Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Joe]

I'll differ on the half space thing.

I cut my repeat needs by at LEAST 75% and still get spotted by the RBN 
all the time, (well not much on 160 he he he)


But on bands where i got good signals my repeats are far less when I use

W9~E~T  than when I use W9ET

Joe WB9SBD

On 12/7/2022 9:13 AM, Mike VE9AA ve...@nbnet.nb.ca wrote:

Lee et al,

Which just goes to further prove my point.  The RBN (& skimmers) are 
truly wonderful tech, but they are not perfect even if your CW is (or 
nearly so).


  Please do not be surprised by the occasional bust or dupe if you are 
doing something "weird" with your callsign by adding 1/2 spaces, 
slowing letters down and whatnot.


Human brains may (or maynot) be able to deal with that somewhat better 
(up for debate - I personally dislike it done to most callsigns), but 
computers don't 'know' what the intent is with that type of sending.


VE9AA

==
I get spotted as KX4M and KK4TT all the time. It does not matter if I 
send by

hand or through N1MM / Winkeyer.

73 de Lee KX4TT



On Wednesday, December 7, 2022, 08:48:47 AM EST,  wrote:

Hi Ron,

The wrong call sign spotting and "run of dupes" happens a few times a
year to me.
Bob, KQ2M
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
Reflector



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

Re: Topband: Noise investigation by FCC?

[Richard Karlquist]

I have called in the power company before regarding RFI that was
obviously their fault. 

I am not sure they would do anything about customer caused RFI, once
they 

eliminated it as being their fault.  They would have to deal with the
customer 

who was at fault.  Doesn't seem likely.  But I could be wrong.

---
Rick Karlquist
N6RK 

On 2022-12-07 13:26, Mike Waters wrote:

> Have you called the power company? The chief engineer from Ozark Electric 
> here has gladly used their expensive noise tracking SDR and VHF antenna (and 
> my Beverages) to find it and fix it.  
> 
> 73 Mike 
> W0BTU
> 
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022, 2:48 PM Richard (Rick) Karlquist  
> wrote: 
> 
>> Can anyone inform me at to whether there is any kind
>> of analogous help about noise on this side of the
>> pond from the FCC?  I have a severe noise source
>> audible for miles on my AM car radio.  It doesn't
>> sound like the familiar power line noise, but
>> rather appears to be CFE (Customer furnished equipment)
>> as opposed to anything related to the utility.  The
>> utility only furnishes the "antenna" AKA the power
>> lines.  (It follows a particular line for miles).
>> That line is few miles from me to the southwest,
>> as indicated by the null in the noise from my loop
>> antenna.
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Richard Karlquist]

>From central California, perennial big guns JA3YBK and JA5DQH were way
over S9 in the ARRL 160 about 2 hours before SR.  They had big pileups,
so I am thinking lots of stations were hearing them, whether or not they
could work them.

---
Rick Karlquist
N6RK 

On 2022-12-07 10:13, Jim Brown wrote:

> On 12/7/2022 6:57 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote: 
> 
>> Well given that several people have posted that conditions were poor, I
>> guess I should be happy that I managed to work 26 NA stations in the hour I
>> spent on the band - even more so as I have this horrendous wideband noise on
>> 160 at the moment!
> 
> ARRL 160 is a worldwide contest. Propagation varies from one part of the 
> world to another. From my QTH near San Francisco, the only stations I heard 
> from the west were KH6 and KL7 (2,000 miles over water), and I heard very few 
> stations from the east coast (2,800). "DX" was PJ2 and C6 (3,800 miles).
> 
> 73, Jim K9YC
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Noise investigation by FCC? (was: Re: ARRL 160)

[Mike Waters]

Have you called the power company? The chief engineer from Ozark Electric
here has gladly used their expensive noise tracking SDR and VHF antenna
(and my Beverages) to find it and fix it.

73 Mike
W0BTU

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022, 2:48 PM Richard (Rick) Karlquist 
wrote:

>
> Can anyone inform me at to whether there is any kind
> of analogous help about noise on this side of the
> pond from the FCC?  I have a severe noise source
> audible for miles on my AM car radio.  It doesn't
> sound like the familiar power line noise, but
> rather appears to be CFE (Customer furnished equipment)
> as opposed to anything related to the utility.  The
> utility only furnishes the "antenna" AKA the power
> lines.  (It follows a particular line for miles).
> That line is few miles from me to the southwest,
> as indicated by the null in the noise from my loop
> antenna.
>
>
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Noise investigation by FCC? (was: Re: ARRL 160)

[Jim Brown]

Rick,

If it's impulse noise, or acts like it at VHF, I chase it with the 
VHF/UHF mobile rig and talkie that also have wide-band RX. I've 
programmed memories both in rigs for AM on 160 MHz, and 3-4 frequencies 
stepping above that up to around 550 MHz. I drive around listening to 
160 MHz, then shift up in frequency as it gets louder. When it gets 
really loud, I get out of the car with the talkie, holding it very close 
to my chest to give it half-space directivity, and when I think I've 
zeroed in on it, I remove the duck.


73, Jim K9YC

On 12/7/2022 7:46 AM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:



Can anyone inform me at to whether there is any kind
of analogous help about noise on this side of the
pond from the FCC?  I have a severe noise source
audible for miles on my AM car radio.  It doesn't
sound like the familiar power line noise, but
rather appears to be CFE (Customer furnished equipment)
as opposed to anything related to the utility.  The
utility only furnishes the "antenna" AKA the power
lines.  (It follows a particular line for miles).
That line is few miles from me to the southwest,
as indicated by the null in the noise from my loop
antenna.

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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Jim Brown]

On 12/7/2022 6:57 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:

Well given that several people have posted that conditions were poor, I
guess I should be happy that I managed to work 26 NA stations in the hour I
spent on the band - even more so as I have this horrendous wideband noise on
160 at the moment!


ARRL 160 is a worldwide contest. Propagation varies from one part of the 
world to another. From my QTH near San Francisco, the only stations I 
heard from the west were KH6 and KL7 (2,000 miles over water), and I 
heard very few stations from the east coast (2,800). "DX" was PJ2 and C6 
(3,800 miles).


73, Jim K9YC
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great!

[VE6WZ_Steve]

Indeed it is John, W1FV who is the father of the 9 circle array and published 
his good work in NCJ.
Together with the YCCC they produced kits which were marketed by DXeng.
Here is my history with the array:

6 years ago I purchased one of these DXeng kits and was impressed with the 
results.

3 years ago, I redesigned John's antenna amplifier to include an antenna bypass 
relay.
My new board geometry to use a 180 deg F connector and screw terminals for the 
ant and ground to simplify construction.
I published a YouTube video on the new design, and in the video notes I provide 
links to the PCB Gerber files, and all of John’s original documentation.
https://youtu.be/dl-crM5Kb6A 

2 years ago, I redesigned the combiner board and integrated a 2N5109 amplifier 
on the PCB.
Gerbers, BOM, and documentation included in the notes of the video:
https://youtu.be/utyJt_Clp3M 

1 year ago, I redesigned the combiner board again using small MuRata chokes at 
each antenna input to eliminate the need for the outboard feedline chokes.
This is the board I am using now.
Gerbers, BOM, and documentation included in the notes of the video:
https://youtu.be/lVW1CmrzP7c 

I do not sell boards. I have no interest in any commercial endeavour.  My 
desire is to share my projects if others want to build them.
If you do build one of these, please read all the documentation included with 
each video.
It is very easy to upload the Gerber files to a PCB vendor and get boards made.
The PI4CC group asked if they could sell my boards to those that don't want to 
get their own made and I agreed
I have no involvement with them.

For these arrays, and other RX antennas that provide DC power via the coax 
feedline (bias-T) I strongly recommend that the PCBs be thoroughly cleaned of 
flux and a conformal coating be applied.
My experience is that residual solder flux can attract debris and moisture and 
lead to noise issues.  This is especially true at the F-connectors that have 
12v DC on the centre conductor.
Use a good flux remover and tooth brush followed by a water rinse and apply an 
acrylic conformal coating.
In this (unrelated) video at 8:00 is show how I clean my boards: 
https://youtu.be/_HvBf_tnjEg 

Why youtube videos? Why not write a paper? 
I am aware there are those don’t like YouTube videos.
In my prior life as a scientist in the Oil and Gas exploration business for 35 
years all I did was write papers and build powerpoint presentations.
I don’t want to do that anymore, but making a video is easy and fun to do. I 
share videos about building radio stuff like guys make videos about making 
furniture.
more videos here: https://www.youtube.com/ve6wz 


73, de steve ve6wz

> On Dec 6, 2022, at 12:46 PM, John Kaufmann via Topband 
>  wrote:
> 
> Here is additional information on the 9-circle low-band receiving array.  It
> was originally designed for operation on both 160 and 80 meters.
> 
> It was based on a couple articles I wrote for NCJ in the September/October
> and November/December issues in 2011.  The design was turned into a set of
> electronics kits that were produced and sold by DX Engineering in
> collaboration with the Yankee Clipper Contest Club (YCCC) and myself.
> There were a few changes made in the DX Engineering implementation relative
> to the NCJ design, the most significant being a reduction in the circle
> diameter from 140 to 120 feet.  This reduction had negligible effect on 160m
> but it improved the 80m performance and also allowed the array to produce
> "usable" performance on 40m.  
> 
> The DX Engineering kits eventually sold out and were discontinued after
> that.  However, there are still a few direction switch box kits left over
> that you can order from DX Engineering:
> https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/dxe-yccc-switch.  You can also download
> a copy of the system user's manual from DX Engineering:
> https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/instructions/dxe-yccc-switch.
> pdf.   The manual has a lot of technical information about the system,
> including circuit diagrams and beam pattern calculations, as well as
> assembly instructions for the DX Engineering kits.
> 
> More recently, PI4CC has produced 9-circle PCB's that you learn about here:
> https://www.pi4cc.nl/tech-info/rx-array/.  VE6WZ also created his own
> version of the PCB's and he will share the info with you, or he may chime in
> here.  You can learn more about the VE6WZ system on his qrz.com page.
> 
> Disclaimer:  I have no commercial interest in or affiliation with any of the
> sources of electronics mentioned above.
> 
> 73, John W1FV

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

Topband: Noise investigation by FCC? (was: Re: ARRL 160)

[Richard (Rick) Karlquist]

On 12/7/2022 6:57 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:


To update on my Noise problem . . . I have had OFCOM engineers here this
week trying to track it down. We came to the conclusion that I have TWO
separate noise sources, that are both about the same strength. They have



73 Roger G3YRO



Can anyone inform me at to whether there is any kind
of analogous help about noise on this side of the
pond from the FCC?  I have a severe noise source
audible for miles on my AM car radio.  It doesn't
sound like the familiar power line noise, but
rather appears to be CFE (Customer furnished equipment)
as opposed to anything related to the utility.  The
utility only furnishes the "antenna" AKA the power
lines.  (It follows a particular line for miles).
That line is few miles from me to the southwest,
as indicated by the null in the noise from my loop
antenna.

Thanks for any help.

Rick N6RK
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great!

[Jim Miller]

I failed to mention that W1FV was the original designer whose work was
published in NCJ. My apologies for that!

73

Jim ab3cv

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 2:34 PM Jim Miller  wrote:

> Thanks to Steve's, VE6WZ, excellent YouTube videos, I decided to tackle a
> better RX antenna. I've been using a 2 element array phased by an NCC-2
> which is better than what I've had in the past (BOG, K9AY) but I wanted
> better.
>
> After evaluating my space available and finding it too small I asked my
> neighbor for seasonal use of their adjoining lot and they graciously
> agreed! My N, NW and W elements are on their property.
>
> Steve's videos include KiCad files for the combiner and preamps and he was
> very helpful by email with any of my questions.
>
> I just completed the array last night and got it on the air and I was
> astonished by how well it worked.
>
> Of course it isn't going to create signals out of thin air but it is much
> quieter due to better RDF and the front to back is very impressive. Strong
> signals on the waterfall just disappear when the antenna is reversed!
>
> I'm very happy to get such an improved antenna for 80 and 160 in a 120ft
> diameter circle!
>
> As a bonus I use it with PSTRotator and a USB controlled relay box so no
> manual switch box is required on my desk. Just a mouse click selects the
> desired direction or it can track my logger automatically.
>
> FYI, most of the cost is in the aluminum, the combiner and preamps were
> pretty cheap to build.
>
> Many thanks to VE6WZ!!
>
> 73
>
> jim ab3cv
>
>
>
>
>
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Mike VE9AA ve...@nbnet.nb.ca]

Lee et al,

Which just goes to further prove my point.  The RBN (& skimmers) are 
truly wonderful tech, but they are not perfect even if your CW is (or 
nearly so).


  Please do not be surprised by the occasional bust or dupe if you are 
doing something "weird" with your callsign by adding 1/2 spaces, slowing 
letters down and whatnot.


Human brains may (or maynot) be able to deal with that somewhat better 
(up for debate - I personally dislike it done to most callsigns), but 
computers don't 'know' what the intent is with that type of sending.


VE9AA

==
I get spotted as KX4M and KK4TT all the time. It does not matter if I 
send by

hand or through N1MM / Winkeyer.

73 de Lee KX4TT



On Wednesday, December 7, 2022, 08:48:47 AM EST,  wrote:

Hi Ron,

The wrong call sign spotting and "run of dupes" happens a few times a
year to me.
Bob, KQ2M
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: ARRL 160

[Roger Kennedy]

Well given that several people have posted that conditions were poor, I
guess I should be happy that I managed to work 26 NA stations in the hour I
spent on the band - even more so as I have this horrendous wideband noise on
160 at the moment!

Regarding Duplicate Calls, I also never have a computer on doing Contests,
so don't "cheat" by using DX Clusters or RBN. I DID call one station I had
worked earlier . . . but that's because I hadn't noticed his call in my
paper log as already worked!

To update on my Noise problem . . . I have had OFCOM engineers here this
week trying to track it down. We came to the conclusion that I have TWO
separate noise sources, that are both about the same strength. They have
found ONE (and confiscated the offending equipment) . . . and although the
Noise on my main Antenna (Dipole) is just the same (S9), it has dropped to
S6 on my Receiving Loop. (it was previously as strong). So the remaining
noise source must be somewhere at right-angles to the loop. They are coming
back next week to try and track down the other noise source.

But at least I should be able to hear DX a little better, using my Rx Loop!
(and in time for the Stew Perry contest)

73 Roger G3YRO


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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160 busted spot

[John Pescatore via Topband]

I mostly ran in my short time in the ARRL 160, but on a Sunday am quick ALT A 
trip down the Available Mult Q Window I did hit a busted spot for I think K1LZ. 
 Spot volume isn't that high in the ARRL 160 compared to the bigger all bands 
tests.
I have the NOT SKIMBUSTED filters running most of the time which eliminates 
most RBN busted spots, but in CQ WW CW I didn't realize the filter status had 
been reset, so did see a higher number of busted skimmer spots. Several of them 
were the bigger stations that most everyone had worked earlier and were pretty 
easily recognized as bust candidates.
73 John K3TN

ARRL 160


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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Lee Boulineau via Topband]

 I get spotted as KX4M and KK4TT all the time. It does not matter if I send by 
hand or through N1MM / Winkeyer.

73 de Lee KX4TT



On Wednesday, December 7, 2022, 08:48:47 AM EST,  wrote:

Hi Ron,

The wrong call sign spotting and "run of dupes" happens a few times a
year to me.  
Bob, KQ2M


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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Tree]

Me too.  When one station that I know knew better called me during a run of
dupes, I sent the following:

"DID I GET SPOTTED WITH A DIFFERENT CALL AND THAT IS WHY YOU ALL ARE
CALLING ME?" or
something like that and they responded with an "R".

BTW - there is no spotting in the Stew Perry.  Turn it off and try it.  It
just might remind you of how operating
used to be when you first started radio.

73 Tree N6TR / K7RAT

PS: I did not invent the Stew Perry contest.  It was a collaborative effort
that I did my best to stay out of.  But
after the first running of it - all of the collaborators disappeared when
it was time to do the work of putting the
results together.  And so it goes.

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 1:15 PM  wrote:

> I had the same occurrence on both CQ WW and ARRL 160.   On 160 I moved
> after
> 10 Dupes in a row.
>
>
>
> In CQ WW, one of the callers asked whether I was N1URF.  So after the
> contest I looked for any manual spots for N1URF and didn't find any.  So it
> was a busted Skimmer spot I assume.  People seem to be trusting what they
> see on the screen and its guaranteed that they will be wrong some of the
> time doing that.
>
>
>
> Ed  N1UR
>
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
>
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Topband: Correction

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

73, Pete N4ZR,one of the RBN team
Check out our web server at
.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

Earlier today, someone who shall remain nameless accused me of claiming 
sole credit for the RBN, based on my long-employed e-mail signature 
block.  In an effort to prevent that interpretation in future, I 
mistakenly and inadvertently connected myself to the N1MM team in a few 
e-mails to the addressees above. when what I meant to say was that I'm 
just one member of the *RBN* team.


My apologies - it was a classic case of thinking of too many things at 
once and having the wrong thing come out through my keyboard  I hope 
this puts it straight.

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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Mike Smith VE9AA]

Some of you may unknowingly be doing yourselves a slight disservice by
changing the speed and spacings within your callsign to satisfy the human
ear (like to distinguish a K5B from a KH6 for example).  (personally I
prefer everything coming at me at the exact same speed, but that's me and
this post is not about MY ear)

 

The (RBN) skimmers (especially in the presence of QRN on 160m) may not
always be able to decipher it and then erroneously spot you as someone else.

 

The same can be said for these funny spacings/speeds if I was to send my
call like this at 35wpm> VE9AA test <<< but send the word 'test' at 55wpm
(fairly common in EU)

 

Sometimes the RBN simply won't spot you at all, or it may spot you as
something not exactly like "VE9AA". I've seen it many times.  I've since
stopped this super quick "test" at the end.

 

A point to ponder?

 

 

 

Mike, Coreen & Corey

Keswick Ridge, NB

 

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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[sawyered]

I had the same occurrence on both CQ WW and ARRL 160.   On 160 I moved after
10 Dupes in a row.

 

In CQ WW, one of the callers asked whether I was N1URF.  So after the
contest I looked for any manual spots for N1URF and didn't find any.  So it
was a busted Skimmer spot I assume.  People seem to be trusting what they
see on the screen and its guaranteed that they will be wrong some of the
time doing that.

 

Ed  N1UR

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

Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great!

[John Kaufmann via Topband]

Here is additional information on the 9-circle low-band receiving array.  It
was originally designed for operation on both 160 and 80 meters.

It was based on a couple articles I wrote for NCJ in the September/October
and November/December issues in 2011.  The design was turned into a set of
electronics kits that were produced and sold by DX Engineering in
collaboration with the Yankee Clipper Contest Club (YCCC) and myself.
There were a few changes made in the DX Engineering implementation relative
to the NCJ design, the most significant being a reduction in the circle
diameter from 140 to 120 feet.  This reduction had negligible effect on 160m
but it improved the 80m performance and also allowed the array to produce
"usable" performance on 40m.  

The DX Engineering kits eventually sold out and were discontinued after
that.  However, there are still a few direction switch box kits left over
that you can order from DX Engineering:
https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/dxe-yccc-switch.  You can also download
a copy of the system user's manual from DX Engineering:
https://static.dxengineering.com/global/images/instructions/dxe-yccc-switch.
pdf.   The manual has a lot of technical information about the system,
including circuit diagrams and beam pattern calculations, as well as
assembly instructions for the DX Engineering kits.

More recently, PI4CC has produced 9-circle PCB's that you learn about here:
https://www.pi4cc.nl/tech-info/rx-array/.  VE6WZ also created his own
version of the PCB's and he will share the info with you, or he may chime in
here.  You can learn more about the VE6WZ system on his qrz.com page.

Disclaimer:  I have no commercial interest in or affiliation with any of the
sources of electronics mentioned above.

73, John W1FV


-Original Message-
From: Topband
[mailto:topband-bounces+john.kaufmann=verizon@contesting.com] On Behalf
Of Joe
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 2:16 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great!

Any links to this system?

Joe WB9SBD

On 12/4/2022 1:34 PM, Jim Miller wrote:
> Thanks to Steve's, VE6WZ, excellent YouTube videos, I decided to tackle a
> better RX antenna. I've been using a 2 element array phased by an NCC-2
> which is better than what I've had in the past (BOG, K9AY) but I wanted
> better.
>
> After evaluating my space available and finding it too small I asked my
> neighbor for seasonal use of their adjoining lot and they graciously
> agreed! My N, NW and W elements are on their property.
>
> Steve's videos include KiCad files for the combiner and preamps and he was
> very helpful by email with any of my questions.
>
> I just completed the array last night and got it on the air and I was
> astonished by how well it worked.
>
> Of course it isn't going to create signals out of thin air but it is much
> quieter due to better RDF and the front to back is very impressive. Strong
> signals on the waterfall just disappear when the antenna is reversed!
>
> I'm very happy to get such an improved antenna for 80 and 160 in a 120ft
> diameter circle!
>
> As a bonus I use it with PSTRotator and a USB controlled relay box so no
> manual switch box is required on my desk. Just a mouse click selects the
> desired direction or it can track my logger automatically.
>
> FYI, most of the cost is in the aluminum, the combiner and preamps were
> pretty cheap to build.
>
> Many thanks to VE6WZ!!
>
> 73
>
> jim ab3cv
> _
> Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband  - Topband
Reflector
>
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 240, Issue 4

[Richard McLachlan]

Personally in contests I don’t even switch the computer on, but maybe I am old 
fashioned.

Regards

Richard G3OQT

> On 6 Dec 2022, at 17:01, topband-requ...@contesting.com wrote:
> 
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
>topband@contesting.com
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>topband-requ...@contesting.com
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>topband-ow...@contesting.com
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. ARRL 160 (Ron Spencer)
>   2. Re: Fwd: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops
>  (James V Redding PE)
>   3. Re: My new 9 Circle works great! (Joe)
>   4. Re:  Ground conductivity discussions ? oops (Dennis Ashworth)
>   5. Prop For ARRL 160 (Jim Brown)
>   6. Re: My new 9 Circle works great! (Stig Vestergaard)
>   7. Re: ARRL 160 (Ed Parish)
>   8. Cluster Spots and the  ARRL 160 (ws6x@gmail.com)
>   9. Re: ARRL 160 (Pete Smith N4ZR)
>  10. Stew Perry coming in 11 days (Tree)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 08:55:10 -0700
> From: Ron Spencer 
> To: "topband" 
> Subject: Topband: ARRL 160
> Message-ID: <184e2ff8fe7.cc36e5d13296722.8911938702354885...@zoho.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> 
> Re Packet and the contest??
> 
> 
> May not be of interest to everyone.?
> 
> 
> 
> Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a 
> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes 
> until I finally QSY'd to escape.?
> 
> 
> 
> My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. On 
> all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped in 
> their call. Typically I work all dupes and,? for the first few did but, as 
> the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went away but 
> a few insisted on a Q.?
> 
> 
> 
> In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the 
> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many of 
> the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again, guessing, 
> they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected a quick Q. 
> NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid contact if 
> you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was correct on packet. 
> Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of the work??
> 
> 
> 
> Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where no 
> spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the 
> information.. Yes, I know. A radical idea.
> 
> 
> 
> Ron
> 
> N4XD
> Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:33:00 -0500
> From: James V Redding PE 
> To: Dennis Ashworth 
> Cc: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Fwd: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> 
> Here is a link to a method of actually measuring the soil complex
> conductivity characteristics and it is focused on 80M:
> 
> https://rudys.typepad.com/files/soil-characteristics-qex.pdf
> 
> Since the depth of the measurement is a function of frequency, the numbers
> for 80M may be quite different than for other HF bands.
> 
> Was also curious whether the elements were detuned for their individual
> impedance measurements like would be done with a BCB array or if the 25
> ohms is a common point measurement.
> 
> Jim/VEZ
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:21 AM Dennis Ashworth  wrote:
>> 
>> I meant to post this to the TowerTalk group. It still may be relevant to
>> Topband ops.
>> 
>> Dennis, K7FL
>> 
>> -- Forwarded message -
>> From: Dennis Ashworth 
>> Date: Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 8:54 AM
>> Subject: Ground conductivity discussions
>> To: 
>> 
>> 
>> Very interesting and timely discussions on radials and ground conductivity.
>> I?m currently rebuilding an 80M broadside array (with shortened, top loaded
>> elements) in SW Utah that I?ve modeled at 12 ohms impedance. The current
>> antenna was tested and the impedance measured was 25 ohms. Each element in
>> the array (4 total) also measured 25 ohms. What accounts for additional
>> system loss?
>> 
>> Upon consulting the original builders, I learned they had also predicted an
>> impedance of approximately 12 ohms. I?m not clear what methods or models
>> they used for their prediction. There are 4:1 baluns at the base of each
>> vertical which begs the question whether the array impedances were ever
>> checked post-install. I suspect not ? and I doubt anything has changed over
>> the years that would equally affect the impedance 

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[kq2m]

Hi Ron,

The wrong call sign spotting and "run of dupes" happens a few times a 
year to me.  The tipoff is that a bunch of guys that you worked within 
the past hour try to work you again on the same band.  And no matter how 
many times you call CQ while correctly sending your call, they STILL 
call you; which confirms that the persistent callers are NOT Listening.


An opr. should ALWAYS copy the information. NO exceptions!

But you can't force people to actually do that any more than you can 
force them to wash their hands after they use the bathroom.



Bob, KQ2M


On 2022-12-05 09:55, Ron Spencer via Topband wrote:

Re Packet and the contest  


May not be of interest to everyone. 



Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then
a dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15
minutes until I finally QSY'd to escape. 



My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect
call. On all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on
it, dumped in their call. Typically I work all dupes and,  for the
first few did but, as the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine
and "B4". Most went away but a few insisted on a Q. 



In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the
responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign?
Many of the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations.
Again, guessing, they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called
and expected a quick Q. NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet
spot. Is it a valid contact if you don't copy the actual call sign?
Even if the call was correct on packet. Or are we moving towards
letting the computer do most of the work? 



Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry
where no spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the
information.. Yes, I know. A radical idea.



Ron

N4XD

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

Re: Topband: ARRL 160

[Tim Shoppa]

Pete,

I'm totally with you in terms of using N1MM configured to show dupes on the
bandmap, and thus give me awareness of what other spots are recently on
that frequency and then using my brain to throw out the obvious bust for a
well-known callsign.

Not everyone else's software supports showing two calls on the same
frequency on the bandmap, and not everyone else is even bothering to show
dupes on the bandmap. So they don't have the visibility of "oh that's
obviously a bust for that well known callsign that's a dupe" that you and I
have come to depend upon.

In any event I've resolved to wean myself off spots by NOT using any
spotting assistance at least through July next year. HI HI I also have to
learn how to operate SSB as well.

Tim N3QE

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:11 AM Pete Smith N4ZR  wrote:

> I had 598 QSOs in CQWW CW (10M) and 420 in the ARRL 160 CW, about 85
> percent S (assisted), and don't recall a single instance where an
> incorrect spot led me even to think about calling a station who wasn't
> really there.  N1MM's Spectrum Display shows previously-worked stations,
> so it would be glaringly obvious when spots for K3LPL and W3LPL showed
> up on the same frequency. I didn't see it happen.
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR,for the N1MM Team
> Check out our web server at
> .
> For spots, please use your favorite
> "retail" DX cluster.
>
> On 12/5/2022 10:55 AM, Ron Spencer via Topband wrote:
> > Re Packet and the contest
> >
> >
> > May not be of interest to everyone.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a
> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes
> until I finally QSY'd to escape.
> >
> >
> >
> > My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect
> call. On all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it,
> dumped in their call. Typically I work all dupes and,  for the first few
> did but, as the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most
> went away but a few insisted on a Q.
> >
> >
> >
> > In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the
> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many
> of the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again,
> guessing, they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected
> a quick Q. NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid
> contact if you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was
> correct on packet. Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of
> the work?
> >
> >
> >
> > Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry
> where no spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the
> information.. Yes, I know. A radical idea.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ron
> >
> > N4XD
> > Sent usinghttps://www.zoho.com/mail/
> > _
> > Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband  - Topband
> Reflector
> _
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
>
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector