Re: Topband: k9ay Loop relay box?
I have built the K9AY kit from Far circuits therer is also a write up on the kit Freank K7SFNhttp://www.farcircuits.net Comes wit hjust he Boards or compleat kit Wayne W3EA > From: dno...@bellsouth.net > To: n...@hotmail.com; topband@contesting.com > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 20:44:54 -0500 > Subject: Re: Topband: k9ay Loop relay box? > > Dan, if you find a source, let us know. TU > 73, > Dave > > ___ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Down to one more state for QRP WAS on 160 meters
I need MS for QRP WAS on 160! Anyone from MS available for a sked? Tomorrow morning around sunrise your time? Think that would be around 0700 your time, which would be 0600 mine? OR, tomorrow evening around 2100 your time, 2000 mine? Let me know - 72, Jim Rodenkirch, K9JWV ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: k9ay Loop relay box?
Dan, if you find a source, let us know. TU 73, Dave ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: k9ay Loop relay box?
> Anyone know of source of a kit? Far Circuits 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 2/14/2012 7:38 PM, Daniel Hileman wrote: > > Hi...I am interested in building a set of K9AY Loops, but those > relay boxes are expensive to BUY! Anyone know of source of a kit? Or, > anyone in the Dallas area want to get together and help a newbie to > building circuits, etc build one? > > Thanks and 73, Dan N9WX > ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 > QSB QSB - hw? BK > ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Rolling your own FCP isolation transformer, IMPORTANT.
Due to email conversations with a surprising number of folks not quite getting the "isolation transformer" part right, we have made some adjustments to the drawings on http://www.w0uce.net/K2AVantennas.html . Whether due to accidentally "flipping" the connection on one end of the winding, or simply misunderstanding directions or function, thereby some have turned their home-brew winding from an isolation transformer into a weak choke balun wound on a powdered iron core, especially weak on 160. By doing so, they have allowed the counterpole to choose between the FCP and their coax shield, now the low Z choice, and route the bulk of their counterpole power onto what amounts to single miscellaneous "radial" on the ground. And thereby in the bargain, they have thrown the FCP improvements out the window. When you get done building it, take an ohmmeter, and for illustration assuming you are using an SO239 connector for the coax and post insulators for connections to FCP and vertical conductor, MAKE SURE that you do NOT get a short between the shell of the coax jack and either post going to the FCP and vertical conductor, or between the center conductor and either post. To finish the check, you SHOULD get a short between the two posts. You SHOULD get a short between the shell and center conductor of the coax jack. Repeat, getting that wrong can throw all the benefits out the window. The tricky part is that if you do get that wrong, it still passes power to the antenna when it's wound wrong, and may seem like it's working until you start comparing Reverse Beacon Network readings. If you put one up and you're not sure, go check it out. 73, Guy. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: k9ay Loop relay box?
Hi...I am interested in building a set of K9AY Loops, but those relay boxes are expensive to BUY! Anyone know of source of a kit? Or, anyone in the Dallas area want to get together and help a newbie to building circuits, etc build one? Thanks and 73, Dan N9WX ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Vertical vs yagi
As far as verticals are concerned, since 2003 I have had great success with a Half Square antenna on 80. (descriptions in the ARRL Antenna Book and in ARRL Antenna Compendium No. 5) I have also used one on 40 and have one planned for 160. One big advantage is that radials are not necessary as with a "normal" vertical and it can be fed directly with coax. Previously I have used almost full size ground mounted verticals (108 to 110 feet) on 160 and several shunt fed towers on 80. Until the 80 meter half square I never had one I thought was a really good antenna on 80. I did think the 160 verticals at 108 to 110 feet were pretty good compared to horizontal wires. On 80 meters the half Square is a very good antenna. It is about 65 feet high and beats out dipoles much higher (in the 90 to 100 foot range usually by more than 1 S-unit). On 40 it is easier to get a horizontal antenna higher than the 35 or 40 feet needed for the half square or any ground mounted vertical. If you can not get a horizontal dipole 50 feet or higher then maybe the half square or phased verticals is your best choice on 40. In my case the simple dipole at 50 or 55 feet equaled or outperformed my half square ( two phased verticals) on 40 so I took it down. On 80, I can not get a horizontal antenna up 120 to 130 feet, so I go with the phased verticals in the half square configuration. Two phased verticals are good but four would be better! I may try a half square reflector when I get the time. On 160, I am planning a "bent" half square. It will be about 2 dB down from a full size half square but EZNEC predicts, that at an elevation angle of 15 degrees and lower, it should have more gain than a 160 dipole at 260 feet! Of course, it can not compare to the Yagi at 260 feet. That is not much of a concern to most of us, because it will not take too long for everyone with a 160 meter Yagi at 260 feet to work the DX first! I wonder how many of those there really are? It seems clear that the horizontal dipole or Yagi should be the first choice it you can get it up more than a half wave high, roughly 65, 130 and 260 feet depending on the band. I have a few plots of the half square vs horizontal dipoles on my website N4DJ.comOn 80 meters the actual on the air comparisons seem to be right in line with what EZNEC predicted. If the EZNEC 160 meter predictions are only half as good as they were on 80, I will be one happy DXer! All my comments assume that working DX is the goal. 73, Don N4DJ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Vertical vs yagi
Jack/W6NF wrote: > I had a 2-element 40-meter array up and in use for about 5 years. It was > a simple system using coax phasing lines (Christman feed, if I recall > correctly) and, even in light of some of the negative comments about > this system, it worked very well for me. > > In my location (northern Nevada) the most useful aspect of the antenna, > with the elements oriented at 75/255 degrees, was the ability to > substantially null east coast QRM when working DX from The Pacific and > Asia. My null, based on repeated observations, was, at a *minimum*, > 20db. I don't believe you'll do that with a 2-element yagi! Your vertical array is of the "driven" (not parasitic) type. A 2 element driven array can, if properly tuned, have a F/B of 20, 30 or even 40 dB at some particular angle. A 2 element parasitic array can never have more than 10 dB or so of F/B. It is baffling to me that virtually all 2 element 40 meter beams are parasitic. Driven arrays also have wider bandwidth, which is an issue on 40 meters. I can tell you that I have compared various inverted vees on 40 to verticals, and there seems to be little difference in performance. OTOH, the advantage of my 3 element Yagi (MonstIR) at 33 meters height over the inverted vee is huge, both in terms of transmitting and receiving. Rick N6RK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Vertical vs yagi
FWIW I get well over 20dB side nulls from a 2el Cushcraft clone and about 15-20dB off the rear which varies by arrival angles. With a pair stacked the rejection is often better and beinng able to upper/lower/both is often an eye opener. I never had good results with a pair of verticals on 40 but they are killers on 160 and the feed is simple coax. IMO if you have good receiving antennas on 160/80 there is no benefit in spending extra for a fancy switching box for just 2 antennas which "may" get you another 5dB in F/B. Carl KM1H - Original Message - From: "Jack/W6NF" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 3:18 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Vertical vs yagi > On 2/14/2012 10:32 AM, Josep Torres wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to hear from people that have tried or compared a 2-3 >> element vertical array vs a 2 element yagi for 40m. I don't have a yagi, >> but I can maybe put a 2(3) element vertical array. At moment, I only have >> a 1/4wvl dipole at 14m high. I want to improve my setup for that band. >> >> Sorry for the post because this is much devoted to 160, but I know many >> guys here have tested many antenna configurations, so maybe I can have a >> response. Thanks very much.. >> >> Josep >> EA6BF >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK >> > Hi, Josep: > > Given the simplicity and minimal expense, the 2 element vertical > performs well. > > Before being able to afford the Comtek 4-square phasing system last year > I had a 2-element 40-meter array up and in use for about 5 years. It was > a simple system using coax phasing lines (Christman feed, if I recall > correctly) and, even in light of some of the negative comments about > this system, it worked very well for me. > > In my location (northern Nevada) the most useful aspect of the antenna, > with the elements oriented at 75/255 degrees, was the ability to > substantially null east coast QRM when working DX from The Pacific and > Asia. My null, based on repeated observations, was, at a *minimum*, > 20db. I don't believe you'll do that with a 2-element yagi! > > I have 40 quarter-wave radials, on the ground with poor soil, and that > likely contributes to performance. The elements were (and still are) > 1-3/4-inch diameter aluminum camouflage support tubes which are readily > available in my area. They are easy to erect and are guyed, four ways, > with light Dacron line at the 28-foot level. > > I did consider adding a third, in-line, element but it's just one of > those things I never got around to and by the time I retired I had the > 4-square in place. In retrospect it may have been a better idea to do > the third element at a right-angle to the 2-element array to allow 4 > directions with 3 elements. The coax phasing system is still useful with > one vertical common and the unused vertical simply switched and floating > to isolate it from the active elements. > > Good luck! > > -- > Jack, W6NF > Silver Springs, NV > DM09ji > > ___ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > > > - > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2112/4809 - Release Date: 02/14/12 > ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Vertical vs yagi
On 2/14/2012 10:32 AM, Josep Torres wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to hear from people that have tried or compared a 2-3 element > vertical array vs a 2 element yagi for 40m. I don't have a yagi, but I can > maybe put a 2(3) element vertical array. At moment, I only have a 1/4wvl > dipole at 14m high. I want to improve my setup for that band. > > Sorry for the post because this is much devoted to 160, but I know many guys > here have tested many antenna configurations, so maybe I can have a response. > Thanks very much.. > > Josep > EA6BF > > > > > ___ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > Hi, Josep: Given the simplicity and minimal expense, the 2 element vertical performs well. Before being able to afford the Comtek 4-square phasing system last year I had a 2-element 40-meter array up and in use for about 5 years. It was a simple system using coax phasing lines (Christman feed, if I recall correctly) and, even in light of some of the negative comments about this system, it worked very well for me. In my location (northern Nevada) the most useful aspect of the antenna, with the elements oriented at 75/255 degrees, was the ability to substantially null east coast QRM when working DX from The Pacific and Asia. My null, based on repeated observations, was, at a *minimum*, 20db. I don't believe you'll do that with a 2-element yagi! I have 40 quarter-wave radials, on the ground with poor soil, and that likely contributes to performance. The elements were (and still are) 1-3/4-inch diameter aluminum camouflage support tubes which are readily available in my area. They are easy to erect and are guyed, four ways, with light Dacron line at the 28-foot level. I did consider adding a third, in-line, element but it's just one of those things I never got around to and by the time I retired I had the 4-square in place. In retrospect it may have been a better idea to do the third element at a right-angle to the 2-element array to allow 4 directions with 3 elements. The coax phasing system is still useful with one vertical common and the unused vertical simply switched and floating to isolate it from the active elements. Good luck! -- Jack, W6NF Silver Springs, NV DM09ji ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Vertical vs yagi
On 2012-02-14, at 1:32 PM, Josep Torres wrote: > I would like to hear from people that have tried or compared a 2-3 element > vertical array vs a 2 element yagi for 40m. I don't have a yagi, but I can > maybe put a 2(3) element vertical array. At moment, I only have a 1/4wvl > dipole at 14m high. I want to improve my setup for that band. Hi Josep, By far, the absolute BEST antenna that I've ever used on 40-meters was an inverted 3-element Bobtail Array (dubbed "The Robert Tail Array" in an early edition of the ARRL's "ANTENNA COMPENDIUM"). That thing would open the band up toward Europe for me a good-hour-plus before the kilowatts in the North-East were alert to any DX...and it's so easy to feed & erect, too. The bi-directional pattern was good for Europe as well as the Pacific for me. What relevance does this have to Topband...? Only this: I wish I had the resources & wherewithal to raise one up for 1.8-MHz! ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Vertical vs yagi
Hi all, I would like to hear from people that have tried or compared a 2-3 element vertical array vs a 2 element yagi for 40m. I don't have a yagi, but I can maybe put a 2(3) element vertical array. At moment, I only have a 1/4wvl dipole at 14m high. I want to improve my setup for that band. Sorry for the post because this is much devoted to 160, but I know many guys here have tested many antenna configurations, so maybe I can have a response. Thanks very much.. Josep EA6BF ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio Allocation
Bert, Thats correct. A few hundred watts output power through an antenna tuner into a good 160 or 80 meter vertical should achieve easily achieve 5 watts eirp. Note the following caution from the ARRL news story: http://www.arrl.org/news/amateur-radio-gets-secondary-mf-allocation-at-wrc-12 "While the Final Acts will be signed on Friday, February 17 at the close of the Conference, the new allocation will not take effect until it is entered into the Radio Regulations. No date has been set for this, but it is unlikely to be earlier than January 1, 2013. In any case, no amateur can use the band until his or her national regulations are revised to implement the allocation." 73 Frank W3LPL Original message >Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:26:13 -0500 >From: Bert Barry >Subject: Re: Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio >Allocation >To: topband@contesting.com > >I understand the EIRP limit for Canada (and presumably the U.S.) is 5 watts. > >On 14/02/2012 10:02 AM, donov...@starpower.net wrote: >> http://www.arrl.org/news/amateur-radio-gets-secondary-mf-allocation-at-wrc-12 >> >> Original message >>> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 09:11:04 -0500 (EST) >>> From: >>> Subject: Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio >>> Allocation >>> To: topband@contesting.com >>> >>> According to a WRC-12 attendee, AI 1.23 just passed first and second >>> reading. We now have a secondary amateur allocation at 472-479 kHz! >>> >>> 73 >>> Frank >>> W3LPL >>> >>> ___ >>> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK >> ___ >> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > >___ >UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio Allocation
I understand the EIRP limit for Canada (and presumably the U.S.) is 5 watts. On 14/02/2012 10:02 AM, donov...@starpower.net wrote: > http://www.arrl.org/news/amateur-radio-gets-secondary-mf-allocation-at-wrc-12 > > Original message >> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 09:11:04 -0500 (EST) >> From: >> Subject: Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio >> Allocation >> To: topband@contesting.com >> >> According to a WRC-12 attendee, AI 1.23 just passed first and second >> reading. We now have a secondary amateur allocation at 472-479 kHz! >> >> 73 >> Frank >> W3LPL >> >> ___ >> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > ___ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio Allocation
http://www.arrl.org/news/amateur-radio-gets-secondary-mf-allocation-at-wrc-12 Original message >Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 09:11:04 -0500 (EST) >From: >Subject: Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio Allocation > >To: topband@contesting.com > >According to a WRC-12 attendee, AI 1.23 just passed first and second reading. >We now have a secondary amateur allocation at 472-479 kHz! > >73 >Frank >W3LPL > >___ >UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: 160m dethroned? 600m the new top band?
I copied VE1ZZ here in Western Massachusetts on 136 hz some years back. 73, Tom, W1TO On 2/13/2012 11:38 AM, Mike & Coreen Smith wrote: > I don't want to say for certain, but "seems" like VE1ZZ played around with > this band as well some years back. > I vaguely recall reading a story about Jack making this humoungous loading > coil, but don't know how > it even panned out. Was there a special temp permit? > > Does anyone know? > > Jack/ZZ is not on the Internet, as far as I know. > > MIke VE9AA > > Mike, Coreen& Corey Smith > 699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge > NB > Canada > E6L 1T1 > ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: 160m dethroned? 600m the new top band?
At 17.16 13/02/2012 -0500, you wrote: >Somewhere, somebody managed to get a TS-940 to transmit down there at around >the 10 milliwatt level out of the transverter port. Ive been looking for >that info but no luck yet. Ten years a go i managed to pick up the pre-driver output of my FT-990 that way: FT990 ---> converter ---> driver with TDA2030 > PA G0MRF with 4 mosfet IRFP450 ---> variometer > antenna. The final output was linear (no class D). I transmitted at 10,137 KHz and the converter had a crystal at 10 MHz if you transmit at 10,500 KHz it works but the driver (it is a BF integrate amp) does not. The final stage also works at 500 KHz, with an appropriate low pass filter and a good fan, and i was able to do some test SSB/CW. Here you can find the final: http://www.g0mrf.com/lf.htm and here my construction: http://i4ewh.altervista.org/LongWaves/FinaleLF.htm (my site is in italian language but you can see the pics). If someone is able to design a good driver (5 or 6 W is enough) we can get on the air easy. Paolo I4EWH ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: WRC-12 Approves the New 472-479 kHz Amateur Radio Allocation
According to a WRC-12 attendee, AI 1.23 just passed first and second reading. We now have a secondary amateur allocation at 472-479 kHz! 73 Frank W3LPL ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: QSL from Gaby, OD5NJ on 160 m
Hi George I got my TB QSL from Gaby within a couple of weeks via EA5BYP (1 x IRC). Good luck. 73 Cris GM4FAM > Looking for suggestions to cfm an April 2011 contact with Gaby? I hate to > have the postal folks continue to eat my Greenstamps. > > 73 George W8UVZ > ___ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: QSL from Gaby, OD5NJ on 160 m
I had no problem when I QSLed via EA5BYP, except that it was a tad slow. Gaby never received the first card which I sent direct to his QTH. He is NOT a $$ hunter, but someone in the postal system is! Vy 73 John EI7BA On 14/02/2012 07:05, Dave G4GED wrote: > Gaby's qrz.com QSLing instructions are a bit confusing but I got my 160m QSL > all OK via EA5BYP. > However, I confirmed the route by email with him first just to check. > As said, be aware EA5BYP is off on his 3C Dxped soon so very busy I'd > imagine. > Gd Lk Dave > > - Original Message - >> From: "Don Greenbaum" > To:; "'George'"; > ; > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 12:40 AM > Subject: Re: Topband: QSL from Gaby, OD5NJ on 160 m > > >> Gaby says top band Q not through EA5BYP. >> >> I mailed a card and $3 from A7 3 weeks ago, it has not gotten to him yet. >> >> :-( >> >> Don >> N1DG >> >> At 07:18 PM 2/13/2012, Bernie McClenny, W3UR wrote: >>> Go via EA5BYP - but be patient he's about to go to 3C and 3C0. >>> >>> Has anyone in North America worked 3C0 - Annobon Island on Topband? >>> >>> Bernie >>> >>> >>> Bernie McClenny, W3UR >>> The Daily DX >>> The Weekly DX >>> How's DX >>> 3025 Hobbs Road >>> Glenwood, MD 21738 >>> 410-489-6518 >>> Get a free two weeks of The Daily DX and The Weekly DX >>> http://www.dailydx.com/trial.htm >>> The Daily DX on Twitter - http://twitter.com/dailydx >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: topband-boun...@contesting.com >>> [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of George >>> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 6:30 PM >>> To: Topband@contesting.com; od...@hotmail.com >>> Subject: Topband: QSL from Gaby, OD5NJ on 160 m >>> >>> Looking for suggestions to cfm an April 2011 contact with Gaby? I hate >>> to have the postal folks continue to eat my Greenstamps. >>> >>> 73 George W8UVZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
