Re: Topband: DX window
Hi Darrell, I have started wading into computer logging and I usually use paper. After the contest I enter the info into the computer but I plan to just have the computer running and do it one QSO at a time. None of my radios have any kind of CAT feature. I do NOT want my radio to be smarter than me so they have to stay pretty dern stooopid. The logging programs let me enter the frequency I am using in whatever format I want AND just keep using the same info for each QSO until I change it. I would enter something like 160M or 1.8 (as in mc) but I could as easily put in 1.835001. Radios smarter than me can tell the computer where they are operating (maybe to the nearest 50 or 100 cycles. Checking for W/VE QSOs in the DX window would work for at least those stations with Baccalaureate radios. Any kind of policing of that nature would be encumbered with challenges and appeals processes and final results could take years. If CAT and computer logging become a requirement those of us without CAT or computer logging will be banned - de facto. Come to think of it my contest operation is already pretty low key. There are always the WARC bands and the expected new allocation at 600 meters. I can't imagine contests in THAT band. Or...we could all just play by the contest rules and agreements. 73, Bill KU8H On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 18:22 -0800, Darrell Bellerive wrote: Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and checking perhaps I am missing something. Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging programs and these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly from the transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log check computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX window? I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but certainly that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program. I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's log to rule out computer errors. Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for true mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification. I will crawl back under my rock now. 73, Darrell VA7TO Darrell Bellerive ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Don't mean to leapfrog you guys technologically. But you don't need to interface your radio to your computer, because lots of other hams have already done this. CQ'ing stations are logged in the Reverse Beacon Network automatically. http://reversebeacon.net/ The reversebeacon data clearly show all the US and VE CQ'ing stations I heard in the DX window. There were several consistently CQ'ing in the DX window the first night of the contest. It even shows that I (briefly, like a minute or two) CQ'ed in the window! While I like to complain too, there was a marked reduction in US/VE CQ'ing in DX window the second night of the contest and many DX stations were clearly audible to me on fairly clear frequencies both inside and outside the window. I was a little surprised that there wasn't a line of callers for the stronger DX stations. I strongly suspect comments made on this mailing list and forwarded/read by those stations, helped rectify the situation. Tim N3QE -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Cromwell Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 9:07 AM To: Topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX window Hi Darrell, I have started wading into computer logging and I usually use paper. After the contest I enter the info into the computer but I plan to just have the computer running and do it one QSO at a time. None of my radios have any kind of CAT feature. I do NOT want my radio to be smarter than me so they have to stay pretty dern stooopid. The logging programs let me enter the frequency I am using in whatever format I want AND just keep using the same info for each QSO until I change it. I would enter something like 160M or 1.8 (as in mc) but I could as easily put in 1.835001. Radios smarter than me can tell the computer where they are operating (maybe to the nearest 50 or 100 cycles. Checking for W/VE QSOs in the DX window would work for at least those stations with Baccalaureate radios. Any kind of policing of that nature would be encumbered with challenges and appeals processes and final results could take years. If CAT and computer logging become a requirement those of us without CAT or computer logging will be banned - de facto. Come to think of it my contest operation is already pretty low key. There are always the WARC bands and the expected new allocation at 600 meters. I can't imagine contests in THAT band. Or...we could all just play by the contest rules and agreements. 73, Bill KU8H On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 18:22 -0800, Darrell Bellerive wrote: Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and checking perhaps I am missing something. Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging programs and these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly from the transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log check computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX window? I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but certainly that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program. I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's log to rule out computer errors. Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for true mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification. I will crawl back under my rock now. 73, Darrell VA7TO Darrell Bellerive ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
What a nonsense. Do you expect a station calling cq during a contest in the DX window and being called by a non dx station to qsy with that station to a frequency outside the dx window? And how many stations can share the dx window? By the way, I don´t see any frequency marked dx window in the ARRL band plan. And no dx window is seen in our region 1 band plan either. 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary Smith Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working a DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have the guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for DX to be heard. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? That is a good suggestion, because it is what the contest rules suggest. It is a place for intercontinental QSO's, and W/VE should not CQ there. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I think tradition for the ARRL has been to only find DX stations there CQing. That's why it is in the rules. It is often the first time some of the little guns have ever heard DX on the band. From time to time - I find some USA stations there CQing - and typically they leave after being reminded about the window. However, from time to time you see a serious station setup camp and run off 100 or more domestic stations - which seems like it is taking advantage of the rule. Tree On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com wrote: I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? That is a good suggestion, because it is what the contest rules suggest. It is a place for intercontinental QSO's, and W/VE should not CQ there. __**_ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I agree when the discussion is about the ARRL 160m contest only. But, how many stations outside W/VE can share those 5kHz? 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary Smith I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? My point is the W/VE should not be within the DX window calling CQ in the first place. I can't imagine anyone would be there calling CQ and expect a constant pileup of DX to be calling them. What is more likely is they may feel by being in that window they will be in a perfect location to get the maximum DX multipliers and by holding that bandwidth in that limited and specific segment, minimize the # of multipliers others will be able to get. Gary KA1J What a nonsense. Do you expect a station calling cq during a contest in the DX window and being called by a non dx station to qsy with that station to a frequency outside the dx window? And how many stations can share the dx window? By the way, I don´t see any frequency marked dx window in the ARRL band plan. And no dx window is seen in our region 1 band plan either. 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary Smith Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working a DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have the guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for DX to be heard. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
On 2012-12-06, at 10:37 AM, Gary Smith wrote: I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? My point is the W/VE should not be within the DX window calling CQ in the first place. I can't imagine anyone would be there calling CQ and expect a constant pileup of DX to be calling them. What is more likely is they may feel by being in that window they will be in a perfect location to get the maximum DX multipliers and by holding that bandwidth in that limited and specific segment, minimize the # of multipliers others will be able to get. Hi Gary, I agree with your sentiments 101%, FWIW... Alas alack, nothing will ever come of it: our Ham society to-day seems to have embraced the domain of society at large, in that we'd rather go out of our way, rather than to offend the offender. Is it in keeping with our seemingly universal mantra anymore of being politically correct...? Or have we collectively suddenly become oh-so-very-kind to one another that the last thing we'd want to do is tell someone that maybe---just maybe!---their behaviour is not quite up to standards...? I don't know, it sure beats me: just as I am still gobsmacked by the ...shy retiring Topband person(s) who, a few years ago, would anonymously send transmissionsklix right at the end of my transmissions, who would besmirch my otherwise good name on various sites because my signal didn't quite measure-up to some ethereal golden standard in the eyes (and ears) of that beholder... Maybe that's the key...? The Kilocycle Kop(s) should dedicate time energy to park in the DX window, send WINDOW HR at the conclusion of each every CQ by NA stations...?! (Where are those Kc Kops when you need one...?!) ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Gary You have a god point, if we don't care they don't mind. I think we cc download the RBN file with all callers on the DX window during the contest, it is available in .csv, easy to filter using excel and send a formal complain to ARRL contest managers, It is not necessary to publish that list because is available for everybody download. Let see the ARRL reaction. If we don't protect the DX windows, we can't complain because we are gentlemen's and we made possible the gentlemen's band throughout the years and it was not staying aside the line and just watching. Any comments or actions? Regards JC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
As Peter has responded, there are two JA windows; 1810-1825 and 1907.7-1912.5 . Until a few years ago the JA hams only had the upper 1907.7-1912.5 allocation. Because the band was segmented in much of the world most international contacts on 160 Meters were done split frequency. From here in the USA the common method was for US stations to transmit in the 1.820-1.830 area where their narrow band TX antennas were resonant and listen for the JA stations in the above 1.9 MHZ JA allocation. The JA stations would do the opposite, TXing above 1.9 and listening down low. Initially USA transmitted 1800-1810 on CW, usually below 1805. It wasn't just JA. The west coast USA had 1975-2000, the east coast 1800-1825. ZL only worked up around 1875. Many Europe and Africa only had 1825 up to 1830, some more. Now the JA's are still very restricted with the two segments you mentioned and no SSB. Other places have a variety of areas to operate. This still does not exclude a DX Window for Europe and the rest of the world, just because JA can't above 1825. Also, the OLD standard was USA CQ on the start of the odd fives, and listen on the even start of 5's when DX CQed. For example, I might CQ at 0500Z and G3PU at 0505. http://www.w8ji.com/160%20History/hist160dx.pdf 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Exactly Correct Peter Put a dozen high powered EU stations in the 5 Khz Window and THEY can't hear any of the US/VE stations called them. John k9uwa I agree when the discussion is about the ARRL 160m contest only. But, how many stations outside W/VE can share those 5kHz? 73 Peter, DJ7WW John Goller, K9UWA Jean Goller, N9PXF Antique Radio Restorations k9...@arrl.net Visit our Web Site at: http://www.JohnJeanAntiqueRadio.com 4836 Ranch Road Leo, IN 46765 USA 1-260-637-6426 ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: buried radials vs radials on the ground
Short version: Believe what you measured. Long version: We did measurements of this for understanding and designing BOGs some years back. In the upper east central part of North Carolina (contains Raleigh/Durham) we made extensive resonance and resistance measurements of a 151 foot dipole of insulated wire laid on the ground (Dipole On Ground or DOG). These varied almost wildly. The wildness was confirmed. From these we computed velocity factors from 45 to 80 percent. Feed resistance at resonance measured from 60 to 200 ohms. Whether these variations are even more extreme in other places I cannot say. But they were more than sufficient to convince that some applications required knowing those constants for effective design. Resistance and resonance did not correlate in any pattern we ever saw, broadly scattering on a plot. This is not terribly surprising since dielectric constant and conductivity are separate specifications for soil. Measurements over the same back yard occasionally varied significantly with the DOG laid in different orientations. No knowing why. Lots of guesses, but no proof. Buried wires, pipes, septic fields, constuction debris used as leveling underneath the top layer of lawn grade dirt, vein of sand with water? The list is endless. But one thing is plain. The coupled resistance of the ground significantly broadens the resonance curve but does not swamp it. The resistance from traversing 75 feet out and back laying on the ground does not sufficiently attenuate the resonance effect from the end of the wire and the resonance is plainly still there. A bare wire buried dipole did not show this resonance. Guessing, it might if the ground was extremely dry or sandy, like the ground seen in the Sand Hills of North Carolina. The insinuation for insulated radials laid on the ground is that some degree of attention to velocity factor may be in order, as in Pete's question. It's interesting to explore this as if it were a controlling issue to see what it would imply. Depending on one's faith in NEC ground effect calculations on wires very close (within several wire diameters) to ground, this is also proven out in the models. Here's the procedure: Create a 151 foot (46m) dipole (+/- 75.5 feet) out of your insulated radial wire. Lay out the DOG centered upon a diameter of your proposed radial circle. Push it through any grass and get it next to the dirt, because that is where it will get to in time. There is a significant difference between ON the dirt and a half inch or cm ABOVE the dirt. If you measure and cut for on top of the grass, they will gradually sink and become electrically longer (and lossier) than you need. Only measure on top of the grass if that is how it is going to be when you are operating, as in laying them out for a contest and rolling them up afterwards. Measure resonance and feed resistance at resonance. The resonance should be in or around the 160 meter band. Re-lay the dipole on the diameter at right angles and remeasure. If you are lucky the two will be close and you can work with the average. The resonant frequency will tell you how long you need a radial to be so that the radial feed is resonant and essentially resistive. The formula for the radial is the DOG resonance frequency in MHz for 151 foot length, times 41.25 feet to get you length for resonance at 1.83 MHz laying on your personal dirt. Trim or extend the dipole to 82.5 times the measured resonance in MHz to adjust to 1.83 MHZ. Redo the procedure, being sure to push the wire down to the dirt. Re-measure. You should be very close to resonance. If this step did not center the resonance, you probably are not being serious about pushing the wire down to the dirt. (Anyone who does this, we would be happy to know your results, resonance and resistance, length and location to add to our data.) Half the resistance will tell you how many insulated radials you need, of that length laid to the dirt, one radial for each ohm, for the radial field to have a radial system effective series impedance of one ohm resistive. There are some places around Raleigh where the measurements tell you that would need a hundred radials 95 feet long. Another place would be 30 radials 60 feet long. This would lead one to expect large variation in results with not so dense radial installations. If one did not want to bother with the math, to be sure of commercial results over heavily root bound soil where you can't possibly bury, I would go with the fuzzy average 65-ish velocity factor, 2/3 for easy memory, and put down 120 insulated 90 foot (28m) radials. That's 10,800 feet of wire, so I'd think you would want to measure and do the math. 30 times 60 feet, if you're lucky, is only 1800 feet. Note that the wire that is pushed down to the dirt always gets the slower velocity factors, thus shorter electrical 1/4 wave radials. Not pushing it down to the dirt costs you. Note that one can reverse
Re: Topband: DX window
One sure way to open the DX window to DX is to blacklist us/ve who CQ there. At least temporarily. Which is what I do, just pass them by even when they're 40 over and I need the mult. Tough love. If there's a DX station nearby I'll surely try to work it, perhaps with a judicious VFO offset to make sure the DX can hear me. Not that I keep a list or anything. I don't. If they just keep CQn in the window I'll never work them. Sooner or later they'll find me up or down the band. A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. But its a lot more than is possible to work if US/VE are CQing in that 5kHz! Another noted there's no rule in terms of licensing structure about the window. True. Its been a gentlemen's agreement since way before I was first licensed. -- 73 Art K6XT~~ Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm. ARRL, GMCC, CW OPS, NAQCC ARRL TA ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: Shunt Fed Tower
I’d like to try shunt-feeding my 60-foot freestanding tower on 160M and 80M. how can this be done? If you’ve done it successfully I’d be grateful for the specifics, or maybe a reference to the construction article you used. 73 and Happy Holidays, Jerry K3BZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
is disingenuous. First the contest planners have already turned their back on DX. DX was included as an after thought. Why, because 160 meter legend DX-er W0NWX-W0DX-VP2VI was ARRL President and lived during the winters in BVI a scant 7 miles from U.S.VI. It seems to me the ARRL intended it as a local **ARRL** sectional contest, not as a worldwide DX contest to encourage DX participation. It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections. I can't see any conspiracy. If someone is in an ARRL section, it counts as an ARRL section. If someone in a country next door is not in an ARRL section, it is DX. Now Tom suggests that I should be sanctioned for calling CQ inside the window...even though I am really looking for EU and Asia. I must not answer NA stations calling because that is Intercontinental but a PJ of a P4 a few hundred miles south of me can do so without impunity. Just to be clear, I certainly did not suggest a sanction against any specific person, especially you Herb. 1.) I think there should be a DX Window of some sort so stations located inland have some improved shot at hearing DX away from strong local signals. I do not think the idea to completely eliminate the window was, overall, a good idea. I think it was done primarily from the view or perspective of people on the east coast with large stations, and without due consideration of how eliminating a window impacts everyone else. 2.) I also think, if something is in the rules or suggestions of a contest, people should follow them or suffer a penalty of some type. This is true no matter who they are. 3.) There isn't any competition in any area can be all things to all people, nor can it be completely fair to everyone everywhere. That doesn't mean it is a conspiracy. This is just my opinion. 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Shunt fed towers and common mode chokes
My 160 meter shunt fed tower project is essentially done. However, I have an issue with the 80 meter antennas hung off that tower. In a nutshell, the current baluns (ferrite beads) feeding these antennas don't have enough common mode impedance on 160 meters. They heat up, and the SWR of the shunt fed tower changes as they heat up. I'm assuming the 80 meter antennas are near the tower top, where 160 meter voltage is high. If I was doing what you are doing, I'd use an entirely different concept and solution than the standard balun concept. What you probably want is a self-resonant choke on 160 that has at least modest Q, so it has a very high common mode, and to isolate the switching box out away from the tower so the switching box and dipoles are independent of the tower. After some reading, I think what I need are some RG8X toroid baluns, wound on #31 ferrite material. If they are going to replace the existing bead baluns, then they will need to be placed at the feedline/antenna junction. However, if I want to completely isolate the 160 shunt fed tower from the 80 meter feedlines, shouldn't I place the new baluns as close to the tower-mounted antenna switch as possible, and leave the bead baluns in place at the end of the feedline to choke off the 80 meter common mode energy ? I think so, except for the idea of 31 material. The isolation ideally should be at the point where the feedlines exit the tower and go to the external antennas, and it has to be a very high impedance without significant dissipative losses. You would be much better off with a high-Q material and resonating capacitance. To add more complications for adding the RG8X toroid balun, my 80 meter antennas are switchable 2 element wire beams, with each element fed with 18' of RG-8. That dimension is critical, as it provides the proper amount of capacitive reactance at the feedpoint to make the element a director. Well, that complicates things a little bit...but not much. The switch needs to be outside the tower. Like this: ant 1 or 2 = 18 ft feedline (includes balun cable length) = switch then from the switch (isolated from tower) you have: Switch = control and coax through self resonant chokes tower (grounded or bypassed to tower) and then just down to the very base of the tower (where it should be grounded again) and out to the world away from the tower. The control and coax choke can be bifilar wound affair (if you can't run control through the coax) and self resonant on 160. 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
On 12/6/2012 5:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections It seems this was the ratinale Tom but that the ARRL SS allows 160 meters and a single band entry. However there are only a few station I have ever heard calling CQ SS on TB. maybe thats not such a bad thing? Herb, KV4FZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Shunt fed towers and common mode chokes
Google G3TXQ COMMON-MODE Dave WX7 G On Dec 6, 2012 1:40 PM, Steve London n2ica...@gmail.com wrote: My 160 meter shunt fed tower project is essentially done. However, I have an issue with the 80 meter antennas hung off that tower. In a nutshell, the current baluns (ferrite beads) feeding these antennas don't have enough common mode impedance on 160 meters. They heat up, and the SWR of the shunt fed tower changes as they heat up. After some reading, I think what I need are some RG8X toroid baluns, wound on #31 ferrite material. If they are going to replace the existing bead baluns, then they will need to be placed at the feedline/antenna junction. However, if I want to completely isolate the 160 shunt fed tower from the 80 meter feedlines, shouldn't I place the new baluns as close to the tower-mounted antenna switch as possible, and leave the bead baluns in place at the end of the feedline to choke off the 80 meter common mode energy ? To add more complications for adding the RG8X toroid balun, my 80 meter antennas are switchable 2 element wire beams, with each element fed with 18' of RG-8. That dimension is critical, as it provides the proper amount of capacitive reactance at the feedpoint to make the element a director. Comments ? 73, Steve, N2IC __**_ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
On 12/6/2012 5:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: There isn't any competition in any area can be all things to all people, nor can it be completely fair to everyone everywhere. TBDC comes very close to being just that. You get credit for distances and a nice boost for not being a QRO alligator. I think that this is steadily gaining in popularity over the years as it should. Herb, KV4FZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: DX Window
Only in the past 4-5 years have I paid serious attention to 160m, and I thought that the DX Window had faded away and was no longer observed. It looks like I was wrong. I understand its purpose, and I'm perfectly willing to abide by it. Perhaps all that is needed (for many of us) is a reminder that it is indeed active, and please to respect it. I spend a lot of time on 6m in the summer, and many newbies, unaware of the DX window (50.1 - 50.125), blithely call CQ and work each other there, until its purpose is explained to them. All same 160m. (DX = off continental NA, so Herb, etc., are welcome there.) I consider myself re-educated. How about: QDW (pse respect the DX window) as a reminder? Ralph, VE7XF ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
Herb, The reason there is hardly anyone on TB during SS is that there is no incentive to be there. There are no band multipliers and you can work everyone on the other 5 bands. Keep up the good work. de Milt, N5IA -Original Message- From: Herb Schoenbohm Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 2:55 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux On 12/6/2012 5:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections It seems this was the ratinale Tom but that the ARRL SS allows 160 meters and a single band entry. However there are only a few station I have ever heard calling CQ SS on TB. maybe thats not such a bad thing? Herb, KV4FZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5940 - Release Date: 12/06/12 - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5940 - Release Date: 12/06/12 ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Shunt fed towers and common mode chokes
On 12/6/2012 12:39 PM, Steve London wrote: My 160 meter shunt fed tower project is essentially done. However, I have an issue with the 80 meter antennas hung off that tower. In a nutshell, the current baluns (ferrite beads) feeding these antennas don't have enough common mode impedance on 160 meters. They heat up, and the SWR of the shunt fed tower changes as they heat up. Right. 5K Ohms is a good rule of thumb for choking Z to prevent noise coupling from feedline to antenna, and if the antenna is reasonably close to balance, is also enough from the point of view of dissipation. A very good choke for 80 and 160 would be 16 bifilar turns of #12 on a #31 2.4-in o.d. core (that is, 32 turns total), connected as a parallel wire transmission line. Tightly spaced enameled wire will yield Zo of about 50 ohms, THHN will be closer to 100 ohms. Either presents a relatively small discontinuity (both because it's a small mismatch and because it's pretty short as a fraction of a wavelength). There's measured data for chokes like these, and for a good range of others wound with RG8X and RG8 around multiple cores on my website, along with considerable tutorial material about how they work and dissipation considerations. In short, chokes overheat because their choking Z is too low to keep common mode current low. An important element of this is the common mode voltage, which is directly related to antenna balance, and also to the common mode length of the feedline (that is, a resonant length that establishes a high common mode voltage). http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf I strongly disagree with Tom about #31 -- it is an excellent suppression material for the HF bands, especially on 160 and 80, when used properly. 73, Jim K9YC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Art A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. I think 5 KHz can hold a lot of DX , CW and 100 Hz BW can do miracles, however just one local CQ machine gun calling CQ stopping only 2.5 sec can kill the same 5 KHz in the whole state. Regards JC N4IS ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I worked several EU near my noise floor (S 0-1) with my radio set to 150 Hz (Icom 756 ProII) and an omni antenna sandwiched I between stateside Ops that were S9 or stronger. Yes, the really close in ones, less than about 400 Hz, add to the challenge, but anyone more than 500 Hz away is a non-issue. I have two stations (at a KW+) about two miles from me in opposite directions and we easily operate within a KHz or each other routinely with no issues. We do see each other on the spectrum scopes, but nothing degrading operation. Maybe we are lucky. tnx Mike / W5JR / GA On Dec 6, 2012, at 6:12 PM, N4IS n...@comcast.net wrote: Art A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. I think 5 KHz can hold a lot of DX , CW and 100 Hz BW can do miracles, however just one local CQ machine gun calling CQ stopping only 2.5 sec can kill the same 5 KHz in the whole state. Regards JC N4IS ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
What do you think 10 callers in Europe will do? And nobody will stop for as long as 2.5 sec. So only the strongest stations in Europe would benefit from a dx window. 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of N4IS Sent: Freitag, 7. Dezember 2012 00:12 To: k...@arrl.net; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX window Art A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. I think 5 KHz can hold a lot of DX , CW and 100 Hz BW can do miracles, however just one local CQ machine gun calling CQ stopping only 2.5 sec can kill the same 5 KHz in the whole state. Regards JC N4IS ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I was able to do this repeatedly with my Flex 3000. Only way was with the 100 Hz filters on max sampling, but it worked perfectly (thankfully) and I was able to hear and work KH7X and D44AC with S9+ stateside stations just 500 Hz away Mark WD4ELG ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
On 12/6/2012 1:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: It seems to me the ARRL intended it as a local **ARRL** sectional contest, not as a worldwide DX contest to encourage DX participation. It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections. That makes no sense -- DX contacts are weighted 2.5x US/VE contacts, and there are country multipliers. It's much closer to being the ARRL DX Contest for 160M. 1.) I think there should be a DX Window of some sort so stations located inland have some improved shot at hearing DX away from strong local signals. I do not think the idea to completely eliminate the window was, overall, a good idea. I think it was done primarily from the view or perspective of people on the east coast with large stations, and without due consideration of how eliminating a window impacts everyone else. I found a year old post that confirms your suspicions. See quote below. John, If it had not been for the window I could not have worked what I have on 160. I would say it had gotten me at least a dozen new ones. One year I remember giving ON4UN Zone 3 in the window. I wish you could walk in my shoes once and do a 160 contest from out here. It might enlighten you. 73 Hardy N7RT - Original Message - From: John Crovelliw...@hotmail.com To:topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 8:19 AM Subject: Topband: DX Window No Long Relevant As a courtesy, last weekend our Multi operation, as a courtesy, refrained from calling CQ in what some still consider the DX Window (1830 - 1835). BUT lets be realistic here, this is 2011, not 1961. Split operation, a necessary operating technique of the W1BB era is no longer necessary. Frequency allocations between ITU regions and individual countries have become more aligned. All world class radios have narrow filtering capability, etc. fully capable of handling the worst pileups. The need for a window has diminished to the point it has become irrelevant in today's world. Only the ARRL seems to hold onto the notion of a DX window in their 160 contest rules, but they are well known for there slowness to react to current world realities. So I vote we assume THE 160M DX WINDOW is DEAD and move on to topics which might have significantly more value to the masses. 73, John W2GD/P40W = = = = = = = My comments: In the context of 160M, Maine, VE1, VY0, and VY2 are DX if you're operating from California. VY2 is closer to Oslo, Dublin, London, Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels, and Madrid than he is to me, and the path to those cities is only 300 miles longer from Boston. Their path to EU is all water, and not over the pole. My path to them is over dirt. So if we're gonna have a DX window, how about one where west coaster with less than a superstation can call CQ with a chance to work the east coast? And while we're at it, how about 5 points/QSO for the west coast working the east coast? 73, Jim K9YC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Shunt Fed Tower
Jerry: Here are a couple of poostings I made after I built my tower and shunt-fed it back in 2002: http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00636.html . I did not install a second set of shunt wires for 80M as I said I would in these postings. Instead, I installed a half (WL)-sloper wire for 80M at 50 feet and it works just as well as my Topband shunt-feed system. But you could install a second variable cap and set of shunt wires on another tower face for 80M; others have done so. Let me know if you have any other questions. I've been saying that my shunt-feed works better than I had ever expected and it outperformed my Inv-L on the band TX and RX by 5-10 (measured) dB. 73 de Gene Smar AD3F - Original Message - From: Jerry Keller (K3BZ) k...@verizon.net To: (REFLECTOR) Topband topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 3:55 PM Subject: Topband: Shunt Fed Tower I’d like to try shunt-feeding my 60-foot freestanding tower on 160M and 80M. how can this be done? If you’ve done it successfully I’d be grateful for the specifics, or maybe a reference to the construction article you used. 73 and Happy Holidays, Jerry K3BZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
