Re: Topband: Shunt fed towers and common mode chokes
I'm with Tom on this one. This is not a noise suppression problem The placement up high on the tower means that the common mode path is nearer a voltage node than a current node and we are talking about the kind of voltage up top there that can destroy a 4000 ohm ferrite device. As the the resistance is increased, the voltage across it increases as well. I am personally well acquainted with destroying ferrite devices in this fashion. As Tom suggests, isolate the switch from the tower. On the shack side of the switch where the phasing is not an issue, you can use 23 turns of RG400 tightly wound around a T300A-2 powdered iron toroid. Place a 500-600 pF transmitting door knob from the coax shield on one side of the winding to the other. This will create a self resonant choke with max up about 1.95 to 2 MHz. Ground the shield on the shack side of the choke to the tower, and at the base. You can monkey with tuning against a given cap by adding or subtracting turns through the toroid. Pick the lowest point of resonance that is above your operating range. Wind it with an old piece of RG59 to get the number of turns worked out and then use the RG400. The RG400 is good for 7 kW, and with a 19 strand center conductor, is the only high power coax rated for tight bends in aircraft wiring harnesses. For the control cable, which doesn't have extension beyond the box, about half-way down, and at the bottom of the tower, loop as many turns as possible through one of the huge #31 clamp-ons. 73, Guy. On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Jim Brown j...@audiosystemsgroup.com wrote: 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.pdfhttp://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 ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
Slightly off subject BUT the problem with the ARRL 160m Contest from a DX point of view Is that You get 5 points for working me but I only get 2 points for working you. 2.5 times as much. That is why I do not operate in that contest anymore. I know it's all relative but it is still wrong. And why it has become an almost Completely domestic contest. 73 Clive GM3POI -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Brown Sent: 07 December 2012 00:23 To: topband@contesting.com Subject: 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 === Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2900, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20900) http://www.pctools.com/ === === Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2900, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20910) http://www.pctools.com/ === ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: zl9hr
Amazing but I have have them acknowledged in Club log for 160. Considering the extreme electrical QRM I get on Topband, this was truly hard fought to get. My DX with the farthest distance on 160. Nice! Gary KA1J ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Why don't folks ever name names? (callsigns) Are we such a PC group of humans worldwide these days that we should not risk stepping on someones' toes dare we insult them or shame them into obeying the rules ? (gasp!) In this last contest Vermont Station W1SJ (is that WB1GQR?) was on 1830.5 or 1830.75 (somewhere like that) and totally was taking out weak DX for me. There were others, but like the previous poster, I didn't keep a list. I just remember SJ as he was LOUD and had a nice call easy to remember and I fought with his QRM for hours, seemingly every time I tuned by. I just don't understand why peer pressure won't work for these people who disregard the rules. Invariably they are the older, experienced ops with big stations (who know better), not the casual 160m op who is new to the band that infiltrate the window and ruin it to some extent for the rest of us ! Mike VE9AA P.S.- I did note there was 1 real big station who was NOT (for once!) parked in the window for this contest, who sometimes is, so I'll bet peer pressure or some outside force worked on this person. P.S.S.-you'll note I did not bash, call names or anything to W1SJjust named his callsign. Keep it clean folks ! ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 3Y0IOF
Sending this again just in case. I didn't write the hilarious post below. That was from the link below. I've tried to post source twice before.. must be getting old. http://dx-world.net/2012/3y0iof-bouvet-well-not-really-but-read-on/ Bryan, WH7DX _ From: Bryan Buck [mailto:wh...@hawaii.rr.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 1:27 PM To: 'topband@contesting.com' Subject: re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 3Y0IOF HAHAHAHAHAH FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE After a lot of negotiation we are pleased to announce a multinational team of twelve is to undertake a Dxpedition to Bouvet Island from 25 March 2013 to 5 April 2013 using the callsign 3Y0IOF. We will be operating 24/7 with five stations covering all bands 160m-10m. We understand that Dxpeditions are all about you - the DX operator - therefore we are pleased to announce some exciting new innovations. We appreciate many of you feel you should not have to make any effort to work us. Accordingly, we are offering you the chance to call us on the telephone when you are ready for a QSO. That's right, we will give you a phone number and when you are ready you can ring us and we will immediately cease to work the pile up and call you on a frequency of your choice. Not only that, we will also ensure an email is sent to you directly after the QSO to confirm you are in the log. Furthermore, we are organizing a team of experts who, if you wish, will fly in and set up your rig on the required frequency, connect the antenna for you and make sure the heating or ventilation is on so it is nice and warm or cool in your shack as the case requires. Don't worry about propagation. We will make sure there is some between us as we understand that is our responsibility and it's our fault if there isn't. If that is not for you then don't worry we are just as happy to work you in a pile up. We realize that we will need to operate in accordance with your operating habits so therefore we will understand if you call over the top of another station we are trying to work, or when we are specifically calling a part of the world you do not reside in, or if you are simply calling aimlessly or while we are transmitting, or even if you call when you cannot hear us. We will do our best to work you despite all this and yes we know it's our fault if you do not make it into the log. We wish to acknowledge the value Frequency Cops bring to a Dxpedition so to recognize this we are going to specifically publicize some times when we will arrange for some operators to deliberately call us on our frequency instead of split. Frequency Cops can even register their availability with us to help us ensure these periods get maximum uptake by the Frequency Cop community. During these periods the Frequency Cops will be able to say or send up up! to their hearts content. (Note: we will make sure we tell the pile up to listen up and not down as the recent PT0S Dxpedition has taught us that Frequency Cops don't know how to send down in CW). We also don't want the tuner uppers to feel left out and like them we feel dummy loads are completely overrated. So when we are ready to transmit on a band we will give them the opportunity to tune up on our frequency before we start working the pile up. Each period will start with us sending our callsign and QDL (Quick Dummy Loaders) so they will know when to commence tuning up on us. We will allow for at least five minutes for this as we know how important it is for the tuner uppers to make sure their finals are good and ready. We acknowledge if they go bang it's our fault. Depending on demand we will every now and then send QDL while working a pile up so any tuner uppers late to the party can tune up on us as well. Unfortunately we will not have cluster access while we are on Bouvet but we know this will not stop you posting announcements and comments on the cluster about our Dxpedition. Some suggestions for you to try include saying what band you want us to QSY to or mode to operate on, the quality of our ops and the usual loud, can't hear them here, thanks for 7th band or yee hah comments. Likewise as we noted above we understand it's our fault if you cannot work us and therefore we accept in that case you will post on the cluster calling us the worst Dxpedition ever. We can't wait to be of service to you. The 3Y0IOF Team ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Shunt fed towers and common mode chokes
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. This is where we can all get into trouble. We need to carefully read, consider, and understand the particular situation or problem, and not just apply a universal rule to systems that have extremes of requirements. The result is always far from optimal results, almost always wasteful, and sometimes even deleterious. One size or method always gains popularity because it is an easy sell, no one has to think because a complex extremely wide range of problems are portrayed as simple with a simple universal answer anyone can duplicate. Everyone loves a simple ruleeven if 99% of the time it is impossible, wasteful, or wrong. This problem shows how not considering common mode voltages or impedances can get us deep into trouble. In this case the original poster has a two-dipole 80-meter antenna attached high on a tower. He needs to isolate common mode 160 meter tower antenna currents and voltages from that array. 1.) He clearly stated electrical length (and by definition that also means impedance) of the transmission lines to the switch was critical, because open circuit reactance of the line tunes the unused element as a director. 2.) Worse yet, the antenna connection or isolation point is almost certainly at a very high voltage point. Assuming this array is at 100 feet on a typical 130-foot tower, and we somehow can use universal 5000-ohm chokes, EZNEC predicts the following for each choke: Frequency = 1.8 MHz Load 1Voltage = 1582 V at 90.73 deg. Current = 0.3164 A at 90.73 deg. Impedance = 5000 + J 0 ohms Power = 500.6 watts Load 2Voltage = 1582 V at 90.73 deg. Current = 0.3164 A at 90.73 deg. Impedance = 5000 + J 0 ohms Power = 500.6 watts Total applied power = 1500 watts Total load power = 1001 watts Total load loss = 4.781 dB Get ready for some serious core heating! It isn't just this system either. Many systems will either fail to work (from heat) or seriously waste materials if we simply decide 5000 ohms fixes everything. 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Shunt fed towers and common mode chokes
On 12/07/2012 08:29 AM, Tom W8JI wrote: In this case the original poster has a two-dipole 80-meter antenna attached high on a tower. He needs to isolate common mode 160 meter tower antenna currents and voltages from that array. 1.) He clearly stated electrical length (and by definition that also means impedance) of the transmission lines to the switch was critical, because open circuit reactance of the line tunes the unused element as a director. I could go with higher Vf transmission lines, which would give me a few extra feet to play with for winding around toroids, etc. 2.) Worse yet, the antenna connection or isolation point is almost certainly at a very high voltage point. Assuming this array is at 100 feet on a typical 130-foot tower, That's pretty close. It's a 110 foot tower, with a 4 element 40 (linear loaded) on top, and a KT-36XA at 75 feet. These two antennas have their feedlines isolated from the tower, and the feed methods at the antennas are isolated from the booms, so there is no low Z common mode path, and neither balun seems to be heating. The two-dipole 80 meter array is at 105'. Isolating the switching network could be challenging. It's a large metal box containing not only relays, but several big air variable caps and inductors. Some kind of polycarbonate or other material ? 73, Steve, N2IC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
- Original Message - From: Herb Schoenbohm he...@vitelcom.net To: topband@contesting.com Subject: 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. Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 4:59 PM 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. There is a person down here always complaining about contest life being unfair, and wanting distance based multipliers in other contests. He wanted support for that idea. When I objectively looked into the notion distance based scoring would level or nearly level the playing field, it was not even close to true. Stations from Minnesota or the Dakotas, for example, are closer to Europe than I am, yet I have a much easier time working them. This is because of path attenuation and unreliability of paths closer to the magnetic poles. Also, signals suffer exaggerated attenuation with each additional hop. Signal attenuation is not linear with distance, because of the way the signal propagates. The end result of distance based scoring or score by distance, power, and number of QSO's is certainly very different, but it is far from level. It simply tilts things in a different way. For example, a very large transmitting antenna low-power station in a one-hop location to very large numbers of stations can totally dominate the contest, while a person with modest transmitting antennas at a location requiring multi-hop or refractive or skirting paths through high attenuation areas will suffer. It winds up effectively being a northern polar path or southern polar path, and unpopulated one-hop radial area penalty. People running low power in the middle of populated areas have a distinct advantage, because signal levels do not decrease linearly with increased distance and because not all paths are equal. Not only that, large transmitting antennas in populated areas will still win. I understand the frustration Herb, but the ARRL obviously never intended the ARRL 160 to be anything like a WW DX contest. It is very different from CQ WW contests, and more along SS and other USA centered contests. That's why large stations from the Midwest do so well, and why DX activity is generally low. 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
There is a person down here always complaining about contest life being unfair, and wanting distance based multipliers in other contests. He wanted support for that idea. [...] The end result of distance based scoring or score by distance, power, and number of QSO's is certainly very different, but it is far from level. It simply tilts things in a different way. [...] It winds up effectively being a northern polar path or southern polar path, and unpopulated one-hop radial area penalty. The concept of a completely level playing field contest is an interesting one. There were several contests in the 1960's that attempted to level the playing field for all participants worldwide. These contests very often ended up with tables of multipliers based on CQ zones that attempted to give bonus points/mults for the most difficult contacts, e.g. over the pole. Check out for example page 57 of QST September 1967 issue for a very large table of QSO scoring based on CQ zone matrix of correspondents. What should be a lesson, is that these contests invariably ended up with bigger lookup tables for correcting QSO's for difficulty, than they had entrants It will be a stretch for anyone to remember the names of these contests although old issues of QST are a start. That's how successful the universal correction was. This was before gridsquares of course. I think the TBDC hits a nice middle ground and best of all nobody has to compute their own score. In fact it is by definition impossible to compute your own score (not knowing whether the other guy is HP, LP, or QRP.) Even with these factors there are still some locations and styles and stations that have advantages over others. I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would win there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Tim N3QE ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Shunt fed towers and common mode chokes
That's pretty close. It's a 110 foot tower, with a 4 element 40 (linear loaded) on top, and a KT-36XA at 75 feet. These two antennas have their feedlines isolated from the tower, and the feed methods at the antennas are isolated from the booms, so there is no low Z common mode path, and neither balun seems to be heating. The two-dipole 80 meter array is at 105'. Isolating the switching network could be challenging. It's a large metal box containing not only relays, but several big air variable caps and inductors. Some kind of polycarbonate or other material ? I've had similar problems when I installed 160 dipoles on 160 shunt fed towers, and on my insulated 300 foot tower. Since many people probably do multiple duty with towers, this is a useful problem to look at. If it were my problem, and I could not run control voltages through the coax, I would use an AIR core bifilar choke with one winding being the coax and the other being the control. I would stay away form cores entirely, because you need a bifilar winding and the system needs to be reliable and immune to lightning. It doesn't matter that the control and coaxial feed cables are dissimilar conductors, they are still in bifilar mode so CM voltages are equalized. Since the choke is on the feedline side, and not the tuning side, you can use any type and length of coaxial line that suits your power needs, like RG400 cable (if you shield it from UV light) and any type of reasonable size control line (although a shielded line with the shield parallel connected to the coax shield would certainly be best). I would absolutely ground the shield to the tower. I would make a support of fiberglass rod for the box, and add the isolation choke between the box and the tower. If you wanted to save a few turns, the coax (box) to tower could have intentional resonating capacitance. It only needs be across the coax shield, because mutual coupling will take care of the control line conductors. That would reduce bandwidth, but even fairly high values of C (50 pF or more) would still be fairly wide bandwidth on 160. You probably actually want the choke to be capacitive in reactance, placing resonance below 160 meters. That would reduce choke (actually it is functioning as a trap) heating. Worse case heating is when resonance is above 160. Even with 50,000 ohms of resistance, you are going to have somewhere around 10% of applied power as heat. I'd be very careful about the 80M baluns you use, because the one size fits all rule won't work well when the system is excited on 160. I'd use a higher Q more reactive type of balun on 80 in this case. I don't see many other solutions to your problem, other than high-Q resonant 160 meter chokes in each dipole feeder. While that is possible, it is a more complex engineering problem and likely would restrict bandwidth. The mechanical issue of suitably isolating the box from the tower is easier than the electrical issues caused by mounting it to the tower. Another entirely different concept (that works well with simple dipoles) would be an isolation transformer for the coax, but it will not solve control line issues. If your system used an isolation (primary-secondary) transformer for RF, you would still be stuck with control wire issues for a floating box (each conductor would require something like an amplifier's RF plate choke) and the open circuit impedance of the transformer if the box. Also, open circuit impedance of the transformer is critical in your particular application. While I'm sure a tower mounted box could be used, the electrical design is far more complex and more compromised. 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
Here's a partial post I emailed to the Arizona Outlaws Contest Club reflector following the 2011 ARRL 160: On the positive side the DX window from 1830-1835 was mostly well observed by W/VE and provided a haven for Caribbean, SA and EU stns to establish runs of their own altho no copy on the Euros here. The window is a valuable asset for encouraging DX participation in what is for the most part a 160m Sweepstakes. The ARRL could change should to shall in Rule 6 thereby making compliance mandatory. With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. I didn't participate in this year's ARRL 160 as I always enter contests SO Assisted and have had enough of being lumped in with multi-op in the results which is ridiculous IMHO. I'll be a non-participant in future ARRL contests with this policy but will continue to enjoy CQ and JA sponsored contests. I just hope to live long enough to see the ARRL establish a separate SO(A) category or merge SO(A) and SO(U). My 2 cents. 73/Pres, N6SS GET FREE SMILEYS FOR YOUR IM EMAIL - Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/smileys Works with AIM®, MSN® Messenger, Yahoo!® Messenger, ICQ®, Google Talk™ and most webmails ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would win there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Truer words were never spoken. That's the way it works in all sports, except radio sports. :-) ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other than the key line. 73 Charlie, N0TT ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
Thanks Tim...Very well said ! This expresses my feelings about TB radio contesting. The challenges of competition can be stimulating and enjoyable. But when beating the oponent takes precedence in the mind over performing as well as possible, enjoyment tends to disappear. Competition is enjoyable only when it is a means to perfect one's skills: when it becomes an end in itself, it ceases to be fun. Mihaly_Csikszentmihalyi How else could a fairly sane QRPer look at life on Top Band ? And my Swish Swish noise problem seems to appear and vanish in sync with my neighbor's outside Christmas lights even though they don't appear to blink on and off. Merry Christmas Everybody ! jim / W1FMR --- On Fri, 12/7/12, Shoppa, Tim tsho...@wmata.com wrote: From: Shoppa, Tim tsho...@wmata.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux To: Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com, he...@vitelcom.net he...@vitelcom.net, topband@contesting.com topband@contesting.com Date: Friday, December 7, 2012, 12:03 PM There is a person down here always complaining about contest life being unfair, and wanting distance based multipliers in other contests. He wanted support for that idea. [...] The end result of distance based scoring or score by distance, power, and number of QSO's is certainly very different, but it is far from level. It simply tilts things in a different way. [...] It winds up effectively being a northern polar path or southern polar path, and unpopulated one-hop radial area penalty. The concept of a completely level playing field contest is an interesting one. There were several contests in the 1960's that attempted to level the playing field for all participants worldwide. These contests very often ended up with tables of multipliers based on CQ zones that attempted to give bonus points/mults for the most difficult contacts, e.g. over the pole. Check out for example page 57 of QST September 1967 issue for a very large table of QSO scoring based on CQ zone matrix of correspondents. What should be a lesson, is that these contests invariably ended up with bigger lookup tables for correcting QSO's for difficulty, than they had entrants It will be a stretch for anyone to remember the names of these contests although old issues of QST are a start. That's how successful the universal correction was. This was before gridsquares of course. I think the TBDC hits a nice middle ground and best of all nobody has to compute their own score. In fact it is by definition impossible to compute your own score (not knowing whether the other guy is HP, LP, or QRP.) Even with these factors there are still some locations and styles and stations that have advantages over others. I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would win there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Tim N3QE ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
interesting. having spend much of my time in competitive swimming and running, the most i ever won was asurvivor tee shirt; and what i disserve winning this last ARRL160 a survivor tee shirt would be most appropriate mike w7dra On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:24:13 -0500 Tom W8JI w...@w8ji.com writes: I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would win there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Truer words were never spoken. That's the way it works in all sports, except radio sports. :-) ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it. http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2 ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 17:48 +, Missouri Guy wrote: With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other than the key line. 73 Charlie, N0TT Hah! That key line is one more connection than my radio has to a computer. My computer is actually turned on while am on the air more than it was even last year. Sometimes I'm actually *using* the computer. A couple of years ago I updated my station to use just one mechanical switch that I throw to go from transmit to receive or back again. The switch and the morse key are arranged so I can T/R with my left hand and immediately start sending CW OR grab the pencil and write. Either direction takes a fraction of a second. Before that I used a T/R system published by R. Goldberg that involved a chicken running back and forth pecking appropriate buttons while plugging and unplugging patch cables. I had to install the present system after a fine chicken dinner one day. I know of some hams who do NOT even have a computer. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
i am authorized to comment on this since i have (and a photo of my shack wall can be produced if requested) a real honest sent by US postage N0TT QSL card... after i get to the back of the yard i have to walk through the woods to get to the ham shack. now why would anyone have his computer connected to his key line? keys use the same type plugs as guitars and head phones don't they? mine does. mike w7dra On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:20:55 -0500 Bill Cromwell wrcromw...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 17:48 +, Missouri Guy wrote: With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other than the key line. 73 Charlie, N0TT Hah! That key line is one more connection than my radio has to a computer. My computer is actually turned on while am on the air more than it was even last year. Sometimes I'm actually *using* the computer. A couple of years ago I updated my station to use just one mechanical switch that I throw to go from transmit to receive or back again. The switch and the morse key are arranged so I can T/R with my left hand and immediately start sending CW OR grab the pencil and write. Either direction takes a fraction of a second. Before that I used a T/R system published by R. Goldberg that involved a chicken running back and forth pecking appropriate buttons while plugging and unplugging patch cables. I had to install the present system after a fine chicken dinner one day. I know of some hams who do NOT even have a computer. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com Woman is 57 But Looks 27 Mom publishes simple facelift trick that angered doctors... http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50c263aed65ce63ae0aadst01vuc ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 13:45 -0800, mike l dormann wrote: i am authorized to comment on this since i have (and a photo of my shack wall can be produced if requested) a real honest sent by US postage N0TT QSL card... after i get to the back of the yard i have to walk through the woods to get to the ham shack. now why would anyone have his computer connected to his key line? keys use the same type plugs as guitars and head phones don't they? mine does. mike w7dra Hi Mike, If we use a logging program it is capable of throwing the T/R switch and then sending Morse. You have to wire stuff up so the puny little computer port can handle your grid-block and things like that but it's not too difficult. The big dogs who do the runs use it to help with fatigue from sending CQ TEST over and over and over and over again. I dunno what they do if we ask them for a fill. I suppose they have to actually type something. I think you do the search and pounce like I do instead of the hunt and peck like they do. I'm getting old now but I can still handle the keying for QSOs. I am getting ready to use the LOTW so I am using the computer to do logging now. I probably don't need it sending sterile CW for me at the same time. BTW...I'm building a contest grade receiving system for 160 through 40 meters using a rack of ARC-5 receivers wink. I was going to use a RAL for that like you do but so far - no RAL. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
I learned long ago that after winning all bands single and multi and single band phone and CW with a world record on CQ WW (except 40 phone) that these records would all disappear in the following years as they all did. Because of the geographic point advantage to stations 300 miles south of me could easily get a higher score with less Q's and less multipliers.So I have come up with self competition like trying to work WAS on 160 in 10 hours and now I have done that in under 4 hours on 160. Or trying to do DXCC on 160 in one weekend. I think Jeff, VY2ZM does this with ease now. So these little self assigned goals are really exciting especially when you can make your quota. But getting in the top ten with a standard home station is getting more and more difficult with all the super stations all over the world. Contesting is like a war to some but those who take it too seriously I offer this memorable line by General Patton as portrayed by George C. Scott in the movie. For over a thousand years, Roman conquerors returning from the wars enjoyed the honor of a triumph - a tumultuous parade. In the procession came trumpeters and musicians and strange animals from the conquered territories, together with carts laden with treasure and captured armaments. The conqueror rode in a triumphal chariot, the dazed prisoners walking in chains before him. Sometimes his children, robed in white, stood with him in the chariot, or rode the trace horses. A slave stood behind the conqueror, holding a golden crown, and whispering in his ear a warning: that all glory is fleeting. Such is contesting and all glory is fleeting. Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ On 12/7/2012 1:24 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would win there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Truer words were never spoken. That's the way it works in all sports, except radio sports. :-) ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: FCC PROPOSES TO RESTORE 1900-2000 KHZ TO PRIMARY STATUS
Here's an example of the kind of opposition we may be up against, who may file comments in opposition to the NPRM, since Lindgren Pittman Inc. likely won't want to recall and re-program units they have already sold. This makes it all the more imperative that the amateur community come up with some good well thought out responses to the FCC. What I wonder is why they didn't program the units sold in the US to operate in 1705-1800 in the first place, since that segment appears to be completely vacant, rather than risk being overpowered by hams who might not even hear them, in a shared band. http://www.blueoceantackle.com/longline_reels_and_equipment.htm But this is encouraging: http://www.ominous-valve.com/hyperfix.html Another comment has come in supporting hams in the NPRM. Notice that this one is simple and to the point, no gobbledygook legalese. He should have included his name and address instead of just a call sign, though. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022074440 I urge everyone to formulate comments and send them to the FCC, even if you work CW DX and contests at the low end of the band only. If radiolocation interests ever were to start placing beacons in the 1900-2000 segment again, much of the displaced amateur phone activity would QSY below 1900, increasing congestion and would put more pressure on the informal CW portion of the band, exacerbating conflicts between wide and narrow band modes. Don k4kyv ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
