Re: Topband: Kostas' point

[Jeff Blaine]

There is no real point of worrying about what the other guy is using.  
We only can control our personal operation, and really have to leave the 
other end of the Q to manage theirs.


73/jeff/ac0c
alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
www.ac0c.com

On 18-Jan-18 1:24 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
They are so cheap that people would buy their own and have friends 
around the world set them up.  It is probably being done now.  There 
is no way to stop the cheating.   They are individual awards.  Some 
will cheat and most will do it right.  I could work a lot more DX if I 
had a remote receiver in W1 land on 160.   With remote operations 
being acceptable across a vast distance like the USA does it really 
matter?


We have had the DX clusters for years and we still have no 
registration system and still get people cheating on them and posting 
with fake calls etc.


Best of luck making cheaters adhere to more rules.

W0MU


On 1/17/2018 12:32 PM, John Randall via Topband wrote:
Yes, this is part of the issue we all face with the vaidation of 
QSO's and its not going to go away either. As more and more people 
realize whats happening, they are going to question their qso's. At 
the moment there is perhaps only one way to test the qso, and that is 
to see if other stations from the same area  are also coming in a 
approx the same level as the station you worked. Even this may not be 
fool proof for those who chase "the paper trail". Cooperation is 
going to be needed from all SDR party's to try and sort it all out. A 
possible solution if to use an identification system on the 
designated sdr websites, which will prove a qso via that particular 
method. But this too takes two to tango and people working together, 
otherwise the award system may collapse into a meaningless pile on 
the floor.
As newer technology appears, things may get even worse for those 
concerned.Talking about this may bring it into the open via various 
magazines and amateur radio society's.Watch this space...hi

73John - M0ELS
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Kostas' point

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

They are so cheap that people would buy their own and have friends 
around the world set them up.  It is probably being done now.  There is 
no way to stop the cheating.   They are individual awards.  Some will 
cheat and most will do it right.  I could work a lot more DX if I had a 
remote receiver in W1 land on 160.   With remote operations being 
acceptable across a vast distance like the USA does it really matter?


We have had the DX clusters for years and we still have no registration 
system and still get people cheating on them and posting with fake calls 
etc.


Best of luck making cheaters adhere to more rules.

W0MU


On 1/17/2018 12:32 PM, John Randall via Topband wrote:

Yes, this is part of the issue we all face with the vaidation of QSO's and its not going 
to go away either. As more and more people realize whats happening, they are going to 
question their qso's. At the moment there is perhaps only one way to test the qso, and 
that is to see if other stations from the same area  are also coming in a approx the same 
level as the station you worked. Even this may not be fool proof for those who chase 
"the paper trail". Cooperation is going to be needed from all SDR party's to 
try and sort it all out. A possible solution if to use an identification system on the 
designated sdr websites, which will prove a qso via that particular method. But this too 
takes two to tango and people working together, otherwise the award system may collapse 
into a meaningless pile on the floor.
As newer technology appears, things may get even worse for those 
concerned.Talking about this may bring it into the open via various magazines 
and amateur radio society's.Watch this space...hi
73John - M0ELS
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Choke?

[Mike Waters]

Jeff,

If a choke at your shack makes *any* difference, then you need a better
choke at the base of your inverted-L.

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Radio KH6O  wrote:

> I'll be erecting a 95-foot Inverted-L antenna. At the shack end of the
> antenna, right before the insulator, I'll need to wrap the wire around
> itself a few times so that it doesn't slip through the insulator. Because
> the wire itself is insulated, is there any negative affect, such as a
> choking action that might take place?
>
> 73, Jeff KH6O
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Choke?

[k8gg]

Jeff, Et. Al.,

Rather than wrap the wire around the insulator opening or itself, how
about a "split bolt" wire clamp with the saddle on the tension side?  A
good "mechanical knot".  I can take photo of one if needed.  Here is a
website link:

http://www.elecdirect.com/split-bolts-grounding-products/split-bolt-connectors/copper-alloy-2-conductors-16-str-8-str

There is a larger one on the same "elecdirect dot com" page on the
internet as well.

GL & 73,  George,  K8GG



> I'll be erecting a 95-foot Inverted-L antenna. At the shack end of the
> antenna, right before the insulator, I'll need to wrap the wire around
> itself a few times so that it doesn't slip through the insulator. Because
> the wire itself is insulated, is there any negative affect, such as a
> choking action that might take place?
>
> 73, Jeff KH6O
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>


_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Kostas' point

[JAYB1943]

As the use of –undeclared- remote receivers increases, it will be (probably 
already IS) IMPOSSIBLE to be sure that our QSO’s meet all the “Rules” of the 
ARRL. Remember, except for the specific purposes of awards and contests, one 
should not care at all how the other station receives his signals.
The ONLY positive solution I see is for the ARRL to rewrite Section 9 of the 
DXCC rules—right now totally remote stations (Rx+Tx) are OK but split Rx and 
Tx more than 500 meters apart are NOT...does this make sense ? If a totally 
separate STATION 3000 mi away is OK, why can’t one use just the Rx feature 
of the remote station and transmit from home ?? ARRL needs to drop the 500 
meter rule as it makes no sense and limits the expansion of new technology.
There is precedence for this – back in the “old days” – remote stations were 
not permitted and there was a limit as to how far you could move inside a 
country to work new countries for DXCC. Times and technology change..and the 
“rules” need to change with them IMHO.
   73 jay NY2NY 
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Kostas' point

[John Randall via Topband]

Yes, this is part of the issue we all face with the vaidation of QSO's and its 
not going to go away either. As more and more people realize whats happening, 
they are going to question their qso's. At the moment there is perhaps only one 
way to test the qso, and that is to see if other stations from the same area  
are also coming in a approx the same level as the station you worked. Even this 
may not be fool proof for those who chase "the paper trail". Cooperation is 
going to be needed from all SDR party's to try and sort it all out. A possible 
solution if to use an identification system on the designated sdr websites, 
which will prove a qso via that particular method. But this too takes two to 
tango and people working together, otherwise the award system may collapse into 
a meaningless pile on the floor.
As newer technology appears, things may get even worse for those 
concerned.Talking about this may bring it into the open via various magazines 
and amateur radio society's.Watch this space...hi
73John - M0ELS
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Bury beverage wire?

[donovanf]

Hi Martin, 


Matching transformers aren't necessary for your 160 meter Beverage 
b ecause your coax is only five meters long, b ut its probably best to 
use a pair of transformers. I ts likely that the loss in the matching 
transformers will be very slightly greater than the mismatch loss 
through only five meters of coax. If you don't use transformers, 
use 75 ohm high velocity factor foam dielectric coax such as RG-6 
cable TV coax. 


If you use matching transformers, it isn't necessary to precisely 
match them to the Beverage, a pair of 6:1 transformers will work fine 
with 75 ohm coax. Because one dB of additional loss isn't a significant 
consideration in a 160 meter Beverage, you can use either a binocular 
core or toroid ferrite core with either isolated windings or auto 
transformer winding. It isn't worth the trouble of building low 
loss transmission line transformers for Beverage antennas. 


The antenna side of each matching transformer must be connected to a 
ground rod. Grounding the coax side of each transformer shouldn't 
matter because the coax is so short. I'd ground the coax shields 
since common mode isn't an issue with only five meters of coax. 


My favorite Beverage transformer is the W8JI 2:5 turn ratio Beverage 
matching transformer using a FairRite Products 2873000202 Type 73 
ferrite binocular core. I use either telephone wire from an RJ-11 
telephone cable, wire from a Cat 5 Ethernet cable or 30 AWG wirewrap 
wire. 


https://www.w8ji.com/core_selection.htm 


73 
Frank 
W3LPL 


- Original Message -

From: "Martin"  
To: topband@contesting.com 
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 4:10:04 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: Bury beverage wire? 

Thanks to all. 
I had a few direct responses to my inquiry. 
I should haver better described the situation by expressing that it is 
not a driveway, but rather an opening in a fence separating 2 lawns. I 
just had no words for it in english. 

One guy came up with the idea to thread the wire through tennisballs and 
bury it in a conduit, so no portion of the wire would touch ground or 
the conduit. 

This seems like a good idea, but isn't just burying coaxcable , leaving 
the shield open and only use the center conductor about the same, 
without a bunch of unknown parameters? 

Another suggestion was to bury coax and start the antenna after the 
opening. Excellent, but last resort, because this would only allow a 
180m long antenna. Still better than no antenna and better than most 
hams can do. 

W3LPL came up with what i think is the best idea: 
Bury coax with high VF and put transformers on both ends. 
This leads to another question: 
What ratio do i wind the transformers? 1:9 at the feedpiont, 9:1 at the 
beginning of the coax, 1:9 at it's end where the wire continues? Or do i 
measure the impedances to calculate a ratio? 
Do i put in a ground rod at each end of the coax to connect the 
transformers? 
Do i connect both sides of the transformers to ground? 

If i get this to work, i have a 230m-235m long antenna with 5m of it 
under ground. 

Any input? 



-- 

Ohne CW ist es nur CB.. 

73, Martin DM4iM 
_ 
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband 

_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Choke?

[Radio KH6O]

I'll be erecting a 95-foot Inverted-L antenna. At the shack end of the
antenna, right before the insulator, I'll need to wrap the wire around
itself a few times so that it doesn't slip through the insulator. Because
the wire itself is insulated, is there any negative affect, such as a
choking action that might take place?

73, Jeff KH6O
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Cheating the system

[Radio KH6O]

John wrote:


Just for being nosey, I ran the ft8 software last night before bed to see
what I could see and boy, there were stations from all over the world on
topband, happily working each other.
73John - M0ELS
=

John -- were those hams happily working each other, or were their computers
happily working each other?

73, Jeff KH6O
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Bury beverage wire?

[Martin]

Thanks to all.
I had a few direct responses to my inquiry.
I should haver better described the situation by expressing that it is 
not a driveway, but rather an opening in a fence separating 2 lawns. I 
just had no words for it in english.


One guy came up with the idea to thread the wire through tennisballs and 
bury it in a conduit, so no portion of the wire would touch ground or 
the conduit.


This seems like a good idea, but isn't just burying coaxcable , leaving 
the shield open and only use the center conductor about the same, 
without a bunch of unknown parameters?


Another suggestion was to bury coax and start the antenna after the 
opening. Excellent, but last resort, because this would only allow a 
180m long antenna. Still better than no antenna and better than most 
hams can do.


W3LPL came up with what i think is the best idea:
Bury coax with high VF and put transformers on both ends.
This leads to another question:
What ratio do i wind the transformers? 1:9 at the feedpiont, 9:1 at the 
beginning of the coax, 1:9 at it's end where the wire continues? Or do i 
measure the impedances to calculate a ratio?
Do i put in a ground rod at each end of the coax to connect the 
transformers?

Do i connect both sides of the transformers to ground?

If i get this to work, i have a 230m-235m long antenna with 5m of it 
under ground.


Any input?



--

Ohne CW ist es nur CB..

73, Martin DM4iM
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: sdrWEB not going in my log

[Kostas SV1DPI]

terry burge wrote:

It was an interesting experiment and later around 08:00Z I did manage to work 
G4AMN, EI6S and G4PEL direct

You have lost the most important point about webSDRs:
Terry says that he worked 3 guys direct and 3 guys via webSDR. He didn't 
logged the last 3. Well done. But he logged the first 3,the guys he 
worked direct. But how does he know that they were listening him direct? 
And if these guys were listening him via a webSDR in West Coast? Is this 
QSO ok? Or this is the same with his webSDR QSO?
This is the main problem and we need to understand it. It is not enough 
to be honest myself but the others must do the same also... A right QSO 
needs 2 stations...

73 Kostas SV1DPI
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband