Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:58:57 + (UTC)
From: Roger Parsons
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Yes
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
On 1/15/2020 1:25 PM, Roger Parsons via Topband wrote:
Your point is unclear to me.
Did you study the slides?
73, Jim K9YC
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
K9YC wrote: "But there IS a difference in efficiency that looking ONLY at the
pattern misses."
Your point is unclear to me. Of course the pattern of a horizontal antenna
changes with changing height and with other environmental factors. If the
antenna is actually on the ground the efficiency
rt, KB3FJO
From: Topband on behalf of
Jim Brown
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 2:56 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
On 1/15/2020 11:13 AM, Lee STRAHAN wrote:
> And from the Northwest I have a slightly different observation of
On 1/15/2020 11:13 AM, Lee STRAHAN wrote:
And from the Northwest I have a slightly different observation of
horizontal/vertical questions.
Your analysis makes lots of sense, Lee. It's consistent with what I've
read from trustworthy sources about propagation.
73, Jim K9YC
_
And from the Northwest I have a slightly different observation of
horizontal/vertical questions. What I have noticed is this. I more or less
equate Horizontal antennas with high angle and vertical with low. The EU
stations are usually mostly looking West into the setting sun. The East coast
On 1/15/2020 9:55 AM, Roger Parsons via Topband wrote:
There is very little pattern difference between a purely horizontal dipole and
an inverted V provided that the angle of the V is not too acute. A horizontal
dipole 5/8 wavelength high has predominantly low angle radiation.
But there IS
It's more than antennas. There's also propagation. You're 700 miles ESE
of me, which gives you a path to EU over less of the auroral zone.
AND there's noise, which has been increasing over time. My first years
in W6 were more productive for CW on Topband than now -- I have a dozen
or so
rcle array and 580 foot Beverages.
You can never have too many antennas...
Unless they interfere with each other, a non-trivial issue.
73
Frank
W3LPL
- Original Message -
From: "Roger Kennedy"
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 10:48:51 PM
Subject: Topba
NR1DX wrote: "Apples and oranges." regarding my antennas.
Not really.
There is very little pattern difference between a purely horizontal dipole and
an inverted V provided that the angle of the V is not too acute. A horizontal
dipole 5/8 wavelength high has predominantly low angle radiation.
: "Roger Kennedy"
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 10:48:51 PM
Subject: Topband: Topband resource
"However, 160 needs vertical polarization for consistent long DX."
So how is it that I consistently work all over the world on 160m with my
horiz
Roger
Apples and oranges
Your antenna is not a dipole but rather an Inverted V . Inverted V's
have a significant "vertical" radiation component compared to a dipole
I am not sure how you can compare your performance to the W4RNL
installation given your 750 miles north of there? Please
W8JI's experience with a horizontal dipole at 300 ft is often quoted as proof
that only vertical antennas are useful for 160m DX. This is not my experience
with a dipole with the centre at 320 ft and the ends at over 250'. In its
favoured directions it is equal to a W4RNL half wave vertical
Roger is in my logbook, along with at least five other "G" stations. My station
is described on my QRZ page. I receive on the TX antenna.
Wes N7WS
On 1/14/2020 9:23 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
On 1/14/2020 4:30 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
And I get good reports all over the world, not just
right
>So how is it that I consistently work all over the world on 160m with my
>horizontal dipole at 50ft?!
Oh boy, here we go again. As I believe I have pointed out before,
your QTH is not that far from a fairly vast amount of salt water. You
can believe anything you want, but your experience if
I am, more or less, 5 days a week around 1730 GMT calling CQ around 1815. Never
be called by NA.
Too early.
So, I agree with Roger.
Have a nice day.
73
Jean-Paul
F6FYA en direct depuis son iPad.
> Le 14 janv. 2020 à 23:49, Roger Kennedy a
> écrit :
>
>
> "However, 160 needs
On 1/14/2020 4:30 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
And I get good reports all over the world, not just
right across America.
I've HEARD two UK CW stations on 160M in the past six seasons, and
worked one of them. You were not either of those stations.
Jim K9YC
Santa Cruz, CA
_
On 1/14/2020 4:30 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
And there's definitely no radiation from the feeder ! The dipole is fed
with good quality coax, there's a properly constructed 160m choke balun at
the feedpoint . . . and anyway, most of the feeder isn't even vertical, as
it runs horizontally
Well, people who work me regularly know I put out a pretty decent signal on
160m with my dipole. And I get good reports all over the world, not just
right across America.
I also have a vertically polarised receiving antenna, so can compare signals
on receive . . . DX signals are very rarely
Could be. I worked my first 80 countries or so on topband with an inverted-Vee,
apex at 45' and ends tied off on Saguaro cacti head high. The transmission line
hung straight down parallel to and about a foot or so from the tower. The tower
has some ground rods but no radials and the single
On 1/14/2020 2:53 PM, donov...@starpower.net wrote:
I've had 160 horizontal dipoles at 100 feet and 200 feet high and
I've never experienced a situation where their performance
approached the consistent excellent performance of my verticals.
Same experience here. When I first moved to W6 in
Ditto. Too much misinformation there.
Mike W0BTU
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 5:20 PM Wes wrote:
> I won't either.
>
> Wes N7WS
>
> On 1/14/2020 4:10 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote
> > I don't think I'll be checking this website for any "resources" anytime
> in
> > the near future.
>
>
_
I won't either.
Wes N7WS
On 1/14/2020 4:10 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote
I don't think I'll be checking this website for any "resources" anytime in
the near future.
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
On 1/14/2020 2:48 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
"However, 160 needs vertical polarization for consistent long DX."
So how is it that I consistently work all over the world on 160m with my
horizontal dipole at 50ft?! (and my signals seem to often be pretty
comparable with other Brits using
It must be a joke. 1730Z would be 4-5 hours before Sunset on the East Coast
of the USA.
I don't think I'll be checking this website for any "resources" anytime in
the near future.
https://topbandhams.com/
Starting around 17:30 UTC to 18:0 UTC on 1850, WG3J Eric will be
coordinating DX
consistent excellent performance of my verticals.
As they say YMMV.
73
Frank
W3LPL
- Original Message -
From: "Roger Kennedy"
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 10:48:51 PM
Subject: Topband: Topband resource
"However, 160 needs vertical po
"However, 160 needs vertical polarization for consistent long DX."
So how is it that I consistently work all over the world on 160m with my
horizontal dipole at 50ft?! (and my signals seem to often be pretty
comparable with other Brits using verticals}
You certainly need a Vertical to work DX
Thanks everyone for the info I never heard that term gimmick cap before first I
thought it was a coax cap. I'm 61 and been around since early 80s I guess I'm
still a young guy in ham terms.. Here's the link to article I was referring to.
Yeah, but I'm not _that_ old!
I received WN6BIL from the Little Print Shop (they issued licenses back then,
right?) in June of 1970. ;)
I signed the resulting QSL cards as the "12 yr old OM."
'JK
On Tuesday, January 14, 2020, 1:07:54 PM PST, Mike Waters
wrote:
Yes, for
Yes, for neutralizing tubes. That goes back the early part of the 20th
century. ;-)
73, Mike
W0BTU
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 1:54 PM Lee STRAHAN wrote:
> Yes, somewhat common in the "hollow state" device days (Tubes).
> Old also Wayne.
>
>
_
Searchable Archives:
Yes, somewhat common in the "hollow state" device days(Tubes).
Old also Wayne.
Lee K7TJR
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
Very good Jeff! See Google/Wikipedia. Wiki says "on the order of 1 pf/inch."
(You must be as old as I am . . .)
- N7NG
On 1/14/2020 11:49 AM
On 1/14/2020 11:08 AM, Mike Waters wrote:
Low, horizontally polarized antennas are usually good for distances within
a few hundred miles. However, 160 needs vertical polarization for
consistent long DX.
The common myth that a dipole should be low for short distance work is
simply not true.
Very good Jeff! See Google/Wikipedia. Wiki says "on the order of 1
pf/inch." (You must be as old as I am . . .)
- N7NG
On 1/14/2020 11:49 AM, Jeff Kincaid wrote:
Hi Fred,
Generally, a gimmick cap is two wires twisted together. Your mileage
will certainly vary, but I seem to recall a rule
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:41 AM W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
> https://topbandhams.com
> A link to some 160 antennas on that same site.
>
>
> https://topbandhams.com/tech-page/6-22-different-wire-antennas-for-the-160-meter-band?fbclid=IwAR06lTswgMULsdMs_wEtKWJXqWpuDgXZPjvx2CNKKqRKztnomzqD6lCC1K8
Hi Fred,
Generally, a gimmick cap is two wires twisted together. Your mileage will
certainly vary, but I seem to recall a rule of thumb suggesting 1 pF per inch.
Regards,Jeff W6JK
On Tuesday, January 14, 2020, 10:27:06 AM PST, fmoeves
wrote:
Mike, 160m antennas my favorite subject.
I did not read in detail any of the designs or what was on the site.
On 1/14/2020 11:25 AM, fmoeves wrote:
Mike, 160m antennas my favorite subject. I sure wish it would either get cold or dry out
here... Winters here in Kentucky are so wet and I think it gets wetter every year. One
thing I
Mike, 160m antennas my favorite subject. I sure wish it would either get cold
or dry out here... Winters here in Kentucky are so wet and I think it gets
wetter every year. One thing I did read in that link was reference to a
"gimmick cap"...not sure what that is?? 73 Fred KB4QZH
https://topbandhams.com
A link to some 160 antennas on that same site.
https://topbandhams.com/tech-page/6-22-different-wire-antennas-for-the-160-meter-band?fbclid=IwAR06lTswgMULsdMs_wEtKWJXqWpuDgXZPjvx2CNKKqRKztnomzqD6lCC1K8
_
Searchable Archives:
39 matches
Mail list logo
