Re: Topband: 160
Semi-Interesting post, but not really applicable to the issue at hand. >> To me, the guys who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until the computer era I have 4 patents in software engineering.I've been doing software since about 1978 when I worked as a research assistant in my undergrad years. I'd be delighted to put my experience in software engineering and computers next to yours or anyone else's on this list, but I'm pretty sure it's quite beyond the button-monkey level of knowledge required to use FT-8. >> Hank Aaron didn't devalue Babe Ruth. No he didn't, but I suspect he tried VERY hard to beat his record. Both Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron used a bat, ball, and gloves.That was a pretty level playing field. Perhaps one day we'll have robot ball players mixed in with humans.Do yo think that will fly?Of course, closer to home, we're now seeing where transgender issues are effecting competitive sports. Competition needs to be equal, and there's nothing to prevent different levels of competition, but equality and fairness must exist within the same level. As I mentioned in a related post while I was /HH6 in May, my FT-8 oriented friend initiated an FT-8 sequence, went to the bathroom, and after coming out pointed out he made a QSO while in the bathroom. He specifically did that to show me it could be done. And FT-8 people want respect for that?Sorry Charlie, not from me. Mark K3MSB On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:36 AM wrote: > > "The dogs bark, but the caravan rolls on" -ancient proverb > > As I understand it, some of this discussion is based on the romantic idea > that we old timers had it tough but today it's all easy and without real > challenge. This charge is nothing new, so a little history might be in > order. The history of Ham Radio since the advent of the home computer has > been the gradual replacement of operator intervention with computer > initiatives in our operating activities. Let's look at some. > > FT8: > Is ultimately just another digital mode, the only real difference is that > more of the automation is built in from the start. But, in principal, any > of the digital modes (indeed any mode at all) can be made as automated as > one desires these days. For those under 45 (hi hi), to operate RTTY back in > the day required a thing called a Terminal Unit to translate the mark/space > signals to voltage levels to feed a Teletype machine (which was basically a > big, noisy, heavy duty typewriter). But that hasn't been the reality for > RTTY for a long time. RTTY is now as easy as downloading a program, only > marginally more difficult than operating FT8. After all, the packet cluster > can give you the who and where and the program tunes your radio to the > proper frequency. You press "send" until you get a reply (if you are > working a rare DX counter operating split there can be some more to it) and > the computer logs it after you make the contact and can even send the > logging in to LOTW for credit. > > DXing: > Originally required hours and hours in front of the radio, tuning and > looking for the DX. Now there were things like DX nets, and > newsletters/bulletins and the like to help a bit and DXpeditions were > publicised in magazines and word of mouth. But with the advent of the > computer and packet radio, all that changed. Decades ago, a friend of mine > developed a computer program to track your DX totals and generate mailing > labels for the QSL's. He interfaced that with the Packet and when a new > coun... err... entity came on the air, his computer would send "DX" (in CW, > of course) and he could walk back to the shack, work the counter and go > back to the ball game. Quite a culture shock for the guys still tuning > around on their National HRO's. Now the DX cluster is an entrenched reality > along with Skimmer etc. No sitting in front of the rig necessary. And > QSLing in the day was a royal PITA, now you just print out the labels and > download the LOTW credits. > > Contesting: > There is a film (now video, produced by a NFL films dude!) from decades > ago on YouTube that shows the DX contest from the perspective of a bunch of > the Frankford Radio Club participants. Again, if you are not over 45 it may > be a bit of a mystery what's going on. There is no Packet cluster, so DX > callouts happened on 2m FM! And you will see lots of paper. They are Log > Sheets (where you wrote down your contacts) and Cross Check sheets (where > you kept track of you contacts by listing them alphabetically so you > wouldn't work too many duplicate contacts). After the contest, you would > have to "redupe" your log to try and catch dupes that got past in the heat > of battle, this would take a week or
Re: Topband: FT8 on 160 - how you can make a difference
Jerry You said " Yes DX last year on 160 CW was pretty scarce" and other have made a similar comment. Are you referring to new ones, or just DX in general?I worked 16 new ones on CW last season and understand that "scarce" can be different depending upon how many DXCC one already has worked. 73 Mark K3MSB On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 8:51 PM K4SAV wrote: > NR2DX asked: "If read your post correctly you are saying that you are > working against an ambient noise level of 20-30 db over S9 is that > correct.? " > > No. The S9+20 to 30 dB is the S meter reading when all the FT8 stations > are transmitting after the band opens a little. Receiver bandwidth was > 1.5 kHz. Tuning to a clear frequency my noise level was about S1 with > 200 Hz bandwidth when I made these tests. I usually used 100 Hz > bandwidth when measuring the signal level of the FT8 signal for > determining his actual strength. Sometimes less if there were multiple > signals in the passband. > > > W0MU asked: "Have you attempted to open a conversation with the > creators of the mode and discuss what you are seeing?" > > No I have not. I have also not seen any published data from anyone > showing actual performance. All I see are claims based on calculations. > Theory is good but it has to agree reasonably well with actual > measurements. If not, one of the two is in error. > > Yes DX last year on 160 CW was pretty scarce. Even when I was hearing > S6 FT8 signals from Europe I would tune down to the CW portion of the > band and usually there were no CW signals there. > > When I was doing these tests I was using WSJT-X in FT8 mode on 160 > meters. I was using version 2.0.0, which was the latest version at the > time. > > Jerry, K4SAV > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: 160
Agreed George. It's (past) time for mode specific single band awards. There's nothing preventing our alleged "national organization" from doing so, only the will to do so. On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 8:06 PM GEORGE WALLNER wrote: > Nobody is talking about "shutting" anything down. > Quite the opposite: expand the DXCC program by creating a new category! > FT-x > is sufficiently different to justify that. The skills need for FT-x are > different from those required for the traditional modes. A new award > category would reflect that. > I would go further, but I don't think too far: > FT-x could be crucial to HAM radio's future. On a recent mini DXpedition I > asked a young and recently licensed HAM to operate FT-8. He said, sure, > give > me a minute. He brought his laptop (not the one that was part of the FT-8 > station) and proceeded to operate FT-8, while using his laptop to watch a > movie and was looking at Facebook, and he was in chats with friends (and > HAM-s) on his phone. I was somewhat peeved, until I came to realize that > this is how the new generation lives: multi-threading using their > electronic > devices. Unlike us, most of them are not willing to put on the head-phones > and concentrate on weak CW signals for hours, to the exclusion of > everything > else. They don't live like that and they will not enjoy a hobby like that. > It is not my place to judge whether this is good or bad. It is what it is. > But to attract this new "multi-activity generation" to HAM radio (an > entire > generation, not just the odd kid), the hobby must offer a mode that is > compatible with how they live. FT-8 is perfect for that: it can be > operated > remotely from a smart-phone via an app, while riding a bus or train and > doing other things... And, yes, it can be automated. > There will be nothing wrong with a young HAM working 100 countries in a > month while not even at his station. Good for him! Just don't mix his > achievement with mine. (Is RTTY really a digital mode? It seems to be very > analog these days.) > 73, > George, > AA7JV > > > > > > On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 17:05:23 -0500 > Cecil wrote: > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Aug 2, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Cecil wrote: > >> > >> This is nonsense > > > >> That is only possible if someone has modified the software and is > cheating the system...which I might add could be done with computers and > creative software writing to any of the digital modes including CW > > > > That is cheating and not grounds for disallowance from total DXCC > participation for all users. > > > > Certainly I can do that for one QSO if I need to run to the bathroom or > grab a quick cup of coffee etcbut if you believe for a second that the > FT8 software is designed to crank it up, walk away for a couple hours and > come back later to tally up your take as you describe you are showing your > lack of knowledge of WSJT’s design. > > > > Am I suggesting that some are not doing that...no...not for a minute. > Would I suggest that all DXers are running no more than the legal limit > when chasing a new one or no more than 200 watts on 30 meters, or not using > a remote station element to gain an unfair advantage to add a new > one...nope. > > > > But it is happening... > > > > Should we shut down the entire awards system because the possibility > exists that someone will cheat...I think not. > > > > I for one think you should rethink your article before submission Alan... > > > > Respectfully > > > > Cecil > > K5DL > On Aug 2, 2019, at 4:22 PM, Alan Swinger > wrote: > >>> > >>> . Since FT8 operators can walk away and not participate in QSOs, and > come back after some other activity and see how many new countries and QSOs > that the computer made, > > > > _ > > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: 160
>>Can't we get along? I doubt I'd like to get along the way you want us to get along, by suppressing discussion because you don't like it. You want tolerance based upon indifference, and that's wrong. I would posit that most people on this reflector have a passion for 160M or else they wouldn't be here. Just because you don't like someone elses opinion of a topic does not mean it should not be discussed.By virtue of the fact that this topic comes up periodically points to the fact that there is deep concern and non-aligned opinions on it and it's smoldering under the surface..As long as it's discussed in a civil manner, it's fair game. Why don't the people that don't want healthy discourse just delete the respective emails, or unsubscribe from the group?It's just that easy. If my opinion offends anyone, that's too bad. Nobody has the right not to be offended. “Cheating” is a strong word.But to address it, just because someone cheats on mode A does not mean we ignore cheating on mode B; it should be addressed on both. FT-8 is another disruptive technology that is here to stay, and one where our alleged “national organization” has failed to provide guidance on it's impact on the competitive aspects of Amateur Radio.Like someone else so aptly put, you don't have a race between a person on foot and a race car. That summed up this entire issue eloquently and sufficiently. Mark K3MSB On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 11:24 AM W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: > Cheating is cheating. How many people used remote stations, exceeded > their power limits, etc. Singling out a mode because you are upset > that it has taken away activity in your preferred mode is not helpful > to the hobby.Not everyone that use FT8 cheats. Not everyone that > uses a amp that exceeds their legal limit uses it in that fashion. > > How can you guarantee that everyone on the "Honor Role" was 100 percent > honorable or even anyone that got DXCC did it right? You can't so > please stop singling out a mode you don't care for. We get it. Move > on. It is here. Just like the Reverse beacon, packet cluster, etc. > > We are all hams enjoying many aspects of the hobby. Can't we get along? > > W0MU > > On 8/2/2019 3:03 AM, Ross Johnson wrote: > > To Carl , my computer is not cleaver enough to work 60 countries FT8 > > on its own. > > I have to check grey line, put many hours in on band, check > > DXpeditions ETC > > Don’t forget hardware and radio gear. > > > > To Nick and George. K1JT has put out a list identifying call signs > > they believe are using automated stations, you cant tell me others > > have not cheated. There was callsigns mentioned on these pages recently. > > > > To problem solver Kevin K3OX ,you have helped some here by pointing > > out Mix DXCC is not CW DXCC or SSB DXCC > > > > Well done > > > > 73 Ross ZL3RJ > > _ > > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > > Reflector > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: BOG height
I used 8 foot ground rods for the BOG and 4 foot ground rods for the RBOG. Mark K3MSB On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 1:36 PM Mark K3MSB wrote: > I’ve used BOGs and RBOGs at 200 feet length laying on the ground. The > BOG worked great, the RBOG worked good, but not as good as the BOG. > > Others tried them in my local area based upon my experiences and said > they didn’t work at all. > > This is typical of people that have used / tried BOGs. > > 73 Mark K3MSB > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 1:08 PM Paul Mclaren wrote: > >> Just a ‘simple’ question hopefully - How close to the ground should a BOG >> be for best/good performance? >> >> I am looking for any additional info that I can get to supplement what I >> have found online already so good on the balun, wire type and termination >> resistor. >> >> My single unterminated beverage I have at the moment was transformational >> compared to a Wellbrooke loop but the location it is in will soon be 80 >> new >> homes so time to look elsewhere. Current plan is a small number (maybe >> three) BOG antennas switched by a remote relay but distance is limited to >> 200ft maximum in any direction. >> >> Plan is to use the BOGs for 160 but also 80,40 and maybe 30m. >> >> Regards >> >> Paul MM0ZBH >> _ >> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband >> Reflector >> > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: BOG height
I’ve used BOGs and RBOGs at 200 feet length laying on the ground. The BOG worked great, the RBOG worked good, but not as good as the BOG. Others tried them in my local area based upon my experiences and said they didn’t work at all. This is typical of people that have used / tried BOGs. 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 1:08 PM Paul Mclaren wrote: > Just a ‘simple’ question hopefully - How close to the ground should a BOG > be for best/good performance? > > I am looking for any additional info that I can get to supplement what I > have found online already so good on the balun, wire type and termination > resistor. > > My single unterminated beverage I have at the moment was transformational > compared to a Wellbrooke loop but the location it is in will soon be 80 new > homes so time to look elsewhere. Current plan is a small number (maybe > three) BOG antennas switched by a remote relay but distance is limited to > 200ft maximum in any direction. > > Plan is to use the BOGs for 160 but also 80,40 and maybe 30m. > > Regards > > Paul MM0ZBH > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Summer Update & a Surprise
Here’s where the DXCC standings are listed http://www.arrl.org/dxcc-standings Can you please show me where 160M CW is? 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 9:35 AM wrote: > It already has them. Mixed is mixed (all modes including FT8, RTTY, SSB, > AM, CW, etc), CW is CW, Phone is AM, SSB and FM, Digital is all digital > machine modes (RTTY, FT8/4, JT65 etc). > > So if you are offended that DXCC is being "degraded" by FT8 contacts, just > look/compare at the CW and SSB mode results only. > > Problem solved! > > 73, Kevin K3OX > > - Original Message - > From: FZ Bruce > To: 'uy0zg' > Cc: 'Andrzej_SP6AEG' , 'topband@contesting.com' < > topband@contesting.com> > Sent: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 09:04:32 -0400 (EDT) > Subject: Re: Topband: Summer Update & a Surprise > > Yes the ARRL needs to step up. > > Years ago there were foot races, then after the invention of the > bicycle races between them were common. After the automobile was > invented they raced. No one seriously thought of foot racing > (competing) against a bicycle or automobile. > ARRL DXCC competition bands need sub categories. > 73 > Bruce-K1FZ > > -From: "uy0zg" > To: "Andrzej_SP6AEG" > Cc: topband@contesting.com > Sent: Thursday August 1 2019 8:53:37AM > Subject: Re: Topband: Summer Update & a Surprise > > Hi Andy Hi All > > Absolutely simple and correct. > > Why don't ARRL leaders understand this? > > It is not possible to equate the results of a robot operator with the > > results of a human operator. > > For FT8, there should only be a separate category for DXCC. > > --- > Nick, UY0ZG > http://www.topband.in.ua [1] > > Andrzej_SP6AEG писал 2019-08-01 14:20: > > In my humble opinion, FT8 should have nothing to do with the > > competitors of > > DXCC Mix, CW, SSB or RTTY. RTTY emission was killed in short > > wavelengths, > > expeditions in the increasing percentage use FT8 as the basic > emission > > and > > this is not due to the lack of propagation. I think, the issue of > FT8 > > should > > be treated as a separate competition not included in DXCC Mix, CW, > SSB > > and > > digital. Then we can talk about competition. Otherwise, it loses > the > > value > > of DXCC from before FT8. The discussions on this list about > receiving > > antennas, the fight against QRM, etc. will end. > > > > Andy > > SP6AEG > > == > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of > > uy0zg > > Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 8:09 PM > > To: Peter Sundberg > > Cc: daraym...@iowatelecom.net; k...@aol.com; topband@contesting.com > > Subject: Re: Topband: Summer Update & a Surprise > > > > Hi Topbanders ! > > > > > > Everything is easy to fix. > > > > There should be a strict separation of achievements - > > > > 1. They are made only by man. > > > > 2. They are made only on the computer. > > > > > > Delete Mixed Achievement Chart : > > > > http://www.topband.in.ua [2] > > > > > > > > > > Peter Sundberg писал 2019-07-31 20:31: > >> If we CW operators would all stay on a very tight frequency > passband > >> and call CQ every 15 seconds I bet there would be a lot of > interesting > >> things happening to us also. Especially if we do it 24/7 or at > least > >> every hour that we are not asleep. > >> > >> However, PC-automation has it's advantages, some are at work while > >> working DX and others are gardening. Some even sit by the radio/PC > and > >> watch things happen :-) > >> > >> Bottom line is, we need to activate our transmitters more and not > just > >> listen for others. A perfect example is Bill KH7XS who opens up > almost > >> any seemingly "dead" band to Europe, at any time, just by calling > CQ > >> for a while. > >> > >> CW is not only great fun as you say Dave, CW is King! > >> > >> 73 > >> Peter SM2CEW > > _ > > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband [3] - > Topband > > Reflector > > > > _ > > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband [4] - > Topband > > Reflector > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.conte
Re: Topband: Summer Update & a Surprise
Hi Jeff Your concerns are shared by a lot of us. I made the same observations about 10M several times this summer. As you said, it the way things are. I have 147 countries confirmed on 160M (all CW).I’d really like to get to 160 confirmed (CW) on 160M before the proverbial well starts to run dry….. 73 Mark K3MSB On Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 8:20 AM k1zm--- via Topband wrote: > Hi Gang > > > It is mid summer here and E season on 6M has been fun to play with while > 160m is pretty S L O W as it usually is. > On these pages there has been alot of chatter regarding FT8 - (which > basically took over 6M DX'ing starting in July 2917 - all DX is now on > 50.313 FT8 - which is why I had to adopt this mode in order to continue > DX'ing on 6m). It was either do that or give up operating on 6M during E > season. > I do hope that CW continues to thrive on Topband - but this past season > there was TONS of DX on FT8 and in my opinion LESS DX on CW than in prior > years. It is quite possible to work in JA on 160m from here on FT8 with > 100w out - which would have been quite rare indeed on CW as I recall (I do > not think I ever worked JA with 100w from here - but who knows?) > Today as I write this - I am listening to 28.074Mhz on a totally DEAD 10m > band. If I tune the entire CW portion and the whole SSB portion, there is > NOTHING - repeat NOTHING there - no signals whatsoever to be found. > Yet on 28.074Mhz - I just worked a whole page of Europeans on FT8 - to my > almost total INCREDULITY!! > I am not sure how I feel about all of this - but one thing is SURE - the > DX world has changed - and there is no looking back. > I love CW on Topband and used to love CW on 6m - but that no longer > exists -so I do hope the 6m migration to FT8 does not repeat itself on > Topband! > To all a good summer and CU on CW again starting in September. > 73 JEFF VY2ZM > > > . > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Transmit High Pass Filters for BCB Interference
Thanks for all the replies. My friend is probably going to go with a DLW custom filter. I'm embarrassed that I forget about the common mode choke as I use them here on all bands especially 160M. I told him I'd help him build one. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: Transmit High Pass Filters for BCB Interference
A friend of mine in our local radio club sent me the following email "I'm 6/10's of a mile from an AM 910 KHz. transmitter. They operate with 5k daytime and 2k at night. They're S9+45db on 160 meters with clear audio and S9+35db on 80 meters. have an inverted "V" resonant at 3.715 MHz. orientated east-west, towards their reflector tower." The station is willing to pay for a filter for my friends station, and he has looked at notch and band pass filters but has concerns. I recommended he look at transmit high pass filters to knock out signals below 1.8 Mhz and provided him with various links: https://www.dunestar.com/store/160-Meter-Highpass-Filter-pid-8.html http://www.kf7p.com/KF7P/Morgan_Filters.html https://www.dxengineering.com/search/part-type/transmit-high-pass-filters/product-line/dlw-associates-am-broadcast-band-brick-wall-high-pass-filters?autoview=SKU=Default=Default I have no practical experience with any of these filters and was wondering what the TB Gang thought. He would prefer one that handled 1.5 KW but I told him he may have to settle for 200W. He prefers an "out of the box" solution. Thanks Mark K3MSB _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: FCP vs Gull Wing Elevated Radials
This kind of goes with the other thread that has morphed into the FCP topic, but is a bit different. With an FCP feeding the INV-L, the bottom of the INV-L will be at least 10 feet off the ground.With my existing trees I can barely get up 50 feet from the ground. So, the INV-L will have 40 feet of vertical radiator. Using a pair of resonant gull winged radials feeding the INV-L at the base, the vertical part will be 50 feet. From what I’ve read, the FCP is a better solution over a pair of resonant gull wing radials, but I’ve also read that vertical length of an INV-L is important. So there’s a tradeoff to be considered. Comments? Due to real estate considerations, I can put up only 2 one-half wavelength resonant radials Mark K3MSB _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: RFI on TB
I’d be interested in hear about this also. I’ve always used ground radials for my INV-L but this year I’d like to try an FCP. I’ve read that the INV-L as well as the FCP need to be floated during receive, which means two relays at the INV-L. 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Jul 25, 2019, 4:11 AM CUTTER DAVID via Topband < topband@contesting.com> wrote: > Guy > Slightly OT, but how do you deal with re-radiation from your inverted L? > I'm about to erect one of your inverted L on FCP and my rx loops are about > 50m away in the other corner of the field. Is that far enough? > David G3UNA/G6CP > > > On 24 July 2019 at 07:13 Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: > > > > > > I gotta agree with Rob. An inverted L aerial wire will hear ALL the noise > > that is around. Mine sure does. RX antenna will help enormously if there > is > > a place to put one that does not get the noise second hand off the L. Not > > enough room? A bit complicated, but "repeated" noise off the L can be > dealt > > with. > > > > The worst noises around here heard on my L were all repaired by the power > > company. The nastiest noise was very hard to find, I actually never > "found" > > it by looking for it. Noise turned out to be from a bad splice in an > > underground 13 kV cable going from the 13 kV delta overhead out on US 64 > to > > the transformer for my eastern neighbor and next house over. It would > come > > and go with extended cold weather, but never would correlate to sunlight > or > > darkness. I would hear it next to my transformer walking around with my > > battery K2 and a rubber ducky. It would never locate to up on a pole > (only > > power noise that didn't). > > > > Finally the splice hard-arced, exploding the fuse up on the pole for the > > neighbor's 13 kV feed, and taking those two houses off the grid. The > noise > > went away with the cannon shot noise. Blessed quiet on 160 and 80. I had > > put up with that for almost four years. > > > > In the end, Duke Energy completely reran his AND my buried 13kV lines, > and > > replaced his transformer. 35 years in the ground, 35 year old cable > design > > and materials, and deficient in THEIR opinion. Was really fun to watch > them > > use this super-neat burrowing setup that went right UNDER the woods and > the > > creek (whole other story). Now I can hear the lesser noises on my L from > > all over Apex and Cary :>) Need RX antenna for sure. That way I don't > have > > to listen to the Cary, NC noise (NE) at the same time as the generally > > closer and louder Apex, NC noise (S, SE). > > > > 73, Guy K2AV > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 9:37 AM Rob Atkinson > wrote: > > > > > > Over past few months, I have picked up an S5-S7 noise signature on > my TB > > > inv > > > > L antenna with K2AV FCP system. > > > > > > I would not use an inverted L for receiving. Unusable for rx at my > > > QTH but FB for transmitting. > > > > > > 73 > > > Rob > > > K5UJ > > > _ > > > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > > > Reflector > > > > > _ > > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Unsubscribe
They get "ticked" off .... Mark K3MSB On Wed, Jul 17, 2019, 11:10 AM Doug Renwick wrote: > Why do people leaving a list always have to announce it? To make sure > everyone knows how good they are and how bad everyone else is that's left > so > that we can all feel bad? Sorry I don't, had nothing to do with why you > left, your choice. > Why not just unsubscribe without announcing it? > > Doug > > "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its > limits." > Albert Einstein > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ralph > Bellas > Sent: July-16-19 8:01 PM > To: aa0rs; Topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Unsubscribe > > Unsubscribe too. I would rather hear about 160 than ticks. > > > > > From: Topband on behalf of aa0rs > > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 6:44:44 PM > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Topband: Unsubscribe > > Unsubscribe > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: FT-8 My Recent Experience
I spent 9 days in Haiti as HH6/K3MSB a few weeks ago on a missions trip to Les Cayes, which is in the remote southwestern part of the island. As the fellow I was traveling with was a ham, we of course hung some wires at our guest house and had some on-the-air fun. This was good as there really isn't much to do in the evenings down there. Actually, aside from reading, there isn't anything to do in the evenings down there.But I digress. To protect the innocent (or the guilty) I'll call my friend “John”. I did CW and John did some CW but mainly FT-8.John wanted me to do some FT-8, but after watching him for a bit I said to “wake me when it's time for some real radio”. I've seen FT-8 before and I just can't get into it. I can't get into any computer mode, mainly because I've been a software engineer for almost 40 year and dealing with computers at home is a non-starter with me.I like ARC-5s, BC-348s, and Navy RBB's myself..But again, I digress One evening I went to sleep with John doing his FT-8 thing – we shared a room. I awoke around 0100 local and looked at John and I wondered if he was asleep or dead.I watched him for a good two minutes before he finally moved.He hit something on the keyboard and then went immobile for another minute or so. Sleeping or dead?This cycle repeated itself until the I was fairly sure death was not in the equation and I went back to sleep. Knowing John wasn't dead was a relief as we didn't have air conditioning there, and I'm sure things would have gotten smelly rather quickly. A few days later FT-8 came up again and I said I've always maintained it's not a “real” mode as it's computer to computer with almost no human interaction except hitting a key every now and then. He then tried to impress me. John said “But I can do other things while making a QSO!”.He initiated an FT-8 QSO then. wait for it. went to the bathroom.Upon his return he triumphantly showed me he had made a QSO “while in the bathroom”. I can't remember hearing the toilet flush, so I'm not sure what he was doing in the bathroom, but I do know that concurrent with his activity in the bathroom, he did in fact make an FT-8 QSO. I told him I saw no reason for me to change my views on FT-8. He made a lot more QSOs than I did I guess that's good. As an aside, I did carry a 160M Dipole with me (had to get my money's worth for the checked baggage fee..). We had planned to spend one night on 160 with a dipole hung off the 250 Ft transmitter tower, but logistically we just couldn't do it. Hopefully next time towards the fall of the year!! 73 Mark K3MSB & HH6/K3MSB _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Farming and Ham Radio don't mix too well.
I just got back from a nine day missions trip to the southern Haitian peninsula where we were getting a broadcast transmitter repaired and new tuning unit installed. They started rice farming around the 250 foot tower. As the farmers removed dirt and encountered existing radicals they simply cut them. See attached photo. You can see where they laid some new radicals. To the right is where new radicals were laid a while ago. 73 Mark K3MSB On Tue, May 14, 2019, 3:06 PM Gary Smith wrote: > An observation to share about buried > radials surfacing is, It surely has to > happen and it's likely impossible to > predict where & when they'll do that. > > I metal detect and sometimes in never > plowed sites, find ancient coins near the > surface and modern coins 12" down in the > same area. It happens this way so often, I > just can't reliably predict age by the > depth on the detector screen. > > Some sections of buried radials will > someday, probably surface. > > 73, > > Gary > KA1J > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: NA activity CW topband ....................
Joel is right; all my 160M antennas went down 2 weeks ago.Grass to mow etc. 73 Mark K3MSB On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 10:41 AM wrote: > Greetings Nick, > > With spring here in the south I have begun taking down all of my RX > antennas in preparation for hay cutting in the fields plus the severe > lightning we have from spring and summer storms pretty much destroys the > RX antenna components if left out through summer. The QRN/noise level is > high on the TX antenna so my focus has moved to other bands/activity. > > I'm sure that's probably the case with a few other "regulars" on the > band as well. > > 73 Joel W5ZN > > On 2019-04-13 03:31, uy0zg wrote: > > Hi > > > > > > What happened ? > > > > > > One NV3N from all over America. > > > > > > No electricity? > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: VKs This Morning
I sent this to the members of our local radio club as I'm trying to get them to understand the importance of SR and SS on 80 and 160M; I thought some of you may enjoy it. March is here and conditions should be improving for NA to VK/ZL contacts I hope this morning is a good sign.. 73 Mark K3MSB -- Forwarded message - From: Mark K3MSB Date: Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 7:28 AM Subject: VKs This Morning Hello Everyone I could not sleep this morning and got up at 2:30 AM. I went down to the shack and not much was cooking on 160 or 80, so I did some research for some technical material I needed for a Navy RBB restoration that I'm working on. I wandered over to the SKCC chat room around 1030Z (5:30 AM). Steve VK7CW was on and both N1FG and I tried to work him on 160M.He gave us both 559 but neither of us could hear him well enough for a full SKCC exchange( RST, State, Name, and SKCC number). My SR was around 1137Z and Steve said he would be around until then. In the meantime, VK7CW and I worked on 40M (RST 559) at 1048Z then on 80M (RST 469) at 1100Z. We again tried 160M but were only able to exchange RSTs at 1116Z. Steve's signal had improved but not for a full SKCC exchange. VK7CW and I tried again at 1126Z and Steve's signal had now improved enough for an SKCC exchange, but it took two tries, his RST now being 449. At 1139Z (my SR +2 min) I saw VK3CWB spotted on 1828 so went up there and bang! The guy almost knocked me over – an honest 589! I couldn't believe it!I sent my call and bagged him right off! By 1149Z (my SR + 12 min) VK3CWB was down to about 449-549 and not moving the needle. A good morning! A pair of VKs on 160M and I worked one of them with a J-38 straight key! Time for some coffee. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: ARRL on 1802.5 Tuesday PM
Eh? Details? On Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 1:09 PM Charles Yahrling And how about the ARRL encouraging AM ops to expand their use of top band > in the latest ARRL promotional email? > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Logikey K5
I've been using the Logikit CMOS 4 Electronic Keyer (the K5’s little brother) for so long I can’t remember when I got it. The only drawback is that the original buttons wear out; that’s a known issue with the CMOS-4. I replaced them with 4 buttons from Radio Shack years ago and have had no further problems. Fun to build. 73 Mark K3MSB On Tue, Jan 22, 2019, 2:16 PM Keith Hanson I don't know where you can find them now, but you will have to pry my K5 > from my cold dead hands!! Seriously, I built a WinKeyer for Field Day use > and found it very nice with the advantage of the computer interface. > > Keith - AC9S > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: JAs on TopBand
This morning was surreal. I couldn't sleep so I got up around 0900Z, had a cup of coffee, read for a while, then went down to the shack. I worked 3D2AG on 80M CW and was listening to him put in a very nice signal to the east coast while I did some email correspondence. I QSY'd to 160M around 1145Z. I worked JH1HDT, JA7BXS, and JA0MVW between 1202Z and 1216Z. 3 JA's!!! Wow!!! My SR is around 0723Z. I figured what the heck, parked on 1823 and called CQ DX. This is where it gets surreal. I worked JH7PFD, JO1WXO, JH2FXK, and JA2ZL between 1222 and 1234Z -- They called me! I had to dig to get some of them, but we made it. I was going to shut down and noticed BG2AUE was spotted on 80M. I went to 80M and oh my God I'm hearing him. Coffee flying, I quickly changed feedlines and turned the linear so the knobs would match my red electrical tape marks. Squirted some RF He was 20 KHz down from where I had worked 3D2AG and the SWR was higher than I'd like. but 3500Z are forgiving so more RF was squirted.He came back to me! Well, I'm pretty sure he did as he was weak as water, when I worked him at 1259Z, which is my SR + 35 minutes or so. I have an email out to him and I am checking LoTW periodically well, more than periodically.. I'm waiting for Rod Serling to walk around the corner.. "Here we have one Mark K3MSB, an unknowing visitor to the Twilight Zone..." Days like this are what make all the days upon days of crappy propagation worth it! As my TopBand Elmer Glenn K3SWZ always tells me -- "you have to put in the seat time and be there when "it" happens. " 73 Mark K3MSB _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: use of WD-1 Military field phone wire for bog and/or beverage
I used double runs of WD-1A for my RBOG last year and it worked nicely. For each run I combined the two wires of the WD-1A. 73 Mark K3MSB On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 4:05 PM Herbert Schoenbohm < herbert.schoenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Terry, I have learned the hard way that WD-1A, in reverse Beverage two wire > mode, is down many db's compared to the forward direction. The only way to > make them work equally in both directions is to use double runs of WD-1 > with 4 to 6-inch spreaders. For single wire Beverages, the WD-1A is very > durable and also very inexpensive for long runs. > > Herb, KV4FZ > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 3:09 PM terry burge wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > I know it's been discussed but I don't recall the specific questions I > > wish to know. Does the WD-1 need to be separated (2 wire) to work as a > > beverage or bog beverages. Can it just be used as is for both reverseable > > or just one direction. Also, don't know if there would be any advantage > or > > disadvantage to having a dual wire beverage? The bog's won't be real long > > due to my property limitations but I'd like to have something to see if I > > can improve my S to N on 160. Especially for 160CQWWPHN contest which I > > always enjoy operating in. Worked ZL2OK Dave last year! Still a great > > moment for me. > > > > > > Could also deploy my WX0B K9AY which I probably will. Actually burned up > > the switching resistors and WX0B replaced them with higher wattage ones. > > Too many projects getting in my way but I'll get there. Sooner or later > > I'll get that Waller-Flag up which of course should be 'the cat's meow'. > > > > > > Terry > > > > KI7M > > > > _ > > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > > Reflector > > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Fwd: Re: Impedance of inv l?
One of the reason you make an INV-L a bit longer is to address the capacitance you need to tune out the inductive reactance. Capacitance and capacitive reactance is an inverse relationship. See attached graph. 73 Mark K3MSB On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 10:59 AM F Z_Bruce wrote: > > > > > Original Message > Subject: Re: Topband: Impedance of inv l? > Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2018 10:55:47 -0500 > From: F Z_Bruce > To: w...@zoominternet.net, Topband > > > > That sounds about right. As you put a good ground system under it, that > value will come down, and the efficiency will come up. > > Many add extra antenna wire that pushes the current up the wire, this also > raises the impedance, hopefully to near 50 ohms with the right length. > A capacitor (variable, then fixed) in series at the feed point can cancel > the added inductive reactance. > 73 > Bruce-k1fz > https://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html > > > On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 10:41:36 -0500, WW3S wrote: > > What should the Z be for a 1/4 wave inv l, with the radials attached to a > radial plate? Mine seems to be 60 ohms or so > > Sent from my iPad > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Condx on 160
I‘m about 160 miles NE of Jim WS6X and was on last night at the same time as he was. Like Jim, I had no problems working R3LA or LZ1PM.LZ1PM Was holding court for a long time last night! I barely had a QSO with Roger G3YRO, and I was just about to give up when he got my call right. Usually I have no problem working him. F6ARC Was nothing more than a whisper at my place, and after a few times I moved on down the dial. I heard one or two other stations from England but was unable to work them. I concur with Jim’s comment that propagation into eastern EU wasn’t bad but not as good into western EU. Running a KW into my INV-L, and my RX antenna is a HI-Z 3. I noted 3V8 was on the air last night….. unfortunately, I noticed it this morning…… maybe tonight! 73 Mark K3MSB On Wed, Nov 14, 2018, 10:45 AM Jim - WS6X This morning from - 0230 (Tuesday evening, local) conditions were > interesting here in the Shenandoah Valley, Virginia. Early on I copied > numerous Western EU working NP2J, and F6ARC was his usual beacon strength. > > Around 0200 I heard R3LA with a big signal and immediately turned on the > linear. I got impatient with the 3 minute warm-up, so tossed my 85 Watt > signal into the pile. Much to my surprise, he came back to me and gave me a > 559. Twenty minutes later LZ1PM was booming in, and I easily worked him > with > a kW. > > Oddly though, Roger, G3YRO was a steady S4-5 throughout the evening, but I, > and numerous others, could not work him. (I was using the full legal > limit.) > > So from my end, conditions to EU seemed spotty. Pretty good to Eastern EU, > not so hot to Western EU. From this QTH so far, this season has been a > mixed > bag. Many days of very poor condx, and several when Western EU was easy to > work, but Eastern EU was missing. Zero days of wide open to EU condx. > > Keeping my fingers crossed... > > Jim, WS6X > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Working LP from VK6 to the USA - season approaches
Hi Steve I'd be delighted to take a crack at working you. Last April Phil VK6GX heard my CQ and answered me, but I was unable to hear him. I was beating my head against the table, and for some added salt in the womb...N0FW was telling me "Mark, he's answering you".Argh! The RBOGS just didn't do that job that time! Today was a gorgeous fall day here in southeastern PA and what better way to spend it than by installing a HI-Z 3 in the back yard!The mounts and antennas are "planted" and look great (though my wife may not quite agree).The electronics box will have to wait until the final mowing of the yard, and I hope that will be tomorrow. With business constraints, I'm targeting Nov 10th to have the HI-Z 3 on the air and all radials run for the INV-L. That's the plan and we all know how plans go 73 Mark K3MSB On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:02 PM Steve Ireland wrote: > G’day > > After retiring earlier this year, I’ve managed to retrain (at least > temporarily) my body to get up at 5am again for the pre-sunrise period here > during November. > > When not chasing DX to boost my DXCC total, I’ll spend time CQing on > 1831.5, particularly in the 15 to 20 minute period after sunrise, looking > first for EU/Africa and then North America long path. > > I know there a number of east coast USA stations for who it is easier to > work VK6/Zone 29 long path rather than trying for a contact at their sunset. > > Vy 73 > > Steve, VK6VZ > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Why no NA 160m Activity?
For my case it’s pretty simple. As long as the grass is growing and needs mowed, no 160M antennas. Typically Nov 1 is when I do the last mowing, and it takes several weeks afterwards to get everything up and running. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: RE topband Leaving
I had to go rummage around my Trash folder to find the original post that started this: “From the FT8 arguments in addition to the "millennials causing the WWV shutdown" argument, it appears that the parts of the hobby that I enjoy do not cross paths with those on the topband reflector. Although I wish you all many CW DX, it appears that I am no longer welcome and that I must take my leave.” I've no idea what the millennial and WWV comment is about as I did not follow that thread. So we're back to the old FT8 vs CW argument.Was this person specifically harassed and hunted down for his views? Shame on the moderators if that's what happened.Or, did “the leaver” just not feel welcomed because others expressed contrary views and wouldn't back off? If that's the case, then there's the door, don't let it hit ya where the Good Lord split ya. I've been on this reflector for a number of years and from how I observe the moderators actions, I doubt any harassment and hunting down of heretics occurred; I like to see the moderators shoot a warning shot across the bow to get the ship of discourse turned away from the rocks, and overall I think they do a good job of it. In today's society people believe they have a right not to be offended. Really? I don't think so. Nobody, including myself, has the right to have their opinions respected.You do have the right to express your opinions freely, and without fear of persecution. In reality, that's not really true for a reflector as it's a private venue, but most reflectors operate as a benign dictatorship and hold to these principles. Mark's Principles of Discourse: #1: You don't have the right to not be offended. You don't have the right to have your views favorably accepted.You don't have the right to expect people with contrary view to back down because you're offended. Accept the fact that people will not agree with you. #2: Only you can decide to take offense. Sometimes the offenses are real, a lot of times imaginary. When I've felt offended by people on a reflector, or in email, or other electronic mediums, I privately email the potential offender for clarification. The vast majority of times there was no offense intended. Remember, with electronic mediums you loose about 93% of the intended message (body language, tone of voice etc – look this one up if you don't believe me.Google is your friend.). #3: If you don't respect the source of the insult, don't let it bother you. #4: If you're new to the sandbox, welcome. Unfortunately, if you want to be respected for your views, then you have to first earn your stripes. “Respect is something earned, not something given”. I have no idea who said that, but it's true. The corollary is that even if you don't respect a persons position, courtesy still remains. So Mike W0BTU, this is the 2nd thread in which you've posted your stackexchange etiquette manifesto: “but I gar-run-tee you that none of this bickering and (fill in your own definition of inappropriate behavior here) is tolerated there. ” Respectfully Mike, it seems you've had it with this “bickering” and “inappropriate behavior” and recommend putting the proverbial hammer down to set thing straight (you “gar-run-tee” it). That's concerns me. Is it really bickering that's occurring, or might it be just a healthy discourse on issues you might not feel need discussed any longer even though they may be of import to list members? “fill in your own definition of inappropriate behavior here”. Wow. I suspect you may not agree with mine. So, lets use mine and you follow them, OK ? “*Unacceptable Behavior - Even if you don’t intend it, this can have a negative impact on others ” So, if I offend someone I get a “warning” from the moderators as Enforcement step #1? I guess it's don't offend anyone for any reason or the hammer comes down! Sorry Mike, I think the moderators are doing a fine job as it is. Do I agree with their actions all the time? No. But I'll cut them some slack; it's a thankless job and you're always going to upset someone. So, in the end, we really don't know why “the leaver” is leaving. Was he hunted down and the slothful moderators did nothing?Did he attempt to contact the “offenders” to straighten things out? Or, perhaps, maybe he just wasn't able to change people's views to his own and decided to pick up his marbles and leave.Do we really know the facts, or are we just reacting in general to a newbie leaving the sandbox -- because a newbie leaving is bad? 73 Mark K3MSB On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 11:54 PM, Mike Waters wrote: > Okay, bear with me... > > Perhaps we here ought to have a Code Of Conduct. Something along the lines > as this one: > > https://stackoverflow.com/help/behavior > https://stackoverflow.com/conduct > > > I am one of the three moderators on ham.stackexchange.com. Now, that site &g
Topband: Possible Spotlight Prop into Zones 17/18 ?
Greetings I worked my first Zone 17 and Zone 18 stations last December within (about) an hour of each other. What interests me is that the bearing from me to those two stations were within 10 degrees of each other. Possible spotlight propagatio -- Close bearing and time? http://www.k3msb.com/temp/zone17_18_160M.jpg 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: 160M INV-L with 2 Elevated Radials
that is retiring from 160M. This will replace my BOG and RBOG this winter. My intent is to have everything up and working by mid-November. Lord willing.. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Wednesday Activity night
Hi Roger All my 160M antennas have been taken down for mowing season. I plan to put up a NE/SW RBOG for the KH1 DXpedition.Instead of ground radials for the INV-L I plan on experimenting with a pair of elevated "gull winged" radials. If those work well I plan on using them for the next TB Season. So hopefully I'll see some of you for some Wednesday night fun in late June. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: My first VK on 160M!
Huge day for me this morning After several years of trying, I worked my first VK on Top Band! Well, actually my first 2 Vks!! Ron VK3IO had the honors at about 1045Z. Here's a recording of him CQing later at 1051Z, which is about 30 minutes before my local SR: http://www.k3msb.com/dx/vk3io_1052z_31mar2018_160m.mp4 Shortly thereafter I worked Luke VK3HJ at 1101Z which is about 20 minutes before my local SR. Over the past few years I've heard bits and pieces of VK signals, and copied Adrian VK2WFs complete call a few weeks ago. Those signals were only copyable on the NW RBOG antenna. This morning Ron copyable on both the NW RBOG as well as the INV-L. My hands were shaking after those QSOs so I went upstairs and had a cup of (non-decaff) coffee to “calm” down. My XYL Barbara and I then went out for breakfast, and I celebrated with a delicious country fried steak (smothered with gravy) and egg breakfast with more (non-decaff) coffee!! What a morning here. country #131 for me on 160M and Zone #30 as well which is also my 30th zone on TB! Thanks Luke and Ron!! 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 160m polarization and elevation angles
Carl I learned that polarization is not predictable after the first ionospheric bounce. 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Carl Luetzelschwab < carlluetzelsch...@gmail.com> wrote: > Polarization - As Jerry K4SAV stated, the electron gyro-frequency plays an > important role on 160m since our ionosphere is immersed in a magnetic field > - it also affects ionospheric absorption and refraction. For those of us at > mid to high latitudes, vertical polarization on 160m is *theoretically* > optimum since it couples the most energy to the limiting polarization at > the entrance to the ionosphere. I don't understand Mark K3MSB's comment > about the polarization terms disappearing unless it has to do with that > fact that the polarization going up to the ionosphere has nothing to do > with the polarization going thru the ionosphere (which is dictated by the > ionosphere). > > Elevation angles - Ray tracing shows that elevation angles up to about 10 > degrees are E hops since there is still enough E region ionization at night > to refract 160m. I don't know how important these E hops are - probably > okay for short distance, but the losses (absorption and ground reflection) > add up quickly for the longer distances. Above 15 degrees or so we get F > hops. From 10-15 degrees is where ducting occurs in the electron density > valley above the nighttime E region. Ducting in the valley likely requires > shallow angles. But when a signal gets dumped out of the duct, that > suggests a higher down-coming angle. > > K4SAV said it best: ". . . and the real world on 160 is very complicated." > > Carl K9LA > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX Activity Night
Rats. I was working on my Johnson Valiant last night and forgot it was 160 activity night. I have maybe 2 to 3 more weeks before the BOG and RBOG antennas get taken down as well as the INV-L radials get removed. I keep one or two radials rolled up and connected during the summer so I can temporarily unroll them as needed, but it’s rather difficult to work into EU or AF with only that configuration. REALLY hoping to work one of our VK friends before that……. KH1 Is going to be interesting…….. I’ll probably scalp part of the lawn and redeploy the RBOG and hope the SW direction works. Maybe add another few radials for the INV-L. Of course, I’ve been wanting to build a rotating loop for 160/80 and KH1 might be the excuse I need! 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: low inv-vee
I don't think so. In my Electromagnetic Fields and Waves class in EE school (way back when dinosaurs just stopped roaming the earth and Constellations still graced the skies...) the prof derived the equation for a received signal. The polarization terms disappeared after the first ionospheric bounce. 73 Mark K3MSB On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 9:03 PM Steve Maki <li...@oakcom.org> wrote: > Interesting. Some say that on 160 vertical polarization rules, while on > 80, horizontal polarization rules (or at least *often* rules). Of course > polarization and angle of arrival are two different things... > > -Steve K8LX > > On 03/28/18 17:23 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote: > > > Well I've said it before and I'll doubtless say it again . . . > > > > In my experience, most DX propagation on 160m ISN'T low angle (unlike > 80m > > when it nearly always IS.) > > > > For the past 45 years, at several different QTHs I've always used a > > horizontal co-ax fed halfwave dipole, only 50ft high . . . I'm sure most > > people would agree I put a respectable DX signal. I've regularly worked > all > > over the world on Top band, and I've never had trouble getting through > > pile-ups to work Dx-peditions. > > > > Plus a dipole at 40 feet will never really be an inverted vee ! (just a > > horizontal antenna with drooping ends) - You'd have to have the centre at > > least 100ft high for it to be an inverted vee. > > > > Roger G3YRO > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Anyone else hearing broadband digital signal intruder from 1905 to 1925 kHz?
S5-6 on my NE BOG. S10+ on my INV-L. FM19ut @0055Z. 73 Mark K3MSB On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 7:53 PM, <donov...@starpower.net> wrote: > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: TN5R to start tonight on TB
Hello Jose No copy on you last night in PA using my E/NE BOG. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX Activity Night
Roger G3YRO and a French station (F6AGM?) made it into the log.I heard several other EU stations with nice signals but did not work them as they were in QSO and my operating time was only during TV commercials as I was watching the Olympics. I worked UK9AA last month and tried to work him again last night; twice he came back and faded into the noise so I was unable to log him again. I second Ken’s comments about Roger and the Wednesday activity night! Great idea Roger! 73 Mark K3MSB On Feb 22, 2018 8:04 AM, "Kenneth Grimm" <gr...@sbc.edu> wrote: > Thanks for the QSO Roger. If it were not for your exhortation to be on the > band on Wednesday evenings, I would have missed a QSO with UK9AA. That's a > fairly rare one from this side of the pond. > > 73, > > Ken - K4XL > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 5:48 AM, Roger Kennedy < > ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk> wrote: > > > Well conditions were strange last night . . . > > > > Generally poor propagation . . . and high background noise here (even on > my > > Rx aerial) - apologies if you were one of the stations I heard calling, > but > > couldn't pull out of the noise. > > > > However, I did manage to work 16 NA stations in the 2 hours I stayed on, > > including across to Texas. > > > > What was more weird was some of my RBN reports from NA stations (which I > > often view when the band's quiet, to check propagation) - several gave me > > over 40dB above the noise, one even +48dB ! > > > > Thanks to everyone who came on (inc several EU stations) . . . > > > > I shall be on at the weekend, and certainly next Wednesday again. > > > > 73 Roger G3YRO > > > > _ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > > > > -- > Ken - K4XL > BoatAnchor Manual Archive > BAMA - http://bama.edebris.com > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 1/2 wave inv L
I've read that the minimum lengths for ground radials is no shorter than the height of the antenna and that 50% of ground losses occur in the first one-quarter wavelength distance from the antenna. This tells me that "too long" radials have diminishing returns. I've played the radials on ground game for years; I think this year I want to try a pair of elevated radials as Mike W0BTU suggests. 73 Mark K3MSB On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 6:56 PM, Charles Moizeau <w...@msn.com> wrote: > Well it is understandable. The current maximum in the half-wave antenna > is lifted well above ground level. Had there been a radial system it would > have had to employ very long radials, for most of the vertical's radiation > would have been hitting the ground at points far away from the base of the > vertical. It is only at those distant points that very long radial wires > would be able to gather the radiation from the ground's surface and feed it > back to the feedpoint. > > > Charles, W2SH > > > > From: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> on behalf of Mike Waters < > mikew...@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 6:31 PM > To: Roger Kennedy > Cc: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 1/2 wave inv L > > Yup! The lack of a radial system explains why the 1/2w vertical worked > better. :-) > > 73, Mike > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > www.w0btu.com=02%7C01%7C%7C45041a0e70384ee2478008d57727b9e9% > 7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636545934864203108= > Pk6iMJXzsyQupFqxoKoeDy7Qn7WTNUF%2BOgHr40Q5n6E%3D=0 > > On Feb 18, 2018 4:55 PM, "Roger Kennedy" <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk> > wrote: > > > Many years ago, a friend of mine used to operate on 160m with vertical > antennas suspended on a big Weather Balloon filled with hydrogen . . . > > After using Quarter-wave verticals for a few months, he changed over to > Half-wave verticals . . . he found they worked much better ! > > He didn't have much of a radial system (due to lack of space), mainly just > earth rods at the base . . . so I suspect that's one of the reasons why. > > Roger G3YRO > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - https://nam03.safelinks. > protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.contesting. > com%2F_topband=02%7C01%7C%7C45041a0e70384ee2478008d57727b9e9% > 7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636545934864203108= > nFxj%2BLqwi1DLEFj3hHgpcSkBljKeHcT2AZrzNna7YSw%3D=0 > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 160m DX Activity Night
Don I read your post with some interest and dismay as something similar happened to me last November 160M Wasn’t producing anything at my SR so I dropped down to 80 CW.I worked a few stations, one of which showed up as being worked a few years earlier on 80 CW. At that time I was logged into the low band chat room and that same DX station was on and made a non-positive comment that he had “two repeats” this morning.I checked his website and he clearly says “No Dupes”. A lot of times I do not have my PC up and running in the morning before work; if I make a contact I just enter it as memo on my phone and enter it into the actual log when I get back from work. Working these “No Dupe” guys really doesn’t worry me per se, but if I’m trying to work them and they decide not to respond as I’m a “dupe”, then it wastes my time to do so. Last night there were some nice EU sigs on TB and I worked several of them (all “repeats” but they didn’t seem to care). 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 160m DX Activity Night
So what's the accepted practice of working stations again and again on 160M? If I've worked you once or twice in the past I won't answer your CQ, unless you're CQing with no responses, but then probably not.I've found in the past that ops don't want repeat customers, they want fresh fish. I've been doing other thingsin the shack and have heard EU stations CQing and CQing on TB but I don't answer as they're in my log quite a few times. Should I answer? 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: E31
Hi Steve I noticed the same thing. The pileup was considerably wider, but he typically stayed within the 1 to 2 KHz up slot.I had my bandwidth set to 1.2 KHz when I switched to his RX frequency, and my VFO was on 23.66 and it didn’t move for me to hear most of the responders! NT2X spotted him at 0328Z with the comment “160M bev ant stolen by locals” I have no idea if that was tongue-in-cheek or true, but it was obvious they were having RX problems. They had a wonderful signal last night (received on my BOG), but after a while of one QSO every few minutes I got a cup of coffee and headed upstairs to watch some Star Trek Voyager on Netflix. My consolation prize was working UK9AA for a “new one” on TB later in the evening (and man was he ever weak……). Hopefully things will improve tonight…. But I have 6.5 seasons of Voyager left in case they don’t……. 73 Mark K3MSB On Jan 18, 2018 9:47 AM, "Steven R Daniel, D.D.S." <n...@comcast.net> wrote: > I called unsuccessfully for quite some time. I noticed that, on the > stations > I could spot, he stayed within the range of 1-2 up. I did not spot anyone > higher than that. Just FYI. Steve, NN4T > > > > --- > 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: ARRL 160
Hi Marsh I agree. This is a basic technique and I’ve used it for decades.While stations butt heads on the “zero beat” frequency I transmit 100 to 200 Hz above and usually make the contact. During the ARRL 160 Meter contest there were times I was transmitting 300 to 400 Hz high to make the contact. If your station can project power than you can butt heads; those of us that have more modest stations need to do things differently. This technique works well for contests and DXpeditions (although thankfully most dxps run split). Running stations and using a very narrow filter is asking for problems. I typically use 250 Hz and make sure my RIT is well oiled.If a station successfully encroaches on my run frequency such that I have to go to (say) a 100 Hz filter, I find another frequency – there’s plenty of real-estate on 160M. 73 Mark K3MSB On Dec 7, 2017 12:07 PM, <ma...@ka5m.net> wrote: I respectfully disagree with Don Kirk. My experience has been different. I don't how many pileups I've broken quickly - where the station I'm trying to work is operating simplex - by going split and transmitting a few Hz above or below "zero beat". The operator at the other end is trying to copy a callsign, and if everybody is "zero beat" it makes it very difficult to copy anybody. Anything you can do to make your signal "stand out" or differentiate it from the crowd makes it easier for the station you're trying to work. (Also speeding up or slowing down a few WPM sometimes helps.) Someone taught me this a long time ago, and it works. He's worked a lot of good DX in the last sixty (60) years or so. 73, Marsh, KA5M -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Don Kirk Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:17 AM To: MR TREVOR DUNNE <ei2...@eircom.net> Cc: g...@ka1j.com; topband List <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160 Hi Trevor, Besides your TX antenna, another issue I have observed over the years is the importance of being as close to zero beat as possible. The modern HF radios offer very narrow RX filtering options, and during very crowded band conditions most of the stations are running very tight filters and I find that if I'm off zero beat by much more than 100 hertz I'm often not heard. I use a very old HF rig and run a 500 hertz filter, and found myself having to continuously adjust my TX frequency until I popped into the passband of the station I was trying to work (very difficult to zero beat my radio in any kind of timely fashion). I finally installed an audio filter (Hi-Per Mite) with 200 Hz bandwidth and this has basically fixed my problem (99.9 percent improvement). Previously it was very frustrating hearing a station 20 dB over S9 that could not hear me. I originally thought they were using an RX antenna not pointed my direction, but most often I was just not in their RX passband. Just another possibility. 73, Don (wd8dsb) _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Good Conditions or Just Activity?
Hi Roger I would suspect activity. This weened during the CQ WW CW contest our club worked 86 countries on 15M. We were running 100W into a 3 element beam. Nice openings to Africa and a delightful long path opening to the Pacific around 2100Z Saturday. The sun spot number was 0. I commented to my team mates that if there was no contest I doubt you would have heard any activity on 15M. Looking forward to this weekend’s festivities…..I heard you calling CQ last evening but a bunch of stations answered so I moved on down the band. 73 Mark K3MSB On Dec 1, 2017 9:03 AM, "Roger Kennedy" <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk> wrote: > > Well I came on 160 when I got in from a gig last night, around 23.30Z . . . > > And ended up working 35 NA stations! Including across to Texas and several > Midwest states . . . brilliant! > > However . . . was it good conditions? Or just the fact that a lot of > stations were active? > > I note that my reports from RBN stations were just the same as usual . . . > yet when calling CQ DX it often results in NO replies! > > And the stations I worked last night weren't particularly strong - only one > just peaked S9, whereas the "big signals" historically would be much > stronger than that, when conditions are good. > > (I also came on again just before sunrise . . . and as I've noted before, > NO > Sunrise Peak! Didn't hear any Europeans work any DX at this time . . . and > my RBN reports were way down) > > Roger G3YRO > > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
>>established band usage Out of curiosity, exactly who "established" 1840 + 2.5 KHz as the FT8 "window"? Mark K3MSB On Nov 29, 2017 12:04 PM, "Brian D G3VGZ" <topb...@planet3.freeuk.co.uk> wrote: I shall be operating this weekend full legal limit *below* 1837.5 CW, and also FT*/JT65/JT9 at up to the legal limit above 1838. There's no reason both can't co-exist. It should be a rule in contests that all stations deliberately operatimg out of the established band usage to be disqualified. I refuse to work those stations which flaunt the band plans. "Ed Sawyer" <sawye...@earthlink.net> wrote: > I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument that the way to be a "gentleman" is > to accept everyone else's interests above your own. A "gentleman" is > respectful of others and treats others as he/she wants to be treated. > > > > No one owns a frequency channel at least in the US - read your license. > > > > If I come on a frequency, hear nothing, ask QRL using a legal and accepted > mode for the frequency and hear nothing, I am using the frequency. By the > way - even the ARRL admits there is no longer a "DX Window" on 160M. > > > > If FT8 is such a fragile mode to QRM that it needs a 2khz undisturbed > window, then it is a flawed mode that will not stand the test of time in > my opinion. I am already starting to hear DX side people saying it's a > complete waste of time and abandoning it. I hear 3Y is going to try it - > that should be hilarious. > > > > I think that most of the FT8 crowd is horribly misinformed with dribble > they read on the internet and think that some "net authority" has granted > exclusive access to said frequency band and that they have had such right > since June. > > > > Look for me on 1840 in the ARRL 160 this weekend after listening, asking > QRL, and seeing if I am disturbing anyone in my 400hz receiving window. > > > > 73 > > > > Ed N1UR > > _ Topband Reflector Archives - > http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > -- Brian D G3VGZ G3T _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: future of ham radio
The "Delete" key is a wonderful thing. Just because you don't like a discussion thread doesn't mean others feel the same way.Nobody is forcing you to read anything you don't want to. I've been contemplating both sides of this discussion, and others, whose points I don't agree with, believe it or not have given me food for thought. There have been a lot of good examples in this thread that I plan to use in a letter to the ARRL. Someone wanting a discussion banned or stopped, just because they don't like it, is the height of arrogance. This topic is relevant not only to TB but also to amateur radio in general. As long as it's kept civil, I'm willing to listen. Mark K3MSB On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Bob Wolters <bobw...@hal-pc.org> wrote: > Is there another more appropriate forum/reflector for discussions of > different modes and operating habits and history ? > > A place to discuss personal beliefs ? > > The below were just a few examples of the discussions filling up the > topband mailbox and my mail box this week and > seem to have little to do with top band itself. They are NOT directed at > Mike or Roger below. > > Thanks in advance and 73, > > Bob W5XC > > > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of W0MU > Mike Fatchett > Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 9:31 AM > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: future of ham radio > > Roger, > > Do you work FT8? Have you attempted to work any DX on FT8? It takes some > skill. > > There are different skillsets required. I could argue it takes little > skill to buy a 10kw amplifier a remote radio membership and use remote > receivers all over the world takes little skill too. > > Please stop demeaning others that happen to like a part of the hobby you > do not. What is interesting to you is not interesting to others. > > Did you read where there are more FT8 uploads to Clublog than SSB and CW > combined? Sorry this is a great thing for the hobby. People are making > contacts and actually using the bands. > > W0MU > > > On 10/28/2017 3:42 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote: > > I appreciate the point about trying to get youngsters interested in > > the hobby . . . > > > > However, the trouble with the computer-based Digital modes is that > > there is no SKILL involved in having a contact - it's your Computer > having a contact! > > > > That lack of skill and therefore achievement is what gets people > > hooked into a hobby - if there's none they will quickly become bored. > > > > Look what happened with the countless new Amateurs (with new > > easy-to-get-licences) who just came on VHF and used Repeaters - they > > quickly got bored and most are now inactive, unless they were > > fortunate to have someone show them how satisfying making REAL contacts > can be. > > > > The same can be said about Motor Racing . . . if the cars people used > > getting into the sport all had ABS, Traction Control, Automatic > > Transmission etc etc it would be pretty boring and they'd soon lose > interest. > > > > 73 Roger G3YRO > > > > _ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > http://www.avg.com > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: 3C1L Information
>From the 3C0L/3C1L website: October 26 - Update 20:30 GMT Plans regarding 3C1L have changed. Yuris is in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea and he says that they plan to activate 3C1L again. He is looking for proper QTH. But they are not QRV yet. Those were pirats playing on the air earlier this evening on 80m band. The spare K3 has arrived, but has not yet passed customs. And I'm on vacation through Monday.. :-) 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: FT8: Making it too easy?
Only if they used a credit card and a remote station that they didn't build! 73 Mark K3MSB On Oct 26, 2017 2:28 PM, "DXer" <hfdxmoni...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Mark, So, if I use the same 'rational' some people here seems to use, those DXCC awards earned with full legal power, multiple towers, beams, and amps, should really be a mark of shame on their holders? :^) There is no one way, your way, yes, but not only one way. 73 de Vince, VA3VF On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Mark K3MSB <mark.k3...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Vince > > Well, you could use a machine gun instead of a bow and arrow to bag the > “big one” and hang it’s head on the wall, but it wouldn’t be quite the > same, now would it? > > What’s the difference in rolling up to the ice-cream hop in your 1962 > Coupe DeVille convertible that you just cut a check for, or rolling up in > one that you’ve spent years restoring? > > I think that pretty much answers your question. > > 73 Mark K3MSB > > > > On Oct 26, 2017 1:45 PM, "DXer" <hfdxmoni...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> For those that say FT8 makes it too easy to win awards, climb the DXCC >> ladder, or make it into the HR. >> >> May I ask what the reason is for going to the trouble, and expense, of >> purchasing the best transceivers, installing towers, beams, and amps? >> >> How is your operating enhanced, if not by making it easier to 'bag' that >> difficult entity? >> >> Wouldn't a DXCC award be more valuable if earned with a galena receiver, >> and an indoor random wire? >> >> 73 de Vince, VA3VF >> _ >> 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: FT8: Making it too easy?
Hi Vince Well, you could use a machine gun instead of a bow and arrow to bag the “big one” and hang it’s head on the wall, but it wouldn’t be quite the same, now would it? What’s the difference in rolling up to the ice-cream hop in your 1962 Coupe DeVille convertible that you just cut a check for, or rolling up in one that you’ve spent years restoring? I think that pretty much answers your question. 73 Mark K3MSB On Oct 26, 2017 1:45 PM, "DXer" <hfdxmoni...@gmail.com> wrote: > For those that say FT8 makes it too easy to win awards, climb the DXCC > ladder, or make it into the HR. > > May I ask what the reason is for going to the trouble, and expense, of > purchasing the best transceivers, installing towers, beams, and amps? > > How is your operating enhanced, if not by making it easier to 'bag' that > difficult entity? > > Wouldn't a DXCC award be more valuable if earned with a galena receiver, > and an indoor random wire? > > 73 de Vince, VA3VF > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: A way forward to keep 'old school' modes vibrant alongside FT-8? (long)
You can’t retract any awards, and I don’t believe you even have to worry about that. Let’s say you have 150 Confirmed on 160M right now using a combination of SSB, CW, FT8 etc. The current single band award would not change – it’s “Mixed” by default. I would envision 3 new awards to come into existence -- 160M-SSB, 160M-CW, and 160M-FT8. As I mentioned before, once you have the software written for one mode specific band award (ex: 160M-CW), then it’s a simple extension to add –SSB, -FT8, -AM, -PSK31, -Digital etc (unless you really bolloxed up the architectural stage of the software design). The ability to easily add new band/mode combinations will be essential to facilitate new modes that will be available in the future.Like I posted before, it’s not rocket science to get this done. 73 Mark K3MSB On Oct 26, 2017 12:31 PM, "Dave AA6YQ" <aa...@ambersoft.com> wrote: An issue that you'll have to confront in your proposal to the ARRL is the disposition of awards already granted to operators based on QSOs made in "K1JT modes". Will recent DXCC awards that included some FT8 QSOs be retracted? Will 5BDXCC awards or Challenge endorsements be retracted if they included JT65 QSOs? What about WAS and VUCC awards? For the record, none of my DXCC or Challenge award credits come from "K1JT mode" QSOs, but I am using FT8 QSOs in this year's CQ DX Marathon on 160m. 73, Dave, AA6YQ _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Some Operating Observations from JT5DX de K1ZM/VY2ZM (very long!)
GREAT Report Jeff! Enjoyed it immensely! 73 Mark K3MSB On Jun 4, 2017 6:02 AM, "k1zm--- via Topband" <topband@contesting.com> wrote: > Hi All > > > While it is still fresh in my mind and while I have a few moments this > morning, I thought I might pass along a few OPERATING OBSERVATIONS that I > made while over at JT5DX this past week. I will organize these into > GENERAL OBSERVATIONS, TOPBAND THOUGHTS and HF THOUGHTS. > > > GENERAL OBSERVATIONS - & What it was like getting there... > > > First let me note that this was NOT a Topband Dx'pedition. From a timing > perspective, with no overlapping darkness to NA on either coast, the timing > could not have been worse for NA. What it WAS was an invitation to join a > talented International team of old friends to operate the CQ WPX CW contest > and to visit Hong Kong, China and Mongolia and JT1CO. Despite the downside > of SPRING conditions, there was still enough of an attraction there to say > - "HELL YES - I want to go!" Plus it was a chance to visit CHAK and > see his station up close and personal. And, even more important, it was a > chance to help build some updated capability into the JT1CO lowband station > for the upcoming Winter months. While I was out at the farm, my wife and > daughter accompanied K1LZ's wife on a wonderful tour of the Southern GOBI > desert so they were totally cool with my going off on my own thing with the > boys In some respects their experiences and what they got to see and do > was as equally > exciting to THEM as was my experience out on the farming steppes to the > NW of Ulan Bator. > > > Getting there... > > > The farm is around 220 miles to the NW of the capital city. That is about > the the distance from New York to Boston - but there are few paved roads in > JT land. And what exists could HARDLY equate to the I-95 corridor along > the East coast of the US. There are two PRINCIPAL roads in Mongolia - one > North South and one East west. > > > Our route was on one of them for the first part of the trip - perhaps the > first 4 hours of what was about a 6.5 hour drive in total. At about the 4 > hour point, Chak headed LEFT out into the mountainous steppes along a dirt > road and, from that point onwards, it was total dead-reckoning using "this > hill" and "that hill over there" - plus many rock outcroppings which served > as guideposts along the way. THERE ARE NO ROAD SIGNS! There were > MANY dirt roads and Chak knew exactly which one was the road that would > lead the last 45 miles or so out to the farm. (Honestly - if you did not > know where this place was located, you nor I would NEVER find it. There > was no GPS system I was told - I did not understand that - but I did > understand that only Chak's expertise got us there!!!) > > > There are also few treed regions in JT. We did pass through a few > clusters of BIRCH - some evergreens now and then along the hillsides - but > mainly sheep, goats, cows and the occasional hairy YAK. > > > I kept looking out for the station and finally, we dropped down out of the > hills into a valley below and there in the distance I could see 6 tall > towers way off in the distance. There were wheat fields everywhere - many > of which Chak owns as that is what he does for a living. There are 3 > million people in JT and Chak likes to say "I feed 300,000 of them every > year!" > > > The farm is enormous with quite a few LARGE buildings about the size of > aircraft hangers. He employs a large number of staff - most of whom work > the farm. He works his tail off on the farm, and remember - he does NOT > live there - and, with no home station back in UB any more, operating > timeframes are hardly a top priority for him - he gets on when he has > time. He is hardly retired. > > > Some years ago, he bought the land and then built a compound on it - the > MAIN structure has 4 main connected components: > > > The family residence > > > The business side of the operation where his accountants and office are > located > > > The station component which has 4 rooms (one which is a HUGE workshop), > two operating rooms, a full bathroom and a lounge at the rear. > > > The last connected component is what he calls the HOTEL - which has 4 > upstairs guest bedrooms, a kitchen and a dining room where we took our > meals. Three ladies looked after us - and if you came into the dining > room, within 30 seconds you were handed a cup of coffee or tea and two > minutes later a plate of food. So we were well taken care of - that's for > sure. > > > A fridge was stocked with BEER, COKE, COLD WATER and the coffee
Re: Topband: JT1CO/JT5DX 160m Report de K1ZM
Thanks for that very interesting update Jeff. May I inquire as to the reason Chak no longer has antennas at his home JT1CO site? 73 Mark K3MSB On Jun 1, 2017 11:27 PM, "k1zm--- via Topband" <topband@contesting.com> wrote: > Hi Guys > > > Having just returned from JT5DX, I thought I would pass along a few bits > of information for use next Winter season on Topband when NA again has some > lowband PROP to JT land. > > > The team installed the following 160M antennas this past month at the > FARM SITE - JT5DX. There are no antennas remaining now at JT1CO in Ulan > Bator, eg: Chak's home location. > > > 160M - 4 element fixed yagi at 100 feet aimed at EUROPE (I do not know if > this antenna will be removed or not as it was installed primarily for the > CQ WPX CW contest and it may be removed at some point). > > > 160M 4 square array suspended from a 120 ft tower. This antenna is > switched in 4 directions using a conventional COMTEK box. This antenna > should be permanent. > > > 160M - 8 circle RX array for 160M - this antenna is also permanently > installed. > > > 160M/80M - 450m Beverage installed aimed at EUROPE (I suspect this antenna > may be removed and will not be permanent). > > > > > 80M - 4 element K1WA/K1THQ - sloping dipole array - This will be permanent > I think > > > 80M - 4 square array - This antenna also should also be permanent > > > 80M - 5 element fixed yagi at 100 feet - aimed at Europe - (This antenna > may not be permanent).- It was also installed primarily for the CQ WPX CW > test. > > > > > On TUES/WED/THURS nights before the contest I got on Topband using the 4 > el wire yagi and the 8 circle array for RX > I had the beverage on THURS night only. Both the 8 circle and the > BEVERAGE were GREAT into EU. Personally I thought the beverage had a > slight edge - but both were very good on RX. > > > On TUES night I worked about 65 EU and JA stations. > > > On WED night I worked about 100 EU/JA and Asian stations. > > > On Thurs night I worked about 120 EU/JA/Asian stations (including VK4MA > and 4X4DK at my SR peak.) > > > Tues night the call used was JT5DX - qsl via JT1CO. (The logs I think were > actually on 9A5K's computer station log - FWIW.) > > > WED night the call used was JT5LZ - qsl via K1LZ > > > THURS night the call used was JT5LZ - qsl via K1LZ > > > The overall station at JT5DX now sports an enormous amount of firepower on > 40M - 10M. > > > 6 40M yagis (including two sets of 3el full sized 40M stacks), LONG BOOM > 7el stacks on 20 and 15M, two STEPP'IR's, & many additional smaller yagis > for 15 and 10M. I think around 35 yagis in all were installed from May 9th > to May 25th by S52M and RN5M who worked his tail off to complete the task. > > > GL to all next winter season. Note that Chak does not live full time at > the farm - but I know he is anxious to do some lowband work this coming > Winter season using his new antenna arsenal! I encouraged him to do so as > best I could! > > > 73 de JEFFK1ZM/VY2ZM > > > > > > > > > > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65
On the contrary Cecil; I think that due to the fact that this long-going thread has not had people ejected from the list nor has had intervention by the moderator shows that all of us are indeed trying to be Gentlemen by addressing the issues and not throwing rocks at people for their positions. I'm under no delusions that I'm going to change anybody's mind. I do hope that I've planted some seeds for other's to consider, just as I've appreciated some good points made by others whose overall position I am not in agreement with. Live and let live has it's place, but it can also have the negative effect of allowing issues to fester when they should otherwise be discussed and potentially acted upon. As others have pointed out, this discussion on the TopBand list is not the only place this discussion has, and is, going on; nor will it be the last. I submit that the issues are real and not just manifestations of emotion. That being said, I do think we've just about beaten this poor horse to death and are now working on the bones.. 73 Mark K3MSB On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Cecil Acuff <chac...@cableone.net> wrote: > This discussion is going nowhere...and will continue to go nowhere with > the exception of the ill will it spreads...on of all places...a group to > discuss things related to "The Gentlemans Band" > > None of the modes of operations discussed are violations of anyone's > licenses so there is no real point...it's all an issue of emotion. > > Live and let live... > > 73 > Cecil > K5DL > > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65
Because I use my human skill that I developed over years to decode the CW signal. You don't do that for RTTY. Unless of course you're referring to using a CW decoder wherein you just read the decoded CW. You REALLY don't want to know what I fell about people that do that and say they "work CW"..... Mark K3MSB On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 5:16 PM, <buscemij...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > * ...What makes an RTTY QSO run off your computer (since u retired the > Model 23) any different than a JT65 QSO...OR...using your memory (computer > ?) keyer to work CW ? It is no more difficult to make a computer-controlled > CW or RTTY QSO than a JT65 one..just try it if you don’t believe me. * > *73 Jay NY2NY* > > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65
The issue is not one of any mode being more "valid" that the other, nor is it one of a QSO being "valid" or "invalid" based upon the mode.If a two way exchange is completed between two legally licensed amateur stations using lawfully authorized modes, the QSO is valid.I think it's that simple. But that's not what I had brought up in my post of several days ago.The issue I brought up is that of a level playing field for competition / award purposes. Modes that require a computer to effect a QSO should be in a different category than modes that do not.By "require" I do not mean "make easier", but rather could not be accomplished without a computer. My ICOM makes a QSO easier than my ARC-5s, but both still need a human's skill to complete the QSO. Stated alternately, modes that requires a human skill should be categorized differently than those that do not -- and by human skill I do not mean downloading software and pushing buttons. As someone pointed out, the DXCC rules are not part of the 10 commandments. It is my opinion that technology has reached a new level in which the rules need to be changed to accommodate that level. The same is true of remote operations.I can whip out my credit card and use a station on the west coat and get my 5 remaining zones on 80 to complete my 5BWAZ. I will not do that as I feel it is unsportsmanlike to do so. Are the QSOs legal as per the rules? Yes (unless CQ has changed them recently). But, to my way of thinking, the journey is an important part of getting to the destination. This issue is not about validating someone's worth as a "real amateur" (no code, know code, extra light etc), but rather recognizing that human skill in achieving a goal should be treated differently than letting a computer alone achieve the same goal that requires no such skill. There is nothing wrong with the JT modes; they are a wonderful advancement in communications technology in the spirit of the advancement of amateur radio. But in the light of competition based upon human striving and skill, they are in a different category. They are not good or bad, they are not valid or invalid; they are just different. Technology has moved on to the point where the existing rules need to be changed. Mark K3MSB On May 21, 2017 6:20 AM, "Mike va3mw" <va...@portcredit.net> wrote: Glenn nailed it. If you don't like it, don't use it. No one is forcing anyone to comply. It is really that simple. Mike va3mw > On May 21, 2017, at 6:09 AM, Glenn Wyant <va...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > > If an amateur has interest in psk, jt65 etc or EME, cw or any band > or mode; it is not for us to judge his particular interests. > > VA3DX > > > - Original Message - From: <k8...@alphacomm.net> > To: <Topband@contesting.com> > Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2017 11:47 PM > Subject: Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 > > >> Promised myself I'd stay out of this, but it's getting ridiculousComments like "I worked 20 new ones on 160, and I never heard any of them!". Wow! That's amazing...I personally can't find any satisfaction in claiming a contact I never heard. I never have...Yes, the digi modes allow easier qso's that would never have been made, but let's face it, you never made those contacts, your computer & it's software did. Any resulting "Awards" should be made out to your computer. Meteor scatter used to be very popular, actually getting to hear the excited voices of those you worked was thrilling. One m/s qso of mine was with a yl from the Carolinas with a most delightful Southern accent...hard to duplicate with digi modes. I don't know anyone who works or talks about rocks anymoreno challenge. Same with eme, which I pulled the plug on when it was no longer a challenge. How many new eme operators have heard their own voices coming back from the moon? I migrated to TopBand as one of the last real challenges left >> I find the litany of excuses about why one has to go to digital means on 160 to be feeble at best." My rig can't cut it, I don't have the antennas, I can't copy code (one of the real elephants in the room!), my location isn't on the coast where it's easy, etc, etc". There are MANY dxers operating successfully on small lots, and there are a myriad of clever, small receiving antennas out there. How about the gentleman on the left coast who worked DXCC on 160 from his mobile!! (without digital modes). >> My TopBand rig is quite modest, no towers or rotors. The TX antennas are wires hanging from trees with no more than 50' vertical rise. The 16 radials under each are only 48' long. Desperately needing a new rig, I bought the very cheapest HF transceiver on the market (no DSP, keyer, antenna tuner, etc). My location in Upper Michigan is not near either coast f
Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65
Well said Victor. I'm going to offend with this email no matter how nice I try to make it, but I am trying to not be inflammatory. Here goes A human ear can not compete with a computer that extracts signals below the noise level. Being a software engineer my friends are somewhat amazed I have no interest in RTTY or the JT modes. A few years ago they got me to do some RTTY contests. Talk about boring. You set the computer up, spin the VFO to align vertical cursor and push the correct buttons. Ditto with PSK31 only using a waterfall display. Download the software, spin the VFO, and push the buttons. As I told my friend “Even a caveman can do this”. The JT modes certainly have their place as an advancement in communications technology and capability. But from a competition perspective, machine and human detected modes need to be strictly segregated. My hat's off to those that get DXCC on 160 via CW and SSB. Sorry, but the hat stays on for using digital to get “the last few”. Not crying over spilt milk here; I have my TB DXCC and none of it is the JT modes. The ARRL needs to address this, but I doubt they're going to. We've gotten to the point where single band awards need to be split between human and machine detected modes. As posters in other threads have noted, the JT modes on TB will enable those with limited real estate to work 160M DX easily. This is both a blessing and a curse (as the saying goes). Yes, they may be able to use the JT modes to “easily” work DX on 160, but compare them to the guys in the same situation that work TB DX on CW / SSB and take years to do it. 73 Mark K3MSB On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 4:39 AM, Victor Goncharsky via Topband < topband@contesting.com> wrote: > > Wrong. > Both in SSB and AM cases the operator's skills and abilities are involved. > Even more of those are needed on CW. > On those JT modes an operator is just a computer accessory. > > > >Воскресенье, 14 мая 2017, 5:41 +03:00 от Mike va3mw < > va...@portcredit.net >: > > > >JT9 vs JT65 over CW > > > >The same conversation happened when SSB started to gain strength over AM. > > > >73 > > > >Mike va3mw > > > > -- > 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E. > UARL Technical and VHF Committies > DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS > DXCC card checker (160 meters). > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Improving condx?
I am in PA, not out west, but I managed to work 60 EU stations last night (Wednesday night / Thursday morning).For my small station, this was absolutely huge and completely unexpected!! This was the first time I used the BOG exclusively. Shut down at 0730Z and went to sleep, and the alarm clock went off at 1100Z. It was ignored... 73 Mark K3MSB On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Wes Stewart <wes_n...@triconet.org> wrote: > I'm an old ham but relatively new to top band. Last night from here was > amazing. I heard lots of EUs and managed to work S58N for my first EU on > top band. It's super tough from AZ to get by you guys in the midwest and > east coast, even on higher bands, with modest equipment. (Inverted-vee, > 45' at apex, 6' at ends and 500W.) Even without a dedicated RX antenna I > apparently hear much better than I get out. > > Wes N7WS > > On 12/7/2016 1:03 PM, Matt Murphy wrote: > >> Superb conditions to EU from IL last night as well. Definitely the best >> top band conditions I've experienced. >> >> Matt NQ6N >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 1:56 PM Art Snapper <a...@nk8x.net> wrote: >> >> Conditions to EU were better than I have seen so far this season I was >>> only >>> >>> on from 0430-0500z, but even that was impressive. >>> >>> Tom 4O/KC0W was very loud. In fact, he was louder than he is at our >>> sunset >>> >>> peak. >>> >>> >>> >>> 73 >>> >>> Art NK8X >>> >> > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 1809.2 kHz constant dashes
Both the original and remake are great flicks! 73 Mark K3MSB On Dec 6, 2016 1:55 PM, "ersmar" <ers...@verizon.net> wrote: It's a Coke bottle on a Morse key and flapping window blind in San Francisco. (For you youg'uns, check out On the Beach on Netflix.) 73 de Gene Smar AD3F Original message From: Don Kirk <wd8...@gmail.com> Date: 12/06/2016 1:17 AM (GMT-05:00) To: topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Topband: 1809.2 kHz constant dashes 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
Re: Topband: Clean Sweeps in ARRL 160
3830 Scores -> Contest Summaries is one source, but it's not official http://3830scores.com/listeditions.php?arg=B6cgaWz5a3 73 Mark K3MSB On Dec 4, 2016 4:17 PM, "Ward Silver" <hward...@gmail.com> wrote: > Not by me, I assure you, but several have been reported after this > weekend's excellent conditions. > > Does anyone know of historical clean sweeps of all ARRL/RAC sections in > any prior ARRL 160 contests? The online score database only lists "mults" > which include both sections and DXCC entities. > > 73, Ward N0AX > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Contest conditions
I put in my BOG the Saturday before the contest. It’s the basic 200 feet installation with a pair of 8 foot ground rods at each end.One of those rods was almost impossible to hammer in, but that’s why the Lord provides strong sons!The second rod went in after about 10 minutes. I don’t like big contests so I just use them to pick up new band countries. I found 160M to be in great shape the week before the contest, and enjoyed playing with the BOG. I picked up four new ones on 160, and a few new ones on 80 during that week, so I had my list of stations to watch out for on hand for the two contest evenings.I heard none of the on the air, nor saw any of them spotted during the contest. TB Conditions for RX on Friday night / Saturday morning was pretty mediocre here, but I was hearing EU nicely on Saturday night.I was looking for the DL guys in HB0 land on 160, but never heard them, but I do recall seeing a single spot for them. I recall reading last year that the Chinese government was supposed to start issuing personal station licenses as they currently only issue club licenses – thus the reason most stations are in the city with the noise problems W8ZR mentions. I’ve no idea what’s happening on that front. I heard pips out of BG2AUE on 80M here on Saturday morning, but he wasn’t even near strong enough to work. I was switching between my vertical and BOG for 80M RX. The BOG seems to do a pretty good job on 80M for me. I concur with W8ZRs comments about going 45 WPM. This is my third season on Top Band, and I’ve learned the value of slowing way down when a station has trouble copying me.I said I didn’t like big contests, but I did put in a 6 hour stint at our club station W3ZGD on Saturday morning / afternoon. I hit 15 and 10 pretty hard. After not a lot of sleep on Friday night, I had a pretty good headache around 11 AM Saturday. During a contest everyone is simplex (God Bless FO/K7AR who went split……), and that noise, weak signals, and the DX going 45 WPM was just nasty for me to handle. But then, I’m not a seasoned contester so maybe the regulars have learned to deal with it. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Where is everyone?
There's a lot of truth in what Jorge says. At 2 AM EDT (The timestamp of Don's post) I'm in the sack unless 160 has been open the evening before into EU, in which case I'll play radio until the SR line crosses into the Atlantic. When I get up at night to hit the head I typically check the spots for 160 and 80. if something's on I'll get on the radio, otherwise it's back to bed. It's similar to 10M AM. Over the years I've listened and listened and heard nobody. I'll make one or two CQs and have several stations call me. Yes the higher bands have been good the past week or so. There have been some great openings into the SW pacific on 17M, and I did managed to work 5H on 12M the other day.I'm just running a CFZ and the boys with the beams were doing better than I was. I'll be in the stew tonight, but since mowing season is not done here, I only have one radial rolled out under the INV-L and the BOG is not up yet (fortunately the ground rods are pounded in.. I hate 8 foot ground rods. thankfully my son helped with the pounding). 73 Mark K3MSB On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Herbert Schoenbohm <he...@vitelcom.net> wrote: > On six meters here at FK77 it was hot to SA with over 200 PY, LU, CX, ZP, > and CE contacts a few days ago. Many stations were well over S-9 > > > > On 10/22/2016 9:21 AM, Art Snapper wrote: > >> Conditions here in Michigan on 80/160 were poor last night. The signals >> were weak and band noise was high. I managed to work Mali on 40, and >> Hungary on 80, but it was a battle. South America was extremely poor on 80 >> for some reason. >> Art NK8X >> On Oct 22, 2016 2:03 AM, "Donald Chester" <k4...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Here it is Friday night, with relatively little QRN, but only a couple of >>> signals are audible across the entire 160m band. 80/75m has a few more >>> signals than that, but it's sparsely occupied as well. Usually by this >>> late in the season one will hear plenty of activity in the evening, >>> especially on weekends. I have noticed this dearth of activity for >>> several >>> weeks now; it's as if this year's radio season hasn't got off the ground >>> yet, despite the fact that we are almost midway through autumn and the >>> summer QRN has substantially subsided. >>> >>> Is this a trend, and is this becoming the new normal? They keep telling >>> us we now have a record number of hams in the FCC data base, over >>> 700,000. >>> Those hams certainly aren't on the air, at least not on 160, 80 or 40m. >>> I >>> can remember not that many years ago when at this stage in the season >>> on a >>> quiet weekend night one had to scout around to find a clear spot to call >>> CQ. So far this year, the bands have all had vast swathes of unused >>> frequencies, but the signals that are heard appear to be at normal >>> strength, so the bands apparently aren't dead. >>> >>> Don k4kyv >>> _ >>> 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: BOG - Selecting the Optimum Length
Gents Thanks for your very quick replies, a lot via private emails – you guys are great and this 160M JN really appreciates it. I didn’t realize the Lloyd’s BOG was a few inches above the ground, which makes a difference. Mine will be on the ground (with staples at points to make sure it stays there…..). 73 Mark K3MSB On Oct 17, 2016 12:29 PM, "Kip Edwards" <kedwa...@ltol.com> wrote: > Mark, > > The BOG here is 190 feet. It works very well and is quite > directional. As a result of my experience so far, I'm thinking of a second > one for the other directions. > > 73 Kip W6SZN > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mark > K3MSB > Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 8:35 AM > To: Lloyd - N9LB > Cc: topBand List > Subject: Re: Topband: BOG - Selecting the Optimum Length > > Based upon N9LB’s comments, I just emailed Bruce and told him to hold my > order for a KB-1. > > I have just enough room for 200 ft for a BOG. Extending it to 250, 290 > feet etc is NOT an option for me. > > From my reading, I understood that 200 feet was not exact, but I didn’t > expect it to be 250 to 290 feet. If I had known that I would not have > even considered a BOG. > > With the cable, KB-1 etc (my BOG will be unidirectional to EU only, not > bidirectional), I really don’t want to invest close to $200 on an antenna > that will not do any better on RX than my Inverted-L.Saving it for a > Hi-Z 3 may be the better option. > > So, with only 200 feet to play with, is it worth it? > > I've no doubt BOGs work, I may not have the room for them. > > 73 Mark K3MSB > > On Oct 17, 2016 9:35 AM, "Lloyd - N9LB" <lloydb...@charter.net> wrote: > > > I have been asked how I arrived at the 290 foot BOG length. > > > > My original 200 foot BOG had a good F/B on 80m but showed almost no > > directivity on 160m, so this indicated to me that the BOG needed to be > > longer to improve the 160m performance with my particular soil > > conditions and environment. > > > > A search on the Internet produced recommendations for 160m BOG lengths > > of > > 247 to 290 feet. Knowing that I could always shorten the wire, I went > > with the longer number as a starting point. That produced a greatly > > improved 15 to 20 dB Front-to-Back ratio. > > > > The 290 foot length was not chosen for a good match, but that length > > just happened to result in a good match. > > > > Unfortunately, I did not measure the match on my 200 ft BOG before it > > was dismantled. > > > > The optimum 160m BOG length in your environment might be much > > different from what I found at my QTH. > > > > - - - I think the group would benefit from hearing what others have > > found to be their optimum BOG lengths - - - > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of > > Lloyd - N9LB > > Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2016 11:06 PM > > To: 'Topband' <topband@contesting.com> > > Subject: Re: Topband: BOG > > > > My Reversible Bog uses the KD9SV transformer set. It was originally > > 200 feet long, just increased to 290 feet and that made a very > > significant improvement on 160m front-to-back ratio, but hurt 80m > performance. > > > > Conditions here are: > > Wire run across a weedy field, as close to ground as possible (weeds > > trampled down to allow the wire to be close to ground - mostly 2-4 > > inches above the actual ground). Soil is a few inches of decent dirt, > > about one to two feet of clay, about one to two feet of sand, and then > > bedrock. Tops of the five foot ground rods can't be driven completely > > below the ground's surface. > > > > WX - a wetter than normal Summer and Fall here in Southern Wisconsin. > > > > My Antenna Analyzer shows a 1.45 : 1 match at 1825 KHz ( 75 ohm system ). > > > > I can send the analyzer plots to anyone that is interested. > > > > 73 > > > > Lloyd - N9LB > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of > > Charles Moizeau > > Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2016 10:20 PM > > To: Lloyd - N9LB <lloydb...@charter.net>; Topband > > <topband@contesting.com> > > Subject: Re: Topband: BOG > > > > Thanks Lloyd, > > > > But pls tell us your wire height and approximate description of gnd > > condx for your otherwise well-described bog. > > > > 73, > > > &g
Re: Topband: BOG - Selecting the Optimum Length
Based upon N9LB’s comments, I just emailed Bruce and told him to hold my order for a KB-1. I have just enough room for 200 ft for a BOG. Extending it to 250, 290 feet etc is NOT an option for me. From my reading, I understood that 200 feet was not exact, but I didn’t expect it to be 250 to 290 feet. If I had known that I would not have even considered a BOG. With the cable, KB-1 etc (my BOG will be unidirectional to EU only, not bidirectional), I really don’t want to invest close to $200 on an antenna that will not do any better on RX than my Inverted-L.Saving it for a Hi-Z 3 may be the better option. So, with only 200 feet to play with, is it worth it? I've no doubt BOGs work, I may not have the room for them. 73 Mark K3MSB On Oct 17, 2016 9:35 AM, "Lloyd - N9LB" <lloydb...@charter.net> wrote: > I have been asked how I arrived at the 290 foot BOG length. > > My original 200 foot BOG had a good F/B on 80m but showed almost no > directivity on 160m, so this indicated to me that the BOG needed to be > longer to improve the 160m performance with my particular soil conditions > and environment. > > A search on the Internet produced recommendations for 160m BOG lengths of > 247 to 290 feet. Knowing that I could always shorten the wire, I went with > the longer number as a starting point. That produced a greatly improved 15 > to 20 dB Front-to-Back ratio. > > The 290 foot length was not chosen for a good match, but that length just > happened to result in a good match. > > Unfortunately, I did not measure the match on my 200 ft BOG before it was > dismantled. > > The optimum 160m BOG length in your environment might be much different > from > what I found at my QTH. > > - - - I think the group would benefit from hearing what others have found > to > be their optimum BOG lengths - - - > > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd - > N9LB > Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2016 11:06 PM > To: 'Topband' <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: BOG > > My Reversible Bog uses the KD9SV transformer set. It was originally 200 > feet long, just increased to 290 feet and that made a very significant > improvement on 160m front-to-back ratio, but hurt 80m performance. > > Conditions here are: > Wire run across a weedy field, as close to ground as possible (weeds > trampled down to allow the wire to be close to ground - mostly 2-4 inches > above the actual ground). Soil is a few inches of decent dirt, about one > to > two feet of clay, about one to two feet of sand, and then bedrock. Tops of > the five foot ground rods can't be driven completely below the ground's > surface. > > WX - a wetter than normal Summer and Fall here in Southern Wisconsin. > > My Antenna Analyzer shows a 1.45 : 1 match at 1825 KHz ( 75 ohm system ). > > I can send the analyzer plots to anyone that is interested. > > 73 > > Lloyd - N9LB > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Charles > Moizeau > Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2016 10:20 PM > To: Lloyd - N9LB <lloydb...@charter.net>; Topband <topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: BOG > > Thanks Lloyd, > > But pls tell us your wire height and approximate description of gnd condx > for your otherwise well-described bog. > > 73, > > Charles W2SH > > From: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> on behalf of Lloyd - N9LB > <lloydb...@charter.net> > Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2016 7:15 PM > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: BOG > > Hello Tony! > > Ground conditions and wire height above ground make a huge difference in > best length. > > I found the optimum for my BOG, using WD-1A wire and operating at 1825 KHz, > at my QTH is 290 feet. > > 73 > > Lloyd - N9LB > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of N2TK, > Tony > Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2016 5:15 PM > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Topband: BOG > > Stretched out 200' of WD-1A along a stone wall. Kept it about 2" above the > ground and right up against the stones. Fed it with a 300 ohm secondary > transformer and left the far end unterminated. > > Used the MFJ-259 to sweep the bands starting at 1.67 MHZ. Saw on K1FZ > notes > that to find the best single wire length for 160M is to sweep the bands and > check where the SWR goes to a low value and stays there. > > I couldn't find that frequency. I get dips at > > 2.58 MHZ 4.3:1 > 3.36 MHZ 1.5:1 > 4.39 MHZ 1.4:1 > 6.033 MHZ 1.3:1 > 9.807 MHZ
Topband: 160M Inverted-L Radial Question
I've been doing some reading on elevated radials for Inverted-L antennas. The existing literature seems to fall into two types; ground radials where the feed point is very close the ground, and systems were the feed point is elevated at the height of the radials. My Inverted-L is 50 feet high and has the feed point in a box at ground level. I'm considering using 2 elevated radials so as to reduce the radial field next to my new (hopefully) RX antenna (BOG). Since I don't want to raise my feed point by 5 feet and thereby decrease the vertical part of the Inverted L accordingly, I was considering using a pair of elevated radials (5 feet high -- don't know the exact height yet). I was planning on the radials sloping up 45 degrees from the base of the Inverted-L to my radial height. The radials will not be straight, but will have doglegs due to property constraints. I haven't found any literature that addresses this consideration. Comments? 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: W0CM Coaxial Quarter Wave 160M RX Antenna
Hi Bob Thank you for your post.In addition to the link you provided, the only other info I have for this antenna is from http://lists.contesting.com/_topband/1996-10/msg00146.html and http://www.kcdxclub.com/LOW%20BAND%20RECEIVING%20ANTENNAS-1.pdf (pages 21-22). I've been in email contact with Mike AB0X and he has used the antenna in the past with success, as has my friend Glenn K3SWZ. I'm intrigued with this antenna as I can avoid my radial field with it. 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Bob K6UJ <k...@pacbell.net> wrote: > Mark, > > I think you are talking about this RX antenna. I would like to know > more about it. > > http://lists.contesting.com/_topband/1996-10/msg00137.html > > Bob > K6UJ > > > > > > On 9/21/16 6:01 PM, Mark K3MSB wrote: > >> Hello All -- >> >> Do any of you have any experience with this antenna ? >> >> 73 Mark K3MSB >> _ >> 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: W0CM Coaxial Quarter Wave 160M RX Antenna
Hello All -- Do any of you have any experience with this antenna ? 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: W3LPL station
I live about 50 miles northeast of Frank's QTH.My family was away for a few days and I was coming home just after lunch to take care of the critters, and I saw those thunder cells SW of me as I drove home.I remember thinking man those things look really ugly -- very, very dark clouds. I'm glad Frank and family are OK. Antennas can be replaced; people can't. 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Art Snapper <a...@nk8x.net> wrote: > I am sad to pass along a report that Frank's station took a hit from an EF0 > tornado. There was some tower damage. Hopefully there was minimal damage to > the rest of the property. > > > http://www.arrl.org/news/view/confirmed-tornado-in-maryland-downs-tower-at-w3lpl-contest-station > > de Art NK8X > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: FCC Public Notice DA 16-676 Noise Floor Technical Inquiry
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0615/ <http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0615/DA-16-676A1.pdf> DA-16-676A1.pdf <http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0615/DA-16-676A1.pdf> 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: FT4JA easy copy tonite
Well, for some of us that don't have RX antennas (yet) he was definitely not super easy to copy, but there was at least a 30-45 minute interval when he was very workable using my Inv-L on TB and I was in the pileup!! Like you, I don't think I made it, but it was enjoyable just being in the dogfight!! This ends my 2nd season on TB, and it is a super band to chase DX on. Next season, Lord willing, RX antennas will be up here! 73 Mark K3MSB On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Tim Shoppa <tsho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well that was amazing. FT4JA super-easy copy in W3 for several hours before > his sunrise. My RX antenna pointed toward EU. Working well into USA midwest > with a very occasional European. I didn't get through but I heard many > regulars that did!!! > > Now about 10 minutes after his sunrise I can still hear him but copy way > down. > > Time to get ready for LZ Open 40M sprint :-). > > Tim N3QE > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: K5P 160m run
I emailed the East Coast pilot station this morning inquiring about the 80M situation, and said I had heard that they may be having 80M TX problems. Don was kind enough to respond, and said "It seems they do", and that they are receiving OK. Lot of chomping at the bit to work them on 80M (myself included) !! 73 Mark K3MSB On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 1:27 PM, George <w8...@voyager.net> wrote: > Guys > > They have a BCS which is what they are using on 160. The BCS also has 80 > m capability but that trap shorted so it isn't working on that band. > > But the BCS wasn't to be their main 80 m antenna, anyway. They were gg to > use a Steppir vertical, as I recall. I haven't heard there is a problem > with the latter but the 80 m sigs seem to be weaker than expected. > > They are a resourceful bunch of ops so I would expect plenty of 80 m > action from some antenna. > > GL > > 73 George W8UVZ > > -Original Message- From: Tim Shoppa > Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2016 10:32 AM > To: Art Snapper > Cc: kd8...@aol.com ; 160 > Subject: Re: Topband: K5P 160m run > > > They had huge signal on 160M here in W3 last night. > > On 80M... my unconfirmed suspicion is that they have one ?Battle Creek > Special? and maybe one ?lowband receive system?, and cannot activate both > 160M and 80M simultaneously with the good stuff. > > Right now the stats in clublog say they 120 in zone 3 on 160M, but only 23 > in zone 3 on 80M. > > They certainly had the good stuff on 160M last night! Their signal was > entirely comparable to that E5 activation in October on that first > exceptional morning. > > Tim N3QE > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Art Snapper <a...@nk8x.net> wrote: > > I was surprised how much stronger they are here on TB than on 80. >> >> Art NK8X >> >> ᐧ >> >> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Mike via Topband < >> topband@contesting.com >> > >> wrote: >> >> > What a run K5P has had on 160 the last 2 nights! I run an inverted L >> with >> > the vertical portion up 65" and 90 radials of which 60 are 120'. It's >> not >> > a bad Tx ant, but not so hot on Rx, and I need a bit better Wx to put up >> > the Hi-Z array I bought. I usually hear stations in the pacific for > >> 30- >> > 60 >> > min before my sunrise here in the black hole of DX in southern Michigan >> > and >> > they are only workable for 15-30 min. These guys were workable for >> hours >> > prior to my sunrise (worked them @ 0530 EST, 1030Z, 2.5h before > >> sunrise, >> > 550 >> > W) and I heard them for an hour after when most stations fade within >> > minutes after sunrise. Impressive. >> > >> > Mike KD8RQE >> > _ >> > 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
Re: Topband: Huge NA-EU opening last night
Hello Tim I am a "Johnny Novice" on Top Band; my best was 25 EU DX contacts the night before last night. That was the first time I was able to call CQ and have EU stations answer me! Last night I worked a few EU, but was playing with my EWE antenna. TB is indeed fun, and very challenging (at least for me!) 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Tim Shoppa <tsho...@gmail.com> wrote: > There was a huge NA-EU 160M opening last night and I was surprised to work > 50 Europeans on one night, outside a contest. I'm sure that 160M veterans > can tell me of working 1000 on a good night, but this was great for me. I'm > surprised there were that many Europeans awake before their dawn! Including > Russians and Ukranians too. > > It was a little different than the "Belgium-specific" opening I found a few > months ago, this one seems to have been all across Europe. There was a good > hour when the DL's, ON's, OK's were loud like regional stations on 80M and > there were a couple loud Ukranians too. > > Reversebeacon screenshot: http://www.trailing-edge.com/DEC31-opening.png > > Tim N3QE > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: 160M EWE Problems Part 2
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 The EWE is pointed roughly 40 degrees, and the grounds are not connected via wire. That means the transformer end is towards Europe, and the resistor end is towards California -- some of you asked for clarification. General Noise Floor: INV-L: S2-S3 spikes above S5 EWE: S4 steady, no spikes (Higher than the INV-L !) Forward reception: In the following table, (S1, S2) means S1 on the INV-L, S2 on the EWE. SP5GRM (S7, S7) OK2RJC (S9 , S6) RA2FV(S6, S4) RN3CT(S7, S4) EU3AR(S5, Below noise level) UT7NY(S5, S4) EI4KF(S5, S4) YO9HP(S5, S5) UY0ZG(S5, S4) Those stations that were S4 on the EWE were pretty much riding the noise level and I could hear them, but they were much stronger (and easily copied) on the INV-L! Conclusions (perhaps incorrect…..) A) The noise floor of the EWE can be higher than that of the INV-L. B) The EWE is NOT suitable for weak signal reception If A and B above are correct, what’s the point of using an EWE? I state my conclusions based upon my observations, knowing full well a lot of you successfully use the EWE antenna, so I still need to learn more, do more tweaking, etc. Back Rejection: I recorded some stations that should have been off the back of the EWE (or thereabouts….. I didn’t check them on QRZ.com, but just assumed 8,9 and 7 land stations were behind me…..) N8 (S9+10 , S7) N7: (S7, S4) N8 (S9+10, S9+10) N9 (S9, S7) N8 (S9+10, S8) N8 (S9+20, S9) So, I am seeing rejection off the back of the EWE. It doesn’t happen all the time, but as I said I didn’t do a search to see where each station was actually located. Some of you asked how I know my cable and transformer are good. I attached the feedline to the transformer, then used a resistance substitution box to put a load on the other end of the transformer. A 470 ohms resistance provided an SWR of 1.1. As I moved the resistance above and below 470, the SWR moved as expected. Since the transformer is 9:1, I felt this showed the coax and transformer were OKI. Comments welcome. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 160M EWE Problems
Good Evening I completely repositioned the EWE today, it's about 70 feet from it's original position and is not pointing at the INV-L.It's pointing towards southern EU. I Verified the feedline was OK, verified the transformer was OK etc. Same results. When listening to an EU station on the INV-L, I switch to the EWE and the signal disappears. It's just not working guys. The transformer is pointed NE towards EU, and the resistor is pointed SW. I've checked just about everything I know to check, and the EWE just ain't workin' for me! Ideas? 73 Mark K3MSB On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Mark K3MSB <mark.k3...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings fellow Top Band enthusiasts! > > > I'm Mark K3MSB, and I live south of York PA. This is my first time posting > to this list. > > > I’ve been licensed for 43 years and got on 160M in November 2014, so this > is the start of my second year. Why I didn’t get on TB sooner is a > question I keep asking myself! I’ve enjoyed the challenge of 80M DXing > for years, and I find 160M to be an even more challenging band! > > > Last year I used an Inverted-L for TX and RX. The vertical part was 30 > feet high and I used about a dozen ground radials. I was very pleased > with its performance and was delighted to be able to work stations in > Europe.This year I changed the Inverted-L; the vertical section is now > up 50 feet and I’m using about 16 ground radials. > > > This year I also decided to put up a separate RX antenna. I put up an EWE > oriented towards Europe. Each leg is 10 feet tall, and the length is 50 > feet.The terminating resistor should be 1.2K, so I used a 2K > potentiometer set for the correct resistance. The preamp is the > P1-30/20VD from Advance Receiver Research. > > > After attempting to use the EWE for a few weeks, I’m convinced the EWE > doesn’t work. Obviously, since a lot of people use the EWE, the antenna > design must work, so it’s an installation or usage problem on my end > that’s the issue. I hope some of you seasoned 160M men can help me out. > > > I have the terminating end supported by a fiberglass mast about 2 feet from > the end of my house (vinyl siding). The transformer end is supported by a > rope to a tree, and the drop to ground on that end is vertical.The > terminating end goes to a 4 foot ground rod. The transformer end goes to > a 2 foot ground rod (septic line concerns prevent me from going deeper). > > > When I turn on the preamp, the noise level rises to the same level as that > heard with my Inverted-L. Stations in Europe are sometimes at the same > signal level, but a lot of times much lower, so that I can hear them better > on the Inverted-L and not on the EWE. Stations off the back of the EWE > sometimes are attenuated, but not all the time. > > > I tried adjusting the potentiometer, and that has no effect at all. I did > this by running a long patch cable from the headphones jack on the > transceiver to the area of the terminating resistor. I tuned in a > moderately strong station (off the back of the EWE) whose signal level was > fairly constant, and adjusted the pot while listening to the audio. No > change at all.Granted, the ear is not the best way to do this. > > > I have a noise issue here, and I think it’s man-made, but from reports of > 160M hams in the area, I’m not sure it’s local. The bandscope on the > radio shows a ragged saw tooth waveform . When I switch from the > Inverted-L to the EWE, the ragged waveform goes away, but I do not see a > decrease in background noise as I expected. > > > My expectation of the EWE is that both signal and noise would go down > (relative to the Inverted-L), but the preamp would boost the signal higher > relative to the noise (although the signal level itself on the EWE would be > less than the Inverted-L). As mentioned above, the noise level is > unchanged, and the signal is much more difficult to copy with the EWE. > > > It was suggested that I connect the two ground rods with a wire. I did > this and it had no effect. > > > So, I’m open to any and all suggestions. > > > 73 Mark K3MSB > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Best DX QRP contact in the SP - N5IA
>>He was the furthest DX contact Same here! 73 Mark K3MSB On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Jim F. via Topband <topband@contesting.com> wrote: > Couldn't believe hearing N5IA before dawn this morning and > got him in the log. > He was the furthest DX contact - by far - and to see whyLook him up on > QRZ.com. His 160m antennas are ... Amazing ! > He copied my 5 watts from a condo in NH on a hidden antenna. > Thank you Milt !!! You made my day ! > I didn't make many QSOs but had a Blast working some of myfavorite QRP > club locals on 160m. > > 73, Jim / W1FMR > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: ARRL 160CW Contest QRP Portable Op
Well, I think doing QRP is nuts on 160M, but I tired it during the RAC Winter Contest and made 26 QSOs in about 1.5 hours, and I have to admit it was kinda fun, and I was just pokin' along. So, me thinks I'll try QRP during the Stew Perry and see how it goes. Now if I could just locate the source of my nasty 160M noise. 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 8:14 AM, K4OWR <k2...@comcast.net> wrote: > I will indeed be in there trying out all my new CW interface goodies. > I have not really operated CW in a contest in many years. > BTW FYI in the CQ 160 contest last year, In 9 hours I made 972 contacts in > all 48 states plus 12 countries :-) :-) For first in TN and 17th. in > country. All on phone. > I did run full power though. One of these days I may try qrp just to > punish myself. > BILL K4OWR > > > On 12/23/2015 9:34 PM, Jim F. via Topband wrote: > >> Amen brother Jim ! >> Hope K4OWR catches the drift and gives it a try :-) Jim / W1FMR >> >> >>From: Jim Brown <j...@audiosystemsgroup.com> >> To: topband@contesting.com >> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 1:55 PM >> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160CW Contest QRP Portable Op >> On Wed,12/23/2015 10:38 AM, K4OWR wrote: >> >>> "/162 contacts in the log, with 51 sections, including 8 countries/" >>> is terrible in any contest. >>> >> Huh? For QRP with a completely portable operation, I'd call that pretty >> good. >> >> The late jazz saxophonist Gene Quill was sometimes criticized for being >> a poor imitation of the great Charlie Parker. At one point, he handed >> his horn to one of those critics, saying "Here -- YOU play Charlie >> Parker solos." >> >> 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 > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 160M EWE Problems
Bjorn, Tim: Thanks for your comments. I don't have much time to play with the antennas until the weekend, but I did manage to hook up an SWR Analyzer. The analyzer says 1.5:1 at 1820 Kc (35 ohms R). So, there is an antenna out there. A need to clarify that the noise level is the same between the INV-L and EWE when I use the EWE preamp. Without the preamp on, the EWE noise level is almost nonexistent. A did notice something. With the coax cables on my other HF antennas, when I unscrew the shield connector and break shield contact the noise rises significantly but goes to nothing when the shield is screwed back on. This does NOT happen when I disconnect / reconnect the PL-259 shield connector on the cable. Re-orienting the EWE to be "in front" of the INV-L isn't possible right (I have only an acre). What I may do is take down the EWE and put it up in the front yard where it will point N/S. I really would like the EWE for EU DX, but if it's not working, then a N/S attempt may be in order. 73 Mark K3MSB On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Tim Shoppa <tsho...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would like to concur with SM0MDG's comments about receive coax > connections. I betcha the OP's system is leaking in at levels way higher > than the Ewe actually produces. I know everyone loves to detune their > transmit antenna, but there's no way an Ewe should sound noisier than the > inverted L. > > A reversible array is far and away the best way to convince yourself that > you have a working receive antenna system. If you reverse it and nothing > ever changes, well, you're listening to some other antenna! Some (e.g. YCCC > array) are supposed to be far more sensitive to near-field metal objects > than others (e.g. K9AY loop) but even then I'm sure you'll be able to find > a convincing F/B on known BCB stations once you have stuff working right. > Another useful beacon is W1AW code practice at 1802.5. > > Tim N3QE > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 9:19 AM, JC <n...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> Hi folks >> >> I would like to add some comments to receiving antennas issue. Any >> resonant thing (wire, cable, rotor cable tower, TX antenna...) will >> interact with the RX antenna if they are in the same polarity, different >> polarity has 27 dB or more of isolation due the polarization itself. >> >> The inverted L is easy to detune, just open the wire from the coaxial and >> check the noise on the EWE. The noise on the RX antenna needs to decrease >> one or 2 S units. However, it is possible you will not see any difference. >> The reason is that you may have another point where common noise is >> deteriorating the directivity of the RX antenna. If it work, just add a >> relay for detuning the Inv L during RX. >> >> The integration with the inverted " L " TX antenna is the easy one do fix >> the others resonant "things" could be difficult to recognize. Example, if >> you have a low dipole or elevated radials, these "things" will destroy any >> directivity of nearby RX antennas, and nearby distance on 160m means 300ft >> or more, one wavelength. Rotor cable, VHF or other's 120ft feed lines could >> be resonant and a good reflector for noise and re-radiate them too. >> >> Lack of good ground (or no ground at all) is receipt for failure on RX. >> Running the cables outside the tower and far from the ground is the >> preferred way to screw things up. >> >> I am following every installation of my WF's and there is an issue very >> frequently found. It is bad connectors contact with the cable shield. Cold >> solder, no solder, little copper wire on the braid. One single point with a >> bad shield can ruin you RX system. >> >> Doug Waller when he build the first WF was very disappointed with the >> results until he found a RCA connector with one RCA ear not contacting >> the preamp input RCA female. Just one little gap in ear with no contact was >> enough to leak noise into the preamplifier input. After fixing the bad >> contact, the RX antenna started to work with good directivity. PL259 or a F >> connector with bad contact with the braid can cause several S units of >> noise. >> >> Spending big money on the radio and do not care about the quality of the >> connectors used for RX is no sense. >> >> Open frame relays (not coaxial relay), open contact switches, plastic >> boxes are the most common points to add noise and destroy the directivity >> pattern. >> >> Running cable outside de tower and ground them at the base is not a very >> popular solution. It is hard to run the cables inside the tower they say. >> As a result RF is everywhere in the shack. No solution for that too. >> >> I am just trying to help, there is no free beef regarding good RX systems. >> >> 73's >> JC >> N4IS >> >> >> >> >> >> _ >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >> > > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 160M EWE Problems
By the way, there is a thread on 160M Noise Levels that is active. Is the noise that I'm seeing common to what others are seeing? If it is, that means it's not local to me (which doesn't mitigate the EWE issue.) 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 160M EWE Problems
Good Evening Everyone Thank you for all the responses, some public, some private. Since some content overlapped, I’ll post my answers to the group. I replaced the 2K pot with a 1.2K resistor. No change. I disconnected the feedline at the base of the Inverted-L (simulating a relay). No change . The EWE is aimed directly at the vertical part of the inverted-L, about 25 to 30 feet away. The transformer end is towards the Inv-L.I didn’t think about that when I put it up. One radial passes the transformer end of the EWE by about 4 feet. No radials pass under the EWE. I took some pix of the bandscope / S-Meter tonight: http://www.k3msb.com/temp/INVL_No_NB_NR.jpg http://www.k3msb.com/temp/INVL_With_NB_NR.jpg http://www.k3msb.com/temp/EWE.jpg <http://www.k3msb.com/temp/EWE.jpg> Here are some measurements (taken before the above photos were taken, so there isn’t necessary any correlation to the measurements and the photos…. With the INV-L feedline disconnected: EWE: S5 1.2 Khz filterNB no effect S3-4 500 Hz filter NB no effect S2-3 250 Hz filterNB no effect With the INV-L feedline connected: EWE: S5.5 1.2 Khz filterNB no effect S4 500 Hz filter NB no effect S1-2 250 Hz filterNB no effect INV-L (NB/NR OFF) S7-8 1.2 Khz filter S5 500 Hz filter S3-4 250 Hz filter INV-L (NB/NR ON) S2-3 1.2 Khz filter S1-2 500 Hz filter S1 250 Hz filter The noise looks partially artificial. I’ve done the gig of popping all the breakers in my house (except the one that powers the radios) with no effect on the noise. Using a portable radio, I swept the entire house and found nothing that caused the noise issue go away. I didn’t turn off the cable modem (need to keep the inmates happy….), but we got our cable modem in January, and this problem pre-dates it. Drove up an down my country road tonight with the car BC radio on as well as the portable battery radio. The car radio didn’t pick up anything; pretty quiet. The portable radio picked up hum, but it was everywhere I went (including inside the house); when I plugged the portable radio into the house mains, the hum went away. I had my neighbor turn off his dusk/dawn light – no change in the noise. The only thing I haven't yet checked is the matching transformer. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: 160M EWE Problems
Greetings fellow Top Band enthusiasts! I'm Mark K3MSB, and I live south of York PA. This is my first time posting to this list. I’ve been licensed for 43 years and got on 160M in November 2014, so this is the start of my second year. Why I didn’t get on TB sooner is a question I keep asking myself! I’ve enjoyed the challenge of 80M DXing for years, and I find 160M to be an even more challenging band! Last year I used an Inverted-L for TX and RX. The vertical part was 30 feet high and I used about a dozen ground radials. I was very pleased with its performance and was delighted to be able to work stations in Europe.This year I changed the Inverted-L; the vertical section is now up 50 feet and I’m using about 16 ground radials. This year I also decided to put up a separate RX antenna. I put up an EWE oriented towards Europe. Each leg is 10 feet tall, and the length is 50 feet.The terminating resistor should be 1.2K, so I used a 2K potentiometer set for the correct resistance. The preamp is the P1-30/20VD from Advance Receiver Research. After attempting to use the EWE for a few weeks, I’m convinced the EWE doesn’t work. Obviously, since a lot of people use the EWE, the antenna design must work, so it’s an installation or usage problem on my end that’s the issue. I hope some of you seasoned 160M men can help me out. I have the terminating end supported by a fiberglass mast about 2 feet from the end of my house (vinyl siding). The transformer end is supported by a rope to a tree, and the drop to ground on that end is vertical.The terminating end goes to a 4 foot ground rod. The transformer end goes to a 2 foot ground rod (septic line concerns prevent me from going deeper). When I turn on the preamp, the noise level rises to the same level as that heard with my Inverted-L. Stations in Europe are sometimes at the same signal level, but a lot of times much lower, so that I can hear them better on the Inverted-L and not on the EWE. Stations off the back of the EWE sometimes are attenuated, but not all the time. I tried adjusting the potentiometer, and that has no effect at all. I did this by running a long patch cable from the headphones jack on the transceiver to the area of the terminating resistor. I tuned in a moderately strong station (off the back of the EWE) whose signal level was fairly constant, and adjusted the pot while listening to the audio. No change at all.Granted, the ear is not the best way to do this. I have a noise issue here, and I think it’s man-made, but from reports of 160M hams in the area, I’m not sure it’s local. The bandscope on the radio shows a ragged saw tooth waveform . When I switch from the Inverted-L to the EWE, the ragged waveform goes away, but I do not see a decrease in background noise as I expected. My expectation of the EWE is that both signal and noise would go down (relative to the Inverted-L), but the preamp would boost the signal higher relative to the noise (although the signal level itself on the EWE would be less than the Inverted-L). As mentioned above, the noise level is unchanged, and the signal is much more difficult to copy with the EWE. It was suggested that I connect the two ground rods with a wire. I did this and it had no effect. So, I’m open to any and all suggestions. 73 Mark K3MSB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
