Re: Topband: FO8AJ - TX5K
Mike: re TX5K I "saw" much of that behavior on 40 as well. In fact, 40 was the only HF band that I operate on that I did NOT work them on and felt like the number(s) of stations and the utterly rude behavior contributed to that "non band happening"! I put out a decent signal on 40 so was surprised. Totally disgusting is the only way to describe the behavior of some of those 40 meter operators! Oh well, it's a hobby so you get what you get, I guess - or sumpin' like that. The Top Band crowd was, as usual, totally on the other of the spectrum - congenial, allowing the operator to run the show...no keying down on top of themsigh..wish all bands were like that. 72, Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV > To: w7...@juno.com > Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 09:47:57 -0800 > From: w7...@juno.com > CC: topband@contesting.com; tetr...@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: Topband: FO8AJ - TX5K > > not being any sort of DX hunter although i went down and turned on the > worm warmer on 160 and gave TX5K one call and worked him, promptly turned > off everything and went back to the house. > > but on 40 meters sitting in front of a super pro with a globe chief 90 > and a dipole trying to work TX5K was a different story. i can hear quite > a bit of the band without having to turn the dial and the number of W > hams transmitting on or very close his frequency and the tendency of the > guys that actually were "up" to slide "down" and crowd him was amazing,. > and W hams still calling him when he is saying "up EU" was quite an eye > opener for someone who does not do is sort of thing very often. > > mike w7dra > > Woman is 57 But Looks 27 > 2013's No. 1 Facelift. Mom is Wrinkle Free Thanks to Doctor's Secret! > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/513a2489ae8824885f05st04vuc > _ > Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Comparison testing
And also the axiom that if your antenna didnt come down in the winter it wasn't big enough. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 7, 2013, at 10:15 AM, bruce whitney wrote: > Tom, > It is a very well known fact that an antenna erected hastily in harsh > conditions always outperforms one erected leisurely -nice warm day, no wind, > lots of planning and help, etc.. Every Ham I know - is well aware of this. I > can cite example after example - including temporary Field Day antennas > erected in rainy windstorms that outperformed much larger home station > arrays. > > In fact, to take advantage of this - I have been waiting and watching the > weather reports for the worst, blinding snow storm of the season - to be > absolutely sure that my next antenna project will outperform everything else > I have at present. > > Then, you come along and inject all this thinking about objective reasoning, > science and engineering into the mix to challenge many of the popular truths > - it's just demoralizing... Don't be surprised if there are people that will > feel violated or compromised in some way and will lash back. > 73, Bruce W8RA > > > > > > --- On Wed, 3/6/13, Tom W8JI wrote: > > > From: Tom W8JI > Subject: Topband: Comparison testing > To: topband@contesting.com > Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013, 1:25 PM > > > This reminds me of an experience I had with a new antenna. After working > several days installing a new antenna, I attached it to an a/b switch to > compare it with my old antenna. I was delighted, the new antenna was always > better !!! Then to my dismay I saw I had the switch reversed ... oh boy... I > changed the feeds, and continued the test. Guess what.. the new antenna was > still always better. > Lesson learned human nature and switching antennas in face of QSB.>>> > > There is more truth to that than most of us realize. > > I put up a G5RV about 100 feet in the air, and I used a pretty good feedline. > Doing tests against a dipole on 75 meters, the antenna I called a "G5RV" > would almost always get a worse report than the antenna I called a "dipole", > even during the times when I called the antennas by the opposite names of > what they really were. > > When I would do a test using "antenna 1" or "antenna 2", they were almost > even. > > The most extraordinary thing was with a good friend who just absolutely hated > G5RV antennas. He would say "your audio sounds worse on the "G5RV" " . This > was true even when I called the dipole a G5RV, or didn't change antennas at > all and just said I was changing. > > I really think this is why I installed a 300-foot tower just so I could have > a high dipole. I "distinctly remembered' how well a 300-foot high dipole I > had worked, and I wanted another one. After I installed the dipole here and > compared it to a vertical and other antennas for a year or two, I finally > remembered how well my old 1/4 wave vertical worked. :) > > This was eye opening to me. > > 73 Tom > _ > Topband Reflector > _ > Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Topband: Re TX5K op
They seemed to hear well on 160 and were very loud right before sunrise yesterday. Unfortunately the op copied me as"NOOK" and kept sending "b4" as I tried to correct my call. Guess N0OK was already in the log. Sun came up and they were gone. N0JK _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: ALUMINUM
Bob, I had the same experience. I was using bare 75 ohm TV hardline as a matching section on my 160 Delta loop and it was partially buried. But after 2 years, the outer jacket was almost gone when I had to dig it up. My soil is just regular sandy dirt. So my advice to anyone that wants to bury aluminum cable or wire is make sure it is insulated or jacketed. 73 Hardy N7RT Phoenix - Original Message - From: "Bob Kirkeby" To: "Mike Greenway" Cc: "TOPBAND" Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 10:24 AM Subject: Re: Topband: ALUMINUM I have used solid #10 aluminum as radials buried 6" in alkaline soil. It became badly corroded in 2 years; nearly disintegrated in spots. Not saying it wouldn't be fine in other soils. 73 Bob WBØDSF On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Mike Greenway wrote: From some feedback on the aluminum coated steel, I am thinking about trying some regular aluminum, 14 gauge. Anyone got a downside to this? Price, weight, conductivity are good and little if any stretch. I will use aluminum screws and nuts on the end terminations with No Ox. 73 Mike K4PI _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: FO8AJ - TX5K
not being any sort of DX hunter although i went down and turned on the worm warmer on 160 and gave TX5K one call and worked him, promptly turned off everything and went back to the house. but on 40 meters sitting in front of a super pro with a globe chief 90 and a dipole trying to work TX5K was a different story. i can hear quite a bit of the band without having to turn the dial and the number of W hams transmitting on or very close his frequency and the tendency of the guys that actually were "up" to slide "down" and crowd him was amazing,. and W hams still calling him when he is saying "up EU" was quite an eye opener for someone who does not do is sort of thing very often. mike w7dra Woman is 57 But Looks 27 2013's No. 1 Facelift. Mom is Wrinkle Free Thanks to Doctor's Secret! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/513a2489ae8824885f05st04vuc _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: ALUMINUM
For what it's worth, for T32C, because our container never arrived, we bought lots of alumin(i)um wire in KH6 for radials. In the saltwater atmosphere close to the beach at T32, they lasted less than a week before disintegrating! The second party to arrive brought copper wire, which was fine. Don G3XTT On 7 March 2013 17:24, Bob Kirkeby wrote: > I have used solid #10 aluminum as radials buried 6" in alkaline soil. It > became badly corroded in 2 years; nearly disintegrated in spots. Not saying > it wouldn't be fine in other soils. > 73 > Bob > WBØDSF > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Mike Greenway wrote: > > > From some feedback on the aluminum coated steel, I am thinking about > > trying some regular aluminum, 14 gauge. Anyone got a downside to this? > > Price, weight, conductivity are good and little if any stretch. I will > > use aluminum screws and nuts on the end terminations with No Ox. 73 Mike > > K4PI > > _ > > Topband Reflector > > > _ > Topband Reflector > _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: tx5k ops
I have listened to the TX5K operation for hours and hours. Overall, they have had the best operators and operating practices I've seen in a very long time. . .maybe ever. They stick with the call until they get it. They do a good job of staying in sync with the station they are working and completing the qso with confidence. When you're done you know you've worked them. They do a remarkable job controlling unruly European mobs that call incessantly and pay no attention whatsoever to instructions from the operator. They've been friendly and courteous. They know what bands to be on at which time of day. My only complaint is that some of the SSB audio has been "pinched" to the point that it can be just a bit difficult to copy under certain circumstances. But a minor point for sure. I'm sure with over 100,000 QSOs in the log there are exceptions to the above. But overall, the operators have been nothing short of outstanding IMHO. 73. . . Dave W0FLS Some of the TX5K operators are indeed the best, especially on 160 being able to dig out so many Europeans in the past nights and even 4Z1 last night. Yet there are a few operators that defy logic like on 75 meters this morning who showed up on 3.785 at 11:00Z where I was waiting for him with excited anticipation of finally being able to add Clipperton on 75 SSB. TX5K was 20 over and I immediately got a reply "KV4FZ are you a one?" Then after a short lecture the operator proceeded by numbers starting with "1". Unfortunately by the time the operator got to number group "four" he had dropped into the noise and was impossible to work him. Do I have a legitimate beef? I sure think so. 73, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ _ Topband Reflector
Topband: gentlemen's band
The TX5K SSB operation last night on 160 was a joy to listen to everyone stood by for the station being called and paid attention to the DX operator's instructions quite a contrast to some of the higher bands _ Topband Reflector
Topband: One comment belatedly filed in opposition to the proposed 1900-2000 kHz changes
Looks like the first, and so far only, comment has come in (they missed the formal comment deadline), opposing the proposed 1900-2000 kHz changes. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6017166561 The following was submitted as a reply comment to the above, to refute the claims. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6017166592 _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Elevated Radials
I have hesitated to jump in here to relate my own personal experience since it flies in the face of accepted theory. Further, I have no objective measurements to support my observations. The only thing I can offer is my own observations based on 52 years of operating. Pete's last sentence," if you have good ground conductivity, a relatively sparse radial field can work better than a really extensive radial field on lousy ground" is what prompted me to stick my head on the block.At one time I had as many as 30 full size radials attached to my 160 meter shunted tower but over the years attrition eg.,mowers, animals and nature have reduced this to a motley mess of 2 or 3 radials and various pieces of copper wire strewn randomly around the area under the tower. My results have been far better than I would ever expect based on physics but the fact remains on a comparative basis it gets out very well. If it didn't do that well I would probably get off my butt and lay some radia ls but don't see the need right now. My reason for mentioning this to encourage others that may not have the possibility of a having a good theoretical radial field to jump in and give it a shot. You may be surprised. 73,Howard..K2HK > Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 07:11:01 -0500 > From: n...@contesting.com > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Elevated Radials > > The other rule that seems to apply, based on a number of pretty serious > articles, including K3LC's NCJ series in the mid-2000s,is "they that > has, gets." By which I mean, if you have good ground conductivity, a > relatively sparse radial field can work better than a really extensive > radial field on lousy ground. > > 73, Pete N4ZR _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: ALUMINUM
I have used solid #10 aluminum as radials buried 6" in alkaline soil. It became badly corroded in 2 years; nearly disintegrated in spots. Not saying it wouldn't be fine in other soils. 73 Bob WBØDSF On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Mike Greenway wrote: > From some feedback on the aluminum coated steel, I am thinking about > trying some regular aluminum, 14 gauge. Anyone got a downside to this? > Price, weight, conductivity are good and little if any stretch. I will > use aluminum screws and nuts on the end terminations with No Ox. 73 Mike > K4PI > _ > Topband Reflector > _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Comparison testing
I "distinctly remembered' how well a 300-foot high dipole I had worked, Very evocative quotation marks. Reminds me that the area of the brain that deals with memory also deals with creativity (imagination), and that one definition of imagination is "remembering something that didn't happen."And the more often we "remember", the more intensively we believe. Bob VE7BS _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Elevated Radials EPILOGUE
ON4UN's series of books have always had way too many individual assumptions and we all know what happens then. Those books offer a place to start and then apply your own unique soil and local conditions and change as needed. Carl KM1H - Original Message - From: "Buck wh7dx" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 3:42 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Elevated Radials EPILOGUE There is some good stuff in ON4UN Low Band Book - Chapter 9-10 on Elevated Radials. He suggests that an elevated system would be even better above ground versus on the ground in poor conditions. References 0.1 wave height or less. For 160m that could be 50 feet down. In Section 2.2.7 K3LC says that there is no point in raising radials any higher than 6 meters on 160 or 3 meters on 80 meters. Such a height would be between 0.2db of what can be achieved with 64 buried radials... N7CL says they need to be higher The perfect on ground system might be 50-100 1/4 wave ground radials... In 2.1.2 he warns of trusting modeling because of outside factors. 9-12 Figure 9-18 (modeling) regarding 160m gain using 1/4 wave is interesting over average ground. If you wanted max. it suggests using 120 - 80meter radials. But the difference between 120 (1.5 dbi gain) and going with 32 (1.0 dbi gain) would make one wonder if it was really worth it for another 1-2 miles of wire.. work? 0.5 dbi gain? The Conclusion in 9-14 is interesting.. basically saying.. "Take the example of an 80-meter vertical over average ground: going from a lousy eight 20-meter long radials to 120 radials would only buy you 1.4db of gain, which is less than what I think it is in reality. In very good ground that difference wold be only 0.7 db!" 2.1.3.2 - "From these almost 70-year old studies, we can conclude that 60 quarter-wave long radials is a cost effective optimal solution for amateur purposes. K3NA's work in 2.3.1.3 talks about using 1/16 wave radials.. not going beyond 48.. but that doesn't match up with N6BV's work several years prior. In 2.2 Elevated Radial and beyond it's gets really interesting and less conclusive? The Conclusion States - "If you want to play it extra safe, and if you have the tower height, get the radials up as high as possible and add a few more. Use a ground screen if you have it. "It all is very logical. Get away from the lossy ground or hide the lossy ground with a dense screen using many radials. No free lunch!". This was one book and it goes on. All of this sounds like a great episode for Ham Radio Myth Busters... 73, Bryan WH7DX [CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE] Information transmitted by this email is proprietary to Mr. & Mrs. B and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed, or where ever the hell it ends up, and will almost certainly contain information that will offend a large portion of the population, which isn't our concern. If you are not the intended lucky recipient, or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without the proper authority of the Wizard of Email or Al Gore, you are notified that any thought, use, or consumption of this email is entirely your choice. In such case, Bon AppetitNote: A $.02 Internet Tax was charged for receiving this email and all funds were given to some family somewhere in America or the U.N Have a nice day. _ Topband Reflector - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2641/5652 - Release Date: 03/06/13 _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: tx5k ops
Some of the TX5K operators are indeed the best, especially on 160 being able to dig out so many Europeans in the past nights and even 4Z1 last night. Yet there are a few operators that defy logic like on 75 meters this morning who showed up on 3.785 at 11:00Z where I was waiting for him with excited anticipation of finally being able to add Clipperton on 75 SSB. TX5K was 20 over and I immediately got a reply "KV4FZ are you a one?" Then after a short lecture the operator proceeded by numbers starting with "1". Unfortunately by the time the operator got to number group "four" he had dropped into the noise and was impossible to work him. Do I have a legitimate beef? I sure think so. Observation: A good DX-pedition with experienced operators never goes by the numbers! My point here is that the best DX-pedition could have operators that are not knowledgeable and do not realize that propagation does not go by numbers. In so many cases with Pacific island rare operations the also may rely on the wrong information like using the gray line software that shows the opening possibilities to the East Coast as a time to move from 80 to 160 meters. There are some very active DX-ers in the Eastern Caribbean at 64 degrees West longitude that end up in total daylight when that change is made. St. Croix at point Udall near my house is the furthest eastern point of the U.S. North America...the sun will not reach the East Coast U.S. for nearly and hour. So in short there are good reasons for taking along seasoned TB and Low band operators on these Macro-Dx-peditions who know at what time the paths exist. Their skills and abilities are renowned and remembered for years after the QSL card is put in a drawer. These are never ops who feel required to ever use some sort of "by the numbers"' scheme. Such a process seems always to be counter productive as the numbers roll call runs right through a nice path opening where you are totally precluded from even having a chance to get in the log Chances to work someone on the low bands at time have openings measured in minutes and seconds to some parts of the world. No I am not whining about this operation as had another op been behind the mic on 75 SSB he might have realized that by the time I get down to the "number four" group the Virgin islands will be in full day light and will not have a chance. Some experienced ops know and sense this and also know that a "1" could be in Alaska and a "5" could be in Rhode Island. In the case this morning the operator when finished with the "5":group just jumped to "8" leaving 6's and 7's, who might been waiting for over an hour, to sit on their hands. Number groups make no sense at all and defy logic and real time propagation. Numbers have nothing to do with either location or propagation. My question does my friend Allan 8P6AH/W4 get three bites from the apple or should I sign KP2/KV4FZ to get double the time at it? Again my pont is that this rolling the numbers game really irks me and I hope other might agree. In short a numbers routine is a horrible way to waste an opening and not a sign of a season operator who can handle a pile up properly. 73, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ On Mar 6, 2013, at 6:58 PM, N7DF wrote: Those guys are great I just worked them on 160 with only 1 watt output! Now I am going to try with 100 milliwatts _ Topband Reflector _ _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Comparison testing
Tom, It is a very well known fact that an antenna erected hastily in harsh conditions always outperforms one erected leisurely -nice warm day, no wind, lots of planning and help, etc.. Every Ham I know - is well aware of this. I can cite example after example - including temporary Field Day antennas erected in rainy windstorms that outperformed much larger home station arrays. In fact, to take advantage of this - I have been waiting and watching the weather reports for the worst, blinding snow storm of the season - to be absolutely sure that my next antenna project will outperform everything else I have at present. Then, you come along and inject all this thinking about objective reasoning, science and engineering into the mix to challenge many of the popular truths - it's just demoralizing... Don't be surprised if there are people that will feel violated or compromised in some way and will lash back. 73, Bruce W8RA --- On Wed, 3/6/13, Tom W8JI wrote: From: Tom W8JI Subject: Topband: Comparison testing To: topband@contesting.com Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013, 1:25 PM This reminds me of an experience I had with a new antenna. After working several days installing a new antenna, I attached it to an a/b switch to compare it with my old antenna. I was delighted, the new antenna was always better !!! Then to my dismay I saw I had the switch reversed ... oh boy... I changed the feeds, and continued the test. Guess what.. the new antenna was still always better. Lesson learned human nature and switching antennas in face of QSB.>>> There is more truth to that than most of us realize. I put up a G5RV about 100 feet in the air, and I used a pretty good feedline. Doing tests against a dipole on 75 meters, the antenna I called a "G5RV" would almost always get a worse report than the antenna I called a "dipole", even during the times when I called the antennas by the opposite names of what they really were. When I would do a test using "antenna 1" or "antenna 2", they were almost even. The most extraordinary thing was with a good friend who just absolutely hated G5RV antennas. He would say "your audio sounds worse on the "G5RV" " . This was true even when I called the dipole a G5RV, or didn't change antennas at all and just said I was changing. I really think this is why I installed a 300-foot tower just so I could have a high dipole. I "distinctly remembered' how well a 300-foot high dipole I had worked, and I wanted another one. After I installed the dipole here and compared it to a vertical and other antennas for a year or two, I finally remembered how well my old 1/4 wave vertical worked. :) This was eye opening to me. 73 Tom _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
