Re: Topband: HEBA antenna
What is the desired coverage area for the antenna? I would expect it to be very small, local area coverage of 50 miles or so. What is the take off angle etc. W0MU Mike On 4/19/2024 1:41 PM, Dave Cuthbert wrote: The HEBA appears to be the same animal as the CFA (Crossed Field Antenna) patented by Dr. Kabbary and M.C. Hately in the late 1980s. As the HEBA Model 103 Performance Analysis says, *" WWAS accomplished this feat of engineering through the development of a two-element antenna that generates the electric field and the magnetic field separately."* This is the idea of the CFA where separately generated E and H fields combine in space to overcome one or more limitations of conventional antennas. I thought the CFA was debunked by the time the last one was sold by Dr. Kabbary's Egyptian antenna company in 2003. Up to that time there were several articles in AntenneX magazine about the antenna along with attempts to build and test it. Dr. Kirk McDonald, a regular author for AntenneX, goes into the math in his paper *“Crossed-Field” and “EH” Antennas Including Radiation from the Feed Lines and Reflection from the Earth’s Surface.* My NEC models at the time for a CFA driven as a standard monopole against the Kabbary-recommended 2-story, copper strapped building showed it operating well enough as a standard monopole. The CFA on top of the two-story building formed a center-loaded monopole. I can build that model again and report back here if anyone is interested. I will compare them to the HEBA performance analysis. Sometime around 2002 an Australian ham/BC engineer worked with Dr. Kabbary to tune up a CFA at an AM broadcast station in Australia. After Kabbary give up and returned to Egypt the amateur retuned the antenna as a standard monopole that exceeded the measured field strength of the CFA tuning. To me and others the promise of the CFA for topband was a heady time which helped propel me more deeply into antenna design and analysis. The CFA turned out to be both a disappointment and a good lesson. *Wikipedia CFA article* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossed_field_antenna * “Crossed-Field” and “EH” Antennas Including Radiation from the Feed Lines and Reflection from the Earth’s Surface*, Kirk McDonald, Princeton University http://kirkmcd.princeton.edu/examples/crossedfield.pdf *HEBA Model 103 Performance Analysis* https://www.thebdr.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/high-efficiency-broadband-plain-english.pdf Dave KH6AQ On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 6:01 AM Radio KH6O wrote: I'd like to see a version of this for 160M: https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/headlines/wqvram-is-granted-cp-to-use-heba-antenna-at-night -- 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
Re: Topband: Real World logging issues
After being DX many times, mistakes happen. About 1/2 took place prior to online logs. For my operations this has been a very tiny issue. My choice before online logs was that I would wait for a period of time to see if the station in the log actually requested a QSL. I might have even reached out to ask. Hey did you work me on at V47M. If so, when? This is a hobby. We should strive for perfection but that is impossible. My goal is to give credit to the station I actually worked. I have had numerous people attempt to phish a contact with vague log data. Those requests are quickly denied. Weird stuff happens. I have worked someone and then W1MU has worked them right after me or vise versa. That has happened on enough occasions that it comes to mind quickly. The older I get the easier it is to drop a dit on CW. I have had a few duh moments just looking at the log and knowing that what I typed was not what I heard. Stuff happens. I never answer any emails about contacts during a contest or look at offline data etc. I do very very log massaging other than checking on notes that were taken during the contest and making the appropriate corrections immediately after the contest if they could not be made during. Are most people cheating, nope. Are there cheaters. You bet. W0MU On 11/30/2023 1:45 PM, w3...@roadrunner.com wrote: Am enjoying comments from DXers about real world/160m/marginal copy, and can only imagine the challenges faced. My kudos to you for making the valiant effort! One obvious but simple check an op can do, after finding HIS call is not in the DX's log, is to check whether that call is in the FCC database. A few years back, I had a qso declared NIL and when I checked the call sign that "took my place," I found it was not a listed call sign - so how could it be a valid qso? The QSL manager accepted my argument that it had to be me, and I picked up a new DX entity- Band. ( his log was off by one letter...an "S" instead of a "H," no less.) Bob, W3HKK PS While 160 has been more often poor than good here of late, the first night of the CQWWDX-CW test was excellent into EU, around their SR. It was such a pleasant surprise I stayed on the band for several hours and "mined" the band for new signals that would pop up every few minutes! PPS George, sorry I missed you at K8R. Didnt realize you were there til afterwards. PPSS 4W8X - great effort in the CQWW-CW test! Terrific sigs on 10m! Thanks for the qsos ( W3HKK-W8TNX-WW8OH-W8FD) and pulling me thru the massive pile ups! -From: topband-requ...@contesting.com To: topband@contesting.com Cc: Sent: Thursday November 30 2023 12:00:45PM Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 251, Issue 31 Send Topband mailing list submissions to topband@contesting.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband /> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to topband-requ...@contesting.com You can reach the person managing the list at topband-ow...@contesting.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Timor Leste report #10 (Dietmar Kasper) 2. Re: Timor Leste report #10 (GEORGE WALLNER) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 04:39:54 +0100 From: Dietmar Kasper To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Timor Leste report #10 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Topbanders 90% of the equipment is in the container. We still have 2 1/2 stations running (one without amp in phone only) the 160m antennas and beverages are still up and some simple wire verticals have been added to continue beeing QRV the next days and nights. It seems we are in rain season now. No afternoon without close thunderstorms and all the noise on the bands. Propagation is still poor however last night was a short window around 12:30 to work a few lucky W4?s. In the thunderstorm noise call sign logging is guessing. I am sure that I am not almost right with the call. I called a W4 for about 5 minutes and thought it was K4SV. At the end I was logging K4SV but I had the feeling that this station was not happy with that call and I may have it wrong ... as much as you can hear in the crashes.. (QSO interpretation later) When it comes to the question if a QSO is a QSO or not there is no unique standard. Thanks to all for discussing the question about FT contacts that must be initiated by an operator. I feel that the discussion is still open and a solution accepted by the majority of topbanders is not there so far. It was clearly indicated that the station must be observed during the contacts so automated contacts do not count for DXCC. Still open is if the contacts must be initiated by the
Re: Topband: [PVRC] 2-element receiving arrays
Meaning, We do the best we can and there is no and there will never be a perfect solution. All we can do is attempt to eliminate as many variables as possible. My circle array works better than all of the other things I have tried. It is near fencing, close to a power line etc. I don't have unlimited flat land in the middle of nowhere. Not optimal but it is what I can do. I think people get caught up in perfection. Put up stuff and try it! You might be surprised. What works for me might not be a good solution for you, etc. W0MU On 3/30/2023 7:47 PM, Frank W3LPL wrote: Hi Dave, Anyone who has experimented with a high impedance antenna such as an end fed half wave has experienced the extreme environmental influence on the feedpoint impedance of a high impedance feed. The required spacing to trees and buildings is very difficult to predict with any confidence. The impedance of a high impedance element -- and hence the amount of voltag if feeds into the preamp -- is heavily influenced by its immediate environment. If all of the high impedance verticals in an array do not produce the same voltages from the signals received by the array, the pattern of the array and especially its nulls are significantly degraded. 73 Frank W3LPL Allow me to quibble a little with this analogy. The 1/2 wave dipole is a tuned circuit with a Q in the low double digits. This leverages any capacitance change. The voltage probe antenna is just a plain non-resonant capacitance. Still sensitive to nearby conductors, but probably not to the extent of the EFHW antenna. I would be more worried about circuit capacitance in the hi-Z preamp. In general, the capacitance of JFET's (or any FET's) is very loosely specified. The transconductance is also very loosely specified, and can act as a modulator of input capacitance due to the Miller effect. As if that isn't bad enough, the DXE preamp comes with tank circuits that you can optionally activate with jumpers. This adds another random variable to the input capacitance. Ideally, there would be a "factory select" padding capacitor to make the capacitance the same on all copies of the preamp. AFAIK, no preamps have this feature. And finally, the CB whip moves around wildly in the wind. If there are nearby objects, this adds a time variability. 73 Rick N6RK _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: My take on ARRL 160
I didn't realize that 160 and all its challenges to get on this band with a decent xmit and receive antennas was the birthplace of new contesters. On 12/4/11 8:39 AM, Herb Schoenbohm wrote: On 12/4/2011 11:09 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote: Rather than decry the format of the event, why not celebrate it as a potential birthplace for to-morrow's contestors...? EddyI will tell you why..The ARRL 160 is and always has been a disappointment in turn out and DX. Not so much that it treats the amateurs in the U.S. Territories as second class hams, but the fact that it not even a challenge as a radio competition to participate in. For station only miles away in VP2V there could be some interests but even there they are prohibited from working any real DX and must EPA in the log a zillion times. At least their results will get listed in the QST published results if they get on for more than a few hours. In a contest that scores KH0, KH8, KH2 (and alll the other U.S. possession in the Pacific in the same category as Hawaii just makes no sense. It appears the ARRL/CAC is infactuated with the ARRL sections thing. But wait, they have the ARRL Sweepstakes and that covers 160-10 and excludes DX. Now if you want a contest design that as you said celebrates it as a potential birthplace for to-morrow's contestors, I would ask you only to compare the Stew Perry Topband Distance challenge. This is a superb model and allows competition of all types of entries where low power and QRP get significant boost, especially if you work one. The SP is not designed to molify someones ego at Newington with this EPA thing but rather serves as a fair and balance competition designed for 160 meters by 160 meter operators. Remember years ago when Charles O'Brian, W2EQS (sk) came up with the CQ 160 meter contest idea. There is no question that it is one of the most popular low band contests with the SP close behind. There is this sclerosis and atrophy, it appears, by those in charge in Newington and the CAC members who really don't care that much about 160 meters. So it is what it is, a bummer of a contest for most. Why is it so difficult for them to make a simple change in the rules to reflect what is DX and what isn't? Last night I got some raspberries for calling CQ EU only even though there were two other KP2's active during the contest. On Friday night my call operated remotely from NYC gave out 100 mainland contacts while I held my nose. As far as the 160 meter ARRl DX contest is concerned, I just quote Roberto Duran, No Mas Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Beverages near the ocean
I was reading ON4UN's Low Band DXing Book and ran across a comment he made about beverages not working near the ocean and the Heard Is folks could never get one working. I know we used one from V47 and it worked great. It was located probably no more than 300 ft from the water. This is the first time I have read or heard of this phenomenon. Have others had issues with beverages near the ocean? ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: RX Antenna
You might look at the K9AY receiving loops from Array Solutions or the 4 sq receive antennas from Dx Engineering. I have used the DXE 4 sq rcv antennas and they work very well. Mike W0MU On 2/21/2011 3:56 PM, W0UCE wrote: I would appreciate hearing from folks using Pennants, Flags or EWEs for RX antennas on 160 and 80m with regard to your success with them and any recommendations you care to offer. I have no room for beverages here but plenty of natural supports for simple wire RX antennas. Thanks, Jack W0UCE ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
