Herb, Congratulations on the 160 contact! I still haven't heard a peep but its good to know some of us are getting the Q.
Last night was a bit irritating on 80 in that I heard their weak signal, building over 45 minutes and then peaking at close to S9 on the Hi-Z, but they were only calling JA. Calling JA lasted well past the peak and well until they were back to being S2 here. By that time a Q wasn't likely for most of the horde I saw calling them on the scope. Perhaps they're going to cover different geographic areas on different days, we'll have to see. It is a challenge! Gary KA1J > EP6T was easy to work on 160 meters last night perhaps due to some > equatorial skewing and some skilled operators who had a NA set aside on > 1828. without this breaking the EU wall would have been impossible. > This has not been the case on 80 meters as there appears to be some > local noise problem. The 80 meter CW signals here were at time 599 plus > 10 and there were many QRO East coast callers with no joy. When EP6T > would QSX up 2 for NA only they did not appear to hear anything except > maybe now and then a partial. So apparently in frustration they > returned to working EU. The question remains if they can be easily > worked on 160 and then not on 80 will the same rig and antenna(s) on > this end what could be the problem. After five days of calling on 80 for > six hours every night I have come to the conclusion that their 80 meter > RX antenna may not favor the Western hemisphere. It almost seems like > the front end of the RX section is hurting. With an 80 meter Q rate of > one contact in five minutes and then > > Even a 200 foot BOG favoring the America's at the end of a 1000' piece > of RG6 away from the local noise might help make it possible for some > NA/SA stations to get in the log on 80. Certainly EP6T being able to > hear me with ease on 160 so they should be able to do the same on 80. > Maybe the solution is not that difficult. The awesome skill of the > operators on 160 is well established but the 80 position might be > different. with different equipment and different ops. On this side > there may come a point where it is point where calling for days with no > chance in even having a chance must be considered. > > > Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ > > On 1/21/2015 8:19 AM, Bill and Liz wrote: > > Last night the expedition had a pretty good signal on 80M...workable,I > > thought, by anyone running a bit of power, some long deep QSB but also some > > surprisingly long peaks too. In the time that I spent listening, they > > worked no NA stations, so either propagation is causing great difficulties > > for them on receive, their noise level is high (this may be the real > > reason-there is heavy industry on the island not very far from their QTH) > > or the oeEU wall is just too high and deep. At no time did I hear a > > request to stand by for NA even as their sunrise approached and propagation > > would be tops for us. > > > > And not a peep on 160M here (EN93) through the first few evenings. So far > > just 3 NA stations have made it into the log on topband with some 71 on > > 80M. Not good for NA!! > > > > Bill VE3NH > > _________________ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > _________________ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
