Re: Topband: QRP on 160?
Ah! So "zero power" on a K3 is not actually zero?! Good to know! Ken WA8JXM On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 9:46 AM Mike Furrey wrote: > I accidentally made a QRP Q on 160 ... I had just moved and set up my > station and wanted to test a feature off the air but couldn't find a dummy > load. So, I cranked the power of the K3 to zero, dropped my call, NO3M > came back with a report. That dude has some ears! > 73, Mike WA5POK > > On Monday, July 1, 2024 at 10:59:20 PM CDT, Ken WA8JXM < > wa8...@gmail.com> wrote: > > For the younger crowd, 25 watts was the max power allowed in several 160m > segments (especially the opposite coast) back in the 60's and 70's. 100w > was the max anywhere in the U.S. > > When I first got on 160 in 1964, working two states away was > often considered DX for me! > > Yes, there were exceptional stations, but they were rare. > > Ken WA8JXM > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 1:57 PM Radio KH6O wrote: > > > Is anyone regularly using say, 25W or less on 160? > > > > -- > > 73, > > Jeff KH6O / 6 > > _ > > 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 > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: QRP on 160?
For the younger crowd, 25 watts was the max power allowed in several 160m segments (especially the opposite coast) back in the 60's and 70's. 100w was the max anywhere in the U.S. When I first got on 160 in 1964, working two states away was often considered DX for me! Yes, there were exceptional stations, but they were rare. Ken WA8JXM On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 1:57 PM Radio KH6O wrote: > Is anyone regularly using say, 25W or less on 160? > > -- > 73, > Jeff KH6O / 6 > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: B7P
webSDR's are really fun to play with and great for testing purposes. But you can bet the mortgage they are also being used for other less than honorable purposes, especially on our beloved Topband. I'm interested the RM Noise initiative (https://ournetplace.com/rm-noise/). A search on YouTube brings up some excellent demonstrations. This could be a game changer. 73 Ken K4ZW On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 10:49 AM VE6WZ Steve wrote: > Here BG2AUE has been logged 3 times on 160m. > BD4WN 5 times, BA7IO 2 times and one QSO with B5TT. > > Unfortunately when I check QRZ for BG2AUE his QTH is spotted in the large > city of Harbin, and his equipment does not suggest any dedicated 160m rx > antennas. > My QSOs with BG2AUE have also suggested his rx is really good. > It is possible (likely) he is getting some NA webSDR help (like a KIWI). > Of course we won’t know for sure unless he says so on his QRZ page like > Kanti VU2GSM does. He lives in the city of Bangalore, and has little hope > of working DX on the low bands without webSDR. > If you have had QSOs with VU2GSM you will notice how quickly he responds. > I worked him on 40m when I was TX with just 10w. (I had info to know he > was rx on a local VE6 Kiwi at the time ) > > Steve, Ve6wz > > From Babcocks iPhone > > > On Apr 4, 2024, at 6:59 AM, John Kaufmann via Topband < > topband@contesting.com> wrote: > > > > It is also my experience that stations in China and Southeast Asia in > general do not hear well at all on the low bands. One exception is BG2AUE. > I have worked him multiple times on 80m CW from my QTH in the Boston area. > He hears extremely well on 80. Every single time I've worked him there, > he's been very weak but he's always answered me immediately. I've also seen > him spotted a few times on 160 but have yet to hear him there. That's an > extremely difficult path from W1 on 160. In fact, zone 24 is one of the two > remaining zones I need for 160 WAZ, the other zone being 26. > > > > 73, John W1FV > > > > > > _ > > 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: Remotes
I agree with Mark. Can I claim a 5000 mile 2m QSO by remotely operating a station 4999 miles away that can communicate with the DX station in the same village? Ken WA8JXM On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 9:35 AM lmlangenfeld wrote: > The fundamental questions seem to be: What is the purpose of a DX QSO? > What does a DX contact signify?In my book, three things:(1) The ability to > assemble a station capable of making the contact;(2) An understanding of > propagation sufficient to identify and exploit the path; and(3) Sufficient > operating skill to complete the contact within the constraints of (1) and > (2).Otherwise, what's the point? Without these three things, why bother > with radio?Mark -- WA9ETWSent from my U.S.Cellular© Smartphone > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Remotes
Why is it important what someone else does? Doesn't our fulfillment come from what **we** do? I admit, I'm not a competitive person. I prefer to be amazed at what I can do with my own skills, including the antenna I experiment with, Someone else blows $50,000 on an antenna and works a weak 9K2 station. Okay, bully for him, that doesn't change what I do. Some people can buy their DXCC, others earn it. I have 132 (or so) confirmed countries but that's just for me. I haven't sent it in for League approval, why should I care what Newington collects money for? Heck, back 30 or 40 years ago, I cleaned out the shack and pitched all my certificates and QSL cards, 78 countries at the time. It doesn't matter, **I** know I had done that before spotting networks or any of the modern crutches. It's a HOBBY, it's a PASTIME. YMMV. Ken WA8JXM On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 9:08 PM Tree wrote: > "*I'm still stuck in the 1970's with my Drake line.*" > > Nothing wrong with that. :-) > > Tree N6TR > > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 5:45 PM Charles Morrison < > charles.morrison.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > * If you want to "fix it", petition to change DXCC to read:* > > > > * "4-digit GRID SQUARE" -or- * > > > > * "Same State" -or- * > > > > *"Same Antenna for all contacts"* > > > > * -or- "wearing the same clothes as you wore for your first confirmed > > country" * > > > > *instead of "within your country."* > > > > > > *Then the people who are whining now will still whine = * > > > > *Oh, he's on the higher peak in my grid,* > > > > *Oh, he's visiting his buddy with the 4-Square and they're having a > > pizza -&- beer party and I love pizza too. * > > > > *My old clothes dont fit any more.* > > > > *My dial-up mode is too slow for today's internet.* > > > > *I'm still stuck in the 1970's with my Drake line.* > > > > > > *DXCC RULE 9. Station Location and Boundary:* > > > > *a)* All stations used to make contacts for a specific DXCC award must be > > located within the same DXCC entity. > > *c)* QSOs made with legally licensed, remotely controlled stations are > > allowed to be used for DXCC credit. > > > > > > Back in the day the A.M operators complained about the SSB guys > > "slop-bucket" > > > > So much complaining... > > _ > > 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: Using 4 - 6 elevated radials in lieu of 120 buried wires
> > > One thing to bear in mind throughout any analysis of such designs for 160M > is > that the total focus of the Broadcast designs and measurements and proofs > is > energy at zero degrees elevation. Our needs benefit from low angle > radiation, > for certain, but, little attention is paid by the broadcasters and by the > modeling programs to position and shape of elevated lobes, or for that > matter, > the shape of the main lobe above zero elevation > Actually WLW, 700, Cincinnati reduced their tower height to raise their angle so that the "first hop" hit the Columbus market, about 100 miles away. I believe this was after their 500KW era. BTW, that tower is now almost 90 years old and even survived a small plane crashing into it There's a lot of interesting engineering and history with WLW. Powell Crosley was an innovator, Supposedly the half megawatt transmitter is still operational and licensed. Ken WA8JXM Ken WA8JXM. On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 2:59 AM Jim Brown wrote: > On 1/4/2024 9:53 PM, Robin wrote: > > Milt Jensen, N5IA (SK) constructed his original (circa 1990s) 160M > > station TX antenna based on a similar design I encouraged him use. He > > built a 180 ft tower with an insulator at 50 ft, Four elevated quarter > > wave radials, each made of a box of four pieces of # 12. This was on > > his "city" lot where buried radials were impossible > > > > It worked very well, We did not have the tools to make real field > > strength measurements to compare to a model, but on air performance was > > excellent > > Some thoughts about that particular installation and why it worked well, > based on my study of Rudy Severns' excellent work on the topic. > > The earth is a big resistor, and thus a lossy place for return current > to flow. Radials are intended to prevent the antenna's field, and its > return current, from seeing the earth. > > The closer they are to the earth, the greater the resistance that > couples to them. The more there are of them, the more evenly current > divides between them, and since P = I squared R, where R is the loss > coupled from the earth, when the radials are close to the earth, the > more radials we have, the less total power will be dissipated in their > combination. THAT'S why more on-ground radials are important. That is, > because power is related to I squared, but I divides by the number of > radials, the total power lost is inversely proportional to the number of > equal radials. > > Current in radials close to the ground also is affected by variations in > the conductivity under them, which caused Rudy to recommend as many > elevated radials as practical. Also to keep the currents more equal, he > recommended making them slightly shorter than resonant. And he observed > that in radials longer than a quarter wave, current increases as we move > away from the feedpoint, reaching a maxima a quarter wave from the end. > > But because Milt's radials were so high, there would have been very > little coupling to the earth, thus none of Rudy's concerns matter. AND > the higher feedpoint which is the current maxima on a quarter-wave > antenna, (and thus the higher max current point), it improves the > vertical pattern. > > BTW -- none of this thinking is new to me, it's what I learned from > studying Rudy's work -- except that the light bulb that lit up for me > was that power division concept as WHY "more is better" for on-ground > radials. > > Another thing I learned from N6BT, who we all know has worked > extensively with verticals, is that to be reasonably efficient on > topband they must be at least 20 ft above the ground. > > 73, Jim K9YC > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Using 4 - 6 elevated radials in lieu of 120 buried wires
Very interesting, thanks for sharing. I have seen similar information in one of the ARRL manuals, that elevated, insulated radials are more efficient than the typical ham buried 30 or 40 radials Perhaps that originated from the information you posted. Is it okay if I post your information to a ham antennas group? Ken WA8JXM On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 9:58 PM Radio KH6O wrote: > Attached is an interesting research paper by Clarence Beverage. > > -- > 73, > Jeff KH6O > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector > _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: GDT's for receive ant's
Hi Dave, I have some design experience for POTS lightning protection. GDTs were sometimes used but by the end of my design career we were using mostly solid state devices (TVS and other SCR like devices). Our golden rule was to avoid turning common mode surges into differential mode as even the solid state devices would have differing turn-on thresholds which would result in higher voltage stresses on the downstream electronics. This meant the protection would go only across tip to ring and never tip-to-ground or ring to ground. GDT's were even worse in this respect. Having said that, I would recommend you dig around for articles written by K3NA related to phased array receive antennas used on Ducie etc. He thought through protection schemes that involved GDTs, Fuses and TVS solutions. Very thorough designs. I remember his designs were documented in the Sept/Oct 2008 and Nov/Dec 2008 NCJs but I was not able to find an archived copy on the web, though this seems to be a version of what I remember: https://ncjweb.com/bonus-content/200807NCJVP6DXreceiveantenna1.pdf 73, Ken - WO1N _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: GDT's for receive ant's
Hi Dave, I have some design experience for POTS lightning protection. GDTs were sometimes used but by the end of my design career we were using mostly solid state devices (TVS and other SCR like devices). Our golden rule was to avoid turning common mode surges into differential mode as even the solid state devices would have differing turn-on thresholds which would result in higher voltage stresses on the downstream electronics. This meant the protection would go only across tip to ring and never tip-to-ground or ring to ground. GDT's were even worse in this respect. Having said that, I would recommend you dig around for articles written by K3NA related to phased array receive antennas used on Ducie etc. He thought through protection schemes that involved GDTs, Fuses and TVS solutions. Very thorough designs. I think his designs were documented in the Sept/Oct 2008 and Nov/Dec 2008 NCJs but I was not able to find an archived copy on the web, though this seems to be a version of what I remember: https://ncjweb.com/bonus-content/200807NCJVP6DXreceiveantenna1.pdf 73, Ken - WO1N _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: New design W1FV preamp for 9-Circle
I have a bunch of paperwork describing the new design preamp (the one with the trimmer cap for gain adjustment) but no schematic. Anyone have a schematic handy? tnx, *Ken K6MR* _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: 1940 kHz Intruder
Hi Frank, I am hearing it here in WNY (Rochester area), but very weak (S1 at best). I can hear it on my vertical, or using receive antennas only when pointing southeast. 73, Ken N2ZN > On Jan 4, 2023, at 7:32 PM, Frank W3LPL wrote: > > Hi John > > Your results suggest the 1940 kHz intruder is near New York City or northern > NJ > > Does anyone else hear it? > > 73 > Frank > W3LPL > > - Original Message - > From: "John Kaufmann via Topband" > To: "topband" > Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2023 12:25:52 AM > Subject: Re: Topband: 1940 kHz Intruder > > Here in the Greater Boston area, the signal peaks from the southwest on my > 8-circle array. It's not real strong, varying between S4 and S6. I can tell > there is some audio in there but it's not strong enough to identify. > > 73, John W1FV > > -Original Message- > From: Topband > [mailto:topband-bounces+john.kaufmann=verizon@contesting.com] On Behalf > Of David Olean > Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2023 7:09 PM > To: Frank W3LPL; topband > Subject: Re: Topband: 1940 kHz Intruder > > I listened this evening at 2345 UT Jan 4, and hear the best strength > with a southwest beverage. I live in Southern Maine. Signal was about S9 > and sounded distorted with possibly two station audio streams. I hope > this helps. My beverages were really messed up (destroyed is more like > it) from the last cyclone around christmas. My EU and East wires are > dead at the moment. I have all the others working again. > > Dave K1WHS > >> On 1/3/2023 5:56 PM, Frank W3LPL wrote: >> The 1940 kHz broadcast station is audible now (2245Z Tuesday) >> Its roughly northeast of Maryland, perhaps in New England >> >> I did not hear it yesterday >> >> 73 >> Frank >> W3LPL >> _ >> 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 > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Lawn staples
Areas of my yard have a lot of stone. Six inch staples were a pain to use. Four inch worked better, in case you have similar soil. Also, if you are going to install a bunch of them, do yourself a favor and buy the staple driver tool which makes it a breeze. 73 Ken K4ZW On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 5:02 PM Mark - N5OT wrote: > I think I gave $18 for a box of 1000 at a hamfest in Joplin MO a couple > years ago. > > Honestly, I can't believe how cool turf staples are, or that I didn't > use them for all the years before that. > > They really are the easy button on putting down radials on the ground. > I use a mower to get the grass as low as I can, then I use my string > trimmer to get it down to pretty much dirt where that individual radial > will go. Then I staple the wire to the ground. Then after a season of > regular grass growth and mowing, you never see them again, but they do > their work. > > I'm a convert. > > 73 - Mark N5OT > > > On 2/22/2022 2:56 PM, Jim Brown wrote: > > On 2/22/2022 12:12 PM, Gene Smar via Topband wrote: > >> HongWay 6 Inch Galvanized Landscape Staples 360 Packs Garden Stakes. > > > > I'm happy with the box I bought from DX Eng several months ago. > > > > 73, Jim K9YC > > _ > > 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
Topband: Congratulations - VE6WZ
Congratulations to Steve Babcock, VE6WZ, who received the Yasme Excellence Award for his contribution to the art of lowband antennas and remote operating. Steve has made available to the amateur community countless hours of instructional videos on lowband topics, available for free on YouTube. Thanks for all you've done Steve! 73 Ken K4ZW _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: PL259 type connectors for RG11
The PL-259 is not a constant impedance connector. It works fine on either cable. And yes, crimp is a whole lot easier. Solder the center pin and you will be golden. Ken K6MR From: Raymond Benny<mailto:rayn...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 12:23 To: 160<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Topband: PL259 type connectors for RG11 I'm in the process of building a vertical phased antenna system for 80m and 160m. I am looking to purchase some crimp type connectors to build the phasing lines but have not found any. RF Parts does not have them. Somewhere online, it was suggested I use the typical RG8 /213 crimp-on connector instead and wonder if this is OK? I do know that the center conductor is smaller in diameter than common RG8/213 cable. Would this make a difference? It seems to me that in the past I did use the standard PL259 and soldered the center conductor and braid, but I'd rather use crimp-on type connectors instead. Any thoughts or other sources for RG11 type PL259 connectors? I did try google and eBay, but they all ended up showing either RG6 or 'N' type connectors. Ray, N6VR/W7YA _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: I4EAT Fausto SK
OM Paolo, Thank you for sharing the sad news about Fausto. He was quite an accomplished DX'er (huge numbers) who held a similar call to mine. I treasure the time in 2013 when I got to spend the day with you, I4EAT, and T77C in Ravenna and San Marino. One of my favorite ham memories. 73, Ken, K4TEA On Wednesday, March 31, 2021, 01:51:57 PM EDT, Paolo Zaffi wrote: Guys, with great sadness I must inform you that Fausto I4EAT passed away today due to COVID. He was a good friend and great DX'er not only on low bands but also on VHF. We will miss him. Regards. Paolo I4EWH _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Portable transmit antenna suggestions?
We installed an 18 meter Spider Pole at ET3AA, which supports a wire Inverted L for 80 and 160. It blows around pretty good at times. While I don't discount Jim's experience, it's been up for 2 plus years and is still going strong. 73 Ken K4ZW On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Jim Brown wrote: > > On 3/10/2021 4:25 AM, S57AD wrote: > > Spiderbeam sells 160m antenna kit (top loaded 60' vertical - telescopic > > fiberglass pole, all the wires, etc, > > Their fiberglass is not to be trusted structurally. I speak from experience. > > 73, Jim K9YC > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Receive ant - binocular cores
Hi Tony, I also use the BN-73-202 cores for my Beverages and have also experienced the self-destructing core phenomenon. Not often, but I have occasionally opened up one of my Beverage boxes and found the two windings perfectly intact, hanging from the connectors, with the remains of the core broken into small pebbles, scattered around the box. I’ve never figured out what it was. The best guesses were from moisture that had somehow gotten into the boxes, which settled on (or in) the core, and went through enough freeze/melt cycles to cause the core to crack. There was no evidence of any lightning hits; no damage to my switching equipment, radios, coax, or other components in line with the antenna. I have never accidentally put power through the beverages, so it wasn’t that. I just figured I had done something wrong in the construction and this was the result. Interested to see some of the theories on this; I had always wondered what could cause this. I have only witnessed it maybe twice or three times in the last dozen years or so. 73, Ken N2ZN > On Oct 5, 2020, at 7:19 AM, tony.kaz--- via Topband > wrote: > > I use BN-73-202 cores for my receive antennas - Pennants, BOGs. > > Finally getting time to check out my receive antennas. One BOG was very low. > The BOG transformer was broken. I mean it was totally destroyed. The largest > piece was 1/8" long. The primary and secondary wires, #30 were intact and > neither open or shorted. The wire looked pristine. Any ideas what could do > that to a ferrite core? Any reason I should change anything other than just > wire another transformer? > > N2TK, Tony > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: 160m Vertical
I would favor using an inductor. Tune it for the lowest part of the band. Then using a relay or two, you can short out turns if you want to move higher in the band. Although I think you will find using Rohn 25, it will be pretty broad. 73 Ken K4ZW On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:28 AM wrote: > > > Hi Ron, > > > > A more reliable approach is a tuner in your shack. The extra coax > cable loss from elevated VSWR is insignificant on topband. > > > How high up the band do you want to go and at what maximum VSWR? > > > A resonant Rohn 25 160M vertical will be about 124 feet tall for > resonance around 1820 kHz > > If for some reason you must install a tuner at the feed point of the > vertical, follow Tree's advice and make it slightly short: 120 feet > of 115 ft if you need to tune for minimum VSWR above 1900 kHz. > > > > Use a small tapped inductor to tune it around the band. > > > 73 > Frank > W3LPL > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Tree" > To: "Ron WV4P" > Cc: "160" > Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 3:18:39 PM > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Vertical > > Slightly shorter makes it easy to use an inductor to make up the > difference. If you make it long - you can do the same with a capacitor - > but it's typically more trouble than the inductor. > > Tree N6TR > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 8:15 AM Ron WV4P wrote: > > > I have built an insulated base for a 1/4 wave 160 antenna. The antenna > > will be XXX' of Rohn 25. In searching I see people using heights from 115' > > - 130' with a pretty high number around 124'. > > I do not know how I am going to match it yet, I figure I will do my > > research on that once it's up so I can learn while experimenting But > > the height has me second guessing. I want it tunable across the band, > > perhaps using a Tornado Tuner like my JK 801's have with a motorized > > inductor ? But the question at hand is do I want the antenna Tall or Short > > ? What is the Method behind the Madness ? :o) > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Ron WV4P > > _ > > 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 _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: DXCC Committe
I don't wish to drag this debate out any longer than necessary, but some credit is due the League and the DXCC desk. I was contacted some time back asking for a section of one of my DX logs. I gave them the whole thing. Check as many QSO's as you like. I have no idea if this had anything to do with the station being discussed, but he was not in my log. So it seems like concerns about cheating were heard, and they are probably doing as much as they can, with the resources available to them. 73 Ken K4ZW On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 3:43 PM Bill Tippett wrote: > > FYI: > > http://g3txf.com/dxtrip/Fake-C21XF/Fake-C21.html > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Slightly OT - amplifier noise
A couple of issues I see. It depends which direction(s) the noise and desired signal are coming from. You may null the noise and signal. Also, the loop is bi-directional. I've been playing with a DX Engineering RF-PRO-1B at ET3AA and it works. Thanks to Tim and the gang for their support. But there is a lot of noise and not being able to null everything except the desired direction I suspect is an issue. Our noise is close in, so I have some upgrades in place using a Hi-Z 4 square and NCC-2 with a "noise" antenna as Frank mentions. Unfortunately the next thing I need to do after I send this, is to cancel my reservation for the 27th of this month. Africa looks like a pretty safe place Covid-19 wise at the moment. But one look at the long lines at immigration did me in. I don't have the patience for that. 73 Ken K4ZW On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 11:43 PM wrote: > > > Hi Rick, > > > > A noise receiving antenna close to a noise source is used in conjunction > with a higher performance receiving antenna such as a Beverage or an > array of short verticals and a passive or active noise canceller. > > > > A small loop antenna provides a mechanically steerable null off of both > sides of the loop. Null beamwidth is just a few degrees at the 3 dB > points, otherwise a small loop is an omni-directional receiving antenna. > Simply turn the loop to minimize the interfering noise signal strength. > > > The smaller the loop, the deeper the null depth but the smaller the signal > strength of desired signals. A small loop antenna requires a low noise > high gain pre-amp directly at its feed point for optimum sensitivity. > > > A small loop antenna should be close to ground for optimum null depth. > Horizontally polarized skywave signals penetrate the nulls if a small > 160 meter loop antenna is much higher than than about ten feet above the > ground > > > On 160 meters a small loop antenna provides: > - a 30 dB null off each side of a 5 foot diameter loop. > - a 25 dB null off each side of a 10 foot diameter loop, or > - a 20 dB null off each side of a 17 foot diameter loop > > > 73 > > Frank > W3LPL > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" > To: "Dave Cuthbert" , n...@arrl.net > Cc: "Topband" > Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2020 10:17:59 PM > Subject: Re: Topband: Slightly OT - amplifier noise > > > I am trying to understand what these noise cancelling > schemes do that couldn't be done with a simple loop > (rotating the loop until the noise drops into one of > the null directions). You can easily prove to yourself > with a hand held AM BCB receiver equipped with a ferrite > bar antenna that even the worst power line noise can > almost always be greatly suppressed by properly rotating > the receiver. Similarly, I have had good luck with > small tuned loops (10 feet perimeter) nulling power > line noise. Smaller loops seem to have deeper nulls. > > It is critical to keep loops away from your other antennas > and power wiring. Otherwise, they will not exhibit a > good null. > > Rick N6RK > _ > 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: Experiences with toploaded vertical with spiderbeam pole?
Hi Henk - we are using an 18 meter Spiderpole at ET3AA. It supports a wire, using a Unadilla 80 meter trap (no longer in production), so that it works on both 80 and 160 meters. I found while using those traps at XW4ZW, that they cannot handle more than 900 - 1000 watts. That is not an issue in Ethiopia as they are power restricted. I'd be happy to share some pictures, email me, but basically the wire is wound around the pole in a somewhat helical pattern, with the trap a meter or two down from the top of the pole. The wire from the top of the trap goes to the top of the pole then out like an L. You could use the top-loading design shown on their webpage too. As I said during my presentation at the Dayton Topband dinner last year, it is the ugliest antenna I have ever built. It was put up in a hurry and swings/bends a lot as you say. I took it down last month, so we can re-guy it when I'm back this weekend. That will keep it straighter than it was. The pole appears to be very strong. The pole at ET3AA works way beyond my expectation. I credit that to the fact is is sitting on a metal roof covering the entire university. It's a vertical antenna, so naturally the counterpoise is a BIG factor, especially with a shortened version such as this. Good luck! 73 Ken K4ZW On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 7:31 AM Henk Remijn PA5KT via Topband wrote: > > Hi, > > I am looking for experiences with the toploaded vertical with a 18m > Spiderbeam pole. > > As described on the Spiderbeam website: > <<https://www.spiderbeam.com/product_info.php?info=p338_160m%20Wire%20Vertical%20kit%20for%2018m%20fiberglass%20pole.html&XTCsid=4a1073266aff30fbb590fe50e3bd792a>> > > I have erected a 18m pole for use as 80m vertical. Looking if I can > change that to 160m as well. > > I see a lot of swing of the top of the pole. Just wondering if the > CQ-534 is strong enough to keep the antenna straight during heavy wind. > > 73 Henk PA5KT > > _ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: 160 Meters in Thailand
Hi Gang - I was fortunate to be part of the HS0ZAR M/2 team for CQWW DX CW. I arrived at the station on Tuesday afternoon, hoping the days leading up to the contest a couple of us would be able to hand out QSO's on the lowbands. A lot of work needed to be done in preparation for the contest, including cabling of new antennas into the shack. Two of those antennas are Waller Flags for receiving. So between not having antennas available and the long hours of preparation, there was little time for operating. Maybe next time. Nevertheless, everything came together beautifully and we had a blast. Here's some pictures of the station and the contest operation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IngAca7VQbQ&feature=youtu.be 73 Ken K4ZW/HS0ZLD _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: RFI on TB
I want to know how you guys get the power company to respond so quickly. I’ve been calling Pacific Gas and Electric for 6 weeks now and nothing. I can’t even get a phone call. Ken K6MR From: Topband on behalf of K4SAV Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 8:43:56 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: RFI on TB Don't know why the mail system thinks this message is spam... Trying again. Lightning surge suppressor on power poles can be big noise generators when they go bad. The worst one I found was three miles from my house and created S9 noise on my receiving array. Its characteristics fooled me at first because it didn't sound like something a power pole could generate. It sounded like someone holding down the dash lever on a keyer set at about 10 wpm and running continuously 24/7. Then one day I heard it break into a more random pattern. That's when I went looking for it. Found it easily because of the huge noise signature. Called it in to the power company, gave them the pole number and which component on the pole was at fault. Went back home and turned on the radio and the noise was gone. Couldn't believe that so I drove back to the pole and they had already disconnected the surge suppressor. Best repair time ever. I use an MFJ-856 to get close and a homebrew ultrasonic detector to identify the exact component on the pole. MFJ also now makes an ultrasonic detector, the MFJ-5008. Jerry, K4SAV _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Fwd: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters OK1YQ (OK1RD) Legitimacy???!!!
Several months ago I was asked by the League for a segment of one of my DX-pedition logs. I assume it was for this, but I don't know that for a fact. Times are changing. There are more ways than ever for someone who wants to game the game. Fake cards seem rather old fashion. 73 Ken K4ZW _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: ET3YOTA Lowband Report
August in South Africa. We took time to give them a hand or discuss what they were working on. After all, this trip was about mentoring youth, and filling the age gap that exists in our hobby. It was a wonderful week with our friends at ET3AA. As I said during my presentation at Visalia last year, my involvement with the club here is one of the coolest things I have done in amateur radio. I think W9XY would agree. I would be remiss if I didn’t mention Terri K8MNJ and the team at DX Engineering for the support they have provided to the station. Thanks to them and the others who have helped, youth and amateur radio is flourishing in of all places, Ethiopia! 73 Ken K4ZW _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Topband: Straws in the Wind ....A 160m Dx'ing Sea Change is Upon us!
Seems like this is a matter of personal preference, where our individual interest lies, and what motivates us to operate. Some of you may know my attempts to activate XW on the lowbands these past few years. My success on Topband to the US, most difficult path, has been limited at best. It seems this would be an opportunity ripe for use of FT8. Personally, I have ZERO interest in doing so. I’d rather stay home or, drink beer with the guys at night than do that. Just my personal preference. Nothing wrong with those who would do it different. Same with RHR. I’ve seen it used to overcome propagation challenges that someone has from their home QTH. I don’t think much of it, I don’t understand the satisfaction, but I recognize it’s allowed for DXCC and people still feel good about working someone that way. Your prerogative. I got involved in lowbands around the age of 17 because I loved the challenge. That and competing with my peers, through continuous home station improvements has kept me engaged in this for almost 40 years. This is a game changer, and you can be sure more, with greater impact, are on the way. If it keeps people active in our beloved hobby, that’s a good thing! For those who think guys like me are dinosaurs, I would kindly suggest you don’t understand what motives us. 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Webinar - Receiving Antenna Metrics With Examples
Thanks to Jukka, OH6LI, for his very informative Webinar. The event recording, presentation slides, and Excel spreadsheet used can be found on the World Wide Radio Operators Foundation (WWROF) at http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/receiving-antenna-metrics-with-examples/ 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Receiving Antenna Metrics With Examples Webinar
The World Wide Radio Operators Foundation (WWROF) is pleased to present the following Webinar. Date - Tuesday, February 13 Time - 19:00 UTC Registration - https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/6004189296300531458 Jukka OH6LI shares a presentation about receiving antennas. Gain and front-to-back are well established specifications. Some have used Receiving Directivity Factor, RDF as a receiving antenna metric. Now we have also the DMF. The Directivity Merit Figure algorithm is shown in an Excel tool for the first time. The Receiving Antenna Metrics Excel workbook is EZNEC and MMANA compatible. Presentation includes new metrics Noise Margin and Leaking Index. A number of antennas will be used as examples. The examples begin with residential area level solutions, extending to staggered beverages and beyond. Please note that this presentation will be recorded and available for playback at your convenience on the WWROF webpage: http://wwrof.org/category/webinar-archive/ 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Band Open - But No Sunrise Peak
High noise levels must be driving people off the band. Conditions have been generally good in the last week, but activity has been light. Have heard several UA9 stations on both 80/160 and worked a few on 80. Europe has also been in very good on both bands. I heard you working the US last night Roger-you were about 579 when I listened. I know a number of folks in the NE USA worked UK9AA last night with 'AA having a good signal for a few hours between 2300-0200z. 73, Ken N2ZN > On Jan 12, 2018, at 9:04 AM, GEORGE WALLNER wrote: > > Some EU stations were S7 in Miami last night, Unfortunately, noise on my TX > antenna was also S7. > > George > AA7JV > > > On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 07:34:58 -0500 > Thomas Hoyer wrote: >> I must be in a black hole as I have listened every night this week and heard >> no EU. Probably doesn't help I have an S7 to S9 noise level >> though >> Tom >> W3TA >> -Original Message- >> From: Roger Kennedy >> To: topband >> Sent: Fri, Jan 12, 2018 4:57 am >> Subject: Topband: Band Open - But No Sunrise Peak >> The band has been open for DX from Europe almost every night this week . . . >> so let's hear some more activity from you North American guys! (I'm >> usually on from around 23.30 Z) >> However . . . I'm still amazed that there seems to be no peak in signals >> around our Sunrise (in the old days, when conditions were much better, >> signals would usually >> increase by at least 10 to 20dB, both ways) >> Roger G3YRO >> _ >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >> _ >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: A way forward to keep 'old school' modes vibrant alongside FT-8?
Most of you know where my heart is on this one. And there are some good suggestions for keeping the old school modes vibrant. While good intentioned, the idea of splitting up the DXCC award is going to be a wasted effort. I would argue remote operating has already changed the DXCC landscape in a major way. Whether it's good or bad is a personal thing. Technology is constantly changing. The DXCC program will never keep up. Get on the air. Do your thing. Have fun. When it ceases to be fun for me, then I know I'll move onto something else. Anyone up for a contest this weekend? 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: TZ4AM
I thought 160 Meters was the Gentleman's band? Some of you need to take a deep breath and relax. Surely you have more important things in your lives? Jeff knows he has an RX problem and he's working on it. What more can he do? Topband is difficult and frustrating from many locations. A little understanding and encouragement goes a long way. 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: underground cables question
As you have found out, it's impossible to keep water out of a conduit like that. I use direct bury cabling and put it directly in the ground. Granted the cable is flooded, but putting in back in the conduit ensures it will sit in some water, something I would try to avoid. 73 Ken K4ZW -Original Message- From: John To: topband Sent: Thu, Oct 5, 2017 4:11 am Subject: Topband: underground cables question Hi all, some years ago I buried a 4 inch conduit about a foot deep in my field , inside I run a control wire and a coax line RG213 to a 160 m vertical the feeder was a total of 5/4 wavelength long about half of it in the conduit, it was used as one line for a pair of verticals spaced 5/8 wave apart. When first installed it worked very good but after a while I noticed it dropped off and I suspected water ingress. An insulation test with 1000v from my electricians test equipment showed indeed a fall in insulation resistance. So my question is I have a couple of large reels of commscope F1160 BEF flooded 75 ohm do you think I could put it in the same conduit which has allowed some water in or would you make alternative arrangements . I realise it a direct bury coax but appreciate advice. I wish to get the two verticals going again will use 1 X 3/4 line above ground 1x5/4 line part in conduit and a 1/2 wave to switch in and out above ground. regards John Beaumont G4EIM _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Upcoming Webinars - Preparing for the Upcoming Contest Season
Hi Gang - with CQWW DX and other contests coming up, I've put together a few Webinars to kick things off. More are in the works, but we're ready to announce the first two. Pass the word! Wednesday, October 4, 9 PM EDT (Thursday, October 5 - 01:00 UTC) A Look at Propagation for the 2017/2018 Contest Season Registration: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5179671020739447042 K9LA will review the status of Cycle 24 for the next half-year, and will discuss how the contest bands will be affected. Bonus - He'll also tell host K4ZW whether the lowbands will open this year during his XW4ZW lowband DXpedition or, whether to bring extra beer money and a deck of cards. Wednesday, October 11, 9 PM EDT (Thursday, October 12 - 01:00 UTC) Contesting! It's a fun game. Let's do it the right way. Registration: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/4458259451700357122 W5ZN discusses the ethics of radiosport and why following the rules matters! 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Enhancement?
I heard you here near the totality. I did not call you since I figured I was too close to see any difference, and you are always pretty loud anyway. Imagine my surprise when you were almost in the noise a while later. Yep, there was a difference. Ken K6MR From: Tree<mailto:t...@kkn.net> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 12:54 To: 160<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Topband: Enhancement? I think so - the peak of the eclipse was around 1715 - my station was at 99.5 percent totality (I was 100 percent totality about 25 miles further sound). N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 8 dB 27 wpm 1753z 21 Aug VE6WZ <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/VE6WZ> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1811.8 CW CQ [LoTW] 9 dB 27 wpm 1747z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 16 dB 26 wpm 1742z 21 Aug VE6WZ <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/VE6WZ> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1811.8 CW CQ [LoTW] 13 dB 26 wpm 1736z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 25 dB 26 wpm 1732z 21 Aug VE6WZ <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/VE6WZ> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1811.8 CW CQ [LoTW] 11 dB 26 wpm 1729z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 20 dB 26 wpm 1722z 21 Aug VE6WZ <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/VE6WZ> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1811.8 CW CQ [LoTW] 6 dB 27 wpm 1713z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 13 dB 27 wpm 1712z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 14 dB 27 wpm 1702z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 8 dB 27 wpm 1652z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 11 dB 26 wpm 1642z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 3 dB 27 wpm 1619z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 5 dB 26 wpm 1609z 21 Aug N7TR <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/N7TR> K7RAT <http://www.reversebeacon.net/qrz/K7RAT> 1812.0 CW CQ [LoTW] 5 dB 26 wpm 1559z 21 Aug _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Dayton 2017 Contest Activities With K3LR
Thanks to Tim Duffy, K3LR, for doing a short video on Contest University and other contest related activities at Dayton 2017. You can access the video on the World Wide Radio Operators Foundation (WWROF) at the following link - http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/k3lr-contest-university-2017-dayton-contest-activities/ 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: N4IS - Waller Flag Construction Webinar Posted
Thanks to JC, N4IS for his presentation. The Webinar and his slides are now available on the WWROF webpage at http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/n4is-waller-flag-construction/ 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Webinar - Waller Flag RX Antenna 101 - How to Construct a WF
Join us for a webinar on Feb 16, 2017 at 9:00 PM EST Register now! - https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7735767269616129539 JC N4IS covers the concepts and decisions to build your own WF low band high performance receive antenna. Topics include: 1- What is a Waller Flag 2- Horizontal or vertical poles. 3- Common node noise, and detuning towers or TX antennas 4- Phasing lines and transformers 5- Feed lines and chokes 6- Preamplifiers, filter and R/T switches 7- How to measure pattern (polar plot) 8- How to test and evaluate results. 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: DX'ing on the Edge - Available in Canada
For those of you in Canada that would like to order this book. I first was looking at ordering from the US Amateur suppliers but the cost of shipping to Canada was more than the cost of the book! I contacted Jeff K1ZM/VY2ZM to see if he had any suggestions for a better supplier to Canada. He suggested Barnes and Noble. I ordered from them (shipping charge $6.58) but after 2 delay messages they cancelled my order (after waiting about a month) stating the book was not available from them. About 10 days ago I was in a local Indigo/Chapters store in Ottawa. I had a look for the book on their online kiosk in the store and was able to order it for $27 CDN to be delivered to the store (no shipping charge). I received an e-mail today that the book was in and I picked it up. It was a full edition - no issues. Thanks Jeff for a great looking product. I look forward to reading it and working you on 160 again some day. 73, Ken VA3KA _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: ARRL 160
Not sure about other loggers: mine (DXLog.net) has a hotkey that marks the Q in real time. Ken K6MR From: DXer<mailto:hfdxmoni...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 2:54 PM To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160 If I understood this correctly, the QSO will not count for/against you, but remains on the log for the benefit of the other station. My question is, this line 'x'ing' must be done manually after the contest, right? 73 de Vince, VA3VF On 2016-12-05 4:46 PM, Ken K6MR wrote: > So what does X-QSO do to a log line? > > > > Ken K6MR > > > > > > From: Tree<mailto:t...@kkn.net> > Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 11:37 AM > To: Lee STRAHAN<mailto:k7...@msn.com> > Cc: Ward Silver<mailto:hward...@gmail.com>; > topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160 > > > > There is no way to mark a QSO as unclaimed in the Cabrillo format. > > Either it is there or not. _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: ARRL 160
So what does X-QSO do to a log line? Ken K6MR From: Tree<mailto:t...@kkn.net> Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 11:37 AM To: Lee STRAHAN<mailto:k7...@msn.com> Cc: Ward Silver<mailto:hward...@gmail.com>; topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160 There is no way to mark a QSO as unclaimed in the Cabrillo format. Either it is there or not. The correct thing to do is have the log submitted with what was copied during the contest. It is also correct for the Web App to not delete the QSO. In this case - it flagged it - and perhaps prevented submission of the log without it being corrected - but I think this is not the right thing. Submitting the log via via email to 160me...@arrl.org bypasses the web app - and in this case will allow the log to be submitted as is. And in any case - if you find you are having issues - you can contact the ARRL for help. 73 Tree N6TR (who is also the log checker for most - if not all - of the 160 meter contests) On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Lee STRAHAN wrote: > That's all OK Ward but the guy on the other end will not get credit for > the correct QSO. Not right also. > I chose to mark the QSO as unclaimed as that hopefully will deal with it > correctly? > Lee K7TJR OR > > >> > If the web upload app for log submission finds something in a QSO: line it > can't deal with... > > > The ARRL submission AP tells you to correct the mistakes rather than > remove or unclaim them and that is NOT RIGHT! > > Point of clarification - the app does not really know anything about a > particular call. It just knows that the data it found in what it thought > was a call sign field did not look like a call sign. (You would get a > similar error if the Sent Call data is bad or the RST isn't an > RST.) It is up to the log submitter as to what to do about that. If the > QSO: line is just mis-formatted, rearranging the information to satisfy the > Cabrillo format is perfectly OK. If the call sign is busted (from typo, > mis-copy, or whatever), my suggestion would be to remove the line > entirely. Same thing if the the section abbreviation is not valid. > > 73, Ward N0AX > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ > 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: Waller Flag construction and performance
No, only at the feedpoint. Once I get the resistors changed I’ll try some tests with the feedline. Thanks for all the ideas. This thing may work yet! Ken K6MR From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 19:04 To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance Ken, I am thinking along the lines as Gregg. Try disconnecting the feedline at the antenna and compare noise levels. Do you have a choke on both ends of the feedline ? Bob K6UJ On 4/26/16 6:00 PM, Ken K6MR wrote: > Good idea Gregg. I suspect there may be some common mode problems. > > I did discover one problem thanks to questions from K6UJ: the resistors on > the loops need to be non-inductive and the ones I installed are not. Dumb > error on my part. When I lower the antenna to change the resistors I will be > able to get to the feedline connector. So that is something I can do easily. > I also have more ferrites so I may add some additional feedline chokes since > I have to cut the feedline loose from the mast anyway. > > Thanks, > > Ken K6MR > > > > From: Gregg W6IZT<mailto:gregg.w6i...@gmail.com> > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 17:34 > To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance > > Ken: > > No directivity and noisier than the TX vertical. Perhaps you should look at > these as two separate observations. Try disconnecting the feedline at the > antenna. What is the noise level with the antenna disconnected and the > pre-amp gain adjusted for 35-40 dB? > > 73 > Gregg > W6IZT > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ken K6MR > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 6:11 PM > To: Clive GM3POI ; topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance > > No it does not and that’s a good point. I’m pretty sure the vertical 800 feet > away is not much of an issue, but the tower within 150’ could be a problem. > The model is going to be difficult because there are four yagis on the tower. > Good project for a rainy day. > I have one other tower about 350’ away that also has multiple yagis but > hopefully that also is far enough. > > The other option is to move it to one of the other towers and change to > horizontal polarization and up higher. N4IS seems to prefer that orientation. > At the moment the performance is so poor that I’m thinking I did something > wrong in the assembly. > > Ken K6MR > > > > > > From: Clive GM3POI<mailto:gm3p...@btinternet.com> > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 15:03 > To: 'Ken K6MR'<mailto:k...@outlook.com> > Subject: RE: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance > > on Locked=" > Ken, When you say the EZnec model looks great does that include the other > towers.? If not include them and reassess. > 73 Clive GM3POI > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ken K6MR > Sent: 23 April 2016 18:38 > To: Bob K6UJ; topband@contesting.com > Subject: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance > > Let’s start here and see how it goes. If someone complains we’ll take it off > line. Nothing like a public discussion to bring out the best ideas. I > changed the subject line so the discussion will make sense. > > The 160 transmit vertical is about 800’ away. There is an 80’ tower with > various higher band yagis on it about 150’ away. > > My loop size is 12’ high, 10’ wide. 4’ between loops. Vertical loops. The > boom is 50’ high. The tower is near the house, but single story house so the > boom is 35’ above the roof. > > The EZNec model looks great (of course). The gain models a bit low, but the > RDF and gain test are in the right ranges. Right now the big problem is no > directivity and it is actually noisier than the vertical. I have the > adjustable gain pre-amp from DXE (KD9SV design) in the shack. > > So that’s the background. Common mode problems would indeed be my first > suspect. Interested in how you handled it. > > Ken K6MR > > From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 11:00 > To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise > > rue" Name="index 1"/> Hi Ken, > > Be glad to. It took me a while to get mine working, found some basic things > I needed to do and it now works very well. > First a question. How far is your flag from the house and also an antenna > tower or other metal structures ? I
Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance
Yes I did put that in. I think. I modeled the whole thing and duplicated the phasing line lengths and crossover at the feedpoint. Although once I get it down I’m going to recheck that again. After my blunder with the resistors there’s no telling what else I’ve done wrong. Thanks, Ken K6MR From: Lee STRAHAN<mailto:k7...@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 18:16 To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance Ken, did you remember the 180 degree phase inversion needed on the Waller flag. It will act like a very large signal level single loop if not. Lee K7TJR _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance
Good idea Gregg. I suspect there may be some common mode problems. I did discover one problem thanks to questions from K6UJ: the resistors on the loops need to be non-inductive and the ones I installed are not. Dumb error on my part. When I lower the antenna to change the resistors I will be able to get to the feedline connector. So that is something I can do easily. I also have more ferrites so I may add some additional feedline chokes since I have to cut the feedline loose from the mast anyway. Thanks, Ken K6MR From: Gregg W6IZT<mailto:gregg.w6i...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 17:34 To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance Ken: No directivity and noisier than the TX vertical. Perhaps you should look at these as two separate observations. Try disconnecting the feedline at the antenna. What is the noise level with the antenna disconnected and the pre-amp gain adjusted for 35-40 dB? 73 Gregg W6IZT -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ken K6MR Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 6:11 PM To: Clive GM3POI ; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance No it does not and that’s a good point. I’m pretty sure the vertical 800 feet away is not much of an issue, but the tower within 150’ could be a problem. The model is going to be difficult because there are four yagis on the tower. Good project for a rainy day. I have one other tower about 350’ away that also has multiple yagis but hopefully that also is far enough. The other option is to move it to one of the other towers and change to horizontal polarization and up higher. N4IS seems to prefer that orientation. At the moment the performance is so poor that I’m thinking I did something wrong in the assembly. Ken K6MR From: Clive GM3POI<mailto:gm3p...@btinternet.com> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 15:03 To: 'Ken K6MR'<mailto:k...@outlook.com> Subject: RE: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance on Locked=" Ken, When you say the EZnec model looks great does that include the other towers.? If not include them and reassess. 73 Clive GM3POI -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ken K6MR Sent: 23 April 2016 18:38 To: Bob K6UJ; topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance Let’s start here and see how it goes. If someone complains we’ll take it off line. Nothing like a public discussion to bring out the best ideas. I changed the subject line so the discussion will make sense. The 160 transmit vertical is about 800’ away. There is an 80’ tower with various higher band yagis on it about 150’ away. My loop size is 12’ high, 10’ wide. 4’ between loops. Vertical loops. The boom is 50’ high. The tower is near the house, but single story house so the boom is 35’ above the roof. The EZNec model looks great (of course). The gain models a bit low, but the RDF and gain test are in the right ranges. Right now the big problem is no directivity and it is actually noisier than the vertical. I have the adjustable gain pre-amp from DXE (KD9SV design) in the shack. So that’s the background. Common mode problems would indeed be my first suspect. Interested in how you handled it. Ken K6MR From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 11:00 To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise rue" Name="index 1"/> Interesting comments about the WF. I recently built one and so far it has > been a complete failure. > > Care to share the details? > > Ken K6MR > > > > From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 10:30 > To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise > > Bill, > > Sounds great ! hihihi A lot cheaper than a Pixel too ! > > Until now I have kept my comments to myself about the Pixel. > I had a Pixel for a short time and sold it. > At the time I had electrical hash from one direction due to loose > hardware on a power pole. > It took forever for our utility company to fix it. I have a Waller > Flag for receive on 160 and it was very effective at nulling out the > power pole noise. I read all the rave reviews on the Pixel and > thought it would outperform the Flag for nulling out the noise and was > also curious how it compared to the flag on picking up 160 DX signals. > The Pixel did provide a nice null from the power pole noise but not > nearly as deep of a null as the Waller Flag. On discriminating > 160 DX from the band noise level > it was very poor indeed. The Waller Flag way out performed the Pixel. > I
Re: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance
No it does not and that’s a good point. I’m pretty sure the vertical 800 feet away is not much of an issue, but the tower within 150’ could be a problem. The model is going to be difficult because there are four yagis on the tower. Good project for a rainy day. I have one other tower about 350’ away that also has multiple yagis but hopefully that also is far enough. The other option is to move it to one of the other towers and change to horizontal polarization and up higher. N4IS seems to prefer that orientation. At the moment the performance is so poor that I’m thinking I did something wrong in the assembly. Ken K6MR From: Clive GM3POI<mailto:gm3p...@btinternet.com> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 15:03 To: 'Ken K6MR'<mailto:k...@outlook.com> Subject: RE: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance on Locked=" Ken, When you say the EZnec model looks great does that include the other towers.? If not include them and reassess. 73 Clive GM3POI -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ken K6MR Sent: 23 April 2016 18:38 To: Bob K6UJ; topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance Let’s start here and see how it goes. If someone complains we’ll take it off line. Nothing like a public discussion to bring out the best ideas. I changed the subject line so the discussion will make sense. The 160 transmit vertical is about 800’ away. There is an 80’ tower with various higher band yagis on it about 150’ away. My loop size is 12’ high, 10’ wide. 4’ between loops. Vertical loops. The boom is 50’ high. The tower is near the house, but single story house so the boom is 35’ above the roof. The EZNec model looks great (of course). The gain models a bit low, but the RDF and gain test are in the right ranges. Right now the big problem is no directivity and it is actually noisier than the vertical. I have the adjustable gain pre-amp from DXE (KD9SV design) in the shack. So that’s the background. Common mode problems would indeed be my first suspect. Interested in how you handled it. Ken K6MR From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 11:00 To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise rue" Name="index 1"/> Interesting comments about the WF. I recently built one and so far it has > been a complete failure. > > Care to share the details? > > Ken K6MR > > > > From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 10:30 > To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise > > Bill, > > Sounds great ! hihihi A lot cheaper than a Pixel too ! > > Until now I have kept my comments to myself about the Pixel. > I had a Pixel for a short time and sold it. > At the time I had electrical hash from one direction due to loose > hardware on a power pole. > It took forever for our utility company to fix it. I have a Waller > Flag for receive on 160 and it was very effective at nulling out the > power pole noise. I read all the rave reviews on the Pixel and > thought it would outperform the Flag for nulling out the noise and was > also curious how it compared to the flag on picking up 160 DX signals. > The Pixel did provide a nice null from the power pole noise but not > nearly as deep of a null as the Waller Flag. On discriminating > 160 DX from the band noise level > it was very poor indeed. The Waller Flag way out performed the Pixel. > I could hear DX stations with the > flag and could not hear them at all on the pixel when receiving > stations close to the noise level. > The Pixel would be suited for someone in an apartment or with a small > lot and doesn't have the room for a larger receiving antenna like the > Waller Flag. It is a compromise receiving antenna but we have to work > with what we have as far as room for antennas. > > 73, > Bob > K6UJ > > > > On 4/23/16 9:45 AM, william radice wrote: >> I have an antenna of very similar design and performance. It is >> an all aluminum lawn chair on a pole. >> BILL >> >> On 4/22/2016 1:42 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote: >>> Throw bricks all you want to the end of time but you'll never change >>> the fact that we tested that antenna and saw its performance first >>> hand; The preamp was designed by Jack Smith at CliftonLabs..I'm sure >>> he'll enjoy reading your comments and get a good laugh. >>> >>> 73 >>> >>> Rob >>> K5UJ >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:26 AM, JC wrote: >>>> SORRY am not getting into this PR.. PIXEL loop is a low RDF and LO
Topband: Waller Flag construction and performance
Let’s start here and see how it goes. If someone complains we’ll take it off line. Nothing like a public discussion to bring out the best ideas. I changed the subject line so the discussion will make sense. The 160 transmit vertical is about 800’ away. There is an 80’ tower with various higher band yagis on it about 150’ away. My loop size is 12’ high, 10’ wide. 4’ between loops. Vertical loops. The boom is 50’ high. The tower is near the house, but single story house so the boom is 35’ above the roof. The EZNec model looks great (of course). The gain models a bit low, but the RDF and gain test are in the right ranges. Right now the big problem is no directivity and it is actually noisier than the vertical. I have the adjustable gain pre-amp from DXE (KD9SV design) in the shack. So that’s the background. Common mode problems would indeed be my first suspect. Interested in how you handled it. Ken K6MR From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 11:00 To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise rue" Name="index 1"/> Interesting comments about the WF. I recently built one and so far it has > been a complete failure. > > Care to share the details? > > Ken K6MR > > > > From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 10:30 > To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> > Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise > > Bill, > > Sounds great ! hihihi A lot cheaper than a Pixel too ! > > Until now I have kept my comments to myself about the Pixel. > I had a Pixel for a short time and sold it. > At the time I had electrical hash from one direction due to loose > hardware on a power pole. > It took forever for our utility company to fix it. I have a Waller Flag > for receive on 160 and it > was very effective at nulling out the power pole noise. I read all the > rave reviews on the Pixel and > thought it would outperform the Flag for nulling out the noise and was > also curious how it compared > to the flag on picking up 160 DX signals. The Pixel did provide a nice > null from the power pole noise > but not nearly as deep of a null as the Waller Flag. On discriminating > 160 DX from the band noise level > it was very poor indeed. The Waller Flag way out performed the Pixel. > I could hear DX stations with the > flag and could not hear them at all on the pixel when receiving stations > close to the noise level. > The Pixel would be suited for someone in an apartment or with a small > lot and doesn't have the room > for a larger receiving antenna like the Waller Flag. It is a compromise > receiving antenna but we have > to work with what we have as far as room for antennas. > > 73, > Bob > K6UJ > > > > On 4/23/16 9:45 AM, william radice wrote: >> I have an antenna of very similar design and performance. It is an >> all aluminum lawn chair on a pole. >> BILL >> >> On 4/22/2016 1:42 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote: >>> Throw bricks all you want to the end of time but you'll never change >>> the fact that we tested that antenna and saw its performance first >>> hand; The preamp was designed by Jack Smith at CliftonLabs..I'm sure >>> he'll enjoy reading your comments and get a good laugh. >>> >>> 73 >>> >>> Rob >>> K5UJ >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:26 AM, JC wrote: >>>> SORRY am not getting into this PR.. PIXEL loop is a low RDF and LOW >>>> performance receiving antenna, it is really snake oil. >>>> >>>> I'm out of this discussion. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> JC >>>> >>>> >>>> In tests, the Pixel magnetic loop provided at least 20 dB null off the >>>> sides. From my experience, that is much better "filtering" than what >>>> would be had with a horizontal loop. Of course it isn't all in the >>>> antenna itself--a great deal of the success comes from the special preamp >>>> designed for use with the antenna. >>>> <<< >>>> _ >>>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >>>> >>> _ >>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >> _ >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >> > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ > 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: The band sans noise
Interesting comments about the WF. I recently built one and so far it has been a complete failure. Care to share the details? Ken K6MR From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k...@pacbell.net> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 10:30 To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise Bill, Sounds great ! hihihi A lot cheaper than a Pixel too ! Until now I have kept my comments to myself about the Pixel. I had a Pixel for a short time and sold it. At the time I had electrical hash from one direction due to loose hardware on a power pole. It took forever for our utility company to fix it. I have a Waller Flag for receive on 160 and it was very effective at nulling out the power pole noise. I read all the rave reviews on the Pixel and thought it would outperform the Flag for nulling out the noise and was also curious how it compared to the flag on picking up 160 DX signals. The Pixel did provide a nice null from the power pole noise but not nearly as deep of a null as the Waller Flag. On discriminating 160 DX from the band noise level it was very poor indeed. The Waller Flag way out performed the Pixel. I could hear DX stations with the flag and could not hear them at all on the pixel when receiving stations close to the noise level. The Pixel would be suited for someone in an apartment or with a small lot and doesn't have the room for a larger receiving antenna like the Waller Flag. It is a compromise receiving antenna but we have to work with what we have as far as room for antennas. 73, Bob K6UJ On 4/23/16 9:45 AM, william radice wrote: > I have an antenna of very similar design and performance. It is an > all aluminum lawn chair on a pole. > BILL > > On 4/22/2016 1:42 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote: >> Throw bricks all you want to the end of time but you'll never change >> the fact that we tested that antenna and saw its performance first >> hand; The preamp was designed by Jack Smith at CliftonLabs..I'm sure >> he'll enjoy reading your comments and get a good laugh. >> >> 73 >> >> Rob >> K5UJ >> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:26 AM, JC wrote: >>> SORRY am not getting into this PR.. PIXEL loop is a low RDF and LOW >>> performance receiving antenna, it is really snake oil. >>> >>> I'm out of this discussion. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> JC >>> >>> >>> In tests, the Pixel magnetic loop provided at least 20 dB null off the >>> sides. From my experience, that is much better "filtering" than what >>> would be had with a horizontal loop. Of course it isn't all in the >>> antenna itself--a great deal of the success comes from the special preamp >>> designed for use with the antenna. >>> <<< >>> _ >>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >>> >> _ >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: WWROF Webinar - High Performance RX Antennas for a Small Lot
Thanks to JC N4IS for his excellent presentation on lowband RX antennas and to WWROF for their continued sponsorship of the Webinar programs. We had almost 500 people register for this event! The recorded Webinar along with a copy of JC's slides has been posted to: http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/high-performance-rx-antennas-for-a-small-lot/ 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Webinar - High Performance RX Antennas for a Small Lot
The World Wide Radio Operators Foundation (www.wwrof.org) is pleased to sponsor the following Webinar. High Performance RX Antennas for a Small Lot Jose Carlos (JC), N4IS, will look at basic concepts of RX antennas and share his experiences with lowband RX antennas on a small lot, including the Waller Flag. Date & Time: March 3 - 9 PM EST (March 4 - 02:00 UTC) Register: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5041717483258312204 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: VP8STI last night
Just my observations from what happened here last night in NY (doesn't help you west coast guys, I guess). VP8STI was solid copy from my sunset around 2230z until 0200z. Very little fading and Q5 copy. They were calling and working EU only during this period. Around 0200z, their signal got much weaker and more susceptible to QSB. They also started calling for anyone at that time, not just EU. I don't know if they switched direction on their TX array or not at that point, but things did get worse at that point; propagation I'm assuming. I use two 560' beverages to receive, one at 135 degrees and one at 180 degrees. No diversity rx, just switching back and forth. They were the same copy on both antennas, generally, since both are about the same amount "off" of STI's hearing from here (FN13, western NY). I didn't listen much after 0200z, so I don't know if their signal came back up at any point. They did have an excellent run of EU during that 2200-0200 time frame, though. 73, Ken N2ZN > On Jan 22, 2016, at 11:11 AM, Tom wrote: > > N6SS is located about 40 miles north west of me in AZ,, 2800 feet higher in > elevation and a lot quieter location,,and better receiving antennas,, I have > not heard but just traces past 2 nights,, will be there tonight,, been > listening to the east coast guys working them,, all signals have been great > except Vp8!! Congrats to all that have worked them and maybe tonite the > propagation gods will shine west!!! > 73's > Tom > > -Original Message- > From: Tree > Sender: "Topband" > Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 06:57:33 > To: 160 > Subject: Topband: VP8STI last night in Oregon > > At least in my location - I would say that things were no better last night. > > N6SS in Arizona said he worked them just after 0400Z. There was also a > report that he came back to N6MB about 10 times around 0430Z - but N6MB was > not hearing him. The data suggests they are hearing better than getting > out - which means if you can hear them - the spotlight is shining on you > and you have a pretty good chance of making the QSO. > > If it was easy - it wouldn't be as rewarding when it happens!! > > Good luck to all. > > 73 Tree N6TR > Hillsboro, OR > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: XW4ZW Update
I see now why my original post, from the 18th, didn't show up. I sent it to the wrong address. It's below. I can report that the beverage is working very well! Only thing I can figure is that it fills in a gap to the south, where the 4 square pattern falls off. Last night the band was rather noisy to the south. The guys in Bangkok told me this morning they had rain so that may explain it. Nothing left to do but keep plugging away. I really hope things pick up on Topband but I know XW is very rare on 80 as well. I have 330 plus countries on 80 from home and still need it. 73 Ken K4ZW/XW4ZW --- Hi Gang - quick update on things from Laos. Yesterday I added a few more radials to the TX antenna. It's a trapped wire vertical for 80 & 160, full size. It now has 32 quarter wave 160 meter radials. As most of you have observed, when propagation allows, it's working fine. I continue to be a little confounded on the receive side of things. For example on 80 meters the TX signal is fine into the US but it's real work pulling out stations calling. Some of them with big arrays and full power. I don't have a high noise problem and there have been no storms in the area. I'm using a completely refurbished, by DX Engineering, W8JI 4 square array on receive. Maybe more of an RX system than some of the guys hearing me. The F/B on it is excellent, on the signals I can hear. That wasn't necessarily the case last year. Today I added a second ground rod at each element, not being sure what condition the existing ones were in. When I arrived I replaced ALL of the coax and control lines. We in effect have a new system now. Today I installed a beverage to the south. It's a little short for 160, about 450'. But it will be interesting to compare it to the 4 square. The rig by the way is a Yaesu FT 5000 so I have good hardware. In fact there is a new one available and I guess I can always try swapping radios. All I can say is if you hear me, keep plugging away. At times it feels like I'm in a big RF RX hole but one of these days things will break loose. I do have a favor to ask. If you worked me last year, please don't make a duplicate QSO. Too many people need XW. Sit back, listen, and enjoy knowing you already made it into the log. There is a log checker on my QRZ.com page. Logs are uploaded daily to K1SE and ARRL LOTW. As of now, I'm scheduled to fly back to Bangkok on the 23rd. I do have some flexibility. Let's see how things go. _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Strange propagation
“Remember back in the Golden Years when it was STRICTLY FORBIDDEN to profit from "amateur radio" When did that go away???” I believe the rule is “station must not transmit communications for hire or for material compensation, direct or indirect, paid or promised…” That’s way different from “profit from amateur radio”. Otherwise all the equipment manufacturers would be non-profits (more likely out of business). Ken K6MR From: Brian Mattson<mailto:k8...@alphacomm.net> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 13:45 To: Louis Parascondola<mailto:gudguy...@aol.com>; topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Strange propagation -Original Message- From: Louis Parascondola via Topband Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 3:27 PM To: j...@audiosystemsgroup.com ; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Strange propagation >SO they did the next best thing and left it up to the individual to decide >what is moral or ethical for them. If someone gets DXCC honor roll using >that system, good for them but it >doesn't hold water to me. They work >really hard putting up towers on a regular basis not to mention maintaining >it all. They make an honest living. Remember back in the Golden Years when it was STRICTLY FORBIDDEN to profit from "amateur radio" When did that go away??? -Original Message- From: Jim Brown To: topband Sent: Thu, Jan 14, 2016 1:49 pm Subject: Re: Topband: Strange propagation On Thu,1/14/2016 10:33 AM, Herbert Schoenbohm wrote: >The problem with the US RHR deals is that it completely skews the process > as far as the propagation differences across the fruited plan. I > would love to add to my DXCC totals as I close into the 300 mark. USA > stations can do this but is it ethical. It sure makes money for a pay > to play amateur radio scheme. Amen Herb!! >I strongly agree -- while it is permitted by DXCC rules, it is NOT >ETHICAL to use a remote station, or a different QTH of your own, >thousands of miles closer to a DX entity to add to your country totals. >And in reality, it IS pay to play -- nice stations cost money! There's >the gear, the antennas, and the real estate. Yes Jim, ALL of our stations require those outlays, but we don't make money from them! >73, Jim K9YC Brian, K8BHZ _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Webinar - "Grayline Propagation, or Florida to Cocos (Keeling) on 80m"
N4II's very informative Webinar has been posted to the World Wide Radio Operators Foundation (WWROF) web page. "The 2013 VK9CZ DXpedition to the Cocos (Keeling) Islands made 51 QSOs with US Zone 5 on 80m. 21 of these QSOs – more than 40 percent – were with stations in Florida. This presentation discusses several possible propagation mechanisms for this grayline event, and concludes that propagation through the dark ionosphere, rather than along the grayline itself, was the responsible mechanism." The direct link to the archive is: http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/grayline-propagation-or-florida-to-cocos-keeling-on-80m-ed-callaway-n4ii/ 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Webinar - "Grayline Propagation, or Florida to Cocos (Keeling) on 80m"
Description: The 2013 VK9CZ DXpedition to the Cocos (Keeling) Islands made 51 QSOs with US Zone 5 on 80m. 21 of these QSOs - more than 40 percent - were with stations in Florida. This presentation discusses several possible propagation mechanisms for this grayline event, and concludes that propagation through the dark ionosphere, rather than along the grayline itself, was the responsible mechanism. Date: March 5 Time: 9 PM EST (March 6 - 02:00 UTC) Registration: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/1210821051936697601 _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: The Stew
I almost fell out of the chair when NO3M came back to me… Definitely time for a receive antenna. I looked at the K9AY and I believe it is somewhat dependent on a decent ground, which can’t be found around here. I was hoping for a report from N6RO on his new Shared Apex Loop Array. Looks like a good bet for ground challenged locations. Ken K6MR From: Tim Shoppa Sent: Sunday, 19 October, 2014 10:11 To: Richard (Rick) Karlquist, topBand List Rick - you were very loud here. Also out on the left coast was K7RAT coming in very clearly too. I think you two were the only "coasters" I found. I had a fair number of 7 pointers not on the coast. If you want a simple easy to maintain directional loop, I strongly recommend a K9AY. Last night I would sometimes stop and listen to NO3M running the far west. Very very rarely could I hear the guys he was working!! Tim N3QE On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist < rich...@karlquist.com> wrote: > I got on for about 2 hours after local sunset here. > Band was very quiet as predicted. Lots of east > coast stations worked. Also, the VE3's were out > in force as usual. Only "DX" was KV4FZ, who > was easily worked on the first call. The > activity dropped off after 0400Z and I shut down > after about 75 QSO's. I ran high power and "felt > loud". Lots of callers at the noise level. > I probably missed a fair number of callers. > Receive antenna was just a 20 foot loop. I need > to get a directional array going. > > Rick N6RK > > > On 10/18/2014 4:14 PM, pat wrote: > >> Not sure what you mean by not worthwhile. Sorry about your beverages. >> I'll be one after my daughter's soccer game. >> >> dit dit >> >> n8vw >> >> On October 18, 2014 6:24:52 PM EDT, Garry Shapiro wrote: >> >>> I have never found it worthwhile, and my Bevs were flattened by a >>> falling tree. >>> >>> Garry, NI6T >>> >>> On 10/18/2014 11:57 AM, pat wrote: >>> >>>> Don't forget to get on for the fall edition of the Stew Perry >>>> >>> contest. >>> >>>> >>>> n8vw >>>> _ >>>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >>>> >>>> _ >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband >> >> >> _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: TX relays
Milt's question was a good one and it got my interest since I am in the process of building an 80 meter transmit array. It's unfortunate the discussion tuned into an excrement fest but it shouldn't come as a surprise. People are who they are. Thanks to those who provided useful comments. I looked over data sheets for a variety of DPDT relays but eventually bought mine from Array Solutions. Why? There were a lot of choices and I really wasn't sure which was best suited for my application. I figured, and time will tell, that they have been used in enough applications and potential issues should have been sorted out by now. Might there be something better or could I have got them cheaper? Maybe. But I don't have time to analyze this to the nth degree. The project moves forward. 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Webinar - A Long Overdue Review of Gray Line Propagation on the Low Bands
The World Wide Radio Operators Foundation (WWROF) is pleased to present A Long Overdue Review of Gray Line Propagation on the Low Bands with Carl Luetzelschwab, K9LA. Carl will trace the origin of gray line propagation, and show that there is a problem with the current explanation that propagation along the terminator is efficient. He will then provide an alternative explanation for gray line that satisfies both observations and ionospheric physics. Date: Thursday, September 11 Time: 9 PM EDT (Friday, September 12 - 01:00 UTC) Registration: https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/582697442 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: Are We Headed Into Another Maunder Minimum?
The World Wide Radio Operators Foundation (WWROF) is pleased to host Carl Luetzelschwab, K9LA, as he presents "Are We Headed Into Another Maunder Minimum? What Does It Mean for Propagation?" Date: Thursday, April 24 Time: 9 PM EDT (Friday, April 25 - 01:00 UTC) Registration: https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/659385122 73 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: The Quest to save AM radio
"Exactly right. Isn't small government wonderful?" That's really not the problem. Many federal agencies, including the one I work at, have plenty of money and personnel. It's more a function of priorities and who sets them. Years ago when I was in a Master's program, one of the courses I took was Telecommunications Law taught at the George Mason University School of Law. It was taught by an adjunct professor who was an attorney at the FCC. I was the only engineer in the class. It was a fantastic class, the best one of the program! One of the things we looked at was expanding broadband access in the US. BPL was prominent at the time. I remember trying to make the case about its interference potential to existing services and I was basically told I hear you, your right, but you are barking up the wrong tree. It was clear many of the decisions were being made by policy types and not by people that understood its implications, especially the technical part. If BPL was going to be defeated, it would happen because it wasn't financially viable, not on technical merits, because it harmed existing services. Who could be against greater broadband access for the public? Are other services like guys with t heir ham radios and AM broadcast stations (who listens to AM) going to trump that objective? I'm more dubious about greater enforcement than some it appears. It's an uphill battle on many fronts. Aren't there powerline RFI cases that have gone unresolved for years because the FCC won't step in or won't enforce their own standards? Besides, how long have guys like K1MAN and KZ8O been on double secret probation, and nothing can be done about them? Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Z81Z
I was unable to get the antenna working today. Not really sure why because it was tested extensively at home. Could be interaction with the tower. Maybe just as good as some strong rain storms are moving through the area. I'll make another attempt at it tomorrow. Ken K4ZW/Z81Z _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Z81Z
Got a line up on the tower today so I will do my best to be on this evening. But I have a lot of challenges to deal with in order to make this happen so hang in there. I will do my best. 73 Ken K4ZW/Z81Z _ Topband Reflector
Topband: Webinar - The first Top Band DX Contest – the 1921 Transatlantic Test
Frank Donovan, W3LPL, provides a very entertaining and informative look at the 1921 Transatlantic contest, complete with the transmitters, receivers, and antennas used. Since that time much has changed in the equipment and antennas used. The lengths contestants will go to win a contest has not. Guaranteed you will enjoy Frank's presentation. Date: March 18 Time: 9 PM EDT (March 19 - 01:00 UTC) Registration: https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/949979170 Ken K4ZW _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: 160 knocking out modem
The one major problem with the DSL is that every time I would key on 160 the DSL would just shut down and loose connectivity completely. I tried building filters, toroid wraps and even shielded tel-co wiring but anything over 50 watts on 160 cause a disconnection using the DSL service. I tried four different DSL modems, still no improvement. Then Dan, K3ZXL suggested I try a filter made by Westek Electronics, their type TC-Z100B1 telephone DSL line filter, which I ordered right on line from their website at www.westek.com. The item cost only $8.50 with shipping cost of $5.95. After installation all the interference which used to crash the connection is gone. Shipping cost were $5.95. Now running a full KW on 160 is possible after plugging this filter between the wall jack and the DSL modem. Regards, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ __ Hello A word of caution regarding the above "solution" to 160 getting into and shutting down a modem. I ordered the TC-Z100B1 and put it in line and it does not allow DSL to pass. I called Westek and talked to the head engineer (John Martin) and he verified it would not work as it will not pass DSL. My DSL comes from Century Link (Formerly Quest) over my phone line. 73 Ken W0LSD _ Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
Since I started this thread, hopefully this will end it. I was talking about a difference on the order of 6' - 9', which I think was understood. But there are always those few that like to stir the pot, no matter how petty. Thanks to those who provided useful feedback. I'll follow up directly as I get further into the project. Ken K4ZW ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: Vertical Array Over Uneven Ground
Has anyone modeled or have experience with a transmit vertical array, say a 4-square, over uneven ground? By uneven I mean a variance of up to 2 - 3 meters over the footprint of the array elements. I have plenty of room at this QTH but the terrain is fairly uneven. I've done some modeling but would like to see if my findings compare with others that may have done the same. Modeling was done with radials on the ground, not elevated. Thanks Ken K4ZW ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: Digital on 160m?
Are you saying we will be banned for for answering the original question about frequencies? Or just grumping about the use of 160? Ken WA8JXM On Dec 29, 2011, at 1:56 PM, Tree wrote: > I would like to nip this thread in the bud if possible. > > This has proven to be a very emotional subject. > > I think it is safe to say that using digital modes is something some > people enjoy - and something that other people do not. > > This is not something that is going to change with a lot of posts to > this reflector. Feel free to engage in emotional e-mails about it > directly with the people who have made posts about it. Doing so here > on the reflector (after reading this) will result in you being put on > the moderated list. > > Thanks. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: QRP Question
On Dec 13, 2011, at 10:19 AM, Roger D Johnson wrote: > My pet peeve is the use of QSL. It's supposed to indicate the receipt of a > message. A simple "roger" will suffice for the receipt of a signal report. "Roger" is proper for phone use, it's the old phonetic for R. Just a plain "R" is proper for CW or keyboard use. Ken WA8JXM ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: QRP Question
On Dec 12, 2011, at 11:58 AM, W0UCE wrote: > So here is the question: Why do some using QRP continually send /QRP after > a CQ, their call or a contest exchange? In a contest I don't care if the > station I work is QRP, LP or QRO - a QSO is a QSO. I think it is a plea to accept their weak signal and work them. Or an explanation as to why they are so weak. For some, it may be a brag. Ken WA8JXM ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Nice QRPP QSO
On Dec 11, 2011, at 2:03 PM, ZR wrote: > QRP can be fun and I guess I'll never > understand the type of operator who needs a 3CX15000 and a world class > antenna farm to boost his ego. Carl, QRP may be fun for the QRP station but it's often a PITA for the station on the other end. I'm not saying that most of us need a KW on CW, I sold my SB220 in 1974. But I hate trying to dig some station out of the mud to get 50% copy just so that he can get his jollies with miles per milliwatt. Yes, I've operated a little QRP and decided it wasn't fair to the stations on the other end. Obviously, YMMV. 73, Ken WA8JXM ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Nice QRPP QSO
On Dec 11, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote: > One bit of advice, though: save yourself a LOT of potential grief, & limit > operations between 1800- & 1810-KHz, i.e. the extreme bottom 10-KHz of the > band. Apart from the W1AW code practice sessions there, that part of the band > is usually unoccupied. If you call CQ QRP anywhere from about 1812- to > 1835-KHz, you could well incur the wrath of the DX crowd hunting their quarry > therein...! Be forewarned... The Ham world needs to get their act together! Not complaining about your advice Eddy, but just yesterday I found the IARU recommended 160m bandplan (dated October 2010): 1800-1810 digi modes 1810-1830 CW 1812QRP 1830-1840 DX window Isn't it nice that the amateur radio bureaucrats are totally disconnected from reality? I try to be cooperative but in truth I can't figure out where in the heck I should operate on 160 with casual CW operation. I usually hang around 1836-38 for digital (Contestia, Olivia, Thor). 73, Ken WA8JXM ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Nice QRPP QSO
On Dec 11, 2011, at 2:44 AM, Gary Smith wrote: > By no means any shadow of a record but I just had a CW QSO on TB with > N3LCW/QRP in Md & me in CT; about 300 miles apart. The band was > absent of signals till down at the bottom, there he was calling CQ as > a QRP so I switched the amp off, turned the K3 down to 5W and got A > 599. a bit later I dropped it to 100mW and got a 559 from his K2. > > Kind of amazing there aren't more people on 160, it's definitely > alive. 100mW... nice! I agree, there is not a whole lot of activity on 160 cw or digital even though the band is quite capable. Activity seems to be mostly devoted to contesting and DX, (or SSB.) Ken WA8JXM ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: ARRL 160 conditions/zero beat
A few points on the zero beat issue: Some rigs are difficult to "zero beat". For example, my TS-440: 1) does not have a ZB function 2) uses a 800 Hz offset while I prefer to listen to a lower tone (600-700 Hz). Until I started using fldigi with it's waterfall, I didn't even realize what tones I was listening to so yes, I probably answered stations 100-200 Hz offset 3) The TS-440 RIT only shows 100 Hz offsets, so I can have the RIT +/- 90 Hz and not be able to tell it. Take me back to my Drake Twins (1967), or the older Johnson Viking II and Hammarlund receiver, and zero beat was easy although the Viking probably drifted more than you guys are complaining about ;-) 73, Ken WA8JXM ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: ARRL 160 Conditions, Key Clicks
On Dec 4, 2011, at 2:40 PM, Preston Smith wrote: > > Solution is simple, one yellow carding or delisting to check log and > these guys would have a clean signal in the next contest guaranteed. > But that is up to the sponsors. I'm not holding my breath. > > Pres, N6ss > Sounds like an easy way to eliminate the competition: just report them for having a bad signal. :-( This isn't back in the crystal controlled days when you were fixed in your frequency, your can change frequency easily. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Who among us is surprised? Almost all of the new technology tools (SDR, chatroom, Spectran, etc.) while intriguing and fun to operate, can be used to make QSO's that would not otherwise be made. I personally have no interest in working DX that way. It removes some of the challenge that drew me to Topband in the first place. Sadly, it causes one to look at some achievements on the band with a far more skeptical eye too. Ken K4ZW ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
