Re: Topband: 4W6A
thanks all for the answers. Just a dream to heard them hi hi... 73, Jorge CX6VM -Mensaje original- De: topband-boun...@contesting.com [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] En nombre de Gary K9GS Enviado el: Domingo, 18 de Septiembre de 2011 11:37 p.m. Para: topband@contesting.com Asunto: Re: Topband: 4W6A Hello Jorge, SR= 2127 SS= 0931 Good Luck! On 9/18/2011 11:43 AM, Jorge Diez - CX6VM wrote: great Merv!... anyone know the SS/SR of them? 73, Jorge CX6VM -Mensaje original- De: topband-boun...@contesting.com [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] En nombre de Merv Schweigert Enviado el: Domingo, 18 de Septiembre de 2011 01:11 p.m. Para: topband@contesting.com Asunto: Topband: 4W6A I was doing my morning routine calling CQ on 1822.5 at 1550Z just before sunrise, heard several times someone tune up, send some VVV etc. on my freq so I continued to call CQ. heard the tuner again, and this time he started calling CQ just a little down freq. Was 4W6A. He said QSX up so went up 1 and called, had to call several times before he finally came back. There was some QSB but he was about 579 here, not as strong as expected as on the other bands he is very strong. I heard a couple JA, UA0, KH6 calling him up 1 and he was having a hard time working any one, he stayed maybe 10 mins and left. I hope that there was just some local QRN or something. Anyway they are active at least on top band. GL 73 Merv K9FD/KH6 ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK -- 73, Gary K9GS Check out K9NS on the web: http://www.k9ns.com Greater Milwaukee DX Association: http://www.gmdxa.org Society of Midwest Contesters: http://www.w9smc.com ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Effect of current max not at base of vertical.
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:38:09 -0500 From: mikew...@gmail.com To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Effect of current max not at base of vertical. Guy, I'm not saying that I understand this 100%, but I certainly do find it fascinating. I have a question, though. For quite some time, my understanding has been that by making a bottom-fed vertical (or inverted-L) longer than 1/4λ --and thereby raising the max current point-- that we simply move the point of maximum current farther out on the radials. This makes sense to me, if we consider the thought that the ground is an image of the antenna, the missing portion (for lack of a better expression). Other well-respected hams used to say that this condition significantly added to the requirements for the radial system under such a longer vertical in such a way that we now need even longer radials. Later, though, one of these hams seems to have reversed his beliefs 180°. I don't pretend to know the answer. (And at this point, I'm not sure anyone does. :-) If I use a 5/16λ or 3/8λ inverted-L, how does this change the requirements of: 1. ~60 radials stapled to the surface of the earth ? 2. An elevated counterpoise (which would of course require far fewer radials) ? Thanks, Mike www.w0btu.com I have the same issue and opinion that Mike describes, although my thoughts on how to deal with it are different. The point of difference is that I just don't want to put my hand in a bag of snakes fussing with the erection and tuning of elevated radials that in my case must weave around trees within a wooded area. My inverted L is 85' up and 85' out in the belief that its point of maximum current is located half way up the vertical leg. There are 55 in-ground radials, most of them 120-160 feet long (a dozen are only 75' long). My thought is that instead of adding more radials originating at the base feedpoint and extending each of them out 120-160 feet, there would be economies of copper and labor to crow foot those additional radials. By crow foot, I mean digging up an existing radial at, say, 60 feet out from the base feedpoint and splicing in a new radial that would fit within the interstice of two existing radials and would itself be only 60-100 feet long. And, by extension, repeating this crow footing at, say, another 30 feet away, splicing and siting each new radial between pairs of then-existing radials. As such, the newest radials would be only 30-70 feet long By this means I would avoid what I judge to be an unnecessary intensification of radial density close to the feedpoint, and instead deploy the copper further away and at areas where the existing radials are extremely far apart from one another. Charles, W2SH ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Effect of current max not at base of vertical.
Milt says: Yet we all know from experience that the WWV radiation performance is excellent. I see N6RK has addressed this statement in his response as well, but I would like to add that this kind of statement is often heard on the air, That antenna of yours there is doing a FB job for you. I always think, How do you know? Maybe his antenna is working horribly. Maybe the owner has water in his coax, and a resultant 10 db of loss, but the propagation just happens to be favorable and he is really putting a smashing signal into your QTH in spite of his 10 db loss. Turn the thought process around a bit, and ask ANY ham you talk to how he likes his antenna, how's it working for him? Invariably he will tell you it works great, he loves it. Ask him how he knows it is working great and he will tell you, Because of all the stations I work, who tell me what a great signal I have!!!' Think about it. Rick K2XT ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Effect of current max not at base of vertical.
While I was in College I had a ½ wave 20 meter vertical on the top of a two story apartment building. Fed with a parallel tuned circuit taped at the 50 ohm point with about 20 or so 18 foot radials. Worked like gang busters but I always had to wait in line to work rare DX. It was not the best but something better than the Ed Sullivan Show. But I did see the Beatles for the first time 73 Hardy N7RT - Original Message - From: Rick Stealey rstea...@hotmail.com To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 9:45 AM Subject: Re: Topband: Effect of current max not at base of vertical. Milt says: Yet we all know from experience that the WWV radiation performance is excellent. I see N6RK has addressed this statement in his response as well, but I would like to add that this kind of statement is often heard on the air, That antenna of yours there is doing a FB job for you. I always think, How do you know? Maybe his antenna is working horribly. Maybe the owner has water in his coax, and a resultant 10 db of loss, but the propagation just happens to be favorable and he is really putting a smashing signal into your QTH in spite of his 10 db loss. Turn the thought process around a bit, and ask ANY ham you talk to how he likes his antenna, how's it working for him? Invariably he will tell you it works great, he loves it. Ask him how he knows it is working great and he will tell you, Because of all the stations I work, who tell me what a great signal I have!!!' Think about it. Rick K2XT ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
