Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min

There appear to be different propagation patterns during various sunspot cycles. From my article in CQ Magazine June 1980: http://www.k3bu.us/propagation.htm It is known that with increased sunspot activity the thickness of the atmosphere increases. (This caused Skylab to come down

Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min

I've only been active on Topband since 1987 but nothing has beat the 2008 and 2009 seasons when NA topbanders were easily working Zones 17, 18, and 19 both morning and night. I remember commenting to some of the newer guys (who had been thinking it was always like that) telling them it was a

Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min

JC, My expectation is the same as yours, cycle 25 should be better than 24 for the low bands. The basis for my expectation is I am putting up better 160M antennas this summer and I am an optimist :-) Bob K6UJ On 6/5/16 6:41 PM, JC wrote: "I assumed that this was normal propagation for

Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min

Carl and John, your comments about the last cycle bottom not being as good as the previous cycle bottoms were very interesting. I missed the previous cycles you mentioned. My activity started here in Oct 2008 and the first two or three seasons seemed fantastic compared to later years. I am

Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min

"I assumed that this was normal propagation for 160 but I have never observed anything consistently as good as it was in the 1980's. Anyone else found this to be true? What was different about the solar minimum in that decade?" John. I was in Brazil that time and I remember working several US

Topband: Maunder Minimum

> Here are just two references http://www.livescience.com/51597-maunder-minimum-mini-ice-age.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/entries/6d50a6bd-779a-32d6-bfca-06e4484d6835 Craig K1QX _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min

(Note: disregard my earlier incomplete post) Carl K9LA: " But in my opinion (and in the opinion of others) the deep and long solar minimum between Cycles 23 and 24 (2006-2010) didn't live up to this axiom compared to the not-so-deep and not-so-long solar minimum between Cycles 22 and 23

Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min

> As for low band propagation being better at solar min, I grew up believing in this axiom. But in my opinion (and in the opinion of others) the deep and long solar minimum between Cycles 23 and 24 (2006-2010) didn't live up to this axiom compared to the not-so-deep and not-so-long solar minimum

Re: Topband: Maunder References

I agree with you. Most of the evidence for the "little ice age" points to increased volcanic activity. On the other hand no one can say with metaphysical certitude that the MM didn't cause it either. The Mini-Ice age happened in the last half of the MM. How much climatic inertia is there? 70

Re: Topband: Maunder References

Another link referencing the Zharkova model results: http://www.vofoundation.org/blog/new-dual-dynamo-solar-model-predicts-maunder-minimum-for-cycle-26/ This one mostly steers clear of the climate predictions and focuses on the sunspots or lack thereof. A lot of the articles about this

Re: Topband: Maunder References

I would note that some of that material got scalding negatives in commentary, bemoaning nonexistent references to data, etc, one commentor calling an article a "puff" piece. Stuff from CERN is one thing. Some of the other, well, I could write stuff using my ear wax and put it out there. We need

Re: Topband: VANISHING SUNSPOTS (http://spaceweather.com/)

It turns out that there have been two cycles back to back with what we would consider bad numbers. They started in 1800 and it lasted three cycles. It's called the Dalton minimum. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalton_Minimum On 6/5/2016 2:50 PM, Kevin Stover wrote: If I read the reference

Re: Topband: VANISHING SUNSPOTS (http://spaceweather.com/)

I did a general Google search on the Maunder minimum and clicked on the Wikipedia page describing the phenomena. Looking at some of the references for that article leads me to believe what I do. if cycle 25 turns out to be as bad, or as predicted, worse than cycle 24, then I think that strongly

Topband: Maunder References

Here's a couple of references I found stored on my tablet https://nextgrandminimum.wordpress.com/ http://notrickszone.com/2013/11/11/german-scientists-solar-cycle-24-points-to-dalton-or-maunder-like-minimum-boding-ill-for-a-climate-cooling/

Re: Topband: Maunder Minimums

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html > Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:15:41 +0100 > From: g4...@ronaunwin.plus.com > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Topband: Maunder Minimums > > Hi Frank, > >

Topband: Maunder Minimums

Hi Frank,  It was general info that has been circulating in the UK newspapers, and some additional comments that I picked up from an online newpaper sometime back. As you know the Brits are fascinated by the weather :) and the idea that a comming Maunder Minimum may cause the Thames to freeze

Re: Topband: Sunspots & Maunder Minimum

Hi Paul, Please share with us the growing evidence that the next Sunspot Minimum may well herald the start of a Maunder Minimum. Thanks 73 Frank W3LPL - Original Message - From: "g4hds" To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2016

Topband: Sunspots & Maunder Minimum

It's interesting that there's now seeming growing evidence that the next Sunspot Minimum may well herald the start of a Maunder Minimum From what I've read and understand the 11 year cycle effectively rides on yet another and somewhat longer cycle. As both now begin to combine on the downward

Topband: VANISHING SUNSPOTS

Thanks  Bill,   I like it when the minor flares come along and give us those enhanced openings.   73 Bruce-K1FZ http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/flag_antennas.html   On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 08:47:12 -0400, Bill Tippett wrote: Something interesting is happening on the sun. Yesterday, June 3rd, the

Re: Topband: VANISHING SUNSPOTS (http://spaceweather.com/)

> On Jun 5, 2016, at 11:40 53AM, Kevin Stover > wrote: > > I think Cycle 24 will be looked at as the beginning of a new Maunder Minimum. > If so then Cycle 24 will be as good as it gets for the next 70 years on the > high bands. That’s not all bad. It gives me

Re: Topband: VANISHING SUNSPOTS (http://spaceweather.com/)

Thanks Bill. I think Cycle 24 will be looked at as the beginning of a new Maunder Minimum. If so then Cycle 24 will be as good as it gets for the next 70 years on the high bands. On 6/5/2016 10:05 AM, Jeff Kinzli N6GQ wrote: Bill, good reads, thank you. It seems that the consensus is that

Re: Topband: VANISHING SUNSPOTS (http://spaceweather.com/)

Bill, good reads, thank you. It seems that the consensus is that cycle 25 will be less active than cycle 24, with some projections putting it at the lowest in many cycles. I think the theory is that the speed of the conveyor belt is an indicator the vigor of the coming cycle. Do we have any

Topband: VANISHING SUNSPOTS (http://spaceweather.com/)

Something interesting is happening on the sun. Yesterday, June 3rd, the sunspot number dropped to 0, and the solar disk is still blank on June 5th. Latest images from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory reveal no significant dark cores. What does this mean? The solar cycle is like a pendulum,