Re: Topband: EP6T and outside world
160 stopped becoming the Gentleman's Band ever since mainstream manufacturers started incoroporating a spot marked 160 on the front of their rigs linears... 100% disagree.. 160m is a gentleman's band by choice, all of us can make that choice, we respect the visitors that come and go, we don't blame them we educate them by example. We don't fight the pig because the pig will get you into the mud and he loves it. Gentleman's and gentlewoman's are here to stay! Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: XW8BM on 160m again
Hi Eugene I heard Toshi very well last year several days long path SSE/SSW around 11:30z. If you have a chance tell him to set some SSE/SSW RX antennas for NA, Regards JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Eugene Popov /RA0FF/ Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:33 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: XW8BM on 160m again Today XW8BM makes a call CQ-NA on 1812 (rx UP2 ) . It was after 22:00 UTC . Earlier, I wrote it down signal in my archive . http://www.qsl.net/ra0ff/160m/ears.html Signal could be heard much better than the last visit to Laos. Unfortunately, there is not a better RX in XW . But he said that the change of place and now he has the opportunity to place long RX antennas . 73! de Eugene RA0FF http://www.qsl.net/ra0ff/ _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: That radar on 1915...
Mike Very interesting signal. I tuned on 3260 and the radar signal was very strong and let's say unique, two bursts, one narrow band another wide band. It turns out that I am testing several preamplifiers and the signal on 3260 was Intermodulation coming from the preamplifier. I removed the preamplifier and listening on the iC7800 the signal is not there. This is a very serious problem all of us is facing nowadays and it is hard to even figure I out what is happening. Two week ago I noticed an intermodulation signal on 1890, I recognized the AM broadcast program and I was able to identify the two station generating the intermodulation, I was expecting two local AM BC below 1.8 MHz. for my surprise both signal was SW, 11,930 MHz and 13,820 MHz , same station Radio Martã 1890 KHz apart. With the solar activity peaking the propagation is exceptional good on 6MHz to 9 MHz or 12 MHz and others SW bands. The two station from Radio Martã was arriving here in Ft Lauderdale with -20 dBm with peaks -10 dBm, any preamp with 10 db gain will delivery to the radio 0dBm, this is 1 mW most radios with IP3 bellow 40 dB cannot handle that level of energy without distortion and intermodulation. Most RX antennas have low gain on 160m and requires a preamplifier, however the same antennas can have some good gain on 12 MHz. With the propagation so good on SW the broadcasting are causing a lot of problems. Most of us are not using tunable pre-selector ahead of the preamplifier as we are used to have on old tubes receivers. The Radio Martã is not near my house, it is in South Carolina and I'm in South Florida. Last Sunday I measured s9+60 dB from a BC signal without preamplifier on 7 315 . this is - 13dBm, with any preamplifier with more than 10 dB we can send almos 1 mw to the receiver front end. I try to check 7315 and there are several BC on that frequency form 5 to 250 KW... This situation with the propagation can last another year or two. Check if your preamp is not overloading from SW boradcat signals. We need preselectors or a low pass filter. See what I found on 7.315 MHz 7315ADVENTIST WORLD R. 03:00 03:30 1234567 Tigrinya250 125 KW FIssoudun 46N57 001E59OFF_AIRMBR 7315Radio Tamazuj 04:00 04:29 1234567 Sudanese Arabic 250 KW 146 CVASanta Maria di Galeria 42N02 012E18OFF_AIRPNW/FPU 7315Radio Dabanga 04:29 05:57 1234567 Sudanese Arabic 250 KW 146 CVASanta Maria di Galeria 42N02 012E18SIGNAL_STRENGTH_2PNW/FPU 7315AIR Shillong06:56 09:31 1234567 Hindi 50 76 INDShillong 25N33 091E56OFF_AIR 7315CHINA RADIO INTERNATIONAL 16:00 16:57 1234567 Vietnamese 100 184 CHNKunming 25N10 102E49OFF_AIR 7315CHINA RADIO INTERNATIONAL 17:30 18:27 1234567 Chinese 500 300 CHNKunming 25N10 102E49OFF_AIR 7315CHINA RADIO INTERNATIONAL 22:00 22:57 1234567 Esperanto 500 294 Kashi-Saibagh 2022 39N21 075E45OFF_AIR 7315CNR 2 09:00 16:04 1234567 Chinese 150 ND CHNXian 594 34N23 108E40OFF_AIR2 7315CNR 2 20:55 01:00 1234567 Chinese 150 ND CHNXian 594 34N23 108E40OFF_AIR2=11660 7315TWR Africa 14:25 14:55 1234567 Portuguese 50 5 SWZManzini 26S19 031E36OFF_AIR 7315TWR Africa 14:55 15:10 1234567 Makhuwa 50 5 SWZManzini 26S19 031E36OFF_AIR 7315TWR Africa 15:10 15:55 1234567 Lomwe 50 5 SWZManzini 26S19 031E36OFF_AIR 7315VOICE OF AMERICA19:00 20:00 1234567 Kurdish 100 105 DBiblis 49N40 008E30OFF_AIRIBB/ 7315WHRI CYPRESS00:00 00:30 12. English 250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR1 a14 7315WHRI CYPRESS00:30 01:00 .234567 English 250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR1 a14 7315WHRI Water of Life Ministries 00:30 01:00 1.. English 250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR1 a14 7315WHRI Water of Life Ministries 01:00 01:30 .2. English 250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR2 a14 7315WHRI CYPRESS01:00 02:00 12. English 250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR2 a14 7315WHRI CYPRESS02:00 03:00 1234567 Spanish, English250 152 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR1 a14 7315WHRI CYPRESS05:30 09:00 1234567 Spanish, English250 152 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR1 a14 7315WHRI CYPRESS10:00 12:00 .23456. Spanish, English250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR1 a14 7315WHRI Christian Worship Hour 11:00 12:00 1.. English 250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08OFF_AIR1 a14 7315WHRI Water of Life Ministries 12:00 12:30 1.. English 250 173 USACypress Creek32N40 081W08
Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas
An array of loops is two loops for two directions. Hi guys The simple solution that is working very well since 2009 is the HWF. Why not two horizontal loaded loops end-fire. Two identical horizontal loops see the ground wave signal at the same way Va=Vb and because the 180 degree out of phase we have Va-Vb=0 . A loaded loop has a cardioid patter and two in phase , like the horizontal WF , have over 90 dB attenuation on vertical polarized signals at the front lobe and at same time has 11.5 to 1332 dB directivity for horizontal signals The main lobe is near 40 degree and + - 20 degree for 3db, it means deep null from 90 degree plane, not only from the side , also with a 5 to 8 degree difference in phase you can enjoy 20 to 40 F.B. So the HWF can null the noise in all direction coming from ground wave, simple as that. You can turn the HWF and aim to the DX with good directivity like a 3 elements full size beam from 160, 80, 40 and 30m in one single feed line. The HWF needs to be at least 30 Ft. high for 80m and 60 Ft high for good performance on 160m. Even on 40m and 30m the HWF offer the same noiseless performance. I called noiseless because with 90 dB attenuation on ground wave, mainly man made noise, the noise level during the day without propagation noise or sky wave is below the noise floor of the receiver. The challenger is to avoid any common mode noise pickup from the feed line, the feed line is a vertical antenna and it will deteriorate the vertical attenuation if you don't choke it, not that shield is our enemy for that. Quad shield just increase the common mode noise problems. I recorded some signals comparing a good RDF vertical HF, is my main antenna for almost 10 years, I built on in 2006. The results speak for itself, it is a booring 10 minutes video and at the end somebody started a huge intentional QRM on top of the DX, unbelievable bad in all aspects. It is my Drop box https://www.dropbox.com/s/xqrtj86jout29ph/MVI_0075.MP4?dl=0 Another solution not so efficient because does not have directivity, but works very well is the old K6STI loop http://www.angelfire.com/md/k3ky/page45.html Same issue , you need to use unshielded twisted pair to feed the loop, no shield !!! you don't what that on the feed line. 73's N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas
Hi Guys I uploaded the video on YouTube on this link, DropBox is not working. http://youtu.be/dNBekvzlxgM Hi guys The simple solution that is working very well since 2009 is the HWF. Why not two horizontal loaded loops end-fire. Two identical horizontal loops see the ground wave signal at the same way Va=Vb and because the 180 degree out of phase we have Va-Vb=0 . A loaded loop has a cardioid patter and two in phase , like the horizontal WF , have over 90 dB attenuation on vertical polarized signals at the front lobe and at same time has 11.5 to 1332 dB directivity for horizontal signals The main lobe is near 40 degree and + - 20 degree for 3db, it means deep null from 90 degree plane, not only from the side , also with a 5 to 8 degree difference in phase you can enjoy 20 to 40 F.B. So the HWF can null the noise in all direction coming from ground wave, simple as that. You can turn the HWF and aim to the DX with good directivity like a 3 elements full size beam from 160, 80, 40 and 30m in one single feed line. The HWF needs to be at least 30 Ft. high for 80m and 60 Ft high for good performance on 160m. Even on 40m and 30m the HWF offer the same noiseless performance. I called noiseless because with 90 dB attenuation on ground wave, mainly man made noise, the noise level during the day without propagation noise or sky wave is below the noise floor of the receiver. The challenger is to avoid any common mode noise pickup from the feed line, the feed line is a vertical antenna and it will deteriorate the vertical attenuation if you don't choke it, not that shield is our enemy for that. Quad shield just increase the common mode noise problems. I recorded some signals comparing a good RDF vertical HF, is my main antenna for almost 10 years, I built on in 2006. The results speak for itself, it is a booring 10 minutes video and at the end somebody started a huge intentional QRM on top of the DX, unbelievable bad in all aspects. It is my Drop box https://www.dropbox.com/s/xqrtj86jout29ph/MVI_0075.MP4?dl=0 Another solution not so efficient because does not have directivity, but works very well is the old K6STI loop http://www.angelfire.com/md/k3ky/page45.html Same issue , you need to use unshielded twisted pair to feed the loop, no shield !!! you don't what that on the feed line. 73's N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas
I am going to try to get a horizontal loop aimed at 70 degrees up Hi Rick It is not recommended to tilt and elevate the loop. There is two reasons it improve the signal to noise ratio, First is the attenuation of the vertical component at the same direction you are receiving the DX signal, Second is the directivity for horizontal signal. Her the first one is the most important to kill local ground noise. I used to tune the HWF for best RDF, but I've seen better results tuning it for max attenuation of the vertical field. Since I did that I rarely use my vertical WF, including for signals coming due north. Horizontal signals get very attenuated near the ground, that's why you should install the loops or the loop as high you can. Different from dipoles the takeoff angle is the same for any height above ground. Long path propagation SSE SSW is the most interesting observation of polarization coming horizontal polarized. Since I install the first HWF back in 2009 I started to copy long path signals from South Asia in a daily base during Fall and Winter. 6 month season. On 160m, the activity is a key factor, like I heard Peter from HS0ZAI the only day he was active on 160m, I cant say the propagation is not open if there is no activity. There have been several reports of long path propagation this year on 160m , on 80 m is it pretty common. The HWF because the difference in polarization , the interaction with TX antenna is 25 to 27 dB reduced. But not the same for low dipoles, elevated radials or any other resonant wire or structure at the same band,, Remember the HWF has the same performance on 160 . 80. 40 and some good usability on 30m, However the gain is different, like 160m -50 dB, 80m -30 dB , 40m -10 dB e almost some gain on 30m, these figures depend on the size of the HWF. This also means the same preamp is not recommended for all bands, it needs to be tuned and what I use is preamp tuned per band with the adequate gain. Just few days ago I measure signal from two local broadcast in South Caroline, Radio Martã aimed for Cuba, on 11.930 MHz signal at the receiver -13dBm (s9+60) and 13.820 MHz, -20 dBm , the preamp can/may handle it but these numbers can overload any receiver if you don't adjust the gain. Also the IM or PIM became a problem , the product of 1890 can be very strong. Regards JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Richard (Rick) Karlquist [mailto:rich...@karlquist.com] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 2:36 PM To: JC; 'topband' Subject: Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas On 1/8/2015 5:36 AM, JC wrote: An array of loops is two loops for two directions. Hi guys The simple solution that is working very well since 2009 is the HWF. Why not two horizontal loaded loops end-fire. Two identical horizontal loops see the ground wave signal at the same way Va=Vb and because the 180 degree I have been modeling horizontal loops recently. The idea is to reject vertically polarized ground wave noise. As far as I can tell, a horizontal loop rejects vertically polarized noise from any direction. As opposed to a dipole that receives vertically polarized signals from the ends. You can make the loop just about any size or shape and terminate the side opposite the feed with a resistor of around 1000 ohms to get a cardioid pattern. There is a resonance when the perimeter of the loop is a half wave long, so you need to stay somewhat below this length, which would be something like 260 feet on 160 meters. That's a huge loop. The higher the loop and the bigger the loop, the more signal you get (that is gross signal, not SNR). You need to overcome your preamp noise. As JC says, these loops can be the building blocks of an array. I am going to try to get a horizontal loop aimed at 70 degrees up for the upcoming CQWW contests as a proof of concept. In the recent SP, I tried a horizontal dipole, but it was no better than the transmit vertical. In the past, dipoles have been good receiving antennas. I am thinking it is a matter of what direction the dominant noise is coming from as to whether they work. The loop doesn't have that issue. Rick N6RK _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Silver solder
Hi Jorge The most common problem of Passive Inter Modulation (PIM) that can flood your radio with BC harmonica is Aluminum Oxide. The dielectric on that white powder between aluminum and most every others metal became a diode with moisture and a capacitor when dr. It can protected with all kind of process, however tall of them last no longer than one year. With RF current on 160m the joint with rectify and generating all kind of noise. Electro voltage due different materials is an irreversible process. If you want to have your ground plane for several years, do yourself a favor and use brass split bolt and cooper, you can find split bold that can be buried. High temperature also change the tempera of cooper and with all the different metals you are set up to failure, it just a matter of time to happen. Regards JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jorge Diez - CX6VM Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2015 9:28 AM To: Topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Silver solder Thanks all for the help Will be looking for a lead free solder to solder terminals to the radial wires According to use 3.5 mm aluminum wire, what do you think? Is a good option or is better to use copper stranded cable? 73, Jorge CX6VM/CW5W -Mensaje original- De: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] En nombre de Gary Smith Enviado el: miércoles, 31 de diciembre de 2014 02:49 a.m. Para: Topband@contesting.com Asunto: Re: Topband: Silver solder I 2nd Merv's experience. My on the ground radials, on an oceanside salt marsh, have held up as new for 4 years and I used the lead free plumbing solder. The only issue is that solder requires a bit more heat then the leaded solder. That's all I use outdoors any more. 734 HNY, Gary KA1J Here in salt air regular solder turns to white powder pretty fast, I have been also using lead free solder, I got a roll of plumbers solder and a jar of resin flux. works very well on #10 radials and 4 inch wide copper strap etc. Have left several joints exposed and there is no corrosion after 4 years. Works great so far. 73 Merv K9FD/KH6 2% is about what the lead-free electronic solders are (they are a tin/silver/copper alloy and are mostly tin). Don't bother with the 30%. My mechanical contractor uses this stuff to fix things he can't reach well enough to braze. It's not generally used for anything normal. Coincidentally I was just out soldering more radials last night. I use 18 gauge solid copper radial wire and a 1/2 copper pipe ring to tie them together. My original 29 radials were all soldered with lead-free electronic solder and they are all fine after 2-3 years. I didn't do anything to try to protect the soldered connections -- everything is fully exposed and lying on the ground. I added 31 more radials. I soldered some the same way, but I'm trying regular lead-free plumbing solder on the others. I am finding the plumbing flux to work better than the rosin-core solder (it wets the joints more evenly). I'm not sure what the exact alloy is for the plumbing solder. If you use the solder bars remember that you'll need separate flux and brushes to apply it. I like the water soluble flux -- it cleans up way easier. -Bill KB8WYP Sent from my iPad On Dec 30, 2014, at 7:28 PM, Jorge Diez CX6VM cx6vm.jo...@gmail.com wrote: Hello I read about using silver to solder wire radials to terminals This week I decided to ask sellers about silver solder and they offered me a 2% and 30% silver bars What we need for our use? Will be ok to use 2%? The difference in price is extremely high! Thanks, Jorge CX6VM/CW5W Enviado desde mi iPhone _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ 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 --- Este mensaje no contiene virus ni malware porque la protección de avast! Antivirus está activa. http://www.avast.com _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas
Hi Dick I never noticed any difference in receiving performance That's exactly what we should expect using a resonant dipole, it interact with any other antenna because the fiscal length is resonant, does matter if the feed impedance, if it is only a straight wire resonant it is like a director or director. Distance also is something hard to manage on 160m. 120ft is only 1/4 or .25 wave , heavely interact with other resonant elements. A low dipole is like an inverted V, used to be called unidirectional, a high dipole is different because the vertical field change intensity far from the ground, however the feed line is hardtop choke and remove the vertical common mode noise. Ladder line has huge advantage here , but not worth the effort . The low dipole and inverted V is unidirectional only if you disregard the polarization, using EZENEC it is easy to demonstrate that, check Plot Type: 3D plot and select Desc Options Ver.Horiz.Total. When you plot the 2D Azimuth Slice or Elev Slice, the vertical field is the red line and the horizontal a green line. The inverted V or low dipole is horizontal only at broadside with a 8 patter and some RDF, along the wire the Inverted V and low dipole is vertical polarized. Bothe fields are high angle, it means low gain at low angles. Both antennas work like a very short beverage along the wire and does not perform at all. Broadside there is a huge deep null on vertical signals, as a result the manmade noise is also attenuated that direction, the horizontal signal sky wave 20 to 40 degree has less attenuation, that situation there is an increase in the signal to noise ratio. The lobe is very wide and the SNR is better at the center and at 45 degree each side the vertical field is the same as the horizontal field, that's why these antennas are unidirectional, with the two fields the same there is no improvement on SNR after 45 degree from the center The situation where these antennas outperform vertical arrays is because they receive horizontal sky wave signals or high angles vertical or horizontal signals. Any receiver antenna without directivity is works like the attenuator in your radio, just reduce the overall gain decrease the Noise figure of the RX system but increase the IP3 reducing intermodulation. Almost the same thing as reduce the RF gain and increase the audio gain does. Receiver antennas to perform must have good RDF, and keep no other resonant anything around, only one resonant wire will be part of the RX system and change the patter, is the wire works like a director or reflector it would increase the RDF , the odds are not that and most of the cases the interaction makes the RX antenna patter useless. This long answer is to validate your observation, resonant dipoles does not provide any difference in receiver performance than your vertical or TX antenna. 73's JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Richard Karlquist Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2014 4:49 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas On 2014-12-20 13:06, Richard Jaeger wrote: I guess I should try a low dipole and see what happens. Dick, K4IQJ .. When talking about a low dipole, the question comes up as to why it must be low to work. Actually we don't know that it must be low to work. Very few of us are in a position to put up a high dipole, so the question is basically moot. However, in an attempt to gauge the influence of height, I A/B'ed two full size dipoles at 30 and 60 foot heights over a period of 6 months. The one not in use was floating to avoid interaction with the active one. I never noticed any difference in receiving performance. What seems to happen is that the signals are a few dB higher on the 60 foot wire, but the noise is commensurately higher. 30 feet was chosen for the minimum so that the wires didn't look like beverages (and because I have a bunch of 30 foot lengths of pipe). Rick N6RK _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas
Hi John What is the orientation of you low dipole? I assume similar to XZ0A it is broadside N-S. In 2010 the SSW SSE propagation that I am calling TELP started with solid copy for 2 weeks in October of XU7ACY around 11:15z and at 2 weeks per month until March. 2011 was even better and Dec 29 and 30th were the best days I ever experienced LP. January 2012 this propagation just stopped from the best day to zero. Nada!!! During 2013 and 2014 LP on 160m was very rare. 2014 we had some good days with HS0 and DU7 per month., not even close to what happened 2010 , 2011. Also very few days opening near SS. I think your observation is the same as my , the dipole advantage became non-existent 2013 - 2014 because there was no propagation SSE SSW or TELP. I used to monitor a BC on 3915 from 9V1 to check for SSE SSW propagation but the station went QRT last March and I don't have another signal to check propagation from South Asia anymore so we depend on activity to know is the band is open and activity has been very low. I hope the SSW SSE propagation mode will be back next season, or maybe it will start like it stopped with a huge opening. Regards JCarlos N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of John Kaufmann Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 8:43 PM To: 'Top Band Contesting' Subject: Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas A few years ago, I put up a low, non-resonant dipole, about 150 feet long and 10 feet high for use as an auxiliary receiving antenna on 160. My main receiving antenna was and still is an array of short verticals. What I found at my W1 location after I installed the dipole is similar to what N5IA described at XZ0A. If the band was open before my local sunrise (not always the case!), the verticals would always outperform the dipole by a large amount. However, as soon as we hit sunrise, the dipole would suddenly start equaling and then outperforming the verticals. The transition would take place in a matter of a few short minutes. Past sunrise, DX signals would drop into the noise on the verticals but would continue to hang in on the dipole. The dipole would sometimes extend the opening for me by 5 to 15 minutes, allowing me to make some contacts (mainly JA and VK, if the band was open in those directions) that would not have been possible with the vertical array. Sometimes the DX would be virtually inaudible on the verticals but Q5, although not strong, on the dipole. What is rather interesting, however, is that in the winter seasons of 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, this dipole advantage became non-existent. The dipole was never even close to the verticals, either before or after sunrise. It caused me to go outside a number of times to see if the dipole had fallen down, but that was never the case. Evidently the propagation mechanisms at work around sunrise have changed from a few years ago, at least at my QTH. So far in the 2014-2015 season, the dipole has still not provided any receiving advantage around sunrise. I generally don't operate much around local sunset, but I have never seen any dipole advantage at sunset. 73, John W1FV _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z
Hi David and Don I understand your point. Gain is cheap and quite easy to get with a good low noise amplifier, but to keep the common mode noise out of it is very expensive, and could be very complicated. The beverages are very forgiveness and does not requires much amplification. It is an ideal antenna. The noise measured at 500Hz BW on my TX antenna, varies from average -90 dB, when I do not have power line noise to -100 dB few mornings during winter. The noise floor from my HWF is - 120dB (500Hz BW) after a 43db gain preamp (.5dB NF). I have no space for beverages and my station with all antennas uses only 150ft x 100ft. Using 100 Hz BW the noise floor drops to -145dB during the day. Connecting the HWF on the 43db gain increase the noise only 0.2db , you can't hear the increase of noise, I measured it with QS1R SDR, basically the noise is below the sensitivity of the receiver. I can hear very well on 160m. not bragging but just for reference, 4W6, 9M0, 9M4,9M2, HS, DU, XU, and other very weak signals logged in 160 since 2006. Doug worked 292 and I worked 275 on 160m from city lot. The new stuff works. But as I said, it is very expensive. Also the implementation was not possible without the information shared by K9YC, W8JI, and others how to control common mode noise, grounding, shielding and best practices. The list of MUST do things to implement the new stuff is very long The signal above noise is there at the RX array, to bring it at the station and amplify only the signal coming from the RX array without adding common mode noise is very touch. Here is a sort list of must do things 1- Detune all resonant antenna, feed line, rotor cable tower, any metal thing over 90 ft. long . 2- Ground everything at the tower, outside the shack, and in the shack 3- Choke every single cable that enter your radio system, including the preamp. 100's of toroid's is quite common, and few toxoids does not get the job done. 4-All electronics' must be shielded with steel boxes, aluminum does not cut magnetic field and does not help below -120dB noise floor. If possible run all cables inside galvanized grounded water pipes or hot deep galvanized conduit. 5- All cable inside the tower and grounded at the top and at the bottom 6- NO ground loop with the AC lines, isolation transformer and one point ground for the system, your house wires is an effective way to drive noise into the RX system. A good RDF RX antenna does not fix the issues above. There is no allowance here, all points above can deteriorate your RX signal to noise ratio. Using Horizontal antenna does help a lot with interaction with TX antennas but do not eliminate the common mode nose or ground loops problems. Even a single flag is complicated because the feed line can introduce common mode noise, and turn the flag into a loaded vertical. There is only two solution, choke the line overkilling the common mode noise , or use unshielded 100 ohms twisted pair cable. See T6LG results on his web page, only after replacing the coax with twisted pair he was able to work 100's of DX from a military base in YA on 160m. The results using the new RX system varies form excellent to a perfect disaster depending on the points above. 73's N4IS JC -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Raymond Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 1:01 AM To: Don Moman VE6JY; Topband@Contesting. Com Subject: Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z My experience is similar to Don's outlined below. Both gain and noise figure are important in very low noise environments. In my own case, I have a noise floor from my TX array in the high -120s or -130s assuming a quiet atmosphere. A high RDF performance RX array often brings virtually no improvement. In my case, since the RX arrays lack gain, they often don't have the horsepower (gain) to reach down and hear the super low level signals picked up by the TX array. Switching from the TX antenna to the high RDF receive array not only fails to make the signal jump out of the noise (what noise?) but fails to hear the signal at all. In these circumstance both gain and noise figure become very important factors. 73. . .Dave, W0FLS - Original Message - From: Don Moman VE6JY ve6j...@gmail.com To: Topband@Contesting. Com topband@contesting.com Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 10:53 PM Subject: Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z Well I disagree that gain isn't important. Maybe you topbanders in the better areas of propagation can afford to throw away many db to get a better rdf, but that sure isn't the case up here in mid-northern VE6 land. I have numerous receive antennas including many beverages and Wellbrook loops (large area) and the Hi-Z 4-8PRO 8 element circle. They all work more or less as expected on the easy stuff and show reasonable directivity but when I need help for the weaker dx, there just isn't any signal there to work
Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas
Milt, Thanks to share with us your experience during XZ0A. When I started playing with the HWF I was surprised to hear XU7ACY almost every day between 11:10z and 11:20z SSW, during 2010 and 2011 , that happened 50% of the day from October to April. This kind of propagation I called it TELP, Trans Equatorial Long Path. The signals arrive from 40 degree elevation mostly horizontal polarized 20 minutes before SR SSW and 20 minutes after SS SSE. With the HWF I was able to work south Asia almost in a daily base when my colleges nearby only could hear them few day with vertical polarized antennas. The reason why I do believe this propagation is around the equatorial line is due the observation for this kind of propagation from the south hemisphere. Analyzing several long path QSO's from PY's on 160m, there is a common point , in all QSO's the signal was arriving near SS or SR coming from NNW or NNE. In both cases, from north hemisphere or south hemisphere the signal is really coming from the equatorial zone. K9LA demonstrated with a ray trace analyze that the signal refract almost 120 degree at 40 degree angle, you can check that on K9LA web page. I think what I experienced with XU, DU and even JA long path SSW is the same propagation mechanism you mentioned during XZ0A. Very few DX-expeditions uses that propagation mode and do not install any RX antenna to receive SSW and/or SSE. The XU7ACY extravagance QSO's was due the fact Perter was active every day and he installed a SSE /NNW reversible beverage. DU7ET was using a high inverted V broadside N/S that receives horizontal SSE. It is hard d to work DU from Florida until Robert installed that antenna, we worked him Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, and June this year on 160m, we just missed him during May and I don't know why. By the way Robert worked WAS on 160 with that antenna from DU7ET. 73's N4IS JC -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Milt -- N5IA Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 9:56 AM To: James Rodenkirch; Top Band Contesting Subject: Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas Jim, If the arrival angle of the signals is high, then definitely the low dipole will perform stupendously. At XZ0A in 2000 we were having trouble the first few evenings receiving signals at our sunset and for a couple of hours afterwards. The Beverage RX antennas were working very effectively after that time period, for the entire night time. Our conclusion was that the signals were arriving not only skewed (what signals we were hearing were best on the VK/ZL Beverage and not the direct path on the JA/NA Beverage) but also high arrival angle. I installed a full sized dipole at 20' AGL, suspended by bamboo poles at the center (centered on the helicopter landing zone as we suspected the Myanmar Generals were not going to come visit us) and terminated in the jungle on either side of the helo landing spot. The dipole was oriented east/west, broadside to the N/S. Immediately at the start of that day's Topband operation the NA signals came right up out of the noise floor shortly before sunset. Q5 copy signals on the dipole were barely discernable while listening on the VK/ZL Beverage. For 3 weeks we enjoyed this RX signal capability during the early evening time period. BUT, when it was time for the signal path to change it did so within a 5 minute period every night. It was like someone was disconnecting one antenna and connecting the other, so dramatic was the switch of RX path from skewed, high arrival angle to direct path, much lower arrival angle over a period of a few short minutes. It was like clock work each evening. The low dipole RX antenna allowed an XZ0A 160 M contact to be entered in hundreds of NA log books which most likely would have never happened without it. My personal experience with low (10' AGL), full sized (1/4 WL) horizontal loops at my home station is they work very well for high arrival angle signals but are nearly deaf to low angle signals. Good luck, and YMMV. The low dipole is a specialty RX antenna. And you can never have too many RX antennas. If anyone would like to see photos of the low dipole at XZ0A, send me a direct request. 73 de Milt, N5IA -Original Message- From: James Rodenkirch Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 7:26 AM To: Top Band Contesting Subject: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas I noticed JC's comment below about a low dipole as a receiving antenna. Did I interpret that correctly? I've read of a Dipole on the ground as a low noise receive antenna for 160 but.can a non resonant dipole installed at low heights be better, as a receive antenna, than a vertical or L antenna? How about a non-resonant dipole, say, two feet above ground, at a length of 100 feet? Would you feed it with coax or figure out the Zo at 160 and use a suitably wound xfmr to match to 50 ohms??? Just athinkin' of ways to use available low horizontal space, albeit
Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas
Since Rick correctly stated that RDF doesn't account Jim RDF is everything ! The RX antenna system is the only way to improve signal to noise ratio. All electronic device is not perfect and introduce noise and deteriorate the signal to noise ratio, including your radio too RDF is one way to measure directivity . You may do not need directivity to improve signal to noise ratio if you are operating from a very quiet location or a desert island on the pacific without man made noise. If you deal with noise at your location you will select the antenna with better directivity. That's adds another component how to cover all directions. Better RDF equals to better signal to noise ratio. That's is true for all bands, try to work 20 meter contest with a vertical with 1 kW and compare with a 5 elements Yagi with 100W. Your TX signal will be the same however for sure you will prefer to receive on the Yagi due its directivity. You won't hear much on the vertical Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas
Jim What I am asking is if anyone has any, on-the-air experience and would recommend one antenna system over the other for *most conditions*. In other words, will an antenna that has a less lower elevation pattern generally outperform an antenna that has a narrower beam width, but a higher elevation angle? I understand your question now. Yes I have exactly that, a low elevation narrow bean VWF, that works best at 20 degree or lower and a same narrow bean but high elevation angle HWF best at 40 degree. I keep a record of new countries worked with one or another. The high elevation angle outperform the low elevation angle 95% of the time, in special near SS or SR. But the low elevation angle was the only antenna that can hear South Asia direct path due north. 9M2AX , BU2AQ, 4W6 over or near the North Pole. Let me say the same thing in another way. For DX signals coming due North 330 to 30 degree , the vertical low angle outperform the high angle always. It is based on the direction the signal is coming from and the interaction with the dip magnetic field. Like 9M4SLL on Mar 13th 2013 was strong 340 degree only heard with VWF, on Mar 17th the signal was coming SSE and the high angle was better, but copy with both antennas. 95% is a big number however the 5% could be a new country. Like 706T in the first and second night only copy on the vertical low angle, after they move to a new location the high angle RX antenna was better. They are complementary to each other, hard to pick one. 73's JC N4IS -Original Message- From: James Wolf [mailto:jbw...@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 1:30 PM To: 'JC'; 'Top Band Contesting' Subject: RE: Topband: Non-resonant receive antennas Thanks JC, I agree that the RDF number is significant when evaluating a receive antenna. I agree that no one antenna system will work all of the time. Consider we have two scenarios: One RX antenna system that consists of two parallel antennas (Broadside) , and the other is the same antenna configured in-line, toward the desired signal (Delayed series fed). What I am asking is if anyone has any, on-the-air experience and would recommend one antenna system over the other for *most conditions*. In other words, will an antenna that has a less lower elevation pattern generally outperform an antenna that has a narrower beam width, but a higher elevation angle? I think in this we need to consider the arrival angle of atmospheric noise in a broadside array vs. atmospheric noise in a series fed array.Since atmospheric noise propagates and the arrival angle will change, which scenario would provide the general overall better performance? Jim - KR9U _ Jim RDF is everything ! The RX antenna system is the only way to improve signal to noise ratio. All electronic device is not perfect and introduce noise and deteriorate the signal to noise ratio, including your radio too RDF is one way to measure directivity . You may do not need directivity to improve signal to noise ratio if you are operating from a very quiet location or a desert island on the pacific without man made noise. If you deal with noise at your location you will select the antenna with better directivity. That's adds another component how to cover all directions. Better RDF equals to better signal to noise ratio. That's is true for all bands, try to work 20 meter contest with a vertical with 1 kW and compare with a 5 elements Yagi with 100W. Your TX signal will be the same however for sure you will prefer to receive on the Yagi due its directivity. You won't hear much on the vertical Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z
Hi guys Polarization does play a lot on 160m for two reasons. I can say that because I am using my HWF (two horizontal flags end fire) since 2009. The first one is local man made noise that propagate only vertical due the attenuation on the horizontal component near the ground. And Second the DX signal always come in both polarization. The result form the two reasons is an optimized signal to noise ration using horizontal polarization. I have both WF with the same RDF, during SR or SS there is almost no sky noise coming from the back because of the darkness, however local man made noise comes from any direction, especially if you live in a city lot like I do. Most of the time the noise is coming at the same direction you want to hear the DX, and if you add power line noise the situation deteriorates a lot for the VWF due vertical polarization. Using my HWF I normally get 10 dB better SNR than my VWF that has the same RDF and same aperture of 74 degree measures, I can turn the antenna and measure it, they are not optimized for best F/B, I optimized them for maximum rejection of local man made noise. The HWF is not a dipole. The two phased loops take of angle us 40 degree and there is a huge attenuation for signals above 60 degree. Low dipole is a huge issue if the dipole is resonant, it will interact with all other receiver antennas and will destroy directivity of all of them, if you want to use a low dipole make it not resonant. Gain in not important so it can be short as a 30 m dipole and still will hear the same way. Another issue with low dipoles is the amount of energy absorbed from the TX antenna. If you connect a power meter and a 50 ohms load o the low dipole and transmit KW on the TX antenna, you can measure several WATTS at the low dipole . You can burn you front end with a low resonant dipole. Adding to all that there is another very interesting observation from my last 5 year using a high RDF horizontal RX antenna, when the TX signal refract on the ionosphere the signal split in two waves, that was very well explained by K9LA. What I observed is that these two waves does propagate in different directions. I normally receive VK6 near my SR with better SNR horizontal from 210 degree SSW and with better SNR from 280 degree vertical. Sometimes the horizontal peak is 20 minutes before the vertical peak that is most of the time at my SR. 73's N4IS JC -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of John Kaufmann Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 8:59 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z Good points about polarization. If the signals and/or noise are polarized predominantly in one state, then RDF may not be a good predictor of SNR performance, particularly if the antenna receives predominantly in an orthogonal polarization. On the other hand, if the polarization state of the signals and noise evolve randomly with no preference for any one state, which is often assumed for skywave signals, then RDF will be--on average--a good receiving metric, subject to the previous stated qualifications about the spatial distribution of the received noise. However, some of the past discussions on this reflector about preferential polarization of skywave signals on 160 may call into question the assumption of randomly polarized signals. 73, John W1FV -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Richard (Rick) Karlquist Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 3:19 PM To: Lee K7TJR; 'Terry Posey'; 'John Kaufmann'; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z All this discussion about RDF overlooks the issue of polarization. If you make an array of verticals with a certain RDF (assuming noise comes from all directions uniformly), the array will be better than an individual vertical by the RDF factor. However, what I have found is that a horizontally polarized antenna, such as a low dipole frequently receives considerably better than a vertical. In that case, you would be better off using an array of low dipoles. The reason why horizontal polarization can be better is that the horizontal component of terrestrial based noise is highly attenuated over distance as a ground wave. Rick N6RK _ 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: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z
I forgot to mention another very important development. My friend N8PR is experiencing with the WF in another level, Peter is using a rotator to turn the WF vertical to horizontal. He worked FT4TA on 160m with the WF at 45 degree polarization, (not elevation, the rotor turns axial) and only 45 degree at the right side, turning the WF 45 degree on the left side the signal was below noise and any other polarization was not good that day. Peter has a lot of noise from a AM BC station 1 mile from his QTH and he is working to improve the common node noise. However the experiment with polarization rotation is providing return in new countries for him. Regards JC N4IS -Original Message- From: JC [mailto:n...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 1:02 PM To: 'Tom W8JI'; 'Lee K7TJR'; 'Bob Tabke'; 'topband@contesting.com' Subject: RE: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z Hi guys I would like to commented on the subject of RX comparison Tom when you introduced the RDF methodology to measure directivity, you really hit the nail in the head. I'm working on RX antennas only since 2005, after hundreds of tests, I am sure that just 1db RDF matters a lot. When you compare RX antennas you really want to know how much you can improve from your TX antenna Signal to Noise Ratio. Better RDF means better SNR, similar RX antennas performance have similar RDF. 1 RDF does help a lot when the signal is just 2 db above noise and you can't pull it out, adding just 1 db you can change from 339 to 449 and log a QSO, or new country. 3db SNR is just what you need on cw. The implementation of the RX is different from EZNEC , you need to consider all elements neat resonance that will be part of the RX system and deteriorate RDF, it means deteriorating SNR. Common mode noise is not well understood for most of DXer's including grounding, these are factors to consider as well. My recommendation is to kook in the space you have and select the best RDF Rx antenna for your available space. Nothing beats the 13.8db RDF from 8 circle array, but you need 300ft radius to achieve that directivity. If you are able to broadside some good RX antennas and get over 14 dB RDF you shall expect better SNR than the 8 cycle/300ft. Remember to detune your TX antenna during RX, It is hard to measure that and sometimes the only way is to compare the SNR from the TX antenna with the RX antenna, is you are using a 11db RDF system you should see more than 10db SNR over the TX antenna. It means you can hear Q5 signals not even detected by the TX antenna, it is not about move comfortable e copy , it is about to hear what is not there in the RX antenna. Detuning he tower won't fix other common mode noise, like cables not grounded, bad grounding, rotor cable 120 ft long working like a vertical, etc, It is necessary detune them all. Regards JC -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom W8JI Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 7:52 AM To: Lee K7TJR; 'Bob Tabke'; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z Lee, We probably will just have to disagree about this. From my viewpoint, the behavior isn't too much different than a big yagi stack or other antennas we are used to. The size of the array generally sets the directivity limits. We can add more elements that are closer-in than optimum, and that can certainly help if the size is smaller than optimum, but the trade is gain or pattern cleanliness and sharpness for size. The forward two elements and back two elements are too close to contribute broadside pattern, which is what provides the clean pattern absent major side lobes in the full size 8 circle. As a matter of fact, adding them in destroys some of the broadside directivity. If, however, we make the array so small that it loses broadside pattern multiplication, then we can see an increase in directivity through the small endfire length increase. A .327wl radius array gives about .25 wl endfire spacing in the primary cells (the center elements), and is not improved in pattern quality by adding the forward and rearward cells. The two forward pairs and rearward pairs are not only too close to have broadside pattern contribution, they are closer endfire. They are about 75% of the endfire spacing in the central quad, and nearly 40% of the broadside width. They certainly can contribute endfire, but they actually remove broadside directivity in the process! In an optimum size array the amplitude ratio from the primary quad has to be 4:1 or 5:1 or more to prevent some pretty significant pattern null area deterioration when the additional 4 elements are added, because they deteriorate broadside pattern multiplication faster than they contribute endfire gain (at ~.187 spacing when the primary endfire cell has .25 wl spacing). If the array is made so small that there is little broadside contribution from array width, then the addition of the four will improve
Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z
Hi guys I would like to commented on the subject of RX comparison Tom when you introduced the RDF methodology to measure directivity, you really hit the nail in the head. I'm working on RX antennas only since 2005, after hundreds of tests, I am sure that just 1db RDF matters a lot. When you compare RX antennas you really want to know how much you can improve from your TX antenna Signal to Noise Ratio. Better RDF means better SNR, similar RX antennas performance have similar RDF. 1 RDF does help a lot when the signal is just 2 db above noise and you can't pull it out, adding just 1 db you can change from 339 to 449 and log a QSO, or new country. 3db SNR is just what you need on cw. The implementation of the RX is different from EZNEC , you need to consider all elements neat resonance that will be part of the RX system and deteriorate RDF, it means deteriorating SNR. Common mode noise is not well understood for most of DXer's including grounding, these are factors to consider as well. My recommendation is to kook in the space you have and select the best RDF Rx antenna for your available space. Nothing beats the 13.8db RDF from 8 circle array, but you need 300ft radius to achieve that directivity. If you are able to broadside some good RX antennas and get over 14 dB RDF you shall expect better SNR than the 8 cycle/300ft. Remember to detune your TX antenna during RX, It is hard to measure that and sometimes the only way is to compare the SNR from the TX antenna with the RX antenna, is you are using a 11db RDF system you should see more than 10db SNR over the TX antenna. It means you can hear Q5 signals not even detected by the TX antenna, it is not about move comfortable e copy , it is about to hear what is not there in the RX antenna. Detuning he tower won't fix other common mode noise, like cables not grounded, bad grounding, rotor cable 120 ft long working like a vertical, etc, It is necessary detune them all. Regards JC -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom W8JI Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 7:52 AM To: Lee K7TJR; 'Bob Tabke'; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: 8 circle: DXE vs Hi-Z Lee, We probably will just have to disagree about this. From my viewpoint, the behavior isn't too much different than a big yagi stack or other antennas we are used to. The size of the array generally sets the directivity limits. We can add more elements that are closer-in than optimum, and that can certainly help if the size is smaller than optimum, but the trade is gain or pattern cleanliness and sharpness for size. The forward two elements and back two elements are too close to contribute broadside pattern, which is what provides the clean pattern absent major side lobes in the full size 8 circle. As a matter of fact, adding them in destroys some of the broadside directivity. If, however, we make the array so small that it loses broadside pattern multiplication, then we can see an increase in directivity through the small endfire length increase. A .327wl radius array gives about .25 wl endfire spacing in the primary cells (the center elements), and is not improved in pattern quality by adding the forward and rearward cells. The two forward pairs and rearward pairs are not only too close to have broadside pattern contribution, they are closer endfire. They are about 75% of the endfire spacing in the central quad, and nearly 40% of the broadside width. They certainly can contribute endfire, but they actually remove broadside directivity in the process! In an optimum size array the amplitude ratio from the primary quad has to be 4:1 or 5:1 or more to prevent some pretty significant pattern null area deterioration when the additional 4 elements are added, because they deteriorate broadside pattern multiplication faster than they contribute endfire gain (at ~.187 spacing when the primary endfire cell has .25 wl spacing). If the array is made so small that there is little broadside contribution from array width, then the addition of the four will improve things. There isn't any broadside pattern to hurt. That isn't the same as a broad general statement that using more of the elements allows the array to be made smaller, unless we want to compromise pattern to have the same directivity. I go through similar things with Yagi arrays. All of my Hygain 5 element Yagis have been changed to four elements, and my KLM six elements have become 5's. :) It isn't so much they work better, they just work different in a way that is a better compromise for pattern, bandwidth, complexity, and gain. Everything is a compromise. If the target is maximum directivity and a clean pattern (more like a flashlight), the array has to be large. It can never be the same if small, or we all be running multi-element short boom antennas in close-spaced stacks. I do agree, however, if space is so limited the array can't use broadside multiplication (which
Re: Topband: ARRL160 Test conditions
Hi guys We have a new class of station this year, few but some European stations running contest from remote station in US using European call sign, not W4/ or W7/xxx not even xxx/W4. Today with the RBN it is easy to confirm where the station is transmitting, you just need to search the call sign r down load the report with all reports and filter it using Excel. First of all , it is illegal to operate in US without a US license not mention the ethic that does not exist and the Ham radio contest aspect of the event. Forget about DCXX program the issue is real treat for all of us that love what we do in 160m. Check that small report from RBN from EA7PP yesterday night, you can verify reports up to 52db signal in Virginia RBN station and several over 40 db in US at the same time 5-15 db in Europe and sometimes up to 24 db in Europe. http://www.reversebeacon.net/dxsd1/dxsd1.php?f=0 http://www.reversebeacon.net/dxsd1/dxsd1.php?f=0c=ea7ppt=dx c=ea7ppt=dx just unbelievable!! 73's N4IS JC show/hide my last filters rows to show: showing spots for DX call: EA7PP search spot by callsign de dx freq cq/dxsnr speed time EA1FAQ EA7PP 1819.8 CW CQ 40 dB 26 wpm 0414z 06 Dec DL8LAS EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 19 dB 25 wpm 0414z 06 Dec DF7GB EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 15 dB 26 wpm 0414z 06 Dec LA6TPA EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 2 dB 27 wpm 0414z 06 Dec K8ND EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 38 dB 25 wpm 0413z 06 Dec KM3T EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 39 dB 26 wpm 0413z 06 Dec DF4UE EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 38 dB 27 wpm 0413z 06 Dec ON5KQ EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 25 dB 27 wpm 0413z 06 Dec NZ1UEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 39 dB 26 wpm 0412z 06 Dec EI6IZ EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 27 dB 26 wpm 0411z 06 Dec HA6M EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 14 dB 27 wpm 0411z 06 Dec F6IIT EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 35 dB 27 wpm 0411z 06 Dec OH6BG EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 22 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec DQ8Z EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 12 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec G0KTN EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 18 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec IK3STG EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 8 dB26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec W4KKN EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 44 dB 29 wpm 0410z 06 Dec G4HSO EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 15 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec DK9IPEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 26 dB 27 wpm 0410z 06 Dec SE0X EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 13 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec DL1EMYEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 26 dB 27 wpm 0410z 06 Dec OE6TZE EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 16 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec S50ARX EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 24 dB 27 wpm 0410z 06 Dec HA1VHFEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 32 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec GW8IZREA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 28 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec DL9GTBEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 28 dB 26 wpm 0410z 06 Dec NY3A EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 39 dB 26 wpm 0408z 06 Dec W8WTSEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 36 dB 26 wpm 0408z 06 Dec K1TTTEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 18 dB 27 wpm 0408z 06 Dec W8WWV EA7PP1819.7 CW CQ 36 dB 27 wpm 0408z 06 Dec DL1AMQ EA7PP1819.7 CW CQ 27 dB 27 wpm 0407z 06 Dec SK3WEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 36 dB 26 wpm 0406z 06 Dec PY1NB EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 4 dB 26 wpm 0403z 06 Dec ON5KQ EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 24 dB 26 wpm 0403z 06 Dec IK3STG EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 10 dB 27 wpm 0400z 06 Dec K8AZ EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 28 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec WZ7I EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 27 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec DQ8Z EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 8 dB26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec G4HSO EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 15 dB 27 wpm 0400z 06 Dec KM3T EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 28 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec DK9IP EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 17 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec F6IIT EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 35 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec SE0X EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 13 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec DL1EMYEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 29 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec DL8LAS EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 16 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec OE6TZE EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 11 dB 26 wpm 0400z 06 Dec HA1VHFEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 20 dB 27 wpm 0400z 06 Dec GW8IZREA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 29 dB 27 wpm 0400z 06 Dec DF4UE EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 25 dB 27 wpm 0400z 06 Dec EI6IZ EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 31 dB 27 wpm 0359z 06 Dec DL9GTBEA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 16 dB 26 wpm 0359z 06 Dec OH6BG EA7PP 1819.7 CW CQ 14 dB 26
Re: Topband: ARRL160 Test conditions
Hi Saulus Yes, I did it, Actually you had one of the best signals from Europe all night long. You can see the HUGE difference, few US reports and lots of European RBN , some goods report from 2 US RBN only once, like 33db 6z, probably SR peak , I can see one from W4KKN 9db , Huge difference from 52dB. You can download the raw data report from any time and any day for the last 5 years here http://www.reversebeacon.net/raw_data/ Regards JC N4IS show/hide my last filters rows to show: showing spots for DX call: IQ9UI search spot by callsign de dx freq cq/dxsnr speed time S50ARX IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 0 dB 24 wpm 0619z 06 Dec HA5PP IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 13 dB 24 wpm 0618z 06 Dec DQ8Z IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 5 dB 24 wpm 0617z 06 Dec G0KTN IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 8 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec DL9GTB IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 5 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec SE0X IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 12 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec DF7GB IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 7 dB 23 wpm 0616z 06 Dec DL8LAS IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 5 dB 25 wpm 0616z 06 Dec SK3WIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 15 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec GW8IZR IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 13 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec OE6TZE IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 20 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec EI6IZ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 16 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec HA6M IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 15 dB 24 wpm 0616z 06 Dec HA1VHFIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 18 dB 24 wpm 0615z 06 Dec DF4UE IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 23 dB 24 wpm 0615z 06 Dec DL1EMYIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 22 dB 24 wpm 0615z 06 Dec IK3STG IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 15 dB 24 wpm 0615z 06 Dec ON5KQ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 21 dB 24 wpm 0615z 06 Dec DL1AMQIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 16 dB 24 wpm 0615z 06 Dec EA1FAQ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 19 dB 24 wpm 0614z 06 Dec DL1REM IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 25 dB 24 wpm 0612z 06 Dec DQ8Z IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 6 dB 24 wpm 0607z 06 Dec W8WWVIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 33 dB 24 wpm 0607z 06 Dec KS4XQ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 33 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec G0KTN IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 13 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec SE0X IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 15 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec DL9GTB IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 9 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec NY3A IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 27 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec GW8IZRIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 16 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec OE6TZE IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 22 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec EI6IZ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 25 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec DF7GB IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 10 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec HA6M IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 18 dB 24 wpm 0606z 06 Dec WZ7I IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 26 dB 23 wpm 0606z 06 Dec HA1VHFIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 29 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec DF4UE IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 19 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec DL1EMY IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 20 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec DL8LAS IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 7 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec IK3STG IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 21 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec SK3WIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 20 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec DL1REM IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 24 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec ON5KQ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 19 dB 24 wpm 0605z 06 Dec K8AZ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 27 dB 24 wpm 0603z 06 Dec F6IIT IQ9UI 3661.4 CW CQ [LoTW] 5 dB 24 wpm 0559z 06 Dec NZ1UIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 4 dB 24 wpm 0558z 06 Dec W4KKN IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 9 dB 23 wpm 0557z 06 Dec G4HSO IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 3 dB 23 wpm 0557z 06 Dec W4AX IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 7 dB 24 wpm 0557z 06 Dec DQ8Z IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 5 dB 24 wpm 0557z 06 Dec K1TTTIQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 6 dB 24 wpm 0556z 06 Dec KS4XQ IQ9UI 1830.7 CW CQ [LoTW] 8 dB 24 wpm 0556z 06 Dec DL8LAS IQ9UI 1830.7
Re: Topband: EA7PP - Remote
Hi Jose That was me. I was testing my new RX antennas comparing signals from Europe during the contest . WOW you guys have the best site for 160m in Europe, I was impressed with the signal and the reports on RBN, really signal as local signal in US. Regards Jose Carlos N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jose Ramon Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2014 5:29 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: EA7PP - Remote Hi all, I have just subscribed to this reflector- A friend of mine told me there was something about EA7PP's operation during this w/e 160m contest. Someone suggested EA7PP uses a remote in the US as his signal was on the RBN outstanding. More than being an offending remark it's a compliment. We spent yesterday the whole evening at EA7PP's contest station setting a modest EWE pointing to US and built in site a receiver protecting device. Set up is very simple, an inverted L up to 18 metres on a fiber glass ple and then about 21 metres horizontal to the tower (23m) . Only 2 tuned elevated radials circling the plot as it is very small. Soil is very conductive and it has been raining a lot during the last couple of weeks. This is a rural area, almost no cellphone network coverage. Internet connection is poor, a 4 miles 2.3 GHz link to a home in town, as the good 5 GHz was damaged during a storm. The contest started last night and I was still soldering wires to the protection boxes while listening to some good East Coast signal. I wrote a message to Pepe to his WhastApp. When he wakes up from his siesta first thing he will ask me is what the hell is a remote? Zé Carlos, muito grato pelos elogios, our tiny contest farm works! it's encouraging. 73 Jose, EA7KW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: WATCH OUT !!Did you get a new cable modem from Comcast? Arris Modem equal lots of QRM
Hi guys I would like to share with you what NX4D just found out. Doug has experiencing a strong noise on top band for almost a year. He did try to find it everywhere, disconnected all appliances in the house and the noise was still roaring. For some coincidence Dug removed the cable from the modem and the noise quit. The issue is that the Arris modem has an internal battery to work without AC power and when you remove it from the AC line the modem is still generating noise and you can come up into a conclusion the modem is clean. It is not, actually there are several reports of RFI going on for several years and FCC is doing nothing to stop it. Here another source of information about that modem http://forums.comcast.com/t5/Voice-Service-and-Equipment/RFI-Caused-by-Arris -Modem/td-p/548591 Doug also found many complaints about Cisco Modems too, especially the switching supply wall warts. So watch out is you have Comcast cable modem, it is necessary to choke the cable and the AC cord with FT240 # 31. With this fix ,the noise dropped from s8 to s0 but still audible at Doug receiver. Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach
One excellent example of use vertical array for HF on the beach was VP6DX Ducie Island 2008 http://ducie2008.dl1mgb.com/equipment/index.php Fantastic performance and results. N4IS JC _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach
If it was really 10-20 dB, shore locations would stand out like a sore thumb compared to inland locations. Everyone from around New England is about the same. Heck, K3LR is on the Ohio/PA border and does just as well or better than coastal stations in signal levels. Hi Tom Costal stations are not different from inland stations. There is a major difference lost between so many e-mails and replays. Near the water , near the beach ,or on the sand beach does not provide any improvement on the transmit signal , the only way to see or measure this 10 to 20 db gains is ONLY with station with the radial system INSIDE de salt water , nor near , not almost., IN. As George AA7JV always mention it, is you have a copper plate of the size a football field to use as ground plane where you should install your vertical? 1 meter far from it? 10 Ft. 100m , .. well I assume we all agree that the vertical should be on top of the copper plate. A vertical over different ground has almost no difference on signal intensity above 10 degree, but what happens bellow 10 degree , 5 degree gain, 2 degree gain or 1 degree elevation gain. Well, at that point inland vertical has almost nothing to show at 1 degree elevation angle. However when the propagation needs only 30 t0 40 degree take off angle there is nothing to compare. Adding the gain on low elevation with some hops avoided during the path. With low elevation angle the number of hops are different and the attenuation is different as well. The perception , and here you are 100% right, the perception on the receiver end could be 10 to 20 d. George has been very busy with is new business lately, however I will invite him to run some tests next month, and present here the results. My two cents. JC N4IS - Original Message - From: Michael Tope w...@dellroy.com To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 5:03 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach On 8/13/2014 6:28 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: But skimmer, which displays a relative level, does not show the level difference. Skimmer shows about the same peak levels, but the stations closer or over salt water paths (not localized salt water) have longer openings but no more level for peak level. Anyone can look at that. K3LR is about as strong into Europe, when I look at skimmer levels, as someone on the coast. The exceptions are people right next door to Europe (like VY1). 73 Tom Tom, How much skimmer data did you mine before establishing a firm conclusion that the advantages of saltwater proximity are exaggerated? Myself, I think of how well AA7JV and HA7RY have done at various locations using antennas that were very close to or in some cases literally in the saltwater. The consistency of their topband signals compared to Dxpeditions who were confined to inland locations seems to point to a big advantage. I'll admit, however, that this hypotheses comes about from anecdotal observations filtered through a mental lens that is biased towards believing saltwater is a huge advantage. I think using skimmer is an excellent approach to this question provided of course that you have mined enough data to filter out the statistical noise. 73, Mike W4EF... _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4745 / Virus Database: 4007/8035 - Release Date: 08/14/14 _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach
Hi Guys I would say vertical IN the salt water. George AA7JV is my mentor about antennas, and his 160m vertical is at the pear, just 2 m from the salt water, the ground plane is a flat sheet SS metal 1 ft. x 20~30 ft. that goes inside the water , dropping 10 from the pear wall and on the see floor for 10 to 20 ft. if I'm not wrong. My antenna is a stand free tower 116ft with a good a good radial system 20 miles from the beach and 40 miles north of George in Miami, I'm in Fort Lauderdale. George can beat my signal or equivalent to my signal in Europe with only 5 w. I need 1KW to get close to his signal with 5w. We did some tests 3 or 4 years ago. Now with RBN we can run some tests again next fall. Regards JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Hardy Landskov Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 10:23 PM To: Yuri Blanarovich; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach Yuri, Thanks for your input. Tom asks, where are the other stations? It is a one pony race. Well I am sure if we look at the CQ logs for that year we will see that there were other Carib stations on but we did not hear them out here--that is my point. I can't compare a set of verticals on the beach IF I CAN'T HEAR ANYONE ELSE AT THAT GENERAL QTH AT THAT TIME! Verticals on the beach are a winner...nuff said. 73 N7RT - Original Message - From: Yuri Blanarovich k...@optimum.net To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 6:30 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach One pony needs to get into one drag radio car and drive around the ocean front, over the bridges, back over the land and watch the S-meter and listen to the bands. Observant would see 10 - 20 dB difference in signal levels in lousy mobile, especially on low angle propagation. Examples: Driving around Sydney, NS and listening to Disney 1670 AM in NJ - no signals over land, full quieting solid signal while driving on bridge over salt water. While contesting as N2EE from Cape Hatteras, NC on 10m in contest, was told by ZS6EZ to be the first NA he heard, with vertical on the beach. Results of Team Vertical speak for themselves. Some of us do know. The reverse beacons testing can verify or legitimize modeling program's calculated guessing. Yuri, K3BU.us On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: My point is if no one else is on, we really don't how other signals would be. It's like a drag race with just one car, or a pony show with one horse. - Original Message - From: Hardy Landskov To: Tom W8JI ; TopBand List Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2014 9:08 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach Tom, I was totallly not expecting any station from that direction, just thought I'd work a few locals with high incident angles before Sunset here. Then I heard the 6Y2 guys and it was amazing. He was the only station--no KV4FZ, NP4A, etc and certainly no EU at our time. Made me a believer in beach verticals. 73 N7RT - Original Message - From: Tom W8JI To: TopBand List Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:20 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach How was his signal compared to someone from a similar heading and distance at the same time who was not on the beach? - Original Message - From: Hardy Landskov To: Guy Olinger K2AV ; Richard Fry Cc: TopBand List Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2014 7:35 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach Just an observation to all: When Tom, N6BT went to Jaimaca and operated 6Y2J (I think was the call) with verticals on the beach I was blown away. I heard them 2 hours before Sunset here on 160nuff said. The proof is in the pudding. 73 N7RT - Original Message - From: Guy Olinger K2AV To: Richard Fry Cc: TopBand List Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2014 8:35 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Modeling the proverbial vertical on a beach Just to mention that the prior opinion is controversial and not universally agreed upon. Nor to date has anyone surfaced with actual measurements made at the distances (25 to 50 km) and with span of altitudes (0 to 10 km) to either prove or disprove either side. It remains unproven modelling from NEC at those distances either way. This situation may, alas, persist this way, because the precise subject resolution appears to be without benefit to any commercial interest and therefore without funds to pay for some pretty expensive experimenting involving precision measurements from aircraft. Additionally, there is considerable suspicion that moving from LF to MF in this general subject involves a ground modal change of some sort that would render 50x10 km measurments at 0.5 or 1 MHz unlike those at 2 MHz, rendering commercial measurements at low and possibly high BC
Re: Topband: How Increase 160m power on FL2100z
I owned a FT2100Z for several years and the power on 160m was the same as other bands. I don't expect any design flaw. The original tubes are not available anymore, the 572's tubes manufactures nowadays are different and optimized for audio applications and does not perform at the same level as the originals 572's. You may just need more drive or change the input circuit for 160m. Regards N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Crossed Field Antenna
This antenna was evaluated before and published in QEX May June 2005 Just google Broadcast CFA antenna 73's N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Guy Olinger K2AV Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 2:43 AM To: Bill Aycock Cc: Michael St. Angelo; TopBand List Subject: Re: Topband: Crossed Field Antenna Let's see, what was that term, undead? 73, Guy. On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Bill Aycock billayc...@mediacombb.netwrote: WOW!! I thought that had been shot with a silver bullet, at a crossroad, and had a stake driven through its heart over ten years ago! The Flat-Earthers are still among us. Bill--W4BSG -Original Message- From: Michael St. Angelo Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 8:28 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Crossed Field Antenna It's been quiet on this group. The April 9th issue of Radio World Magazine has an article about the Crossed field Antenna. An company, Crossed Field Antennas LTD, Has filed a comment with the FCC espousing its advantages: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6017582994 This should rustle you from you winter doldrums.. 73, Mike N2MS _ 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: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
I'm sure it will play well in terms of keeping your transmitter happy but the relatively large bandwidth you are measuring is indicative of substantial loss in the system somewhere. This would be a large bandwidth even if you did not have the bandwidth narrowing effects of a shunt feed. Hi guys, the 3 wires is actually a transmission line and the antenna is well known as Folded Unipole with 200 ohms impedance. My antenna is a Folded Unipole as well and has the same broadband SWR measurement's. The loss is the same for any tuning circuit it has nothing to do with the bandwidth. The ground plane does, and in this case it is the same, right? 73's JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Shared Apex Loop Array
Hi Jim The antenna geometry indicates that it should perform similar to a Waller Flag *under the same conditions*. The perform under same conditions is expected, however the WF RDF is between 11.5db to 12 db. How that compares with a 8.5db RDF antenna? I would say two antennas with the same RDF should perform similar. The WF is a different antenna, it's a rotatable pair of loaded loops. Each loop is open and loaded with a resistor. Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: circular polarization on 160m
Tom ' The way I see it is if the rate is not 0.546 uS or so, you do not have circular polarization.You have a slowly rotating wave, and the sense of the RX antenna would be meaningless unless you could time-sync rotation at that slow fading rate. Someone correct me if I am wrong. 100% correct My system has two WF's, same gain, one vertical and another horizontal, feeding two preamps into IC7800 two receivers. When there is fading on the signal E-W, the time of the rotation from H to V could be long as 5 minutes, most of the time between 1 to 2 minutes. Using M=S on the IC7800 I can keep the two receivers at same frequency, and I can hear one receiver on each ear. I used to QSO Raoul ZS1REC during summer time and sometimes we start the QSO using V pol and finished on H pol.. About the signal noise gain using H and V with two identical receivers, I can say there is no gain at all, when the signal is weak, I switch the other antenna off and hear with only one channel. The advantage to have both is just to avoid listening in the wrong antenna listening on both antennas at the same time. It is not diversity eider because my antennas are only 60 ft. apart . Besides E-W when the signal is coming from less 45 degree and it is fading, I never see rotation, the vertical signal can have a deep QSB and the horizontal signal constant with no QSB. That just happened last Saturday with the FT5ZM, the horizontal signal was solid all the time with no variation on the intensity, however the vertical signal had deep and fast QSB. My take on that is the propagation mode or multi-path, signals can arrive from a refraction out of a duct and or from the same direction but from a different region on the ionosphere. There is no real correlation between the two polarizations signals, in practice they don't mix. It is very different from HF or VHF where the wave is always coming from the same media. Another point is that refraction increase with the decrease square of the in frequency, on 160m the refraction is stronger than 80 or up, as a result it is not necessary to transmit a horizontal signal to answer a horizontal polarized income signal. When the TX signal reach the first refraction point the wave split in two one vertical and another horizontal. What means is the efficiency to couple the TX signal with the atmosphere this is more important than the polarization itself, but 160m only, moving up in frequency the results are completely different, and 30 MHz to 50 MHz it is even special because it is transition from HF to VHF propagation mode. The experiments on 28 MHz does not apply to 1.8 MHz. Between 1 and 2 MHz , everything is different from HF or VHF Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: circular polarization on 160m
James You brought a good article about HF propagation, however the behavor on 160m is different from HF. If you check on the KL7A arcticle figure 1 what is happening between 1 and 2 MHz you can see that the green and red does not behaivor the same way as above 2 MHz. This subject is more complex because there us no shirt answer, actualy between 1 and 2 MHz. the ionosphere does not support linear polariration wave. The wave are actualy eliptical and not circular for most directions. You can check the long answer on the must read book from NM7M . R Brown 'The Big Gun's Guied to Low Band Propagation . Magneto-iomic Theory pag 47 to 56 ; and Power coupling pag 57. Thanks to Karl. K9LA, the book is available on his also must read site on the 160m link http://k9la.us/html/160m.html Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: circular polarization on 160m
Hi Carl and top-band lovers I would like to mention Chapter 7.6 as well, polarization matching, and also 7.7 Fading. I started developing my HWF early 2009 and I think there is no more to squeeze from it. Here some update in respect of polarization on 160m. It is a game!, vertical and horizontal field changes all the time, an elliptic can describe better the waves on 160m. My last HWF tuning gave me another 6-8 db improvement on the signal noise ratio. The HWF is really an all directions noise cancelling antenna ( Va-Vb=0), the goal is maximum attenuation on the vertical field an good directivity on the horizontal field. The takeoff angle is always the same and does not change with the height above ground ,it always very close to 40 degree. It is alike high horizontal dipole that takeoff change with the height from ground. The HWF has a deep null from high angle signals at any height above ground. The game is maximum attention on the vertical signal because most of the manmade noise, power line noise, city noise propagate with vertical polarization due the proximity with the ground for 160m waves. For 160m the HWF needs to be over 100 ft. to perform well on the horizontal signals, 50 ft. is ok for 80m and up. The HWF works 160m to 30m with excellent performance depending on the area of the loops. The HWF gain is around -43 db, and the vertical attenuation can be adjusted to deep another -50db, the total attenuation front and back is -90 db , It has a front null and a back null for vertical signals. This is a weak, weak, weak signal system implementation, very complex by nature by receiving near the receiver noise floor most of the time. Depending on the direction of the wave the H/V ratio can be -20 db or more both ways, most of the time the vertical component is 10 to 20 db stronger than the horizontal component. When you combine the 4 variables, vertical gain, horizontal gain, vertical noise QRM and the signal H/V ratio you have your final signal to noise ratio, however on top of that you need to add the propagation noise as well. Another dependence is the solar cycle. We are at the peak of the solar cycle and the propagation this year has been very different . Long pass is peaking at the SS or SR and the signals from North are showing a strong horizontal component. or it could be just coincidence, just time will tell. Nowadays I can copy better weak signals with my HWV than my VWF in all directions. I just observed that recently with 8Q7BM, NH0Z,V63DX,4J6RO, 4K6FO and 4L5O, signals from NNW and NNE better on HWF. It is the first time I can hear better signals coming North with the HWF. It is all about signal noise ratio. For long path the new adjust also helped a lot. I detuned the TX tower to minimum noise on the HWF, making the diagram symmetrical on the polar plot. It looks like a butterfly for local vertical signals. Peter HS0ZKX is coming strong from SSW every 28 days. Just after the solstice last month the long path propagation was just fantastic. WV8. H40,RA0. JA. BA. BG and DU7 copy with Q5 from SSW from Dec 25th to Jan 1st , but few QSO's. only JA and DU7 on the log. FT5ZM only on the HWF as well. I agree with Carl. There hasn't been much work in polarization field on 160m, however It is a fascinate subject. Come on in folks! Regards JCarlos N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl Luetzelschwab Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 12:17 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: circular polarization on 160m I hope everyone has had a chance to work FT5ZM on topband. With respect to circular polarization on our HF bands (3.5 - 28 MHz) and on 6m, theory says both the ordinary and extraordinary waves propagate thru the ionosphere with pretty much equal ionospheric absorption. Thus circularly polarized antennas can provide an advantage. Some of the real-world examples I'm aware of have been documented by G2HCG on 10m (in the old Communications Quarterly), by the original K6CT on 20m (in the RSGB Bulletin) and by WA3WDR on 75m (a web paper). I'm sure there are others out there, too. On 160m, theory says the extraordinary wave incurs much more ionospheric absorption (more heavily attenuated) due to 1.8 MHz being so close to the electron-gyro frequency. Thus in theory only the ordinary wave is useful on 160m, which says circular polarization wouldn't do any good. Now things happen on 160m in the real-world that we simply don't understand. For example, an ordinary wave can excite an extraordinary wave under certain ionospheric conditions (if you'd like to read more, curl up in a warm place on a cold night with Chapter 3 in Ionospheric Radio by Kenneth Davies). Could this be happening? I don't think we can rule it out. In my opinion based on all the reports on this reflector over the years, it seems to me that having selectable elevation angles is more important than polarization. But I also admit that there hasn't
Re: Topband: Single antenna port xcvr but want to employ separate receive antenna
Hi James There are several solutions for a separated receive port. However let me comment on some details, 1- Small Delta loop. To be a receiver antenna the antenna gain need to be less than 20 db, why ? simple. Connect a power meter and a 50 ohms load on the Small Delta loop and measure how much power is captured from the TX antenna, I know several guy the burn the RX port on ICOM and YAESU radios using transmit antennas as receiver and injecting 100W into the RX port when transmitting with a legal limit amplifier. Port isolation and RF protection must be the first concern for any solution. If the antenna used for RX is resonant on the same TX band , you can really burn you RX front end. 2- Switch speed. The receive port need to switch fast than TX port. 20ms is not enough, most small frame relays switch around 20ms , To play safe it is necessary 10 ms. Another thing to consider. 3- The RX antenna only will add some SN if it adds some directivity, otherwise the attenuator at -20db will do the same job. 4- Isolation, on low bands if you have s9+10db noise and only 50 db isolation between the RX and TX port, the signal from the TX antenna will be add to you RX signal degrading the signal to noise and reducing side and back nulls form the RX antenna. I can list another several reason to the subject but the T/R switch is a very important part of the receiver system if you want to have some improvement on the signal noise. I sent one RTR-1 to T6LG to use with a good Preamp from KD9SV and a Delta Flag antenna using twisted pair. Without the RTR-1 the system would not perform well as it did. Just my two cents. Regards JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of James Rodenkirch Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 8:36 AM To: Top Band Contesting Subject: Topband: Single antenna port xcvr but want to employ separate receive antenna Have my vertical working great and have a small Delta-loop low band receive antenna BUT the Ten Tec Jupiter doesn't have a separate receive antenna like a K2, for instance (I borrowed a K2 to try out but the buttons/controls are to small for me to operate as I have a severe case of peripheral neuropathy, courtesy of Agent Orange).So, I am up and running and will be in the CQ 160 contest at the end of January but have no means, currently, of switching rapidly 'tween the top loaded vertical and loop. A T/R switch won't do it for meso looking at a DX Engineering RTR-1A but sure don't like the price!!http://www.dxengineering.com/parts/dxe-rtr-1a Anyone have an RTR-1 or 1A that is excess to their needs and willing to sell OR have another idea of how I can employ a separate receive antenna when I have one antenna port? Thank you, in advance, for any repliesoff line replies work for me. 72/73, Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Digital mode spurious issues
Tom, Mike is right, the issue with audio overload is complex for most of new radios, most of them have A/D just at the MIC input, if the A/D overloads the RF chain is compromised. These radios have no actual filters, everything is digital, like the IC7600. An analog radio is BW limited by the SSB crystal filter but SDR don't, when the A/D overloads, there are spoors everywhere several KHz far from the carrier; enough to trash the entire band. Using a SDR water fall it is easy to see the signal transitions and associate the trash with the main signal. I've seen several spoors every 10 KHz almost 100KHz up and down 1838. This is a growing problem. 73, JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mike Waters Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 1:31 PM To: Tom W8JI Cc: Topband Subject: Re: Topband: Digital mode spurious issues Tom, I believe the mode that operates at 1873-1838 is JT65, and WSJT is needed to decode it. I never tried it. It was developed by K1JT for weak-signal and EME work. http://www.physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/wsjt.html A common scenario with digital modes is that the audio into the mic input is too high, causing unwanted spurs. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote: ... a digimode station up roughly around 1837 came on with a LSB spurious signal on 1833. His signal was a series of slowly changing stepped tones. I don't know what mode that was. His unwanted sideband suppression was about 40 dB, but that was not nearly enough. He was 15 dB out of noise with his unwanted sideband. Does anyone know of a universal software to decode signals? Since the FCC does not require a CW ID, I think that is the only way to identify stations. ... _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Beverage antenna terminations
Bruce I lost several resistors on my WF until I started to use NTE 3 W Metal on the vertical Waller Flag and on the Horizontal WF I am using an array of 9 parallel/series. http://www.nteinc.com/resistor_web/pdf/threew.pdf Since that I never replaced it a single time in the last 4 years. The resistor has very low inductance but it is hard to find it, average price is near U$1. http://www.sourceresearch.com/store1/quickstore.cfm?ProductID=48700do=detai l Regards JCarlos N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:46 PM To: Tom W8JI; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Beverage antenna terminations They were supposed to be non-inductive carbon, but need to find something better like carbon film. - Original Message - From: Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com To: Bruce k...@myfairpoint.net; topband@contesting.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:55 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Beverage antenna terminations What kind of resistors are you using? They shouldn't do that if you use the right type. - Original Message - From: Bruce k...@myfairpoint.net To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:50 PM Subject: Topband: Beverage antenna terminations After recent night time thunder storm activity, two Beverage antennas lost some directivity. Termination resistors looked normal, but an ohmmeter checked reviled they had each gone hundreds of ohms higher. Replaced resistors and back to normal. 73 Bruce-K1FZ www.qsl.net/k1fz/bogantennanotes/index.html _ Topband Reflector - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4117 / Virus Database: 3604/6694 - Release Date: 09/24/13 _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: WLW
Here is the K7AGE posts video of WLW's 1932 500,000 Watt AM transmitter http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?398944-K7AGE-posts-video-of-WLW-s-1932- 500-000-Watt-AM-transmitter Enjoy it Regards JC N4IS _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Zo of an individual CAT5 twisted pair
Yes, that's a complicated matter. The name and the function can get very confused if you don't know what you are doing. Any transformer can change the voltage from the primary to the secondary and the impedance follow the square of turn ratio. How you connect the transformer is an application. How you build the transformer is an art! For broadband RX antennas you want the transformer to be broadband. For isolation from the primary to the secondary you want low capacitance. An autotransformer could be used as BALUN, balances input and unbalanced output, it could be broadband, but has no isolation. One example, you take a FT140-77 core and build a primary 12 turns in one side and 4 turns on the other side, you have a voltage transformer but it will perform very bad as a BALUN, or a BALBAL or UNUN depending your application. However if you build 3 times 4 turns for the primary and add 4 turns on secondary in between the primary, you can get the same voltage transformer but It will work as a broadband impedance transformer from 1 MHz to 10 MHz with no adding reactance if the load is a pure resistor or low inductance resistor. I did try to explain it with text, I used pictures, I posted diagrams but people come back to me saying the antenna is not working. When I check what the guy did, he was using the wrong transformer. Jim I'm with you again, very few hams really understand it. Regards JCarlos N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Shoppa, Tim Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 8:08 AM To: 'j...@audiosystemsgroup.com'; 'topband@contesting.com' Subject: Re: Topband: Zo of an individual CAT5 twisted pair A transformer that is connected such that it is UNbalanced on one side and BALanced on the other, and connected that way on purpose, is not a balun? Tim N3QE - Original Message - From: Jim Brown [mailto:j...@audiosystemsgroup.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 03:16 AM To: topband@contesting.com topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Zo of an individual CAT5 twisted pair On 8/12/2013 2:10 PM, JC N4IS wrote: 50/75 BALUN Thanks for the detailed post, Carlos. BUT -- please let's use the right words to describe things so that people understand what you're describing and how it works. I strongly suspect that at least some of those things you are calling a balun are really a simple transformer -- that is, a primary and a secondary with magnetic coupling between them, and probably on a ferrite or powdered iron core. If it's a transformer, let's call it a transformer. Likewise, if we have a common mode choke formed by winding a coil of the transmission line, it is a common mode choke, not a balun. Using the word balun confuses things, because that word is used to describe at least a dozen very different things that I know of. When we use the word balun, it's a magic box that few hams really understand. When we use the right word, most hams have a chance of understanding what it does in a circuit. :) Yes, there are arrays of common mode chokes that can be used to transform impedance, and there are transmission line transformers of various sorts that can do that as well. BTW -- your discussion of phasing between elements of an RX array causes me to add an important post script to my advice that a perfect match is not required. When ANY passive network is used to produce phase shift, the source and termination impedances DO matter. The tricky part, though, is knowing what the input Z of the RX is, and if you're doing something like a phased array using phasing lines that end at the RX input, it might be a good idea to actually measure input Z and the antenna Zs with a VNA. 73, Jim K9YC _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: best core material?
If you plan to use the antenna on 160m you'll need 73 material. 43 works 3.8 up. Regards JC N4IS -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of James Rodenkirch Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 2:20 PM To: Shoppa, Tim; BY THE LAKE; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: best core material? I wasn't going to use a binocular core, Tim - I was going to use the Amidon FT-140-43 OR the FT-140-77 IF it made any noticeable differenceis there some magical reason to use binocular vice standard round? From: tsho...@wmata.com To: rodenkirch_...@msn.com; ma...@isp.ca; topband@contesting.com Subject: RE: Topband: best core material? Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:12:48 + If receive only, you will do just fine using the 2873000202 binocular 73 material core that Tom mentions. I think this corresponds to Amidon part number BN-202-73. Newark stocks the part under the original Fair-Rite 2873000202 number. Tom shows 2:5 ratio but I've done other ratios just fine. I am very very impressed with the 2873000202 core, in fact I also use it in some DC-DC converters and the core just barely gets warm at the 10 watt level. Whenever I've accidentally transmitted into my receive antenna, the transformer survives just fine, it's the terminating resistor that goes up in smoke. I try not to make a habit of it :-) Tim N3QE -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of James Rodenkirch Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 2:04 PM To: BY THE LAKE; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: best core material? Sorry - didn't make it crystal clear that this is a Delta shaped variant of a EWE antenna My bad for not utilizing all of the necessary verbiage to make that clearyou see it in ON4UN's latest book on page 7-104. From: ma...@isp.ca To: rodenkirch_...@msn.com Subject: Re: Topband: best core material? Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 14:00:48 -0400 A full-wave delta loop would have the transformation done with a 1/4 wave line of 75 ohm cable. This must be something other than a full-wave loop? Bill VE3NH - Original Message - From: James Rodenkirch rodenkirch_...@msn.com To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 1:33 PM Subject: Topband: best core material? I have a schematic for a delta shaped loop that shows I'll need an 18:1 transformer to transform the 950 ohms of the antenna to 50 ohms (feeding it with 50 ohm coax). One transformer diagram shows an FT-140-43 core being used. BUT, looking over some of Tom's, W8JI, write-ups, I see where he uses 73 material instead. I see where 77 material replaced 73 material so -- is an FT-140-77 the mo betta way to go? Thanks, in advance, for any advice/info. Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV _ Topband Reflector - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3209/6552 - Release Date: 08/05/13 - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3209/6552 - Release Date: 08/05/13 _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Topband: 160 rhombic
The rhombic at W1AW was used on 20 meters IIRC. Craig K1QX _ Topband Reflector
