Personally in contests I don’t even switch the computer on, but maybe I am old fashioned.
Regards Richard G3OQT > On 6 Dec 2022, at 17:01, [email protected] wrote: > > Send Topband mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. ARRL 160 (Ron Spencer) > 2. Re: Fwd: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops > (James V Redding PE) > 3. Re: My new 9 Circle works great! (Joe) > 4. Re: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops (Dennis Ashworth) > 5. Prop For ARRL 160 (Jim Brown) > 6. Re: My new 9 Circle works great! (Stig Vestergaard) > 7. Re: ARRL 160 (Ed Parish) > 8. Cluster Spots and the ARRL 160 ([email protected]) > 9. Re: ARRL 160 (Pete Smith N4ZR) > 10. Stew Perry coming in 11 days (Tree) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 08:55:10 -0700 > From: Ron Spencer <[email protected]> > To: "topband" <[email protected]> > Subject: Topband: ARRL 160 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Re Packet and the contest?????? > > > May not be of interest to everyone.? > > > > Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a > dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes > until I finally QSY'd to escape.? > > > > My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. On > all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped in > their call. Typically I work all dupes and,? for the first few did but, as > the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went away but > a few insisted on a Q.? > > > > In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the > responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many of > the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again, guessing, > they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected a quick Q. > NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid contact if > you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was correct on packet. > Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of the work?? > > > > Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where no > spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the > information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea. > > > > Ron > > N4XD > Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/ > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:33:00 -0500 > From: James V Redding PE <[email protected]> > To: Dennis Ashworth <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Topband: Fwd: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops > Message-ID: > <CAEa-wQj5kMXVV5=enjdufrklhvvktvkc-ongtppc-qfga3n...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Here is a link to a method of actually measuring the soil complex > conductivity characteristics and it is focused on 80M: > > https://rudys.typepad.com/files/soil-characteristics-qex.pdf > > Since the depth of the measurement is a function of frequency, the numbers > for 80M may be quite different than for other HF bands. > > Was also curious whether the elements were detuned for their individual > impedance measurements like would be done with a BCB array or if the 25 > ohms is a common point measurement. > > Jim/VEZ > > > >> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:21 AM Dennis Ashworth <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I meant to post this to the TowerTalk group. It still may be relevant to >> Topband ops. >> >> Dennis, K7FL >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> From: Dennis Ashworth <[email protected]> >> Date: Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 8:54 AM >> Subject: Ground conductivity discussions >> To: <[email protected]> >> >> >> Very interesting and timely discussions on radials and ground conductivity. >> I?m currently rebuilding an 80M broadside array (with shortened, top loaded >> elements) in SW Utah that I?ve modeled at 12 ohms impedance. The current >> antenna was tested and the impedance measured was 25 ohms. Each element in >> the array (4 total) also measured 25 ohms. What accounts for additional >> system loss? >> >> Upon consulting the original builders, I learned they had also predicted an >> impedance of approximately 12 ohms. I?m not clear what methods or models >> they used for their prediction. There are 4:1 baluns at the base of each >> vertical which begs the question whether the array impedances were ever >> checked post-install. I suspect not ? and I doubt anything has changed over >> the years that would equally affect the impedance *on all 4 verticals.* >> >> Where I don?t blindly trust models (antennas or otherwise), I do believe >> the 12 ohm figure is reasonable given the short, top loaded elements. I >> reviewed the FCC conductivity tables for the locale and they indicate 15-30 >> millimos/meter. That?s pretty good! I would think the loss from a ground >> system of 32, 1/4 wave plus radials would NOT account for the 12 ohms of >> loss ground losses. But what if my ground conductivity is less than the FCC >> tables report? >> >> I?m going to the site again next week to install 26 additional 1/4 wave >> radials on one of the verticals and see if (and how much) the measured >> impedance drops. I?ll share my results here. >> >> This loss has to be a ground system issue. If so, adding radials and seeing >> a corresponding drop in impedance should confirm my suspicions. >> >> At some point, I?ll measure the ground conductivity, but it needs to wait >> for warmer temps (current temp at site is 19F!). >> >> Insight from the masses always appreciated. >> >> >> Dennis, K7FL >> Las Vegas, NV >> _________________ >> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband >> Reflector >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 13:16:25 -0600 > From: Joe <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great! > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > Any links to this system? > > Joe WB9SBD > >> On 12/4/2022 1:34 PM, Jim Miller wrote: >> Thanks to Steve's, VE6WZ, excellent YouTube videos, I decided to tackle a >> better RX antenna. I've been using a 2 element array phased by an NCC-2 >> which is better than what I've had in the past (BOG, K9AY) but I wanted >> better. >> >> After evaluating my space available and finding it too small I asked my >> neighbor for seasonal use of their adjoining lot and they graciously >> agreed! My N, NW and W elements are on their property. >> >> Steve's videos include KiCad files for the combiner and preamps and he was >> very helpful by email with any of my questions. >> >> I just completed the array last night and got it on the air and I was >> astonished by how well it worked. >> >> Of course it isn't going to create signals out of thin air but it is much >> quieter due to better RDF and the front to back is very impressive. Strong >> signals on the waterfall just disappear when the antenna is reversed! >> >> I'm very happy to get such an improved antenna for 80 and 160 in a 120ft >> diameter circle! >> >> As a bonus I use it with PSTRotator and a USB controlled relay box so no >> manual switch box is required on my desk. Just a mouse click selects the >> desired direction or it can track my logger automatically. >> >> FYI, most of the cost is in the aluminum, the combiner and preamps were >> pretty cheap to build. >> >> Many thanks to VE6WZ!! >> >> 73 >> >> jim ab3cv >> _________________ >> Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 11:20:47 -0800 > From: Dennis Ashworth <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Topband: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops > Message-ID: > <CAEn-CUqMPBdzEqnW2aPrW+Se+q8=nieidw4mctamdaotl_x...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > >> Hi Jim ? thanks for the info. Rudy?s latest method is the one I was >> planning to employ. Brian, K6STI also mentioned Rudy?s method. Good >> consensus on which method to use! >> >> Yes, all other elements were either de tuned or on the ground. I have >> checked each vertical one at a time (with others decoupled) and read 25 >> ohms on all 4 elements. Such a head scratcher! I?m beginning to the my >> aluminum elements are doped with Nichrome! :-) >> >> Dennis, K7FL >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 9:33 AM James V Redding PE <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Here is a link to a method of actually measuring the soil complex >>> conductivity characteristics and it is focused on 80M: >>> >>> https://rudys.typepad.com/files/soil-characteristics-qex.pdf >>> >>> Since the depth of the measurement is a function of frequency, the >>> numbers for 80M may be quite different than for other HF bands. >>> >>> Was also curious whether the elements were detuned for their individual >>> impedance measurements like would be done with a BCB array or if the 25 >>> ohms is a common point measurement. >>> >>> Jim/VEZ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:21 AM Dennis Ashworth <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I meant to post this to the TowerTalk group. It still may be relevant to >>>> Topband ops. >>>> >>>> Dennis, K7FL >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>> From: Dennis Ashworth <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 8:54 AM >>>> Subject: Ground conductivity discussions >>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> >>>> Very interesting and timely discussions on radials and ground >>>> conductivity. >>>> I?m currently rebuilding an 80M broadside array (with shortened, top >>>> loaded >>>> elements) in SW Utah that I?ve modeled at 12 ohms impedance. The current >>>> antenna was tested and the impedance measured was 25 ohms. Each element >>>> in >>>> the array (4 total) also measured 25 ohms. What accounts for additional >>>> system loss? >>>> >>>> Upon consulting the original builders, I learned they had also predicted >>>> an >>>> impedance of approximately 12 ohms. I?m not clear what methods or models >>>> they used for their prediction. There are 4:1 baluns at the base of each >>>> vertical which begs the question whether the array impedances were ever >>>> checked post-install. I suspect not ? and I doubt anything has changed >>>> over >>>> the years that would equally affect the impedance *on all 4 verticals.* >>>> >>>> Where I don?t blindly trust models (antennas or otherwise), I do believe >>>> the 12 ohm figure is reasonable given the short, top loaded elements. I >>>> reviewed the FCC conductivity tables for the locale and they indicate >>>> 15-30 >>>> millimos/meter. That?s pretty good! I would think the loss from a ground >>>> system of 32, 1/4 wave plus radials would NOT account for the 12 ohms of >>>> loss ground losses. But what if my ground conductivity is less than the >>>> FCC >>>> tables report? >>>> >>>> I?m going to the site again next week to install 26 additional 1/4 wave >>>> radials on one of the verticals and see if (and how much) the measured >>>> impedance drops. I?ll share my results here. >>>> >>>> This loss has to be a ground system issue. If so, adding radials and >>>> seeing >>>> a corresponding drop in impedance should confirm my suspicions. >>>> >>>> At some point, I?ll measure the ground conductivity, but it needs to wait >>>> for warmer temps (current temp at site is 19F!). >>>> >>>> Insight from the masses always appreciated. >>>> >>>> >>>> Dennis, K7FL >>>> Las Vegas, NV >>>> _________________ >>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband >>>> Reflector >>>> >>> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:05:36 -0800 > From: Jim Brown <[email protected]> > To: 'TopBand' <[email protected]> > Subject: Topband: Prop For ARRL 160 > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > It was totally stinko for the contest. > > 73, Jim K9YC > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 06:51:41 +0100 > From: Stig Vestergaard <[email protected]> > To: Joe <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great! > Message-ID: > <CA+_O4RoK6RbeaZ18YuXrRiVJr+s=sdqxoxwtxk5amp5pn50...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > I completely agree with you Jim, AB3CV. > > I am in more or less the same situation as you, too little footprint for > several serious beverages, single or phased, but instead the W1EW / VE6WZ 9 > circle with only 120ft diameter is really an improvement here on a little > footprint. Steve, VE6WZ has done so many great YouTube videos, not only on > the 9 circle subject, but other TopBand issues. > By the way I am using my 9 circle in diversity RX mode on the transceiver > with other small receive antennas, as short beverages, Bog's and DHDL, it > works great. > Sure long Beverage (too long for my property), would outperform the 9 > circle in the same direction, but then I need a serious big property to get > the opportunity to switch directions from several bev's. > > Now we only need more activity on 160M CW, so we can have more fun, and > reason to play with antennas, hi. > > Great job Steve, VE6WZ and ofcourse John, W1FV who optimized and > developed the smaller 9 circle. > > > Stig, OZ4MM > > >> Den tir. 6. dec. 2022 kl. 05.49 skrev Joe <[email protected]>: >> >> Any links to this system? >> >> Joe WB9SBD >> >>> On 12/4/2022 1:34 PM, Jim Miller wrote: >>> Thanks to Steve's, VE6WZ, excellent YouTube videos, I decided to tackle a >>> better RX antenna. I've been using a 2 element array phased by an NCC-2 >>> which is better than what I've had in the past (BOG, K9AY) but I wanted >>> better. >>> >>> After evaluating my space available and finding it too small I asked my >>> neighbor for seasonal use of their adjoining lot and they graciously >>> agreed! My N, NW and W elements are on their property. >>> >>> Steve's videos include KiCad files for the combiner and preamps and he >> was >>> very helpful by email with any of my questions. >>> >>> I just completed the array last night and got it on the air and I was >>> astonished by how well it worked. >>> >>> Of course it isn't going to create signals out of thin air but it is much >>> quieter due to better RDF and the front to back is very impressive. >> Strong >>> signals on the waterfall just disappear when the antenna is reversed! >>> >>> I'm very happy to get such an improved antenna for 80 and 160 in a 120ft >>> diameter circle! >>> >>> As a bonus I use it with PSTRotator and a USB controlled relay box so no >>> manual switch box is required on my desk. Just a mouse click selects the >>> desired direction or it can track my logger automatically. >>> >>> FYI, most of the cost is in the aluminum, the combiner and preamps were >>> pretty cheap to build. >>> >>> Many thanks to VE6WZ!! >>> >>> 73 >>> >>> jim ab3cv >>> _________________ >>> Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband >> Reflector >>> >> _________________ >> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband >> Reflector >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 05:57:59 -0500 > From: Ed Parish <[email protected]> > To: Ron Spencer <[email protected]> > Cc: topband <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160 > Message-ID: > <CAKR4uUOdqqn8ZkD=c8DQNev3tJtPz=yfei6bt_89fxeqztr...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > The same thing happened to me. I occasionally get a dupe, but at one point, > all of a sudden, I worked 10 or 12 dupes in a row. I finally had to QSY. > Running unassisted, I couldn't tell what was spotted on my frequency, but I > knew it was a busted call. > > reply to: [email protected] > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022, 23:47 Ron Spencer via Topband <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Re Packet and the contest >> >> >> May not be of interest to everyone. >> >> >> >> Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a >> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes >> until I finally QSY'd to escape. >> >> >> >> My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. >> On all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped >> in their call. Typically I work all dupes and, for the first few did but, >> as the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went >> away but a few insisted on a Q. >> >> >> >> In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the >> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many >> of the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again, >> guessing, they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected >> a quick Q. NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid >> contact if you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was >> correct on packet. Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of >> the work? >> >> >> >> Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where >> no spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the >> information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea. >> >> >> >> Ron >> >> N4XD >> Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/ >> _________________ >> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband >> Reflector >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:42:31 -0500 > From: <[email protected]> > To: "'Ron Spencer'" <[email protected]>, "'topband'" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Topband: Cluster Spots and the ARRL 160 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi Ron, > And I thought it was just me. I too, had to resort to S&P because of the > number of dupes. In 9 hrs. of operating, I had 16 total, plus another 4 where > the operator caught themselves and said, "SRI." I have never seen anything > like it. I had a K2 who called me on Sat evening for a dupe, and 4 minutes > later called me again! > Like you, I figured it was bad cluster spots. However, I searched the > database for the usual blown calls -- WI6X, WS6K, WH6X and WS7X. To my > surprise, I can't find a single spot with any of these variations. > I agree: several of these callers were well-known, competent contest > operators. Most I had worked dozens of times. > For 160M tests, I have long since adjusted my callsign in the N1MM text > scripts. I add a half-space before the "S" and slow the "S" down by 2 wpm. In > the past, this has always served me well. But not in this test. >> From this QTH I had lots of QRN and rapid, deep QSB. I even slowed my >> sending by 2 wpm from Sat evening on. That did not seem to do the trick. > Besides the usual wide key-clickers, I also heard an unusual number of > signals breaking up. Some to the point of being nearly uncopiable. Was this > strange atmospheric condx? Was this what was bugging my signal? > I'm curious if others experienced the same stuff. > Jim - WS6X > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Topband <[email protected]> On Behalf > Of Ron Spencer via Topband > Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 10:55 AM > To: topband <[email protected]> > Subject: Topband: ARRL 160 > > Re Packet and the contest > May not be of interest to everyone. > Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a > dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes > until I finally QSY'd to escape. > > My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. On > all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped in > their call. Typically I work all dupes and, for the first few did but, as > the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went away but > a few insisted on a Q. > > In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the > responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many of > the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again, guessing, > they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected a quick Q. > NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid contact if > you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was correct on packet. > Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of the work? > > Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where no > spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the > information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea. > > Ron > N4XD > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 09:15:07 -0500 > From: Pete Smith N4ZR <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > I had 598 QSOs in CQWW CW (10M) and 420 in the ARRL 160 CW, about 85 > percent S&P (assisted), and don't recall a single instance where an > incorrect spot led me even to think about calling a station who wasn't > really there.? N1MM's Spectrum Display shows previously-worked stations, > so it would be glaringly obvious when spots for K3LPL and W3LPL showed > up on the same frequency. I didn't see it happen. > > 73, Pete N4ZR,for the N1MM Team > Check out our web server at > <https://reversebeacon.net/main.php>. > For spots, please use your favorite > "retail" DX cluster. > >> On 12/5/2022 10:55 AM, Ron Spencer via Topband wrote: >> Re Packet and the contest >> >> >> May not be of interest to everyone. >> >> >> >> Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a >> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes >> until I finally QSY'd to escape. >> >> >> >> My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. On >> all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped in >> their call. Typically I work all dupes and,? for the first few did but, as >> the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went away >> but a few insisted on a Q. >> >> >> >> In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the >> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many >> of the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again, >> guessing, they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected a >> quick Q. NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid >> contact if you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was correct >> on packet. Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of the work? >> >> >> >> Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where no >> spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the >> information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea. >> >> >> >> Ron >> >> N4XD >> Sent usinghttps://www.zoho.com/mail/ >> _________________ >> Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:31:33 -0800 > From: Tree <[email protected]> > To: 160 <[email protected]> > Subject: Topband: Stew Perry coming in 11 days > Message-ID: > <CAKF9HhatQv4YHuctArr+_ShMNYgrYgG=taskdamnnhaizbt...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Due to the timing of New Year's Eve, the Stew Perry will move up to the > weekend before the holidays this year. That would be on December 17/18th. > > We understand that this is a bad time for some people - and perhaps a > better time for some others. Most of the time, the contest ends up being > on the weekend between XMAS and New Year's, but this is the one exception. > > As you all know, this contest features a robust menu of plaques. Without > much prodding at all, we already have nearly a full set of plaques > sponsored. You can find the list here: > > Stew Perry TBDC Plaques (kkn.net) > <https://www.kkn.net/stew/stew_plaques.html> > > If you were waiting for an announcement before sponsoring your plaque of > choice - consider this that announcement. Please send me an email with the > info on the plaque you want to sponsor. Payment is best via PayPal to this > email address ([email protected]). The current price is $65. > > The Boring Amateur Radio Club would like to thank Patrick, W7TMT, who is > helping with shipping last year's plaques. These should be arriving in the > next couple of weeks. > > 73 Tree N6TR / K7RAT > [email protected] > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Topband mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband > > > ------------------------------ > > End of Topband Digest, Vol 240, Issue 4 > *************************************** _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
