Thanks for all you do.
I will be calling with a "short" vertical only up 35'.
It is fed 6" from salt water.
I worked the  E6 C82  7O6  VK0/H and others using it.  It's all I have.  
The excitement and anticipation will not be diminished by the challenge I face 
using a stealth wire disguised as a "Bird House" while awaiting you to 
duplicate another great DXpedition.

See you from Baker.

-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 3:43 PM
To: 'GEORGE WALLNER' <>; 'Rob Atkinson' 
Subject: Re: Topband: Baker Island DXpedition on 160

Hi George,
With the oustanding signals you have been producing on top band I hope we will 
be able to have a marginal but valid QSO even this time. I wish you and the 
gang a fine trip

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Topband <> För GEORGE WALLNER
Skickat: den 13 juni 2018 21:27
Till: Rob Atkinson <>;
Ämne: Re: Topband: Baker Island DXpedition on 160

You are right about the timing not being good, but it is way too late now to 
postpone the operation. Most of us are already in the Pacific or on a plane, 
the boat is being loaded, etc., etc.
This is the time we could get and these are the limitations we must live with. 
The circumstances at the FWS were conducive to issuing a permit this year. 
There was no guarantee that those circumstances would remain the same in the 
future. Please remember that, for Navassa we had to wait 18 years for the 
official "stars to line up". Also, fewer sunspots are supposed to be good for 
TB conditions.
As for antennas, of course taller would be better, but...we got the permit by 
agreeing, not arguing.
We have a new 160 m antenna design that I have been testing from C6AGU. With 
the help of a salt-water "ground" it will work OK. (NEC indicates a gain of
6 dBi.)
73 and CU,

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:55:10 -0500
  Rob Atkinson <> wrote:
> I respectfully suggest the Baker Is. dxpedition be postponed for a few 
> years until band condx improve.  It makes no sense to me to mount this 
> costly undertaking to a limited access location when propagation is in
> the toilet.   If USFWS is managing access, they've lately shown that
> they'll only approve trips to islands under their custodianship every
> 10 years or so.  If this is the case with Baker Is., then this trip 
> will make another one in a few years impossible.
> Another point I'd like to make is that a later trip might afford a 
> chance to renegotiate what I consider a ridiculous antenna limit, 
> which seems to be based on a ridiculous antenna design, namely the "43
> foot all-band vertical."    Such a height with top loading might work
> okay on 80 meters but on 160 its efficiency will be poor.
> 73
> Rob
> K5UJ
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - 
> 5f3a0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636645158158478678&
> sdata=RVPbEs%2FIeaHQHC9h26SIlFwi%2F6HeBH851Ljf%2FkKiXXk%3D&reserved=0

Topband Reflector Archives -

Topband Reflector Archives -
Topband Reflector Archives -

Reply via email to