From: Jorge Diez - CX6VM [mailto:cx6vm.jo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 8:50 AM
To: Edward Sawyer
Cc: GEORGE WALLNER; TopBand List
Subject: Re: Topband: AM interference on 1840
Ed
FT8 can move, but 1840 still is useless to do CW, so is not a FT8 problem
George said the two
: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:50 AM
To: Edward Sawyer; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: AM interference on 1840
There are two messages in this topic: One is the interference from this
particular BC station. Not a crisis, not yet. Two is a warning: Newly installed
solid-state AM
While the harmonic interference is unacceptable and needs to be dealt with,
isn't this only "a crisis" because of the simplistic FT8 solution of
bunching everyone up on a small channel? It reminds me of the old CB days
when something would happen on a certain channel but no one would move
because
There continues to be a trend for DXpeditions to be "active on 160M" by
firing up FT8. Sadly, in some cases, recently XT2 and 5T5, there appears to
be no attempt to be on 160M except for FT8. A far different scenario that
utilizing it because of bad band conditions. I worked 5T5 on 20, 40, 80M
I see a general lack of CW activity other than contests and DXpeditions
actually. Not just on top band. Add to that the virtually non-existent SSB
DX activity on top band, and there you have it. Quite a bit of the FT-8
activity looks to me to be non-CW ops who don't have the desire or
They were quite readable here at my sunset yesterday - about 2215Z on 80M CW
but were working EU. Best signal was Long Path from the SE. This morning,
I had no copy on them at all on 160M but could hear what seemed like a
pretty small pile of W5,6,7,0s calling. Usually the sunrise path from
...@optonline.net [mailto:jayb1...@optonline.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 2:35 PM
To: Edward Sawyer; 'Herbert Schoenbohm'
Cc: 'TopBand List'
Subject: Re: Topband: JA's came in droves today on 160
Ed – the “IP address” and the internet have nothing to do with the FT8 mode
other than that’s how you
ultimately – its
computer to computer, the IP address should get the DXCC award no?
Ed N1UR
From: Herbert Schoenbohm [mailto:herbert.schoenb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 2:02 PM
To: Edward Sawyer
Cc: TopBand List
Subject: Re: Topband: JA's came in droves today on 160
Such is the new trend. No offense to KV4FZ whatsoever but if you provide
the easy path.most will take it. The only way to affect the "easy way out"
is to not provide it.
I remember year's ago doing CQ WW CW ABLP as C6ARS in 2001. I ended the
contest on 15M running a couple of hundred JAs.
I am not sure where you are getting your information that cutting the losses
in your 160 vertical from 60 - 37 Ohms will have no difference in
performance - technically or noticeably but its not correct.
Reducing ground losses is THE ISSUE on 160M. Calling a 1.2:1 SWR great and
not realizing
Steve, From here in Vermont, the Long Path has been the only 2 Qs ever had
to VK6 on 160M. Once with 200W in 2008 and once last year with 1.5kW.
Thanks for your efforts in this. Much appreciated.
73
Ed N1UR
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband -
In my case, I don't really get going on 160M until the beginning of
November. My October is usually getting ready for CQ WW SSB and then Nov -
Feb is basically CW season for me which includes getting on 160M DXing.
I respect VY2ZM's comments on FT8 but you will never find me stooping to
that
I usually use the complex impedance as my guide here. What is the resistive
component vs the model? If the SWR is flat it is often because the
resistive ( R ) portion is too high and dominating the frequency dependence
of the X portion. Adding radials can improve that as well as the loss of
the
As a point of reference - I have 4 terminated beverages from 200 - 350m long
(also 2 unterminated bererages). I use them on 40 - 160M. I typically see
10 - 25dB of front to back on these beverages. On 40M and 80M, while
contesting, if I am not careful to first listen on the transmit antenna
14 matches
Mail list logo
