Re: Topband: Topband Inv-L Joy
Hi Gary, Try getting your weight over the limb with a good fishing rod reel combination. I use a Zebco-brand spin-cast reel here myself, the longest pole I can find... To help find the landing spot of your weight in the underbrush, get yourself a buzzer tape it to a 9-volt battery. I did that here with an old seat belt warning buzzer pulled from a Chevy in the junk yard: just before I cast this weight (I tape the buzzer battery together), I connect the buzzer, and can easily find it in any thicket by simply following the sound of the buzz... A sorta red-neck homing device, for sure, but it works for me saves me a TON of time looking for the end of the line... ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Gary Smith g...@ka1j.com wrote: Had a more difficult time getting the antenna up there this time. The first spud snapped away from the fishing line in the dense thicket I was unable to find where it landed. Had to make another the mosquitos were so thick they posted a LUAU sign on my forehead. Till I get something better I retrieved my WD-1A military field phone wire that was left out in the marsh as my old beverage wire. and after a comedy of errors I finally got the antenna up. I was earlier getting a SWR of 1.1 on 160 before and now am getting 1.1 on 1.74365 MHZ 1.74365mhz R=51 X= 6,7,8 swr 1.1 At the desired frequency to match the antenna I've aimed for 1.8MHZ here's the information I was able to get at my desired frequency: 1.8025 mhZ Coax loss 6.3db C=4193 XC=21 L=1.970 X1=21 r=41 x=21 swr 1.6 So this is what the antenna is giving me at this moment. I need to get back down and add the broken wire to the radial bed and I should also trim some length to bring my values to 1.1 at 1.025MHz. Given the info above from the MFJ 259B any idea how much I might nibble off and more, is there anything in this info that tells me I should look to do anything differently? Hopefully the coax loss will be mitigated by a friend bringing me 350' of hardline. Can't wait! Thanks, Gary KA1J _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Topband Inv-L Joy
I myself, tune my 160 antenna with a simple L-matching network at the base. I used EZNEC to model the antenna, and an online L-network calculator, and it was spot-on. I was very impressed. Since you can measure the antenna right at the base with your antenna analyzer, you can do even better. Your match is almost perfect already, it should only take a moderate matching network. You must have a really long coax run if you are getting so much loss with such a close match already. For DX'ing, a better target frequency is probably 1820kc rather than 1802kc, but with a moderate matching network you'll get low SWR for many 10's of kHz around either side of the center freq. Online L-network calculator I used: http://home.sandiego.edu/~ekim/e194rfs01/jwmatcher/matcher2.html Tim N3QE -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary Smith Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:22 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Inv-L Joy Had a more difficult time getting the antenna up there this time. The first spud snapped away from the fishing line in the dense thicket I was unable to find where it landed. Had to make another the mosquitos were so thick they posted a LUAU sign on my forehead. Till I get something better I retrieved my WD-1A military field phone wire that was left out in the marsh as my old beverage wire. and after a comedy of errors I finally got the antenna up. I was earlier getting a SWR of 1.1 on 160 before and now am getting 1.1 on 1.74365 MHZ 1.74365mhz R=51 X= 6,7,8 swr 1.1 At the desired frequency to match the antenna I've aimed for 1.8MHZ here's the information I was able to get at my desired frequency: 1.8025 mhZ Coax loss 6.3db C=4193 XC=21 L=1.970 X1=21 r=41 x=21 swr 1.6 So this is what the antenna is giving me at this moment. I need to get back down and add the broken wire to the radial bed and I should also trim some length to bring my values to 1.1 at 1.025MHz. Given the info above from the MFJ 259B any idea how much I might nibble off and more, is there anything in this info that tells me I should look to do anything differently? Hopefully the coax loss will be mitigated by a friend bringing me 350' of hardline. Can't wait! Thanks, Gary KA1J _ Topband Reflector _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: [ARRL-LOTW] BoD votes LoTW initiatives
On 07/23/2013 10:46 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: §97.307(f) Âno longer reflect the state of the art of digital telecommunications technology, and that the proposed rule change would Âencourage both flexibility and efficiency in the employment of digital emissions by amateur stations. The Ad Hoc Symbol Rate Rule Modernization Committee was dissolved with the thanks of the Board. That part is definitely true. Various low symbol rate Olivia, Contestia, MFSK and DominoEX modes (which are legal) take up more bandwidth than psk500 (which is currently illegal). Save us from a Board of Directors that would not know Digital Operation if it bit them on the ass. All we need is a bunch of 2.8 KHz wide chunks of white noise across the entire non-voice spectrum. If they want to remove the symbol rate, the bandwidth better be compatible with that of CW (100 Hz or less) in the majority of the shared non-voice spectrum. Seggregation by bandwidth might make sense, but I am not sure that needs to be written into FCC rules. A band plan may be a more appropriate way to deal with that, especially considering the fact that different countries have slightly different ham frequencies and rules... -- All rights reversed. _ Topband Reflector
