Re: Topband: HEBA antenna

[kolson]

Look up “Crossed Field Antenna” on Wikipedia… 
  
73, Kevin K3OX 
 

-Original Message-

From: Phil 
To: topband 
Date: Friday, 19 April 2024 12:57 PM EDT
Subject: Re: Topband: HEBA antenna

H 38 feet seems manageable

73

Phil, KBØNES



On Friday, April 19, 2024 at 11:13:56 AM CDT, Radio KH6O  
wrote: 



I'd like to see a version of this for 160M:

https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/headlines/wqvram-is-granted-cp-to-use-heba-antenna-at-night

-- 
73,
Jeff KH6O / 6
_
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: Remotes

[kolson]

Charlie, that was just about what I was thinking. Basically, 'twas always thus. 
I remember operating from a M/M contest station in the early '70s and one of 
the old timers, spying our non-memory keyers, commented that we aren't really 
sending CW ourselves, it was the little box filled with Dinosaur era IC chips 
doing the sending. What would he have thought of N1MM, autofill and Super Check 
Partial? 

I have modest DXCC totals compared to many here, but my only interest is how I 
assess what I have accomplished. It took me roughly 50 years to finally make 
Mixed DXCC Honor Roll from my modest stations, and I am frankly not that 
impressed :). But I am also not impressed by the dude who bought 10 acres, put 
up stacked monobanders, established a "shack" more elaborate in it's own way 
than the WCBS TV transmitter facility I worked at in the Empire State Building 
when I first came to NYC and proceeded to make Honor Roll in a few years. I did 
admire his drive to do all this (and the monetary outlay I could only dream 
of), but still...

Maybe someone should establish a new Countries (oops, entities) award whose 
rules would make even the most hidebound traditionalist proud. I still suspect 
DXCC would keep chugging along, the idea that it has been debased and devalued 
is mostly in folks heads. BTW, what former DXCC department head at HQ (who 
worked most of his countries elsewhere than CT) would drive out to one of the 
big local stations to work a new country (ENTITY...) when one came on the air? 
I'll never tell, hi hi.

73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: "Charles Morrison" 
To: "topband" 
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2024 8:45:08 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Remotes

* If you want to "fix it", petition to change DXCC to read:*

* "4-digit GRID SQUARE" -or- *

* "Same State" -or- *

*"Same Antenna for all contacts"*

* -or- "wearing the same clothes as you wore for your first confirmed
country" *

*instead of "within your country."*


*Then the people who are whining now will still whine = *

*Oh, he's on the higher peak in my grid,*

*Oh, he's visiting his buddy with the 4-Square and they're having a
pizza -&- beer party and I love pizza too. *

*My old clothes dont fit any more.*

*My dial-up mode is too slow for today's internet.*

*I'm still stuck in the 1970's with my Drake line.*


*DXCC RULE 9.  Station Location and Boundary:*

*a)* All stations used to make contacts for a specific DXCC award must be
located within the same DXCC entity.
*c)* QSOs made with legally licensed, remotely controlled stations are
allowed to be used for DXCC credit.


Back in the day the A.M operators complained about the SSB guys
 "slop-bucket"

So much complaining...
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

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

Re: Topband: K9FD

[kolson]

Yeah. K1JT can shove that Nobel Prize where the sun don't shine...

Seriously, he developed the mode, but it was the general Ham population that 
popularized it. They "voted" to operate that mode out of free will, many 
because folks with mediocre stations had very little opportunity to work DX at 
the sunspot doldrums, some because they just didn't enjoy the other legacy 
modes, etc. No one stopped anyone who actually wanted to get on CW (or any 
other mode) from doing so. So "they" didn't ruin 160m, 6m or anything else, for 
that matter. 

It seems bizarre to me to go QRT because of decisions others made, but, 
whatever. It also seems strange to me to assume Ham Radio exists just to cater 
to our particular preferences. 

DXing has always been my favorite Ham Radio interest, so when I heard about an 
organization that's called the "True Blue DXers Club" I joined, it sounded like 
something I would be interested in. But one day I found in my email that the 
"club" wanted its members to take an anti-FT8 loyalty oath, that we wouldn't 
operate that mode, or resign. So, I did. Nuts to that. I wouldn't take an 
anti-CW, SSB, RTTY, moon-bounce or ragchew oath, either.

I am reminded of an old proverb "The Dogs bark, but the Caravan moves on". I 
have had a great time DXing (CW especially) and back in the day, contesting. 
But to me, it would be the height of arrogance to insist that my old ways 
should preclude others from finding their own ways and interests. So yes, let's 
advocate what we do to the new generation of Hams and serve as good example for 
the new guys rather than just disparage them. It's better to plant seeds rather 
than curse the ground.

73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: "sm6cvx" 
To: "ok1tn" 
Cc: "topband" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 1:27:53 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: K9FD

To  OK1TN

YES Slavek,   I agree 100%.   K1JT and his computer-game has 
completely destroyed 160  and 6 meters and most other bands.
VERY SAD .Its a shame.

Me and many many others has almost gone QRT ,and people stay
away from our hobby.   But we had a lot of fun before FT 8.
Because now almost no Ham radio activity  ONLY FT 8….without 
challange and antennas.
 and no need for operating skills.



Take care and stay safe

SM6CVX  Hans
> 28 sep 2022 kl. 18:47 skrev ok1tn :
> 
> Hi to all topbanders.
> K9FD/KH6 was my first and only KH6 station. Merv thus enabled me to get WAS 
> on top band. Thanks for the QSL too. Unfortunately, the days of dx on the 
> top band ended with the expansion of FT8. I am 76 years old and the 
> remaining 4 countries until 300DXCC on TB is probably just a dream..
> 
> -- 
> 73 Slavek Zeler
> www.lc-variable.eu
> www.okdxf.eu
> _
> 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: CQ Zones

[kolson]

Good news! The ARRL already does differentiate this. There is CW DXCC, PHONE 
DXCC, DIGITAL DXCC and MIXED DXCC. Everyone's QSL's/LOTW credits* count for 
only two of these maximum. You can do a little math and gloat to your heart's 
content! 

 And if someone only has MIXED DXCC, you can assume they were all made with the 
mindless DIGITAL modes and still feel superior...

*(oops, wait a minute, I didn't have to "engage my human brain" and fill out a 
QSL card for these, my computer applied for these. Should they count?)

73, Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -
From: Martin Kratoska 
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 18:50:49 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: CQ Zones

Jim,

FIRST - thank you so much for your excellent technical references. It 
helps a lot, I highly appreciate your unparalleled performance.

SECOND - am I allowed to differ between a QSO between living operators 
(possibly friends) and two machines?
If yes, allow me, please keep the difference forever. In a competition 
(DXCC, WAZ, counties etc.), modes with engaged human brain and senses 
should be kept separately from the modes where the brain and senses are 
NOT (or are minimally) engaged. Am I asking for too much?

I am NOT biased against any mode. Do you like it? Do it! Do you count 
this as old dog's new trick? Well, do it, go ahead! BTW there are more 
old dogs, some of them are happy to do old tricks, in the same way as 
they did 50 years ago. As Vern Kaspar, W9FAM did! They still going 
strong, some of them unfortunately only in my mind, in my memories...

Unfortunately I MUST be biased against no-code guys who spreads out with 
pride to have 300 countries and actually they have 150 on SSB and 150 on 
FT8. I would ask them to say honestly that they have X on SSB and Y on 
FT8 and no-code. I would appreciate such honest guy, he would deserve my 
highest respect.

What I am doing wrong?

73,
sincerely
Martin, OK1RR

Dne 09. 03. 21 v 20:41 Jim Brown napsal(a):
> On 3/9/2021 6:36 AM, Martin Kratoska wrote:
>> Oh, FT8 should be proclaimed as illegal for DXCC (WAZ, WAS etc.) in 
>> mixed categories.
>> This "mode" should be counted completely separated from traditional 
>> modes like CW or SSB.
>
> Why? I'm a VERY old dog who can still copy CW in my sleep, but who is 
> still trying to learn new tricks every day. And K1JT's modes are new 
> tricks that allow us to defeat the RF noise that is killing weak 
> signal work for all of us, whether we realize it or not.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
> _
> 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: CQ Zones

[kolson]

That's just what Hal, an old FRC contest mentor said when he saw us operating 
at W3FRY multi-op CQWW CW back in the day with Electronic keyers (oh, the 
mendacity) and CT contest logger (horrors! a computer in the RADIO shack).

What's wrong with paper logs and bugs? (though REAL HAMS used straight keys). 
Back when men were men and so were women...

73, Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -
From: ok1tn 
To: Robert L. Chortek 
Cc: topband@contesting.com, Joe Subich, W4TV 
Sent: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 11:04:43 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: CQ Zones

FT4 FT8 is just a computer game. It's not a ham radio
OK1TN
-- 
73 Slavek Zeler


-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Chortek, Robert L. 
Komu: Joe Subich, W4TV 
Datum: 9. 3. 2021 16:31:21
Předmět: Re: Topband: CQ Zones 
"THANK YOU JOE! That pretty much captures the debate. 

73, 

Bob/AA6VB 
Robert L. Chortek 

> On Mar 9, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV  wrote: 
> 
> [External Email] 
> 
> Oh PLEASE! You sound just like AM phone operators when SSB came 
> along. And spark operators when CW started to replace it. 
> 
> The first DX was nothing more than single letters ... 
> 
> 73, 
> 
> ... Joe, W4TV 
> 
> 
>> On 2021-03-09 10:10 AM, Karel Matousek wrote: 
>> I agree wit Martin OK1RR. 
>> 
>> I cannot endorse FT4, FT8 for the ARRL DXCC Program. 
>> 
>> IMHO, this should NEVER be allowed unless qualified in a separate rules 
>> category! 
>> 
>> Karel OK1CF 
>> __ 
>>> Od: "Martin Kratoska"  
>>> Komu: topband@contesting.com 
>>> Datum: 09.03.2021 15:37 
>>> Předmět: Re: Topband: CQ Zones 
>>> 
>> Oh, FT8 should be proclaimed as illegal for DXCC (WAZ, WAS etc.) in 
>> mixed categories. 
>> This "mode" should be counted completely separated from traditional 
>> modes like CW or SSB. 
>> 
>> 73, 
>> Martin, OK1RR 
>> 
>> 
>> Dne 09. 03. 21 v 15:16 Ian Fugler napsal(a): 
>> > Hi, Dave 
>> > 
>> > Zone 23 - JT5DX will be your man. He is active in contests and puts 
>> out a good signal. 
>> > 
>> > Zone 24 - will be more of a challenge. I have worked XX9D and a 
>> couple of BY stations. But you may need to use FT8 for the BY stations, 
>> since they seem strongly to prefer that mode. 
>> > 
>> > 73 and GL! 
>> > 
>> > Ian G4iiY 
>> > 
> 
> 
> _ 
> 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: The WD8DSB mini-flag antenna

[kolson]

I have read some negative info on the Malahit (the EBAY clones especially, the 
Russian originals seem better) but it might be OK for RFI investigations. N9EWO 
Review : Russian Malachite / Malahit DSP SDR (qsl.net)

But I can recommend this: LAN-IQ SDR (Stand-alone SDR) (afedri-sdr.com)

This is about $400 with tuning knob encoder but is a small, slick and fairly 
serious receiver with a 12 bit Direct Sampling receiver on HF (the Icom 7300 is 
a 14 bit Direct Sampler) and covers from 30 kHz to 1700 gHz with built in 
Spectrum Display and Waterfall. It runs on USB power (I use a Power Bank that 
folks use to recharge up their phones). It probably is overkill for just 
occasional RFI expeditions, but if you like the idea of having a portable wide 
range RX when not on the RFI hunt), it is well worth it.

No connection to the seller (4Z5LB in Israel). He shipped mine promptly, I was 
surprised how soon it arrived!

73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Don Kirk 
To: David Raymond 
Cc: topband 
Sent: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 14:23:17 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: The WD8DSB mini-flag antenna

Hi Dave,

I hate to recommend anything and others have given you some good
recommendations, nevertheless I will make a few comments.

My workhorse radio for direction finding is the good old Realistic DX-440
(also sold as a Sangen ATS-803A) and you can still find nice clean used
ones on E-Bay for less than $100 (I suspect I drove the price of them up).
It is a very old and large radio, but I love this radio for numerous
reasons. It has an external antenna jack as well as an excellent
continuously adjustable RF gain control that really comes in handy. It
also has a BFO for receiving CW which sometimes is very helpful depending
on the signal you are tracking. It uses 6 D cells and has excellent
battery life. I use the radio in AM mode for tracking down power line
noise, but sometimes I need to use the BFO for signals that are just a
carrier as it helps to hear the signal (no need to look at a meter, etc).

I also use a laptop based SDR receiver which is just a cheap RTL-SDR dongle
along with a ham it up converter (both from NooElec) and I have both of
these stuck to the back of my laptop screen so I can go portable with it,
and this is a very handy tool especially if the signal is wandering all
over the place or if I am in a heavily populated area with lots of
different sources of RFI present. If you go this route make sure you pay
the few extra bucks for a TCXO in both of them.

The IC-705 is also a radio that likely would work well, especially since it
has waterfall displays for both the RF and Audio Spectrum, and it also has
an Audio Oscilloscope and I'm anxious to see how helpful that might be.

I see there is now a very small handheld HF SDR receiver called the Malahit
(looks like the size of nanoVNAs), but I don't know how good they really
work. If they become a trusted device I certainly will be interested in
using one for DFing.

73 my friend,
Don (wd8dsb)

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 9:18 PM David Raymond 
wrote:

> Don. . .thank you for the very nice loop article in QST. And, thank
> you for your generosity of not taking compensation to help make it
> affordable. The loop antenna would be a very useful tool to have in the
> arsenal for DFing interference sources of all kinds which continue to
> proliferate (even out in the country where I live).  I am currently
> experiencing an interference problem on 160m that is about 10-15 KHz
> broad with a couple of modest peaks. It often parks in the 1825-1835 KHz
> window on 160m. The frequency range it occupies wanders some and varies
> inversely with the outside temperature. I have DFd it fairly close with
> the HI-Z 8 circle array and know the direction of the source but need
> something portable to home in on it. Do you or anyone here any
> suggestions for a reasonably good portable receiver with an external
> antenna jack (might be hard to find?) that will cover the 160m band . .
> .and maybe up to 30 MHz?
>
> Thanks and 73. . . Dave, W0FLS
>
> On 2/23/2021 5:37 PM, John Kaufmann via Topband wrote:
> > As a follow-up to my original post, here are a few additional comments.
> >
> > Don, you mention that you designed the mini-flag for a deep null off the
> > back at low elevation angles, which is entirely understandable. As I
> said
> > in my earlier post, the null is very pronounced in the AM BCB on local
> > groundwave signals. However, I also see pretty significant nulls on
> > higher-angle signals, too. Just a short time ago, I was listening to
> W1AW
> > on the low end of 160. They are located only ~100 miles from me. Their
> > signal has to be arriving at a pretty high angle, but the null is still
> > quite pronounced.
> >
> > My homebrew preamp, that I mentioned in my post, uses a cascade of UTO
> 511
> > and UTO 533 mini-amplifier modules. I used this preamp, not necessarily
> > because it's optimal, but because I already happened to have it on hand.
> > 

Re: Topband: Tesla Powerwall and RFI

[kolson]

It stores power from your solar panels or from the grid and will power your 
home in an outage. I think it also does stuff like "time shift" power from 
cheaper off peak hours for use during peak hours. So it's a sort of complete 
home power control system...

73. Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Roy Morgan 
To: Steven Daniel 
Cc: topband reflector 
Sent: Mon, 18 May 2020 20:27:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Topband: Tesla Powerwall and RFI

Steven, 

I look forward to any replies. 

I was about to publish my blockbuster book revealing all of the secret genius 
technology from Tesla to enable nearly free electric power for everyone, but 
some strong-arm goons from the oil industry paid me a visit and threatened to 
send me to North Korea for a year of "psychological and cultural re-education". 
So I am sending it to some nice people In Switzerland. Maybe they can use it. 

But wait! I think Tesla is working on home and commercial solar energy and 
storage. The storage devices for homes seem to be called called the Powerwall. 
Why you would want a battery on your living room wall I do not know. 

See Tesla.com for a picture. 

Roy Morgan
K1LKY Western Mass

> On May 18, 2020, at 7:27 PM, Steven Daniel  wrote:
> 
> OK. I’ll bite. What’s a Tesla Powerwsll? 
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: FT8 clutter on the DX Cluster

[kolson]

It should be mentioned that when rarer DX shows up they often use FT8 Fox/Hound 
on non standard FT8 frequencies so the cluster can be helpful to find these 
operations. 

And really, the equivalent of the CW/SSB op who doesn't constantly tune the 
bands is the FT8 op who doesn't constantly stare at the screen. The cluster can 
serve both.

73, Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -
From: Roger Kennedy 
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tue, 12 May 2020 19:58:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Topband: FT8 clutter on the DX Cluster


Why oh why do some people post on the DX Cluster every FT8 station they have
heard?

One GM station this evening posted 21 stations . . . none of them were even
DX !

I don't even see why you would post ANY on the DX Cluster . . . I thought
the whole point of FT8 is that you leave your computer listening on the same
frequency, so surely any stations will just come up on the screen?

Whereas posting the frequency of a CW or SSB DX station on the Cluster is
really useful to help people find those stations, and attempt a QSO.

Also . . . as others have said, DX propagation is still pretty good on 160m
most nights . . . but despite lots of CQ calls by myself and other EU
stations, we're often getting no replies! (despite RBN reports being good)

73 Roger G3YRO

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

Re: Topband: TI9A

[kolson]

Just time yours to coincide with his. :)

73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Thomas Hoyer via Topband 
To: w...@w0mu.com, topband@contesting.com
Sent: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 15:39:05 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: TI9A

Don't think the boss would like me taking a nap during the day


-Original Message-
From: W0MU Mike Fatchett 
To: topband 
Sent: Wed, Feb 5, 2020 12:58 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: TI9A

They should have stayed on past EU Sunrise which would be the prime time 
to work them from NA.  Take a nap earlier in the day and stay up and wait?

W0MU

On 2/5/2020 10:56 AM, Thomas Hoyer via Topband wrote:
> They were really good copy here in eastern PA last night. I'm happy for all 
> of the EU stations that made it into the log but was a bit disappointed that 
> they were only working EU - while I was listening anyway, I just hope they 
> are just as strong when they call for NA - maybe tonight
> I just crossed the DXCC threshold the other evening and would like to work 
> TI9A for number 101!
> TomW3TA
> _
> 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: New Modes, Systems, etc

[kolson]

It's easy to appreciate why many people - who are passionate about the hobby
- get upset about some of the things they see as being very negative to the
hobby.

 Here in Britain there were LOTS of well-respected Amateurs who were actively
involved in Jamming the VHF Repeaters when they first came on the air in the
1970s.

However "well respected" they were, shouldn't they have been reported to the 
authorities rather than "appreciated"? Should we appreciate hams who jam 
dxpeditions, contesters, traffic nets or ragchewers?

Just curious...

73 Kevin K3OX
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband

[kolson]

Another entry in the "Great American Humorist" contest. Very good!

73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Wes 
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 00:12:52 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband

CW, it's just like FT-8 but for men.

N7WS

On 1/10/2020 10:03 PM, kol...@rcn.com wrote:
> BTW, sign seen in a local traffic handlers shack back in the late 
> '60's:"Everyone is welcome in my shack be you Ham Radio operator or Phone 
> man."The more things change...73 Kevin K3OX
>

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

Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband

[kolson]

BTW, sign seen in a local traffic handlers shack back in the late 
'60's:"Everyone is welcome in my shack be you Ham Radio operator or Phone 
man."The more things change...73 Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: kol...@rcn.com
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 23:52:07 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband

It would seem that the new digital modes have re-invigorated ham radio, at 
least activity wise. But if ham radio is so fragile that it cannot sustain in 
the face of interest in a new mode, maybe it deserves to die. I personally 
don't think it will, it is and has always been a big tent...73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Hans Hjelmström 
To: W0MU Mike Fatchett 
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:12:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband

And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
Sorry.Its the end of Ham radio
Hans SM6CVX


> 10 jan 2020 kl. 20:06 skrev W0MU Mike Fatchett :
> 
> 1.5 million hits for FT8? WOW!
> 
> On 1/10/2020 11:38 AM, Herbert Schoenbohm wrote:
>> I know the purists will flame me for this but look at the
>> frequency conservation this would present and look at the activity
>> statistics for only the past couple of hours,
>> 
>> AIf the contest was designed well sub-channels could be recommended for the
>> various continents as Stew Perry use to urge for intercontinental QSO's
>> from 1825-1830.
>> 
>> Here are the amazing stats for only two hours.
>> 
>> Modes over last 2 hours
>> Mode Count
>> FT8 1549146
>> FT4 41733
>> JS8 7895
>> CW 6894
>> PSK31 433
>> JT65 383
>> OPERA 132
>> JT9 65
>> MSK144 37
>> OLIVIA 22
>> OLIVIA 8 22
>> JT6M 18
>> ROS 14
>> DOMINO 13
>> PI4 12
>> OLIVIA-8 9
>> PSK63 9
>> FSK441 8
>> JT65B 7
>> WSPR 6
>> RTTY 5
>> MT63-500 1
>> SIM31 1
>> THOR 1
>> THOR22 1
>> PSK 1
>> CONTESTI 1
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> 
>> Herb, KV4FZ
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _._,_._,_
>> --
>> Groups.io Links:
>> 
>> You receive all messages sent to this group.
>> 
>> View/Reply Online (#3244)
>>  | Reply To Group
>> 
>> | Reply To Sender
>> 
>> | Mute This Topic  | New Topic
>> 
>> _
>> 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
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband

[kolson]

It would seem that the new digital modes have re-invigorated ham radio, at 
least activity wise. But if ham radio is so fragile that it cannot sustain in 
the face of interest in a new mode, maybe it deserves to die. I personally 
don't think it will, it is and has always been a big tent...73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Hans Hjelmström 
To: W0MU Mike Fatchett 
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:12:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband

And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
Sorry.Its the end of Ham radio
Hans SM6CVX


> 10 jan 2020 kl. 20:06 skrev W0MU Mike Fatchett :
> 
> 1.5 million hits for FT8? WOW!
> 
> On 1/10/2020 11:38 AM, Herbert Schoenbohm wrote:
>> I know the purists will flame me for this but look at the
>> frequency conservation this would present and look at the activity
>> statistics for only the past couple of hours,
>> 
>> AIf the contest was designed well sub-channels could be recommended for the
>> various continents as Stew Perry use to urge for intercontinental QSO's
>> from 1825-1830.
>> 
>> Here are the amazing stats for only two hours.
>> 
>> Modes over last 2 hours
>> Mode Count
>> FT8 1549146
>> FT4 41733
>> JS8 7895
>> CW 6894
>> PSK31 433
>> JT65 383
>> OPERA 132
>> JT9 65
>> MSK144 37
>> OLIVIA 22
>> OLIVIA 8 22
>> JT6M 18
>> ROS 14
>> DOMINO 13
>> PI4 12
>> OLIVIA-8 9
>> PSK63 9
>> FSK441 8
>> JT65B 7
>> WSPR 6
>> RTTY 5
>> MT63-500 1
>> SIM31 1
>> THOR 1
>> THOR22 1
>> PSK 1
>> CONTESTI 1
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> 
>> Herb, KV4FZ
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _._,_._,_
>> --
>> Groups.io Links:
>> 
>> You receive all messages sent to this group.
>> 
>> View/Reply Online (#3244)
>>  | Reply To Group
>> 
>> | Reply To Sender
>> 
>> | Mute This Topic  | New Topic
>> 
>> _
>> 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

Topband: Contemporaneous

[kolson]

According to online dictionary, Contemporaneous:

 Existing or occurring in the same period of time.
 "Pythagoras was contemporaneous with Buddha"

But, as it happens, neither Pythagoras nor the Buddha had to deal with 
important things like the ARRL DXCC program. :)

73, Kevin K3OX
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: 160: Digital only DXCC needed

[kolson]

"I said already last year. FT 8 and K1JT will kill our hobby. It takes away all 
efforts, challenge and personal touch."

Read the W6AM book, get the West Coast DX bulletin compilation book and dig 
back to your efforts in the '60s and '70s (if you were around). Even without 
FT8, DXing is mega easier in the 21 Century than before. The "efforts, 
challenge and personal touch" has been eroding for the last 30 years or so and 
we GOT OVER IT! So why is FT8 suddenly the tipping point? It's just a 
continuation of what was already going on for decades as technology unfolds.

"I saw yesterday 2 Hams saying,they will sell their equipment and go QRT for 
ever in our hobby."

Must not be very committed hams. Or old and tired...

"The ONLY possible hope, is ,if ARRL change the rules,and NOT include this FT 8 
in mixed band dxcc:s. Make a special FT 8 award. That might help."

Personally, I have no objection to this. But THIS is the move that will save 
ham radio???

"And that dx-expeditions will be ONLY CW/SSB/RY 75 % and may be FT 8  25 %.Fair 
?"

Why shouldn't the DXpeditioners and the Ham Radio "marketplace" decide? BTW, 
whenever I have operated from DX QTH's, except for Phone DX contests, I work 
CW. Personal preference.

"I am happy ,I was active 1960 up to this day,and have had so much fun,,,BEFORE"

This actually makes me sad to read. I say, be happy and operate how you prefer, 
let the others go their way. I try to never let what others choose to do ruin 
my fun! 

I can be a cynical old coot, but I am still optimistic that Ham Radio will 
continue to bring enjoyment to all who discover it whatever their interests. I 
see young folks at the local Record Store still buying Vinyl records, likewise 
I suspect some young folks will fall in love with CW and SSB (if we let them).
 
73, Kevin K3OX

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

Topband: History of DXing, was Re: 160

[kolson]

To me, the guys who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until the 
computer era.

BTW, to give you an idea what I mean, I can most highly recommend the book 
W6AM, Amateur Radio's Pioneer. It's a fascinating book about an interesting and 
determined man and a legend in the annals of DXing, Don Wallace, who died in 
1985. If you are interested in DXing and history (or the history of DXing), 
this is a must read.

73, Kevin K3OX
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: 160

[kolson]

I was shooting for somewhat interesting, so it's nice to hear that I made it 
all the way to semi-interesting!

Mark, I am not sure why you felt compelled to defend your software expertise, 
but I don't think anyone intended to demean you in any way. If it came off that 
way, I apologize.

Now I have worked new countries on RTTY with my IC-7300 untethered to a 
computer. All it took was a) tune to the frequency of the DX cluster callout b) 
push message buttons until I worked the station c) Log it. So someone with your 
level of expertise surely would agree that that process with todays technology 
could be reduced to one button push. 

Further, since our computers can tune our radios, access DX cluster callouts, 
operate skimmer for more stations, decode any digital mode (and for that 
matter, CW and through voice recognition, SSB), switch our antennas, turn our 
rotors, access our DXCC records, interface with propagation software and real 
time solar indices, log the contacts, send the results to LOTW and print labels 
for QSL's, in principal, the station can be automated to any degree the 
software designer desires and has the chops to implement. 

Not to say that would be more fun. In fact, when computer contest logging came 
along I wasn't a big fan. But the world went on and now hardly anyone would 
(gulp) PAPER LOG! I would rather work CW, but I will work SSB and FT8 when it 
suits me.

Now regarding your baseball comment I feel on more solid ground. The game of 
baseball in Ruth's and Aaron's day was almost night and day different. In fact, 
Ruth had to play most of his games in the daytime summer heat, Aaron played 
most of his games at night for most of his career. And Ruth didn't have to face 
any Afro-American pitchers no matter how good they were (for obvious reasons). 
In Aaron's day, the balls were tighter and more consistently manufactured, the 
gloves larger (improving defensive efficiency) and the bats had thinner handles 
(allowing higher bat speeds). In addition, the fields were better maintained 
(and in some cases, had artificial turf) and the era of dedicated relief 
pitchers had arrived (in Ruth's day, relief pitchers were generally washed up 
starters only used in desperation). I could go on, but no one seriously 
interested thinks you can directly compare the records of players in different 
eras. And a large contributor to this was technology, like the chang
 es in Ham Radio are.

As far as your Bathroom comment, I have known guys who could do that while 
working a CW contest with the addition of a low-tech cup, hi hi.

73, Kevin K3OX

  

- Original Message -
From: Mark K3MSB 
To: kol...@rcn.com
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 17:56:34 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 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 

Re: Topband: Review of the last 1000 spots on 160m

[kolson]

Why weep? To me, it sounds like a lot of people got on and had some fun on the 
modes they felt were appropriate. Hey, at least they were actively on the air 
with Ham Radio. If I am going to weep, it's about all the licensed hams who are 
apathetic and never get on the air. 

But yes, the best way to promote the more traditional modes is to get on the 
air with them and communicate our love for them with others. I like CW best 
because, for me, it's the most fun. But the other modes are also fun. And fun 
is where YOU find it.

73, Kevin K3OX
 
- Original Message -
From: k1zm--- via Topband 
To: wes n7ws , topband@contesting.com
Sent: Sat, 03 Aug 2019 12:30:52 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Topband: Review of the last 1000 spots on 160m

Whoa!
That matrix of Clublog contacts made by mode really does make it pretty clear 
to me.
Probably the best thing we can all do to deal with this is to get on CW and SSB 
as often as we may desire to - to keep the traditional modes alive in the 
traditional band segments.
Tks Wes for adding to this conversation.
73 JEFF
In a message dated 2019-08-03 4:27:01 PM Coordinated Universal Time, 
wes_n...@triconet.org writes:

Perhaps more informative, read it and weep:  https://clublog.org/dxreport.html

Wes  N7WS


On 8/3/2019 8:34 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
> Of the last 1000 spots downloaded from DX Summit  just over 200 of them at on 
> FT8.  Which means that nearly 800 spots were NOT FT8 meaning those were CW or 
> SSB spots.  Not all of the spots are actually spots as many spots are just 
> people venting and using the system as their message system.
>
> Are we really not utilizing our bands?
>
> You decide.
>
> W0MU
>
>
>
>
> _
> 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: WAR !

[kolson]

Packet radio ran unattended for most guys many years ago. I could be at the 
store and the DX callouts would come and my radio would acknowledge them.

I don't remember this being illegal or immoral...

73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Joe 
To: Mark Lunday , Artek Manuals , 
topband@contesting.com
Sent: Sat, 03 Aug 2019 11:17:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Topband: WAR !

What I do not understand on all this is.

If the station is running on itself UN-attended.

Is that just not even legal. Never mind ethical?

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 8/3/2019 9:20 AM, Mark Lunday wrote:
> Dave, that's interesting.
>
> If I remember correctly, there was a data buoy floating in the Pacific with 
> an HF rig on it. Hams could call the buoy and work it on FT8. Because it 
> reported grid location, callers could work different grids as the thing 
> floated with the currents.
>
> Mark Lunday, WD4ELG
> Greensboro, NC FM06be
> wd4...@arrl.net
> http://wd4elg.blogspot.com
> SKCC #16439 FISTS #17972 QRP ARCI #16497
> _
> 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

[kolson]

"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 two of intermittent effort. And a fabulous talent for a contester to have 
was a good level of call recall (hi hi), the more guys you rememberd you worked 
the less you had to refer to the Cross Check sheet. Of course, all this is 
gone, replaced by our computer running a program like N1MM (or CT in th
 e olden times). 
  
I could go on (but mercifully won't), the point is that this is all part of a 
natural progression, an inevitable part of human innovation. To me, the guys 
who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until the computer era. You 
could argue that we have devalued their accomplishments (you can also argue 
they had more fun, but that's another post). But I would argue that everyone's 
accomplishments stand on their own according to their time, circumstances and 
operating preferences. Hank Aaron didn't devalue Babe Ruth. I would also argue 
that the world keeps turning and the caravan is inexorable...
 
73, Kevin K3OX  

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

Re: Topband: Summer Update & a Surprise

[kolson]

I didn't realize we were talking specifically about 160 meter DXCC listings 
(though this IS the Topband reflector, hi hi). 

Still, to get the countries that it takes to get high up on the 160 meter DXCC 
list will take a serious station and a lot of skill (of a different sort than 
CW, but skill nonetheless) even if one is using FT8. I don't really think we 
have to worry about dudes operating 160 meters with 100w and a Butternut 
vertical using FT8 to show up on 160m DXCC Honor Roll...

73, K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Mark K3MSB 
To: kol...@rcn.com
Cc: FZ Bruce , Andrzej_SP6AEG , uy0zg 
, topband@contesting.com
Sent: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 09:56:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 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' 


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.contesting.com/_topband [5] - Topband

Reflector



Links:

--

[1] http://www.topband.in.ua

[2]

Re: Topband: Summer Update & a Surprise

[kolson]

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' 

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.contesting.com/_topband [5] - Topband
Reflector
 

Links:
--
[1] http://www.topband.in.ua
[2]
http://www.arrl.org/system/dxcc/view/DXCC-160M-20190731-A4.pdf#page=1=a
http://www.arrl.org/system/dxcc/view/DXCC-160M-20190731-A4.pdf#page=1=a
 /> > uto,-12,848
 > 
 > And then FT8 (and many future FTs ) will lose popularity.
 > 
 > Only children will play with them ...
 > 
 > 
 > ---
 > Nick, UY0ZG
 > http://www.contesting.com/_topband
[4] http://www.contesting.com/_topband
[5] http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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

Re: Topband: Which RX antenna is better?

[kolson]

On my small lot (130 ft by 50 ft, but it does have a house on it, hi hi) about 
the only half decent and flexible RX antenna I can manage is a K9AY. And it 
definitely helps most of the time, useful on 30 (once in a while), 40 (often), 
80 (almost always) and 160 meters (almost always). But it's not up to those 
guys with bevs and circle arrays, etc. I really would like to hear better on 
160m, but scheme as I might I can't come up with a RX antenna that would work 
better on my property. Mine has no special provision for being away from other 
antennas, I plunked it where it had to be to fit.

Overall, I am glad I have it, it's certainly a compromise but a decent one.

73, Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: terry burge 
To: terry burge , topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 03:34:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Topband: Which RX antenna is better?

Hi again folks,


Got some great advice from several others. 'Shared Apex'; KD9SV bi-directional 
beverage recommended; K9AY (guess I need to get busy and finish mine); Hi-Z 8 
along with Waller-Flag at 95' head and shoulders above others (but expensive 
and tough to build); both K9AY and Beverages not very effected by TX ants/other 
objects around them so much. No real recommendations for DHDL, EWE, 
Flag/Pennant, etc. Being that my property is only one and a half acres for all 
but the bi-directional KD9SV beverage it sounds like my first step is to get 
the K9AY going and the beverage if I can. That does mean some 'interesting' 
hill climbing exercise and hopefully my neighbor won't be target practicing 
while I'm on his hillside. Don't we hams do some strange things just to be able 
to hear radio signals? 


Anyway, that's what I got so far. I do wonder which is better between the 
'shared apex loop(s)' and maybe a 4 or 8 vertical RX array from DXE. Why hasn't 
any hams wrote about what is involved in making a high impedance receive 
vertical work? Of course that requires Doppler shifts I guess like I used in 
the USASA for direction finding way back when (flare 7/9 style). Who would have 
thought I'd be looking at using that technology so many years later?


Terry

KI7M

> On July 28, 2019 at 9:27 PM terry burge  wrote:
> 
> 
>   Hi folks,
> 
>   I have four kits purchased on ebay for receive antennas as well as a 
> bi-directional beverage from KD9SV. Looking on my county plot map it looks 
> like I can run about a 412' beverage using my neighbors ground and mine. Got 
> a good neighbor you could say who just doesn't want a BOG to trip on but a 
> beverage not too low to walk into is Ok. My ebay provided kits are DHDL, EWE 
> and Penant/flag/diamond from a low cost Canada source. But I'm faced with the 
> problem of fences, power lines, roads and my TX antennas on my 1 1/2 acre 
> plot. If one of those antennas could handle being near the fences,etc or TX 
> antennas I'd like to hear about it. I've already got a K9AY in the works and 
> that one is near my 40 meter 4-square. Running the beverage is going to be 
> near or even under my K8UR style 80 meter 4-square made with 1/2 WL slopers. 
> I've thought some about converting the 80 meter 4-square to using 
> 3":irrigation tubing extended with some 3" irrigation tubing and a coil at 
> the elevated base but
 I'm just not sure if it would be an improvement. It would be near 50' 
verticals if I could do it. Not sure if I would lose too much gain.
> 
> 
>   Any suggestions other than 'give up'? I've always had a time hearing the DX 
> especially on 160 meters.
> 
>   Terry
> 
>   KI7M
> 
> 


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

Re: Topband: Directions to Bouvet

[kolson]

I should say, don't go via Duluth, Bucko... 

From Firesign Theater: 

BABE: Hey, Ralph! That's great fidelity on that FM! Nice tone! 
RALPH: You haven't heard nothing yet. I've got right here in this car, for your 
trans-Atlantic driving pleasure, this fully hallicrafted Sea-Master short-wave 
radio in this non-returnable, non-disposable zinc-lined carrying case! 
BABE: Can I get Duluth on it? 
RALPH: Duluth, bucko! You can get Tierra Del Fuego! 
SOUND: Short-wave radio turned on. 
LATIN ANNOUNCER: !Hola, amigos Latinos! Aqui a Ralph's Used Motors, 
tres-cientos Nort' Hoover, a la esquina de 42nd Place, tenemos milliones de 
automoviles. . . [fading under] 

Let's hope we can all get Bouvet whether or not we a re " fully hallicrafted" . 

Best, Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Mark - N5OT"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2019 6:06:16 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Directions to Bouvet 

Someone needed directions to Bouvet: 

Go south to to Tierra del Fuego and turn left.  Watch for it on the right. 

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Tierra+del+Fuego+Province,+Argentina/Bouvet+Island/@
 - 53.2860989, - 
50.2223376,4z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0xbc4c22cfd9432921:0x80ee54358cf0d88d!2m2!1d
 - 68.3242061!2d - 
54.8053998!1m5!1m1!1s0x463a3f223c0c2717:0xb76870f9f9dabceb!2m2!1d3.3464497!2d - 
54.4207915 

Mark N5OT 
_ 
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector 

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

Re: Topband: Directions to Bouvet

[kolson]

But don't go via Duluth, Bunky... 

73 Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Mark - N5OT"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2019 6:06:16 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Directions to Bouvet 

Someone needed directions to Bouvet: 

Go south to to Tierra del Fuego and turn left.  Watch for it on the right. 

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Tierra+del+Fuego+Province,+Argentina/Bouvet+Island/@
 - 53.2860989, - 
50.2223376,4z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0xbc4c22cfd9432921:0x80ee54358cf0d88d!2m2!1d
 - 68.3242061!2d - 
54.8053998!1m5!1m1!1s0x463a3f223c0c2717:0xb76870f9f9dabceb!2m2!1d3.3464497!2d - 
54.4207915 

Mark N5OT 
_ 
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector 

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

Re: Topband: Satisfactory fiberglass pole for K9AY loop

[kolson]

I went to H ome D epot and bought a 23 ft extendable paint extens ion pole. 
It's been up for 8 years so far. The K9AY guys it just fine. Cheap, easy and 
available. 

Kevin K3OX 
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: DXwars over the years

[kolson]

I was licensed long enough ago that I have seen a ton of changes in Ham Radio, 
all of which were purported to make Ham Radio  "easy " and make the previous 
generation of Hams feel that their accomplishments were somehow being devalued. 
Here are a few... 

ARRL DX contest ending Quotas: "We could only work three stations from a 
country, now you just sit on a frequency and call CQ, where's the skill in 
that?" 

When I passed my license test, I was told "Yeah, well when WE were licensed, 
the was none of this multiple guess stuff, we had essay questions and drew 
schematics" 

As commercial radio gear became more available: "Appliance Ope rator s! W e had 
to build our own" 

The advent of electronic keyers: "It takes skill to send CW with a straight key 
or bug (true dat...), now the keyer does the work" 

SSB replacing AM; "Anyone can work DXCC on SSB" 

QSL Bureaus: "you just send your cards to some dude in Pennsylvania/ Newington" 

The ascension of DXpeditions: "They tell you when, what frequency and what 
call, it's  like shooting fi sh in a barrel" 

The advent of computers. DX Cluster: "More fish in a barrel", Contesting so 
ftware: "T hese guys don't even know what a crosscheck sheet is!" Rtty 
software: "Nowadays, you just hook a computer to your radio, t ry keeping a 
Teletype machine up and running" 

CW requirement ended:  "I hear they are going to put Ham Licenses in Cracker 
Jack boxes" 

LOTW: "like QSL bureaus but without QSL's" 

Not to mention the Transceiver (and the once unusual but now c om mo n 
inclusion of 160 meters which I am sure many OT's saw as the ruination of Top 
Band at the time ) , Desktop Linears, DX nets, Rig/Antenna/Rotor control 
software, D XCC record software etc. 

All this stuff that made Ham Radio so much easier happened in my lifetime and 
as a result, it onl y took me about 47 years to eek my way onto the bottom of 
the Mixed DXCC Honor roll :) 

So regarding reactions to FT8 , I think " 'twas always thus". Interestingly, 
from the standpoint of a US Ham, the vast majority of FT8 QSO's are US/ NA to 
US/NA or US/NA to common DXCC entit ies where the noise floor advantage of FT8 
doesn't generally matter. I suspect that FT8 is just the "new mode on the 
block" and an alternative to SSB for the op uninterested in or unable to 
operate  CW. I really don't think there are that many H ams who look at FT8 as 
their opportunity to swell the ranks of the Honor Roll... 

73 Kevin K3OX 

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

Re: Topband: 160 Antenna

[kolson]

Traditionally, the 80 meter dipole example you sited was the typical 
improvisation guys used to get on 160. How well it worked depended on how long 
and vertical the feedline was and a lot of luck, basically how close to a "T" 
top loaded vertical fed against ground it ended up being . But a little 
intention could make it work much better. 

When I put up my first antenna at this QTH (a 92 ft dipole fed with 42ft  of 
open wire line aka ZS6BKW antenna), I put a switch box at the base that shorted 
the bottom of the feedline and fed it to a matching network to make it an 
actual "T" on 160 and put down about 30 random length radials at ground level. 
It has worked pretty well for what it is. 

In your situation, you don't really have anything approximating the traditional 
 "T" .  So applying intention to your case , since you already have a vertical 
with radials, I would say that the easiest good solution would be to put a 
loading coil between the antenna end of your feedline choke and the radiator of 
your 40 meter vertical and tap it for resonance. You cou ld just physically 
switch it in and out to change bands, but ultima tely you will  probably want 
to work out a way to use relays to remote switch the taps, with no inductor in 
series on 40 meters and progressively more on o ther bands (you cou ld add 60 
and 80 meters in addition to 160 if you wanted). You would ne ed to either run 
a control cable or build an arrangement to inject the switching voltage on your 
existing coax. What you would end up with is a base fed vertical, basically a 
version of the Butternut vertical system which works reasonably well on 160. 
You may want to add a few longer radials to help further on 160. 

The low wire would probably be a very poor antenna on 160. 

73, K3OX 

- Original Message -

From: "Joe"  
To: "TopBand"  
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 9:31:49 AM 
Subject: Topband: 160 Antenna 

OK, as users of this band, we all have probably done this at least once 
in your radio lifetime. 

You want to get on 160, but do not have an actual 160 antenna. So you 
connect the largest antenna ya have, usually a 80 meter dipole, but you 
just push the connector in just so only the center pin is touching, and 
load the whole thing up like a top capacity hat, vertical, or end fed 
long wire.  Hey it works. 

I'm thinking of doing something similar, because a full sized 1/4 wave 
elevated vertical for 40 meters, works as well as a cannenna does when 
trying to use it on 160. 

But I never thought of what might be the best way to do this. The 
antenna as stated is a full sized 1/4 wave elevated Vertical,  The base 
of the vertical is 10 feet above the ground with sloping radials that 
act as guy wires also to hold the base in place. 

At the base of the antenna right at the feedpoint, is a large multi turn 
coax choke. ( Ya know the so many turns on a PVC pipe thing ) 

The feedline is then ran through the air for about 60 feet to the eve of 
the house where it runs along the eve of the house on 2 sides and 
finally into the shack. Total length is about 100 feet. 

Now I am trying to decide without actually trying to make up connectors 
or whatever, what might be the best way to use this on 160. 

1- As described above just the center pin, touching. I guess with the 
braid floating the braid gets capacitivly coupled to the power and does 
the radiating and receiving. YES? NO? 

BUT I can see the RF actually also going and using the existing vertical 
because of the touching center pin. BUT, the braid signal, I'm assuming 
the RF is not getting past the Coax coil and using the radials. 

2- Apply power to only the braid?  similiar to #1 but backwards. again 
no power to the radials probably?, and only cap coupled to the vertical. 

3- short the center and shield together and run it that way. 

Anyone have any thoughts of the best configuration any thoughts? 

Or how would a end fed random wire like 1/4 wave long about 10 feet up 
work better? 

Joe WB9SBD 
_ 
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector 

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

Topband: Info on modding 4 el HI-Z to 3 el HI-Z wanted

[kolson]

Anyone have any info? I have a 4 el unit but can only (maybe) accommodate a 3el 
triangle on my property. W hat would have to be done to the controller box 
etc.? 

73 Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -

From: "Gary Smith"  
To: "Steven Jobes"  
Cc: Topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 12:15:21 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Fwd: [yccc] Hi z receive antennas 

Steve, 

I haven't used the HI-Z 2 element or the 
JK system. I do have both the HI-Z 3 and 8 
element arrays. I find them both 
invaluable on 160 and 80. They do work on 
the higher bands as well, I usually use my 
triangular for 20M & up but I have only 
vertical antennas, no tribander. 

I can say that on a given 160 & 80 DX 
signal, the 8 usually hears better than 
the 3 but not always, the 3 sometimes gets 
the best copy but always better by far 
than the sloper on 160 & INV-L on 80. 

You'll never find better support than you 
get from HI-Z. 

73, 

Gary 
KA1J 

> -Original Message- 
> From: Steve via Groups.Io  
> To: yccc  
> Cc: yccc  
> Sent: Wed, Nov 28, 2018 8:51 pm 
> Subject: [yccc] Hi z receive antennas 
> 
> Hi I am seeking information from anyone with experience with hi z 
> arrays. I am considering either the hi z two element array or the Jk 
> antenna bev-flex beverage system. They both can fill my needs as my 
> property has limitations headed northeast. And both will give me 
> directivity towards Europe. Thanks for any advice, 
> 
> 73 , 
> Steve Jobes 
> W1dxh 
> 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 
> Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. 
> 
> View/Reply Online (#52807): https://groups.io/g/yccc/message/52807 
> Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/28483069/417809 -=-=- YCCC 
> Discussion Group (members-only) -=-=- Group Owner: 
> yccc+ow...@groups.io Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/yccc/unsub 
> [w1...@aol.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- _ 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: ARRL 160, was Re: Polarization on 160m

[kolson]

Errr... if the rules specify RAC sections (just like it specifies ARRL sections 
in the US) and VE9, VE1 and VY2 are one RAC section rather than three RAC 
sections, it sounds like your beef w ould be with the RAC... no? 

My assumption is that if RAC decided to break MAR up into NB, NS and VY2 the 
ARRL would honor that. In the US there have been sections changed and added and 
SS reflected that, so why not? Maybe you should contact RAC with your 
reasonable concerns. 

73, Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Mike Smith VE9AA"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 4:40:51 PM 
Subject: Topband: ARRL 160, was Re:  Polarization on 160m 

Don't feel bad Herb.  I'm in the same boat.  I am a VE9..have been since 
1993 when they split, NB, NS and VY2 into various distinct prefixes. 

I live in New Brunswick. (a real Province). Prefix VE9 

  

In 98% of all contests, where S/P/C are mults, I get to send "NB", but in SS 
and I believe the ARRL 160, I have to send "MAR", so 

I don't get to compete against other VE9's...I have to compete against VE1, 
VE9 and VY2's..you figure out how to solve this, 

please let me know.  It's like all 3;'s, 4;', or 5's have to compete against 
all the states in whatever # they're in, because someone decided 

it was RAC sections.  Until someone at ARRL mans up to get with the times I 
think we'll be long covered in dirt before these rules change. 

Do what I do and don't participate in SS, ARRL 160 and the CQP (though I am 
not sure if  CQP affects you or not) 

  

I won't be on this weekend.  I am sure (ahem) "MAR" will be well 
represented. 

  

Mike VE9AA..proudly in NB..covered in snow. 

  

  

That's correct but under these rules, the VI is not DX and counts the same 

as a W/VE two-pointer.  Navassa which is certainly rare, especially on 160, 

is counted as KP2.  Desecheo KP5 is counted the same as KP4.  Sort of weird 

wouldn't you agree?  This is unfair when VP2V on 5 miles from KP2 is 

counted as DX.  Also, all the rare DXCC US entities in the Pacific like 

NMI, Wake, American Samoa, and Guam all count for Hawaii. The ARRL is set 

in their ways and claims the 160-meter contest is supposed to be like SS 

for 160.  They only add DX contacts when ARRL President W0DX and VP2VI 

demanded he should not be excluded from operating in a contest he 

envisioned in the first place. The bottom line is that the statins in the 

U.S. Territories cannot be competitive and are seriously discriminated 

against by the Contest Committee who refuses to visit this issue.  I 

challenge you to look up the results over the past two decades.  Stations 

in the U.S Territories are never even mentioned no matter how well they 

have done in the ARRL 160 contest. 

  

Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ 

  

Mike, Coreen & Corey 

Keswick Ridge, NB 

  

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

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

Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters - Station Location and Boundary

[kolson]

And this is easy to say when you have 5 acres in a semi-rural area, hi hi. 


As it happens, I do not use a remote RX (it shows!). But at my QTH I can barely 
fit a K9AY (though it's compromised by masts and other antennas that are 
necessarily close). I really dig working what DX I can on 160 but even with a 
lousy TX antenna, I TX better than RX these days. I am sure I am one of those 
guys that honk people off from time to time because, for me, hearing on 160 is 
often a come/go proposition. But that's the reality here on the ground. 


Now 20 years ago, hearing was a lot easier, but in recent years, with all the 
noise sources nearby, hearing from most non-rural locations has become 
problematic (to say the least) on 160. So I can understand why people are 
considering going to remote RX and personally, as long as the RX site is close 
enough to the TX site (same grid should suffice) that there is no real 
propagational advantage, I am cool with that. It's making the best out of 
today's bad situation in my view. 


Moreover, my suspicion is that in 10/20 years, as more and more solar panel 
controllers, car charging stations, switching supplies, grow lights (as 
"certain substances"... "certain substances of an illicit nature", as Monty 
Python would have it, become legal in more places) etc. come on line, non-rural 
hams on ANY H.F. band without sophisticated RX arrays will be, as my Dad would 
have put it, S.O.L. 


73, Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -

From: "Joe Subich, W4TV"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 10:28:45 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters - Station Location and Boundary 

On 2018-11-21 2:39 PM, Bill Cromwell wrote: 
> 
> Maintaining a club project "remote" receiver is something I would 
> support with some money and some work. It's a lot more worthwhile than 
> yet another two meter FM repeater. I don't really care about using it 
> for 160 meter DXCC but I would certainly get my money's worth playing 
> with it. 

This (remote receivers in multiple locations) is specifically what the 
rules are meant to prevent. rankly there is no justification for the 
multiple remote receiver operations ... one might as well make an 
internet QSO! 

73, 

... Joe, W4TV 


On 2018-11-21 2:39 PM, Bill Cromwell wrote: 
> Hi Joe, 
> 
> I live in a small village. Even so, 500 meters isn't going to buy 
> anything. If we were overwhelmed by noise we would still be overwhelmed 
> by exactly the same noise. So this is going to be yet another thread 
> about whose ox is being gored. All those noises don't bother anybody's 
> transmitter. So why would we care where the transmitter is within the 
> same grid square as the receiver? 
> 
> Maintaining a club project "remote" receiver is something I would 
> support with some money and some work. It's a lot more worthwhile than 
> yet another two meter FM repeater. I don't really care about using it 
> for 160 meter DXCC but I would certainly get my money's worth playing 
> with it. 
> 
> 73, 
> 
> Bill KU8H 
> 
> On 11/21/18 2:05 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: 
>> 
>>> I think a more practical "Station Location and Boundary, >> would be to have the RX and TX located in either "in the same grid 
>>> square" or "within 100 KM" and of course within the same DXCC 
>>> Entity. 
>> I think 500 meters is more than enough of a "circle" to contain both 
>> transmit and receive antennas. If one is making the effort to create 
>> a remote site, it can certainly contain both transmit and receive 
>> antennas. The idea of placing the transmitter *for an amateur station* 
>> on a salt marsh on the coast and the receive antennas 10 miles distant 
>> and well away from man made noises (to the extent possible) is ludicrous 
>> - it reminds me of the commercial maritime stations of old. 
>> 
>> Frankly, the DXCC rules should be changed to limit all operators to 
>> *ONE* location a month unless the operator is physically present at 
>> the station (as defined by the 500 meter circle) to prevent the near 
>> simultaneous use of multiple remote transmitters/receivers in physically 
>> large DXCC entities to "feed" a single DXCC/Challenge/Single Band DXCC 
>> from propagation advantaged locations. 
>> 
>> 73, 
>> 
>> ... Joe, W4TV 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2018-11-21 12:37 PM, Lloyd - N9LB wrote: 
>>> I'd like to see the ARRL change part >> Amateur 
>>> Radio Community in light of the recent radical increase in electrical 
>>> noise 
>>> from consumer switching power supplies, variable speed motors, LED 
>>> lighting, 
>>> solar panels with "optimizers", and all of the other "energy efficient" 
>>> wideband RF garbage generators. 
>>> 
>>> I think a more practical "Station Location and Boundary, >> would be 
>>> to have the RX and TX located in either "in the same grid square" or 
>>> "within 
>>> 100 KM" and of course within the same DXCC Entity. 
>>> 
>>> I also think that building and maintaining a shared Community Low 
>>> Noise RX 
>>> 

Re: Topband: W7YRV Roy's Increadable Antenna Farm

[kolson]

If you want to read about the early days of DXing and another super antenna 
farm, get a copy of "Don Wallace W6AM" by N6AW. Really fascinating to read 
about his antenna exploits and about long deleted DX entities. And about DXing 
when it was really a "savage art"... 

73 Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Wes Stewart"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2018 9:57:32 AM 
Subject: Re: Topband: W7YRV Roy's Increadable Antenna Farm 

For more about Roy, our DX club website has additional photos of his antenna 
farm, as well as some other members' projects. 

See: http://sadxa.org/memberprojects.html 

Wes  N7WS 

On 9/16/2018 1:40 AM, S57AD wrote: 
> Thank you, Terry! Incredible antenna farm indeed! Enjoyed reading the story 
> and watching pics! 
> 
> 73, Mirko, S57AD 
> 

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

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

Re: Topband: Use shunt fed tower

[kolson]

Well, my system here at K3OX is a "T" with a 40 ft vertical section and a 90 ft 
flat top. It sort of worked OK when I first put it up, but it works much more 
OK after about 32 random (to fit my 4 0 x 110 lot) radials were installed. It 
would work better yet if I had more and longer radials, and mo' better than 
that  if the vertical section was 130 ft! 

So saying an antenna "works" is a relative thing. But the moral is, you do what 
you can. T o paraphrase Clint Eastwood, "A man's gotta know his antenna 
limitations". 

73 Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Peter Voelpel"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2018 9:44:46 AM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Use shunt fed tower 

It can work and it does. 

I used a shunt fed tower without radials for a couple of years on the former 
qth just with the tower grounding. 
Now I feed the tower directly and against a single sloping radial, it works 
great and is also a better receiving antenna then my relatively short 
beverages. 

73 
Peter, DJ7WW 

-Original Message- 
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of John 
Harden, D.M.D. 
Sent: Sonntag, 16. September 2018 02:43 
To: daraym...@iowatelecom.net 
Cc: topband@contesting.com; cfytech24x7 
Subject: Re: Topband: Use shunt fed tower 

A shunt fed tower requires radials period. It cannot work without them! 

73, 

John, W4NU 

Sent from my iPhone 

> On Sep 15, 2018, at 1:55 PM,  
 wrote: 
> 
> It makes no difference how the tower is fed, a vertical antenna must have 
radials of some kind to be effective.      73. . .Dave, W0FLS 
> 
> -Original Message- From: cfytech24x7 
> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2018 11:29 AM 
> To: topband@contesting.com 
> Subject: Topband: Use shunt fed tower 
> 
> A shunt fed tower is a vertical antenna so it offers lowest take off 
angle. Shunt feeding avoids need for radial field.  Any horizontal wire 
antenna is going to put most of your radiated energy out at high angles, 
unless you can get it at least a half wavelength of height.  A loop may be a 
quieter antenna for RX but your existing inverted Vs are no doubt better for 
TX. 
> There is some art and experimentation involved in the matching but the 
results will be worth the effort.  I  would start with your highest antenna 
for top band, next highes for 80m. Note that your yagis will act nicely as 
capacitive hats to add to effective tower hight. 
> Gl es 73, ab1vl chuck 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy TabR A 
> _ 
> 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: Copying IV3PRK in WA-State CN98

[kolson]

I think it's interesting that someone would give up an activity they enjoy 
because someone else does something they don't happen to approve of. This is 
just not limited to radio, I don't know how many times I have heard someone say 
something along the lines of "I am not going to (blank) anymore because some 
else chooses to (blank)". It's fine to personally disapprove of things others 
do, but why let them steal your fun ? 

Just wonderin'... 

73 Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: k8...@alphacomm.net 
To: "Bryon Paul Veal NØAH" , Topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2018 12:27:25 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Copying IV3PRK in WA-State CN98 

Well said PaulI personally gave up when I saw the posting about the 
fellow who worked 20 new countries last winter and proudly exclaimed 
that he never heard any of them! 

Brian  K8BHZ 


On 8/23/2018 10:26 AM, Bryon Paul Veal NØAH wrote: 
> No one knows anymorethe hobby will never be the same.  We had a guy in 
> Colorado work the last P5 operation in zero band conditions...zero.  but he 
> us an expert at remote operating.  That's when I stopped chasing DX 
> 
> 73 
> 
> De Paul. N0AH 
> 
> 


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

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

Re: Topband: DXE NCC-1 phasing box

[kolson]

I hope hams are not becoming strictly black box users. I also hope that there 
isn't a parallel being made between a licensed ham buying a piece of amateur 
equipment and some dude buying a Smartphone. 

In almost any technical environment, having info on how the product works and 
troubleshooting info isn't just some frivolous luxury. At my job, not being 
supplied tech info is a significant argument for not buying the product. For my 
ham activities , h aving info on what's in my radio  is actually something that 
I as the buyer expect. In either case, I find being told "you just have to send 
it back" whenever there is any problem unacceptable. 

Of course, the business in question can run their affairs however they want. 
But so can the customer. I had to laugh, when a customer (who was not 
particularly patient) brought in one vendor's vacuum tube preamplifier for 
repair, I asked the manufacturer for a schematic to make things easier. He was 
a real nice guy, but replied that the info was proprietary. I responded that 
there were only so many ways to hook up triodes! He still demurred, so I drew 
out the schematic from the circuit board and sent him a copy  just for fun! 

And actually, I drive a Prius and there are schematics and troubleshooting info 
available for it... 

73, Kevin K3OX  



- Original Message -

From: "Jeff"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:53:43 AM 
Subject: Re: Topband: DXE NCC-1 phasing box 

Because it's considered propriety information. You paid for a black box that 
does what it says it will. You did not pay for the why or how it works. This 
is not unusual business practice. You bought a car with dozens of black 
boxes in it, do you have schematics to those? 

-Original Message- 
From: Bob K6UJ 
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:40 AM 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Subject: Re: Topband: DXE NCC-1 phasing box 

Rob, 

I just looked at my NCC-1 manual.  No schematic. 
It seems odd they wont provide one. I wonder what their 
reason is ?  I would give them a call. 
I may call them myself, I am contemplating the purchase of the 
new model but would like a schematic 

I like your callsign :-) 

Bob 
K6UJ 


On 9/23/16 6:59 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote: 
> update:  I just received an email, perhaps a canned response from DX 
> Engineering telling me they won't give me a schematic.  In addition, 
> rather than work with me to find the problem, they only offer their 
> repair service.   I am very disappointed in this after spending over 
> $1000 over the past two years on the Pro-1B loop antennas.  I guess 
> this means no one has a schematic so I'll just have to signal trace. 
> If this is a business decision, I think it is a poor one. 
> It certainly gives one pause about future purchases. 
> 
> 73 
> 
> Rob 
> K5UJ 
> _ 
> 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: RX / TX antenna switching

[kolson]

A second for the RTR-1. Well built and reliable.

73 Kevin K3OX

- Original Message -
From: Herbert Schoenbohm herbert.schoenb...@gmail.com
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:35:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Topband: RX / TX antenna switching

I use the DX-Engineering RTR-1 which is the easiest and best solution 
IHMO.  It even provides protection by locking the RX portion out on 
Transmit by loop the PTT amp cable.  I have two of these units now and 
use them on all the Icom radios. They even have a special momentary 
toggle for check the TX antenna for A/B RX tests.  Must have been 
designed by a thoughtful amateur.



Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ


On 9/22/2016 1:27 PM, Gabriel - EA6VQ wrote:
 Boxbe https://www.boxbe.com/overview; This message is eligible for 
 Automatic Cleanup! (ea6vq...@dxmaps.com) Add cleanup rule 
 
https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%3DbWoHeC7pcbMUu0epOCb6Ejoa%252FB6Azx76O8Ul9yLporc%253D%26token%3DiFYrT9om%252FM5XuGlDaEkYKpQBVzQxFSe0f9d16uTj6WUe30BAe%252FPRAjaENMoTrdt800zwujz7gQnhMeSw6hRUc7wj6oiwilNi%252Fg5hieIQ61qbUyfRwmm3d0QnEbr7DWy3EczLJRz60Dw%253Dtc_serial=26887604545tc_rand=249032270utm_source=stfutm_medium=emailutm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADDutm_content=001;
 
 | More info 
 
http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=26887604545tc_rand=249032270utm_source=stfutm_medium=emailutm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADDutm_content=001;
 



 I will appreciate your advice in the best (but simple) way to switch 
between RX and TX antennas for a transceiver that does not have a separate RX 
antenna input.

 The system should be able to switch from RX antenna to TX antenna when PTT 
is applied (and vice versa) but also allow to switch between the two antennas 
during reception in order to compare.

 I have thought about using a coax relay as I do switch the VHF preamps, 
but I think it's switching will possibly too slow and some RF could flow to the 
RX antenna, causing damage.

 Any ideas will be welcome!

 73. Gabriel – EA6VQ



 _
 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: Phone segment for EU stations on 75 meters?

[kolson]

Is there really a "no contest" zone in the European rules on 75 meters? Or is 
this just by custom? 

What they really need is a "no crank and crackpot" zone, but I digress... 

73 Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Henk Remijn PA5KT"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2016 2:27:15 AM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Phone segment for EU stations on 75 meters? 

Doug, 

Phone is from 3600-3800. 

No contest beween 3650-3700. 

There will be station using the lower part of the band, but also the 
higher part. 

If you are allowed to transmit above 3800 you should do split, listening 
3625. 

73 Henk PA5KT 


Op 8-9-2016 om 02:11 schreef Douglas Ruz / CO8DM: 
> Hi, 
> 
> What is the Phone segment for EU stations on 75 meters? 
> 
> I am tunning my 75/80m antenna for WAE SSB... it is very narrow (100 Khz), 
> so, I want to know the most active segment during contest...Resonance (SWR 
> 1:1) on 3625 Khz now...Is it Ok or to low?...maybe can work split... 
> 
> Thanks, 
> 
> Doug, CO8DM 
> _ 
> 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 AC Power

[kolson]

Well, I run 600 watts to a 40 up/90 horizontal "T" with about 30 radials and I 
can operate on 160 m with my "audiophile" stereo system on. No probs. 

73 Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Steve Piotrowski via Topband"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 4:25:28 PM 
Subject: Topband: Clean AC Power 

I say that we deploy a legal limit 160M station next door to one of these 
audiophiles and see how good his grounding and shielding really is ... ;-) 
Steve AG2AA 
_ 
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband 
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Working Europe

[kolson]

"fuggedabout "decent rx antennas" 
  
Jim, I think the two things are both necessary. We need to encourage then to 
get on, but emphasize the need for RX antennas. Without them, 160 is a hard 
sell. I have a buddy that has a perfectly viable TX antenna (better than mine, 
LOL) who never gets on 160 meters because when he does he never hears anything 
interesting. I have so far not been able to convince him that RX antennas 
aren't optional, but a necessary part of 160 meter operating. I would have 
ended up the same way as my friend did before I put up my K9AY, I suspect, but 
fortunately my 160 meter type friends convinced me to give it a try. Hopefully, 
I will get him over one winter night and show him what even a simple 160 m RX 
antenna can do. 
  
Same thing with QRP. I've heard of many new hams whose "buddies" sold them on 
QRP only to drop out when the call/QSO ratio was dismal. Better to start with a 
100w rig and "graduate" to QRP once they have some success and come to 
understand propagation, etc. I think the s ame concept applies  on 160, why 
start them out with a situation that would frustrate even veteran 160 meter 
ops? 
  
73, Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "James Rodenkirch"  
To: "Top Band Contesting"  
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 7:22:43 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Working Europe 

Mike: I would posit we - the "top band community" - need to promote increased 
operations -- fuggedabout "decent rx antennas" --- just get more hams 
operating on top band: 

- emphasize the Maunder minimum 
- emphasize the rise of efficiency of small lot antennas, as a resulting 
"benefit" 
- emphasize the benefits of a new low band rcv arrays 

It's about encouraging hams to explore top band, as the "minimums" descend on 
us.not, necessarily, encouraging "ultimate stations" --- i.e., get 'em on 
the band.. 

71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV 

Guy said: 

>There is the issue of when people are actually listening on 160. *Sounds* 
dead because no one is there. 

...AND THEN there is the issue of when people *can* actually listen; by 
that I mean, they have a decent rx antenna at their disposal. 

I've noticed quite a few locals (W1) with increasing interest in 160. The 
low-space rx antenna options out there are attracting interest. This is 
good. Bring on the minimum. 

Mike N1TA 
_ 
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband 

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

Re: Topband: VOA antenna farm

[kolson]

My suspicion is that the government saved tax dollars tearing it down this way. 
What's sad is that we are no longer interested in telling our story to the 
world through SW radio. Yeah, I know, "Da I nternet"... 
  
Hard to believe that there wasn't some other way to save a buck than cutting 
VOA. Many p eople around the world learned English via VOA and I suspect it 
spread some goodwill in general. Oh well. 

Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -

From: "Gary Smith"  
To: Topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 10:59:21 AM 
Subject: Re: Topband: VOA antenna farm 

I didn't finish watching it. How many hams 
could have had their dreams met with the 
towers and cabling they strip mined. 

Our tax dollars in action. 

Gary 
KA1J 
  
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcsbny8PFZw 
> _ 
> 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: strange propagation

[kolson]

I would see this as analo g ou s to what happened in contesting. Originally, 
you could use 2 meter spotting nets to help "find"  multipliers, no problem. 
Eventually, f olks in less populated areas complained that this was 
disadvantageous to them and the contest sponso rs decided that use of these 
"nets" put you in multi-op category (it would say in the listing "K3OX + net"). 
O nce computer technology became mature enough, "assisted" operating became 
possible using computer technology alone and a decision had to be made as to 
the proper disposition of this practice . The computer didn't technically make 
you "multi-op", but it was an advantage over the fellows who operated without 
this benefit, so the "assisted" category was created. Soon operating assisted 
class was an accepted thing with no more or less "glory" than any other class. 

So here's a proposal; maybe hav ing two cate gorie s, a DXCC "bareback" (all 
QSO's made from a station within, say, 200 miles of the operator's licensed 
address) and "unlimited" (any legal QSO's according to current DXCC rules) 
would be a reasonable accommodation. If you moved outside the miles limit, you 
would  have to decide whether to stay " bareback" and start another DXCC from 
your new QTH or transition to "unlimited" and carry over your previous credits. 
Current DXCC accounts would have to declare which category their previous 
operations conformed to . 

For a hot minute, the "bareback" category might be seen as more prestigious, 
but eventually that would fade like the contest categories have faded. End of 
problem. Except to the ARRL which would have to administer all this, hi hi. 

73 Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "John Frazier"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 2:22:53 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: strange propagation 

Well..many of us /have/ worked to change the rules to reflect the 
use of remote operations. In FACT, the ARRL DX Advisory Committee 
recommended to the ARRL BOD that a distance limit be included in the 
rule. The BOD rejected that recommendation despite the FACT that the 
members of the BOD actually appoint the members to the DXAC. So, they 
appoint members and totally ignore or reject their recommendation. 

Also, even after my post, no one has offered a position on why a 
separate DXCC award for using remote is unfair or unacceptable. All we 
ever hear is "it's legal" or "you object to technology", or "you're 
whiners". We understand it is perfectly legal, and we embrace new 
technology. We simply have an opinion that honestly differs from yours. 

Tom is correct in that the DXCC Award was diminished over the years do 
to the location rule change(s). But, the number of super stations now 
(and in the future) available for rent and the number of folks using it 
will dilute the Award many times more than the previous changes. It begs 
for a separate award. 

73 John W4II 
_ 
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband 

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

Re: Topband: strange propagation

[kolson]

I keep hearing folks say that "stations are no longer licensed", but I can only 
find this in the FCC rules on the ARRL website: 

§97.5   Station license required. 
(a) The station apparatus must be under the physical control of a person named 
in an amateur station license grant on the ULS consolidated license database or 
a person authorized for alien reciprocal operation by §97.107 of this part, 
before the station may transmit on any amateur service frequency from any place 
that is: 
(1) Within 50 km of the Earth's surface and at a place where the amateur 
service is regulated by the FCC; 
(2) Within 50 km of the Earth's surface and aboard any vessel or craft that is 
documented or registered in the United States; or 
(3) More than 50 km above the Earth's surface aboard any craft that is 
documented or registered in the United States. 
(b) The types of station license grants are: 
(1) An operator/primary station license grant. One, but only one, 
operator/primary station license grant may be held by any one person. The 
primary station license is granted together with the amateur operator license. 
Except for a representative of a foreign government, any person who qualifies 
by examination is eligible to apply for an operator/primary station license 
grant. 
(2) A club station license grant. A club station license grant may be held only 
by the person who is the license trustee designated by an officer of the club. 
The trustee must be a person who holds an operator/primary station license 
grant. The club must be composed of at least four persons and must have a name, 
a document of organization, management, and a primary purpose devoted to 
amateur service activities consistent with this part. 
(3) A military recreation station license grant. A military recreation station 
license grant may be held only by the person who is the license custodian 
designated by the official in charge of the United States military recreational 
premises where the station is situated. The person must not be a representative 
of a foreign government. The person need not hold an amateur operator license 
grant. 

§97.103   Station licensee responsibilities. 
(a) The station licensee is responsible for the proper operation of the station 
in accordance with the FCC Rules. When the control operator is a different 
amateur operator than the station licensee, both persons are equally 
responsible for proper operation of the station. 
(b) The station licensee must designate the station control operator. The FCC 
will presume that the station licensee is also the control operator, unless 
documentation to the contrary is in the station records. 
(c) The station licensee must make the station and the station records 
available for inspection upon request by an FCC representative. 

The eCFR text is the same and is noted as being "...current as of January 13, 
2016." 

I can find no reference to stations licenses no longer being required, can 
anyone illuminate this for me? 

As far as responsibility for transmissions from outside the US, from W3BE 
(ex-head of the old Amateur and Citizens (Radio) Division of the FCC in the 
day, FWIW): 

Q. I have a remotely controlled station in suburban Chicago. My friend has a 
ham license in the United Kingdom. Can he legitimately be the control operator 
of my station from England via the Internet?  
   A. Yes, as long as you are in agreement with him doing so. The U.S. and the 
U.K. have a reciprocal operating agreement. Section 97.5 and Section 97.107 
authorize your U.K. friend to be either or both the station licensee and the 
station control operator of an amateur station in places where the FCC 
regulates our amateur service. Here are your choices: 
   Choice One: The station transmits your primary station call sign in the 
station identification announcement. This establishes you as the station 
licensee, responsible for the proper operation of the station. Read Section 
97.103 (a). You and your friend are both accountable for the duties of its 
control operator being performed properly. Note that Section 97.103 (b) says 
that the FCC will presume that you, the station licensee, are also the control 
operator unless there is documentation to the contrary. So, keep a record.  
   Choice Two: Relinquish physical control of station apparatus to your U.K. 
friend. Read Section 97.5(a) . The station transmits your friend’s 
U.K.-assigned station call sign in the identification announcement. This 
establishes your friend alone as being responsible for performing properly the 
duties of both the station licensee and its control operator. You are not 
accountable. He should append the identifier /W9 to his U.K. call sign in the 
station identification announcements. 

73, Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Louis Parascondola via Topband"  
To: he...@vitelcom.net, topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 3:20:32 AM 
Subject: Re: 

Re: Topband: Stew Beef

[kolson]

"Back when the signal report was a real part of the 
exchange and contesters tended to exchange honest reports, a major contest 
could be an opportunity to determine how well your station got out" 

The days of "honest reports" in a contest? I am 63 years old, operated my first 
contest when I was 18  and I don't remember those days. You found out how well 
your station "got out" by how long you waited in the pileups and how much of 
the time you could call CQ. 

"...the minimal value 
of contests sink to zero." 

As opposed to all the valuable weather reports, in ane chatter, QRM on DX 
stations, character assassination  and kvetching about "Obama" in the rest of 
ham radio... 

"They have become nothing more than a vehicle to keep the ham radio 
economy running and the "play" part, after consumer hams have done the 
plugging." 

In my experience,  the average contester is more operationally and technically 
savvy than the average ham, especially the average ham that complains about 
them. 

73, Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: "Rob Atkinson"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, January 8, 2016 9:12:31 AM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Stew Beef 

I completely agree with Don on this.  the incessant and utterly 
meaningless "599" or "59" because it is programmed in and the operator 
too lazy to think about a real signal report makes the minimal value 
of contests sink to zero. 

They have become nothing more than a vehicle to keep the ham radio 
economy running and the "play" part, after consumer hams have done the 
plugging. 

73 

Rob 
K5UJ 


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

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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160CW Contest QRP Portable Op

[kolson]

What would be much more fair is to go by ERP. 5 watts from one of tho se 
sophisticated antenna farms may very well be stronger than 100w or even 600w 
from, let's say, a Butte rnut with a vestigial radial field. T he Butternut guy 
gets no consideration (in fact, generally he gets derision) but the (often 
louder) 5 watt guy is hailed as  a great big QRP hero (hi hi) . Somehow, r 
unning a compromise antenna marks us as not caring but running QRP is "noble". 

To me, the weird thing is that, at least for most of us running compromise 
antennas, our choice is made out of the necessities of real life, that is, we 
do what we can do from a small lot or an antenna restricted development  or 
where zoning laws are especially hostile to amateur antennas. In some cases , 
it's may even be a concession to a neighbor that be insan e (don't ask me how I 
know). The decision to use 5 watts, on the other hand,  is basically whim. M 
ost of our radios output 100w out of the box, so one operates at 5 watts 
because he wants to, not because he has to.  A nd there are plenty of 
reasonably priced used  600w+ amps available if one wants even more power that 
basically only  take desk space, no zoning required. 

73, Kevin K3OX      


- Original Message -

From: "Milt"  
To: topband@contesting.com, "Robert Harmon"  
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 8:59:13 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160CW Contest QRP Portable Op 

Hmmm.  If that is the case, then QRP should NOT be used on any band for 
contesting or otherwise.  That is the name of the game; dig out the weak 
ones. 

I personally have nothing against QRP, having operated QRP in the Stew Perry 
contest for 16 of the 19 runnings.  I even have a plaque on the wall for #1 
World operating QRP. 

IMHO the SPDC is the BEST contest to use QRP because #1-You get more points 
per given Q, and #2-The other station gets equal compensation in points for 
copying your QRP signal.  What could be more fair? 

CU all in the SPDC as N7GP during my daylight hours and as N5IA during the 
core night time 14 hours.  I will make the best effort to put every caller 
in the logs; even the real strong QRP guys and the QRO stations I can barely 
discern through the din, static and fades receive equal treatment. 

73, and Merry Christmas to everyone everywhere. 

de Milt, N5IA 

-Original Message- 
From: Robert Harmon 
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:43 PM 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160CW Contest QRP Portable Op 

Herb, 

I feel the same way. 
I have nothing against QRP, but for me personally I don't have the 
desire to 
handicap myself with QRP power especially on 160.  It doesn't seem fair 
to me for the guy 
on the other end to be burdened with trying to dig my weak signal out so 
I can make another 
contact.  ( Just my opinion, guys. ) 

73, 
Bob 
K6UJ 

On 12/24/15 3:44 PM, Herbert Schoenbohm wrote: 
> Peter, If you think calling CQ in a contest while  running 5 watts and not 
> getting a single reply is fun then have at it. Working some stations with 
> 100 watts is more fun for me. 
> 
> 
> Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ 

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

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

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

[kolson]

Well Rob, if you read Gary's email, you will find that he is interested in 
communicating "...with the hams I daily keep in touch with in the 500-600 mile 
range." The loop may be a great antenna for this but not, as you say, so much 
for DXing. 
  
But there is, in my view, a deeper issue here. I t's  the "it's just that I get 
tired of piss weak signals on 160 from hams who seem to think they have an 
exemption from Mother Nature" theorem. For many of us, compromise is built in 
to our situation, we are not being obstinate just to pee you off. In my case, I 
have a 110 X 50 foot property in a residential neighborhood and I am limited to 
a "T" transmit antenna (40 ft up, 92 ft flattop) and a K9AY RX array in a 
somewhat noisy neighborhood. So no, I don't hear or TX like those with a more 
favorable QTH, but I enjoy 160 meters, I have fun and do the best I can with 
what I have. So if I occasionally call out of time (I try not to) because I 
don't have the "ears" you do, don't take it personally... 

73 Kevin K3OX  


- Original Message -

From: "Rob Atkinson"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 12:53:39 PM 
Subject: Topband:  2 wl loop, worth the effort? 

Hi Gary, It would make a nice receiving antenna. 

Let's start with a question:  Would you put up a loop for 20 meters 
that is 6 feet off the ground?  Height for horizontal antennas must 
always be thought of in terms of _wavelength_.  There is only one 
effective transmitting antenna for medium wave, assuming you do not 
have 200 foot tall supports for stringing up a horizontal wire 
antenna, and that is some sort of monopole over a good ground system. 
Period.  And good ground system means a lot of radials.  A lot.  Not 
10 or 20.  You don't get to cheat on the laws of physics.  You have to 
bite the bullet and do the work.  The excited vertical part has 
options.  T, inverted L, or an insulated tower are all fine provided 
the vertical part is at least 50 feet tall (more is better). 

Don't take this personally--it's just that I get tired of piss weak 
signals on 160 from hams who seem to think they have an exemption from 
Mother Nature.  A dead giveaway that a ham is using a low dipole, 20 
feet or so, is rapid deep QSB.  Even 50 feet is too low.  Inverted Vs 
are worse.  the effective height is halfway between the apex height 
and the height of the ends.  A big horizontal loop on transmit does 
nothing for you but cause more of your RF to get lost to ground 
coupling. 

73 

Rob 
K5UJ 
_ 
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband 

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

Re: Topband: Top Band Antenna

[kolson]

You probably know this Rodger, but just in case... 

Radials are ESSENTIAL. As many as you can as long as you can make them (up to 
1/4 wave) in as many  directions as i s possible. I staple mine down with lawn 
staples (I find them at home improvement stores) and after a year or so they 
tend to migrate underground. Till then, you may have to set your lawn mower 
to leave a bit higher grass and perhaps mow carefully where they are vulnerable 
due to one's lawn not being perfectly flat . When I moved QTH after 4 years a 
while back and decided to remove the radials, I had to rip them up to get them 
out, so they were essentially invisible by then. Having a radial connection 
plate, either commercial or home brew (I use the one from DX E ngineering) 
makes things easier and neater. 

I have a wire  T with a 40 ft vertical section and a 90 ft horizontal section 
and about 35 radials, some as long as 50/60/ft and some as short as 20/30 ft 
(some even go down my basement access hatch and run in the rafters through my 
basement, be creative)! I mo deled this in a simple antenna program (that I 
didn't kn ow much about using, it came with an ARRL Antenna Book) and it spit 
out values for a matching network that got me into the ballpark. The idea for 
the L is another good one and only requires the ability to have space and an 
anchor point in one direction. Try to keep the loading wire as parallel to the 
ground as you can, but don't worry if you can't do that perfectly. Again, 
antenna modeling software will save you much time matching the antenna. On my 
T, one leg e nds up at 50 ft and the other at about 20 feet (due to  the 
supports available ), I would say don't obs ess about it, just do what you can. 

I live on a small lot and that's what I can do in my context and  this works 
positively, err OK, especially for DX. To put it in context, it is MUCH 
better than a Butternut vertic al over the same radial field, so the loading 
wires can buy you a lot . Think about a RX antenna too. I have a K9AY that is 
not as optimal as I would like, but it still often makes the difference between 
copy/no copy for DX (often on bands other than 160, BTW, I have used it up to 
15 meters at times!) . Again, be creative and search the internet for ideas. I 
have not set any new world DX records with this set up, but I did finish my 
DXCC, so it at least  gets you into the game. 

Best, Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -

From: donov...@starpower.net 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Cc: rodger bryce gm3...@hotmail.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 12:16:17 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Top Band Antenna 

Hi Rodger, 


You will have better success if you add a top loading wire to your mast, 
which makes it into an inverted-L. Suggest you start with an 80 foot wire 
in a straight line if possible but otherwise route it any shape necessary . 
You can increase or decrease the length of the top loading wire to improve 
the match. 


As an alternative to shunt feeding your mast, you could simply install an 
130 foot inverted-L parallel to your mast and direct feed it from the 
bottom. 


You could add a loading coil to the wire if 80 feet is too long. 


73 
Frank 
W3LPL 

- Original Message - 

From: rodger bryce gm3...@hotmail.com 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 2:54:40 PM 
Subject: Topband: Top Band Antenna 

Gentlemen, I have the following which I would like to turn into a topband 
antenna if possible. My mast is approximately 40 feet high and there is rotor 
cage with a 10 foot stub mast, on the stubmast I have an 8 el.log periodic and 
above that a rotary dipole for 30/40m. 

I attached a drop wire at approx. 38 feet high, I grounded this wire and tried 
to grid dip the wire plus mast, all as per ON4UN's book USING THE BEAM TOWER 
AS A LOW BAND VERTICAL the results were zilch, nadda nothing at all, no dip 
anywhere on any band. I used the MFJ 259B with the GDO accessory. 

1. Am I doing this all wrong..highly possible.!! 
2. Is the mast not high enough to be used for top band.? 

I am totally out of my depth here.so any guidance would be much 
appreciated. 

Many thanks, Rodger/GM3JOB 

_ 
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: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m?

[kolson]

 
 The ZS6BKW is really a quite different antenna than a G5RV. On 40, 20, 18, 
 12 and 10 meters, the feedpoint is close enough to 50 ohms to present a 
 good match when properly trimmed . The coax is matched so the length of 
 the coax is not important and losses are low ON THESE BANDS.  

It actually is very similar to a G5RV. It just has some length adjustments. 

I guess one could argue that most antennas are similar, just with length 
adjustments. Take a 160 ft long wire, cut it up into 5 pieces, presto. A 5 
element 20 meter beam... ;) 

Kevin 

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

Re: Topband: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m?

[kolson]

Here is what  I would  do. First, build the proposed antenna, set it up at home 
with the coax connected directly to the ladder line at the bottom, the hot and 
ground each to one leg. Trim the ladder for lowest SWR on the low end of 40 
meters (this should get 20,18,12 and 10 more or less right). Then see if your 
internal tuner will tune the antenna as it sits through the coax on 80, 30 and  
15 meters. At this point, you will know if you have a viable all band antenna 
(unfortunately, most internal tuners are not wide rang e things).  If you are 
good to here, put down your radials and reconfigure the feedpoint by shorting 
the ladder line at the bottom and connect that to the hot side of the coax and 
the radials to ground side. Now t ry to tune this arrangement with the internal 
tuner. If this doesn't work and you have a 4 to one balun around, you can put 
it between the output of the rig and the coax to the antenna and try to bring 
the load into the range of the internal tuner with that. It's worth a try... 

If you find a workable arrangement in test, b uild a remote switch box and 
ghost the 12 volts to key the remo te relay box  through the Coax. You will 
need a small switch  box at the shack end and a relay box at the antenna end, 
basically you need a simplified version of the Ameritron RCS-4 (schematic on 
Ameritron website) system. This will switch between 4 antennas through the coax 
without a control wire , but y ou only need 0 and +12 volts and one relay at 
the antenna, so all you need is a two position on-off toggle , the 
capacitor/choke/input- output connectors and 12 volt connection at the shack 
end  and a DPDT relay, choke/capacitor arrangement, one coax connector and a 
pair of banana jacks for the ladder line  and a DPDT relay at the relay box 
end.  The relay is set up with one side of the ladder line to each relay 
section and the deenergized side hooked up to the coax connector back to the 
shack directly and the energized contacts sending both sides of the ladder line 
to the center conductor of the connector. Mak e a ground connection on the 
relay box to hook your radials to. If you really wanted to get slick, you could 
add another relay and a small matching network (a coil and a capacitor) for 160 
in the relay box (I assume you will only run 100 watts) if the internal tuner 
won't match on 160. 

Good luck. What you want to do won't be easy, but could be worth it if you can 
make it happen ! 

Best, Kevin 
- Original Message -

From: Mike Smith VE9AA ve...@nbnet.nb.ca 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 5:12:11 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m? 

Marsh, Kevin, Jim, everyone 

  

This is great info.  Hey, thanks guys,.As I read these comments, I am now 
wondering if there is a magic length of coax, that attaches to the 40’ of  450 
ladder line that I could short right in/at the improvised vacation shack end, 
or just at the interface to the door/window/outside world, where I will be 
allowed to bring the coax in the (for lack of a better term), “cottage”….? 

  

It’s a long story, but I am thinking I am going to be limited to one antenna, 
and there may not be any more than one coax, and no going in and out the 
building in the wee hours of the morning.  A restrictive scenario, but you’ll 
just have to trust me. 

  

So, if I could have, let’s say…..10’ of coax in the “shack”, then let’s just 
say for example, 40’ feet of coax and then the 40’ of ladder line, could I 
short the coax 10’ from the rig in the shack (and even add a coil ?), then if I 
wanted to get back on the other bands, simply unshort the 10’ run and put 
everything as normal?  My goal would be to work some W1’s/W2’s/VE3’s and 
perhaps a G/EA, Carib? on 160m just for mults.  I’d rather not carry too much 
gear with me, so if I could get it in the ballpark and let the Icom’s internal 
tuner handle a small mismatch, I’d be OK with that.  I might even rethink the 2 
gnd radials and tie into the cottage gnd, but whatever works.  I’m not clear 
yet what the trip hazard ratio will be where I am at. 

  

Hope I was clear.   Yes, it’s a strange scenario.hi hi, I even laugh, but I 
can’t really tell the whole story.  One coax, one antenna-ZS6BKW, no going 
outside at night, no external remote tuners …all bands 10-160.  Hm. 

  

If I had more flexibility, I’d string up an inverted L off my proposed 35’ 
fiberglass mast and run a 2nd coax, but for this particular place, I am 
constricted. 

  

I can build and test this before I leave, but I still have to find bare ground 
first.  We still have many FEET of snow everywhere.  Spring has not really 
sprung yet. 

  

Mike VE9AA 

  

Mike, Coreen  Corey 

Keswick Ridge, NB 

  

From: kol...@rcn.com [mailto:kol...@rcn.com] 
Sent: March 26, 2015 2:33 AM 
To: Mike Smith VE9AA 
Cc: topband@contesting.com 
Subject: Re: Topband: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m? 

  

Mike, this is exactly the antenna I use here at the home 

Re: Topband: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m?

[kolson]

The ZS6BKW is really a quite different antenna than a G5RV. On 40, 20, 18, 12 
and 10 meters, the feedpoint is close enough to 50 ohms to present a good match 
when properly trimmed . The coax is matched so  the length of the coax is not 
important and losses are low ON THESE BANDS. To be fair, the original G5RV was 
designed as a 20 meter antenna prima rily and it works only after a fashion on 
the other bands (as G3OIT found) due to losses in the unmatched coax, for the 
most part. With the ZS6BKW here, I switch from the coax to ladder line back to 
the shack at the feedpoint as G3OIT does on the unmatched bands (80, 30 and 15) 
. On 160, I short the ladder at the feedpoint and feed it through a matching 
network against a radial system. 

Best, Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -

From: Keith Jillings (G3OIT) g3oit.ke...@jillings.org.uk 
To: Mike Smith VE9AA ve...@nbnet.nb.ca, topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:51:49 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m? 

On 26/03/2015 21:12, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote: 

 This is great info.  Hey, thanks guys,.As I read these comments, I am now 
 wondering if there is a magic length of coax, that attaches to the 40’ of  
 450 ladder line that I could short right in/at the improvised vacation shack 
 end, or just at the interface to the door/window/outside world, where I will 
 be allowed to bring the coax in the (for lack of a better term), “cottage”….? 
 
 It’s a long story, but I am thinking I am going to be limited to one antenna, 
 and there may not be any more than one coax, and no going in and out the 
 building in the wee hours of the morning.  A restrictive scenario, but you’ll 
 just have to trust me. 
 
 So, if I could have, let’s say…..10’ of coax in the “shack”, then let’s just 
 say for example, 40’ feet of coax and then the 40’ of ladder line, could I 
 short the coax 10’ from the rig in the shack (and even add a coil ?), then if 
 I wanted to get back on the other bands, simply unshort the 10’ run and put 
 everything as normal?  My goal would be to work some W1’s/W2’s/VE3’s and 
 perhaps a G/EA, Carib? on 160m just for mults.  I’d rather not carry too much 
 gear with me, so if I could get it in the ballpark and let the Icom’s 
 internal tuner handle a small mismatch, I’d be OK with that.  I might even 
 rethink the 2 gnd radials and tie into the cottage gnd, but whatever works.  
 I’m not clear yet what the trip hazard ratio will be where I am at. 

Hi Mike, 

I haven't quite got my head round what you're planning, but what I'm 
doing may give you some ideas... 

A G5RV is a compromise antenna.  It's based round a doublet fed with 
ladderline, and a coaxial feed that sort-of matches it.   It works, sort-of. 

I had one here.  I wasn't impressed with the performance.  I removed the 
coax, brought the ribbon feeder into the shack, and built a matching 
unit using a roller inductor, switched variable and fixed capacitors, 
and air-cored baluns.  I tried a broadband ferrite balun, but it got 
very hot on some bands.  The air ones don't even get warm. 

Getting rid of the G5RV coax improved performance significantly - I can 
get an indicated 1:1 match on all the HF bands on the input to the 
matching unit.  I don't know how well it's performing overall since I 
don't have the measuring equipment, but it does well in pileups and I 
seem to be able to work stuff.  It takes a while to retune when I change 
band, but I'm not in a hurry.   I have all the settings written down. 

On 160, I strap the ribbon feeder and load the whole antenna as a T, 
tuned against ground.  I live in a house built around 1490 and there are 
all kinds of restrictions on what I'm allowed to do, but nobody knows 
about the radial field that runs round the garden, across the lawn, etc 
- about half an inch below the surface.   The antenna runs between three 
trees, with a telescopic pole hidden in the middle one to get the 
feedpoint above the treetop.   I need to do some more experimenting with 
it on 160.  I can work all of Europe and into Africa and Asia, but I'm 
definitely in the little pistol category on top band.  I don't think 
there's a better solution given the restrictions of the listed property. 

Best of luck - hope maybe we will work on 160! 

Best 73, 

Keith  G3OIT 

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

Re: Topband: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m?

[kolson]

Mike, this is exactly the antenna I use here at the home QTH. Mine is set up as 
a 92 ft flattop and 42 ft feeder , one end at 50 ft the other at 25 ft (that's 
what I had to work with). I have a switching box at the bottom that has three 
modes: 

a)the ladderline is connected directly to the coax running back from the box to 
the shack (with a bit of trimming this gives you tunerless operation on 
40,20,18,12 and 10 meters. 

b)the ladderline is passed through to an extention random piece of ladderline 
to a tuner at the shack for 80,30 and 15 meters 

c)the feeder is shorted and fed to a coax connector to a dedicated  external 
tuning unit for 160, then back into another connector where it goes back to the 
shack through the same piece of coax as the a) arrangement. I have out 30 
radials, I know you can't do as many but one does what one can. 

This arrangement is one of the best modest all band antennas I have used, and 
it does fairly well on 160, I have worked over 100 countries with this, not 
awesome, but not to o bad for a small station with a so-so operator. I use a 
K9AY for RX here. Just for a dumb comparison, it greatly outperforms a 
butternut (not that hard to do, LOL). 

I modeled this with a simple antenna modeling program (that I barely knew how 
to use) and the matching network it came up with got me in the ballpark. I wish 
I remember what figures I got... 

Best, Kevin K3OX 
- Original Message -

From: Mike Smith VE9AA ve...@nbnet.nb.ca 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 8:57:18 PM 
Subject: Topband: ZS6BKW(G5RV) on 160m? 

I might have a chance to operate from a portable location this summer for a 
contest or two but at the location they have no antennas, nor is there room 
for any huge vertical, inverted L, guys ropes etc. etc. and no permission to 
climb roofs, chimneys, or put a bolt in the building, nor touch the trees. 
All very restrictive. 

  

I might be able to erect a 35' freestanding fiberglass mast with a ZS6BKW. 
Maybe.  The ZS6BKW is basically a 94' dipole with a 40' downlead of 450ohm 
ladeer line..which will be sloped slightly, as I don't see a way to get the 
peak above 35' 

  

Suffice to say, the best I MIGHT be able to do is sneak in this low 
ZS6BKW(G5RV) as an inv. vee to run 10m-80m but I am looking for a way to 
ALSO be on 160m to make a few dozen contacts in a contest or two. 

I am thinking the peak of the ZS6BKW (G5RV like antenna) would be at max 
35'.   

  

For 160m, could I short the 2 leads of the 450ohm ladder line together where 
they meet the coax run and sneak out 2 x 65' (bent) ground radials and 
attach them to the braid side of the coax? 

(maybe I'll even make up a switchbox so I don't have to be running around in 
the dark a few times a night reconfiguring bare wires in an unfamiliar 
location.) 

  

I've read 3830 contest reports where folks have done this type of thing, but 
of all the antennas I have ever had (many!_) I have never EVER tried this 
shorting of the ladder line or coax and feeding what is a G5RV as a T-Top 
vertical. 

with a couple of radials. 

  

I am not sure how a 40' tall vertical with 94' of toploading, models in NEC, 
but it seems like it might be close-ish(?) to resonating on 160m. (will I be 
in the ballpark?) What kind of matching will I need if any?   

I could maybe even add more coax or ladder line to the vertical section 
when on 160m, however it will also have to be sloped/bent and on or very 
near the ground (probably not good, eh?) 

I'll be using a modern transceiver with internal ATU. 

  

I am not looking to run pileups on 160m.(where I am going is not rare, just 
a nice summer place)..I just want to pick up a few 160m mults in a contest 
or two.   

  

Ideas?  Remember, I am very restricted.  Gotta have the ZS6BKW for my 
antenna.and I may not be permitted to have more than 1 coax run out to the 
antenna.  I doubt adding a couple extra 65' legs is possible either. (no 
square footage for that. 

  

Thanks 

  

Mike VE9AA 

Mike, Coreen  Corey 

Keswick Ridge, NB 

  

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

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

Re: Topband: Brave New World

[kolson]

Sometimes it's more in how things are presented. The thing that struck me was 
how the ARRL looked at it was some kind of triumphant feat when it struck me 
as, ultimately, kind of sad. 

It was late in 2006 when it c ame out that the FCC would remove  the CW 
requirement  for HF operation in early 2007 . Actua lly, I had expected it to 
happen, figured it was inevitable and had come to grips. But the President of 
our local Radio club anounced it on the reflector to the membership with the 
message title A Chris tmas gift to all. Mostly I am a laid-back guy, but 
somehow this made me see red. Why? 

Back in the day, when a fellow ham would screw up, we would kid him with 
where'd you get your license, out of a Cracker Jack Box? (or if you are 
Firesignian in nature, a Cracker Back Jox) Well, in this case, at least the guy 
would have had to buy the box of Cracker Jack! It was the idea that a HF  
Amateur Radio license should be a gift that stuck in my craw. This also 
became tinged with sadness as I realized that the powers that be had come to 
the (probably correct) conclusion that people would no longer see an Amateur 
Radio lic ense as being worth putting in some effort  for and would only deign 
to be licensed if it was all but  given to them. BTW, this is not intended as 
a you kids get off my lawn kind of rant, just a statement on how it is. 

Ham radio will go on, but the glory days as we knew them are pretty much the 
province of us veteran hams . That shouldn't stop us from enjoying it as we 
have been doing or welcoming the new hams that get what we do. I just doubt 
that all that many future hams will look at ham radio  as  we do. They will 
find their own ways and interests, but the  romance of putting together their 
own  station to work some far away island through the noise on top band will 
probably (and, I guess,  understandingly) elude them  in a time where you can 
walk down the street talking to your buddy in Australia on your smart phone, 
rent a few minutes  on a remote superstation to work the latest Dxpedition, or 
operate from a big multi-multi contest station without leaving your apartment. 

Best, Kevin 

- Original Message -

From: Eddy Swynar deswy...@xplornet.ca 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:05:09 PM 
Subject: Topband: Brave New World 

Hi Guys, 

I am really  truly surprised that nobody here has raised so much as even an 
eyebrow at this story: 

http://www.arrl.org/news/no-one-in-the-shack-as-station-logs-4200-contacts-in-arrl-dx-cw-contest
 

The whole notion---to me, at any rate---compromises the very essence  the 
...joie de vivre! of operating on 160-meters, don't you think...? And to 
imagine that one of the perpetrators in all this is actually exuberant about 
his accomplishment... 

“...'No one was in the K4VV shack for the entire contest!' said Mike L*, W0**, 
who took part in the contest via K4** from his own shack in Virginia... 

This too is progress...? Oh well, I guess maybe it is. Time marches on, 
things evolve, things de-evolve,  nothing stays quite the same. 

~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ 
_ 
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband 

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

Re: Topband: Brave New World

[kolson]

Actually Jim old boy, I have. I have been a Frankford RC member for 43 years 
and have operated from many M/M and M/S stations both in the US and as DX. I 
have a good idea what goes into it and have helped troubleshoot problems, fix 
rigs and amps and helped with antennas (from the ground as I get a nosebleed 
when I stand on a chair, LOL) from various of those stations. I know and have 
worked with W2VJN who I would say knows a bit about interstation interference, 
hi hi. I have never built a M/M myself as I don't have the QTH, resources or 
inclination. Certainly, it's a lot of work and remoting it makes things that 
much more difficult (though that's much easier now than it was, say, 15 years 
ago). 
  
What's sad in my view, is that in my M/M and M/S experiences, one of the 
greatest parts was getting together with the ops I was friends with that, due 
to time, distance or both, I didn't get to see much. The contest was fun, but 
the comradery was even more so. Just like when you ask most retired Major 
League players what they miss most, it is the locker room and their 
ex-teammates. 
  
I work in audio myself at CBS-TV in NYC in a television (audio and video) 
network studio and distribution facility, so I have a bit of an idea what is 
involved to design a complex facility :)  

And I make my own cables, thank you. 
  
Best, Kevin K3OX 
- Original Message -


From: Jim Brown j...@audiosystemsgroup.com 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:49:28 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Brave New World 

On Thu,2/26/2015 7:29 AM, kol...@rcn.com wrote: 
 Sometimes it's more in how things are presented. The thing that struck me was 
 how the ARRL looked at it was some kind of triumphant feat when it struck me 
 as, ultimately, kind of sad. 

Have you ever visited a multi-transmitter contesting station? Do you 
have any idea of the engineering it took to build it and make it 
competitive? We're talking antenna system design, careful engineering 
and filtering to allow multiple transmitters at high power to not 
interfere with others at the same QTH, power distribution for those 
transmitters, an acoustic operating environment that permits all those 
guys to be running SSB in the same room without going nuts? 

Do you have any idea of the systems engineering needed to remote a 
single station? I'm an EE, designed complex audio systems in my 
professional life. I've looked at what it would take to remote my 
station and quickly decided that it was WAY too much work. Heck -- it 
takes much of my time keeping my station running for me to sit in front 
of. Among other things, you've got to goof-proof the control systems so 
that you don't fry your gear (and Mr. Rodman described). Multiply that 
by 5 or 6 stations, and that's a very serious accomplishment. THAT is 
ham radio. 

Sitting in front of a radio that you bought, set on a table, and hooked 
up to an antenna that you bought with pre-made cables that you bought is 
a lot closer to CB than ham radio. 

73, Jim K9YC 


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


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

Re: Topband: K1N On Line Log

[kolson]

Charlie, that's my point. The people who keep calling in the pile are AWARE 
that they may not have a QSO, that's why they keep calling. With all the 
intentional QRM on K1N, it's possible they were never even aware that K1N 
returned to them! And that can lead to accidental dupes not the fault of K1N 
or the calling station. But the original subject (see subject line in header) 
was people thinking they had to re-work them because they were not or at least 
no longer in the Clublog ummm... errr... log. 
  
Personally, I took it on faith that if the pilots said the log on the island 
was fine and never in jeopardy and it was just a Clublog issue, I need not 
worry and I certainly didn't rework them. Some didn't feel as confident and 
decided upon safety contacts. But from what I saw here, no one questioned 
whether their contact was good in the first place, just whether it was still in 
the K1N log. 
  
BTW, with all due respect, the simple procedures you mentioned below are fine 
for casual DXing, but in DXpedition pileups, its: 
  
(K1N): K3OX 5NN (K3OX): 5NN (K1N): TU 
  
You would make mucho people (including possibly the op on the Dxpedition) very 
unhappy if everyone went: 
  
(K1N): K3OX 5NN (K3OX): K1N DE K3OX TU 5NN BK (K1N): K3OX QSL TU DE K1N UP 
(K3OX): TU Dit Dit 
  
It's a trade off between absolute certainty and speed, getting more calls in 
the log. Maybe an unacceptable trade-off to you, but I suspect not to the 
majority of ops  in Contest/DXpedition scenarios.  
  
Best, Kevin K3OX 

- Original Message -

From: Charlie Cunningham charlie-cunning...@nc.rr.com 
To: kol...@rcn.com, topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:06:46 AM 
Subject: RE: Topband: K1N On Line Log 

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

73.l 
Charlie, K4OTV 



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


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

Kevin K3OX   


- Original Message - 

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

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

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

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

2.0         Copy your report 

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

4.0        LISTEN for the DX operator to acknowledge your report 

5.0         Thanks or TU -or even dit-dit 

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

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

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

73, 
Charlie, K4OTV 

-Original Message- 
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Eddy 
Swynar 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 3:17 PM 
To: topband@contesting.com 
Subject: Re: Topband: K1N On Line Log 

How did we EVER collectively survive the dark ages of hardcopy QSL cards, 
s.a.s.e.'s, QSL bureaus, DX news sheets, and I.R.C.s, I wonder...? 

Is everyone that impatient while attempting to WORK a rare station, too...? 

All this 

Re: Topband: Missing K1N 160m QSO records just uploaded to Clublog

[kolson]

I think the point was that if you NEVER saw your QSO in Clublog, work again. If 
you saw it in Clublog before it's still in the logs on the island, so you are 
OK. 

Kevin K3OX 


- Original Message -

From: Doug Renwick ve...@sasktel.net 
To: Tree t...@kkn.net, Lloyd Berg N9LB lloydb...@charter.net 
Cc: 160 topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 12:55:00 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Missing K1N 160m QSO records just uploaded to Clublog 

Tree, 

My 80 and 160m Feb 4 Q's are still not showing. 
Best thing is to work them again following their advice. 

Doug 

I wasn't born in Saskatchewan, but I got here as soon as I could. 

-Original Message- 

This is good news - but still not seeing my call or ZL3IX who worked 
him just before me. 

QSO was around 0930 on 4 Feb UTC. 

Others??? 

Tree N6TR 

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Lloyd Berg  N9LB lloydb...@charter.net 
wrote: 
 All, 
 
 They just uploaded the missing K1N 160m QSO records to Clublog site a few 
 minutes ago. ~ 7000 entries! 
 
 ... including my missing 160m QSO :-) 
 
 73 
 
 Lloyd - N9LB 
 


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

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

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