The topic of fewer sporadic-E openings since 2011 and their geographical
distribution (Europe has far more Es than North America) will be reviewed in
the August, 2016 QST WA50 column.
- Jon N0JK
"Speaking of the last minimum, I noticed E skip on 50 MHZ was better here than
in the last few
eanut whistle" stations out there who, simply, enjoy hearing a reply
to our CQs OR hope to hear others calling CQ, sans "CQ DX"!
71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
Monday, June 06, 2016 2:58 AM
To: jkaufm...@alum.mit.edu ; 'Carl Luetzelschwab' ; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Top
-Original Message-
From: Bob Garrett
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 2:58 AM
To: jkaufm...@alum.mit.edu ; 'Carl Luetzelschwab' ; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min
...SNIP...
I believe we still have so much to learn
Hello John et al,
The 1987 cycle was truly amazing with similar conditions here in PA. JA
opening most mornings and EU nights like the 20 meter band. Unlike W1FV, I
only heard 9M2AX a few times and worked him once on January 1, 1989. That
night, he was louder than the EU stations he was
[mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] Puolesta David
Raymond
Lähetetty: 6. kesäkuutata 2016 5:39
Vastaanottaja: topband@contesting.com
Aihe: Re: Topband: low band propagation at solar min
I've only been active on Topband since 1987 but nothing has beat the 2008
and 2009 seasons when NA topbanders were
There appear to be different propagation patterns during various sunspot
cycles.
From my article in CQ Magazine June 1980:
http://www.k3bu.us/propagation.htm
It is known that with increased sunspot activity the thickness of the
atmosphere increases. (This caused Skylab to come down
I've only been active on Topband since 1987 but nothing has beat the 2008
and 2009 seasons when NA topbanders were easily working Zones 17, 18, and 19
both morning and night. I remember commenting to some of the newer guys
(who had been thinking it was always like that) telling them it was a
JC,
My expectation is the same as yours, cycle 25 should be better than 24
for the
low bands. The basis for my expectation is I am putting up better 160M
antennas
this summer and I am an optimist :-)
Bob
K6UJ
On 6/5/16 6:41 PM, JC wrote:
"I assumed that this was normal propagation for
Carl and John, your comments about the last cycle bottom not being as good as
the previous cycle bottoms were very interesting.
I missed the previous cycles you mentioned. My activity started here in Oct
2008 and the first two or three seasons seemed fantastic compared to later
years. I am
"I assumed that this was normal propagation for 160 but I have never
observed anything consistently as good as it was in the 1980's. Anyone else
found this to be true? What was different about the solar minimum in that
decade?"
John. I was in Brazil that time and I remember working several US
(Note: disregard my earlier incomplete post)
Carl K9LA: " But in my opinion (and in the opinion of others) the deep and
long solar minimum between Cycles 23 and 24 (2006-2010) didn't live up to
this axiom compared to the not-so-deep and not-so-long solar minimum between
Cycles 22 and 23
> As for low band propagation being better at solar min, I grew up believing
in this axiom. But in my opinion (and in the opinion of others) the deep and
long solar minimum between Cycles 23 and 24 (2006-2010) didn't live up to
this axiom compared to the not-so-deep and not-so-long solar minimum
12 matches
Mail list logo
