 70pf.  My cheapie Chinese meter doesn't
> register anything on the L scale but I have 7 turns on a 3 ½" inductor. The
> full coil is 33 uH at 25 turns so I estimate 8-12 uH of inductance.
>
> But what have I done? Have I resonated a ½ wl antenna or have I resonated
> something else like a 5/8 wl antenna with the added inductance?
>
> I plan on treating them as ½ wl spaced phased verticals on 40 and feeding
> them with equal lengths of ¾ wl feedlines for broadside phasing and then
> adding an additional 2/4 wl to get my 180 degree shift for end fire.
>
> Please share your comments.
>
> thanks
>
> Carl de AG6X
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: UN-REAL AND THE REAL WORLD 2016 FOR HAM RADIO

[Don Kirk]

Hi JC,

Very good webinar presentation (I watched the recorded version this past
weekend), and I always enjoy hearing what you have done, and your on the
air results are always very impressive.

I would like to comment about the statement you just made regarding "metal
box, not aluminum that allows magnetic field through".

Aluminum can't block a static magnetic field, but when we are talking about
RF the magnetic field is not static (it's amplitude is time varying).
Because it's amplitude is time varying, aluminum or any other metal can
provide an effective shield based on the skin effect principal (you just
have to factor in the resistivity of the material and operating frequency
to determine how thick the material must be to become an effective shield).

Aluminum and copper actually have resistivity values close to each other
compared with stainless steel which has much higher resistivity.  Therefore
for a given thickness, aluminum and copper are much better shields than
stainless steel (as an example).

*Resistivity Values*
Copper: 1.7 uohm-cm
Aluminum: 2.7 uohm-cm
304 Stainless: 72 uohm-cm

Just FYI,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 5:43 AM, JC  wrote:

> Hi Folks
>
>
>
> I have been working to improve my RX systems for several years. I ‘ve got
> good results using good practice on grounding  shielding and detuning my TX
> antennas.
>
>
>
> I heard this several times from different hams, I need to update my system
> to the REAL WORLD, my station is close to perfection ..  Well let me tell
> what is happening when I am installing WF. I am personally involve on the
> first 50 WF TOP-BEAM installations to make sure this thing about REAL WORLD
> is part of my RX system.
>
>
>
> With permission from PT9ZE let me explain what I found there . Zé Alfredo
> lives in a farm, not any rural location. The farm is near Brazil Bolivia
> and
> Paraguay border, the first city I hundreds of miles away.
>
>
>
> Would you imagine a quieter place to install a HAM radio Station?
>
>
>
> PT9ZE has an impressive station, 3 towers 120 ft. self-standing  500ft
> apart
> , 1st 3 elements YAGI on 80m + 15m, 2nd 4 elements full size for 40m +15m
> ,
> both 70 ft. boom, 3rd  long 10m +6m.
>
>
>
> We installed the WF on the tower #2 below the 10 m 7 elements. UNREAL
> right!!
>
>
>
> PT9ZE noise was very REAL due these REAL things.
>
>
>
> 1-  LG top line refrigerator, It uses a VFD motor and scream RF like
> crazy.
>
> 2-  Siemens AC center unit. The noise sounds like  10 cw spark station
> in contest.
>
> 3-  WiFi router
>
> 4-  LED lamps
>
> 5-  UPS
>
> 6-  Cable/Satellite  TV box.
>
> 7-  Wall power supply for cellphone, computer and wireless telephone
> extension.
>
>
>
> And the list of noise devices we found goes on and on..
>
>
>
> The station have an extensive ground system, all cables buried. Just
> perfect. It was necessary to choke all those devices , I mean heavily choke
> all wires in and out the devices.
>
>
>
> Well …..welcome to REAL word, the ham radio practices from the last
> century,
> unfortunately few years ago are no  longer enough or apply for REAL WROLD.
>
>
>
> The REAL WORLD we live today brought the noise inside our homes. We need to
> adapt fast if we want to keep enjoying radio.
>
>
>
> Things I presented on the Webnair unfortunately is very real, grounding,
> shielding using metal box, not aluminum that allows magnetic field through
> .
> Run RX lines for receiving antenna inside metal conduit to avoid common
> mode
> noise from inside and outside your hone.
>
>
>
> One single connector with bad contact between coaxial braid and the PL259
> was enough to allow s4 of noise into the receiver and this was after the
> preamplifier.
>
>
>
> I think the real world is here to stay and we need to review our best
> practice for low band stations.
>
>
>
> A SWL AM/SSB portable radio to sniff the new source of noise is a very
> important tool for the Real World.
>
>
>
>
>
> 73’s
>
> JC
>
> N4IS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Comments on High Performance RX Antennas for a Small Lot (Webinar)

[Don Kirk]

Hi Rick,

I would also think that peak radiation angle of the RX antenna versus the
arrival angle of the desired signal is also a big variable that would not
allow the relationship you heard on the webinar to be true under all
conditions.  As you said it probably is too much of a generalized
statement, and needs some very specific conditions to be true.

I know with my RX antennas the improvement in signal to noise compared with
my TX vertical is very dependent on arrival angle (as an example).

P.S I did not hear the webinar.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Friday, March 4, 2016, Richard (Rick) Karlquist > wrote:

> In this webinar, it was asserted (without explanation) that
> for every 1 dB increase in RDF, you get 1.5 to 2.0 dB
> improvement in S/N ratio.  I've never heard that before
> and don't even see how it makes sense.  Actually, I don't
> even know how you can make generalizations like that
> unless you are describing a theoretical QTH with uniform
> isotropic noise.  I'd like to believe this is true.
> Can someone educate me as to why I should believe this?
>
> Rick N6RK
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: BCB High Pass Filter

[Don Kirk]

Hi Roger,

Pretty easy to build your own hi pass RX filter, and here is a link to a
simple website I created that documents one of my builds which might give
you some ideas (I use a dremel tool to quickly create the circuit board).

http://sites.google.com/site/lwmwbandrejectfilter/

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Roger White 
wrote:

> Anyone have a BCB High Pass Filter that they would recommend? Seems like
> there were a number of sources for these a number of years ago, but Google
> only came up with a few now.
>
> Roger White W5RDW
> Murphy, TX
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Receive loop observations

[Don Kirk]

Hi Herb (KV4FZ),

You said "but the 50 turns is going to be a chore"

The only problem I find with winding a core with many turns is keeping
track of the number of turns.  What I do to solve the counting problem is
that I take a zoomed in picture showing all the windings (using my smart
phone camera, or one of my dedicated digital cameras), and this allows me
to easily count how many turns are really on the core (versus what I
thought I counted as I wound the core).

Take the picture so the core fills up almost the entire camera screen, then
when you view the picture you can zoom in even more (as needed) as you move
around the core counting turns.  I then add or remove turns as necessary
for the desired number of turns.  50 turns are easy to count using this
method.  I just counted 103 turns on a T68-6 core using this method (wire
size 30 awg = 0.010" diameter), and it took less than 2 minutes to count.

I now often watch TV while winding cores since real time counting is no
longer a critical task.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Receive loop observations

[Don Kirk]

Hi Jim,

I know my following info does not directly answer your question, but I do
think it's important regarding feedline isolation.

I suggest you take a look at the recommendations of N6RK regarding the use
of a matching transformer to feed tuned shielded loops as it isolates the
feedline from the antenna (shield of coax not tied directly to the loop).
I use the N6RK matching transformer method on my loops of similar design
and think it makes the most sense regarding feedline isolation, and
maintaining proper balance of the antenna.

Here is a link to his paper, and his matching transformer is shown on page
30 and 33 of his paper.
http://www.n6rk.com/loopantennas/pacificon.pdf

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 3:04 PM, James Rodenkirch 
wrote:

> I have installed a receive loop (  http://www.qsl.net/kc2tx/  ) and
> finished measuring and observing...
>
>
> Measurements:
>
>
> VSWR --- 1.7 @ 1.830
>
> ZO - 77 at 1.830
>
>
> Observation:
>
>
> Following ON4UN's comments regarding needing a preamp or not, measured S1
> to 2 noise level with antenna connected during mid-day, S0 with dummy load
> connected.
>
>
> During evening hours, notice some improvement - S2 drop in noise level
> when switching from xmt antenna (inverted U) to the loop - but not hearing
> much in the way of receive signals (e.g., hear a fairly strong signal from
> the west coast on the xmt antenna, nothing on the loop and I have it
> oriented east/west).
>
>
> I'm uncertain if a low noise amp will help my cause (thoughts??)
>
>
> I do not have a common mode choke installed, yet...will one make that much
> difference?
>
>
> The loop is located about 60' away from the Inverted U and radials.
>
>
> Comments/suggestions appreciated.
>
>
>
> Thank you, in advance, for constructive, relative to what I have now,
> repliesnon-"constructive" means I can't erect a BOG, Beveridge or
> Waller Flag so don't ask why I didn't go that route.
>
>
> 71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Hi Gain Preamps, Noise Figure Comparison (KD9SV 994 x5, W1FB, W7IUV preamps)

[Don Kirk]

Hi JC,

I did not publish any absolute Noise Figure values, my measurements that I
published are all just differences in Noise Figure.

It actually is much easier to measure the difference in Noise Figure
between preamps that have such high gain (approximately 40dB in this case)
since the noise floor generated by a 50 ohm resistor at room temperature is
easily measurable (at least indirectly) after 40 dB of gain (It's -106.89
dBm for a 40 dB preamp using a bandwidth of 500 hertz if the preamp adds no
additional noise).  Even if you can't accurately measure -106.89 dBm level
signals, you just need to be able to be repeatable in your measurements
between preamps (accuracy and repeatability are not the same thing), and
your system must be able to detect differences in output signal from the
preamp in units of dB (easy to do with an SDR receiver at these levels
using attenuators to verify changes in dB on the SDR display).  In my case
all of my measurements were made with my Kenwood TS-180s operating on 160
meters, and then making measurements via the wideband IF output port of the
Kenwood TS-180s that's connected to an SDR receiver (the HDSDR software
also allowed me to do long term averaging, and it even allows you to
display power spectrum density).

My second method of measurement used the S meter on my TS-180s, but just as
an indicator (actually digitized the voltage supplied to the S meter).  I
recorded the signal strength on the S meter that the preamp generated when
the preamp input was terminated with the 50 ohm resistor, then I went back
and adjusted my signal generator connected directly to my TS-180s via
attenuators until it provided the same S meter reading.  Using the signal
generator and precision attenuators I was able to calculate the voltage
(and therefore power) into the TS-180s that the S meter recorded when
driven by the preamp.  I used this technique to compare Noise Figure
between preamps, and I made numerous measurements over a 6 day period and
then averaged the data to reduce my variation using this method.

I did in fact test the use of #31 mix cores (10 to 14 turns) on various
lines (power supply lines, 3 foot short feedline between preamp and
receiver input, etc. and saw no difference in signal levels.  I even
eliminated the Kenwood power supply, and fed the TS-180s with a lab grade
linear power supply to eliminate slight changes in supply voltage over time.

P.S. the Kenwood TS-180s is one of the better radios made in regards to
noise floor (measured -139 dBm by Sherwood).

It would certainly be much easier to make these measurements using a
spectrum analyzer, and I probably will acquire one of the lower cost Rigol
spectrum analyzers in the near future.  In the meantime I would love to
have someone independently make measurements comparing these amplifiers
that either supports or disproves my measured values.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)


On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 7:24 PM, JC  wrote:

> Hi Don
>
> Measuring noise figure below 1 db is a very complicated work.
>
> First you need to remove all common mode noise, your noise floor should be
> better than  -135 dBm at least with a 40 db preamp connected to the radio
> input and a 50 ohms load.
>
> You need chokes everywhere and most important shield on 12V, RF in and RF
> out. Check the AM band you hear carrier coming in , noise is also coming
> in.
>
>  Second the NF is very different on 1.8 MHz , measurement near 10 Mhz, does
> not tell you the right NF on low bands.
>
> In order to have Noise Figure Uncertainty near .2db it is necessary a good
> quality lab equipment, calibrated and two hours per measurement for each NF
> reading. This assuming the temperature does no change during the test.
>
>
> Your Noise Figure Uncertainty based on your video could be 5db or more.
>
>
> 73's
> JC
>
> N4IS
>
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Hi Gain Preamps, Noise Figure Comparison (KD9SV 994 x5, W1FB, W7IUV preamps)

[Don Kirk]

Gary (KD9SV) kindly loaned me one of his 994 x5 preamps (sometimes called
KD9SV VLN (very low noise) preamp) so I could compare its Noise Figure
against one of my W1FB preamps as well as 2 of my W7IUV preamps in series
on 160 meters.

Here is a link to a youtube video I created that demonstrates the
differences in Noise Figure between the above mentioned preamps.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpIiF1Hfovw

The KD9SV 994 x5 preamp did in fact come out on top (best Noise Figure) and
it's a commercially available preamp, whereas my W1FB and W7IUV preamps are
home built.  Nevertheless in my current application (pennants that are
51.6% the size of full size pennants) the W1FB and W7IUV preamp Noise
Figures are adequate and I didn't notice improvement in my signal to noise
ratio on 160 meters when using the KD9SV preamp.  The lower Noise Figure of
the KD9SV would allow me to use even smaller pennant receive antennas that
would have more negative gain without harming my signal to noise ratio.

I ran into a couple of interesting issues when working on this project.
The biggest surprise was that the input impedance of my old HF rig (Kenwood
TS-180s) was no where near 50 ohms on 160 meters (it actually measured 189
ohms).  I added a transformer to the input of the Kenwood TS-180s to bring
it closer to 50 ohms for my testing.

Also as previously reported by Hardy (N7RT) a long time ago, the W1FB
output transformer turns ratio is incorrect for a 50 ohm match, and I
measured the output impedance of the W1FB preamp at 429 ohms.  I
subsequently added a transformer to the output to bring it closer to 50
ohms for my testing.

*Noise Figure Comparison (average of two different measurement methods)*
W1FB preamp: Noise Figure 3.3 dB higher than KD9SV 994 x5 preamp
Two W7IUV preamps in series: Noise Figure 1.1 dB higher than KD9SV 994 x5
preamp

Note 1: my W1FB preamp is not stock, as I made modifications to protect the
MC1350 IC from damage when transmitting.
Note 2: The KD9SV 994 x5 preamp was set at its maximum gain (41 dB) for all
of my tests.

*Summary*
While I suspect (through my measurements) that the KD9SV preamp absolute
Noise Figure value is not the very low 0.7 dB value listed on a commercial
website, it's indeed a very nice adjustable high gain preamp offering a
maximum gain of 41 dB and it has the best (lowest) Noise Figure when
compared with my other two types of preamps.  I highly recommend the KD9SV
994 x5 preamp if you're in need of a high gain preamp on 160 meters.

73,
Don Kirk (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Plasma TV noise

[Don Kirk]

Joe N3HEE said "My K9AY rx loop does a pretty good job of knocking that
down enough that I can deal with it."

Likewise my pennant antennas do a great job knocking it down as long as the
plasma TV is located off the backside of the pennant.

Some folks have some success using a noise canceller like the MFJ-1026,
DXE-NCC-1 (there is now a DXE-NCC-2 available), etc.

73,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Joe Galicic  wrote:

> Hi Bill. Nothing you can do about it as far as filtering. I've tried W3NQN
> power line filters with no luck. I finally replaced our plasma tv with a
> LED tv. Cost me $1200 to do that but was worth it. My neighbor still has a
> plasma tv that they use occasionally. My K9AY rx loop does a pretty good
> job of knocking that down enough that I can deal with it. -Joe N3HEE
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "William Hill" 
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 6:59:16 AM
> Subject: Topband: Plasma TV noise
>
> Hello: Has anyone successfully solved this problem? 73,
>
> Bill/W3WH
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Plasma TV noise

[Don Kirk]

Hi Bill,

Appears to be a pretty unsolvable problem.  I had succes with one by
installing a K9YC type choke on power line cord but this one case was
unusual as the TV generated RFI regardless if the TV was actually turned on
or not (this case is documented on YouTube).

 Have not been able to put a dent in any other cases and one theory is that
the screen directly radiates RFI versus feeding back down the power cord to
the house wiring.  The RFI from the screen may then get induced back into
the house wiring, but not necessarily a direct path from the TVs power cord
to the house wiring.  I'm starting to think this theory is true.

Don WD8DSB

On Friday, November 18, 2016, William Hill  wrote:

> Hello: Has anyone successfully solved this problem? 73,
>
> Bill/W3WH
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 1809.2 kHz constant dashes

[Don Kirk]

Thanks Russ,

With your heading, we are starting to narrow in on a East South East
direction from Columbus Ohio (heading 106 degrees from Columbus Ohio at a
distance of approximately 77 miles).

If someone is in that general area it would be nice to know if they hear
the signal during the middle of the day.

Suspect location subject to change as more data is received.

Thanks,
Don

On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Russ Tobolic via Topband <
topband@contesting.com> wrote:

> I'm hearing it here near Grand Rapids, MI at 1336Z peaking on my SE K9AY
> loop around S2-S3..
> Russ, N3CO
>
>   From: Don Kirk <wd8...@gmail.com>
>  To: JP Zaimes <j...@verizon.net>
> Cc: topband <topband@contesting.com>
>  Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 7:13 AM
>  Subject: Re: Topband: 1809.2 kHz constant dashes
>
> Thanks to everyone that has sent in directional headings so far.
>
> Jon (AA1K) and I are in almost perfect agreement regarding the direction of
> the signal from each of our locations, and using reports I received from
> others I would estimate the signal is coming from Ohio, SW Pennsylvania, NW
> West Virginia, or Eastern Indiana.
>
> Thanks so far to K3UL, AA1K, W5ZN, K1FZ, and K2XT.
>
> The signal was getting very strong when I left for work at 6am EST (peaking
> solid S9).
>
> Someone will probably figure out their mistake before we track it down.
>
> Don (wd8dsb)
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Jon Zaimes <j...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > Hearing it at 1157z. Peaks on 280-degree Beverage from central Delaware.
> S5
> > on my K3 meter.
> >
> > 73/Jon AA1K
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Don
> > Kirk
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 5:30 AM
> > To: topband <topband@contesting.com>
> > Subject: Re: Topband: 1809.2 kHz constant dashes
> >
> > Update.
> >
> > Still hearing it at 1026 UTC.  Heading approximately 90 to 100 degrees
> from
> > Fishers Indiana.
> >
> > Don (wd8dsb)
> >
> > On Tuesday, December 6, 2016, Don Kirk <wd8...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm hearing what sounds like a stuck Key sending dashes (rate
> > > approximately
> > > 20 dashes sent in 10 seconds).  Does not appear to be a local signal
> > > and heading approximately 90 degrees from Fishers Indiana (which is
> > > near Indianapolis).
> > >
> > > Hard to get super accurate heading right now due to Thunder Storms in
> > > Southern US, but definitely close to 90 degrees from me.
> > >
> > > Anyone else hearing and please provide heading from your location.
> > >
> > > At 0600 UTC it is peaking about S7.
> > >
> > > Don (WD8DSB)
> > > _
> > > 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
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband