So how many of us still send the whole QSO with a key?Buttons on my Pro III do most of the work (like mouse clicks with FT-8), I only send the other station's call (like typing it in with FT-8) I have a friend here in Yorba Linda running 100W to a short vertical that never worked east of the Mississippi on CW.He now has about 25 DXCC using FT-8. There are times when you cannot even hear an audio tone and you still make a "QSO" DX on 160 is like a DX-pedition 5NN, RR ur 5NN 73 dit dit. I can count on one hand the QSO's where someone sent OP HR Roger running 1KW to phased verticals and 500 foot beverage NE/SW Countless people have told me they never get on 160 because there is never anyone on, except during ARRL and CQ contests.More and more are getting on because there always seems to be guys on FT-8. My DXCC on 160 is all CW and I may have worked a few SSB stations during contests, only locals on SSB otherwise. If there is a country I need, I'll work it ANY mode. The problem is FT-8 is supposed to be a low power mode and naturally some are running 1 KW and swamping the little guys No matter who is in the White House, it hasn't changed how I live or how often I go out to eat. FT-8 isn't going to change my enjoyment of ham radio. SSB, PSK, EME, AM, Slow Scan TV etc have all fought their battles. If FT-8 was at 1895 or prohibited during contest weekends, we probably wouldn't even know it was on the band.
Rick N6PE ====================================================================== Dying is easy, the hard part is living On Tuesday, April 23, 2019, 11:21:48 PM PDT, topband-requ...@contesting.com <topband-requ...@contesting.com> wrote: Send Topband mailing list submissions to topband@contesting.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to topband-requ...@contesting.com You can reach the person managing the list at topband-ow...@contesting.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 (Andree DL8LAS) 2. Re: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 (daraym...@iowatelecom.net) 3. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Victor Goncharsky) 4. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg) 5. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (VE6WZ_Steve) 6. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (GEORGE WALLNER) 7. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Mike Waters) 8. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (W7RH) 9. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Mike Waters) 10. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg) 11. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 16:50:57 +0000 (UTC) From: Andree DL8LAS <dl8...@aol.com> To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 Message-ID: <1521797704.3392014.1556038257...@mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hey topbanders, I am also every morning 2:30 UTC? on 160m CW, check at first W1AW beacon? 1802,5 Mhz. Signal is mostly clear RST 559. Than i call CQ and check RBN, the NA skimmer received me from 10-24dB. But no answer from NA stations. Conditions are not bad, so please listen more for DX from EU. vy 73? Andy DL8LAS www.dl8las.de www.dl8las.com On Dienstag, 23 April, 2019 topband-request <topband@contesting.com> wrote: Send Topband mailing list submissions to ??? topband@contesting.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit ??? http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ??? topband-requ...@contesting.com You can reach the person managing the list at ??? topband-ow...@contesting.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." Today's Topics: ? 1. Lack of NA Activity on CW (Roger Kennedy) ? 2. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (lennart.michaels...@telia.com) ? 3. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Peter Sundberg) ? 4. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg) ? 5. Re: Fresnel Zone (Emir Memic) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 09:16:30 +0100 From: "Roger Kennedy" <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk> To: <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <BF4E50FA22DA4134B83EBE8FC8BC8A57@Packard> Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="us-ascii" I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an achievement). I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island they're on anyway) It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! Roger G3YRO ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:25:24 +0200 From: <lennart.michaels...@telia.com> To: "'Roger Kennedy'" <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk>, ??? <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <002501d4f9ae$1a2783d0$4e768b70$@telia.com> Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1" Roger et al, I was on early this morning and even checked in on? ON4KST. Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out? 73 all Len SM7BIC -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr?n: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17 Till: topband@contesting.com ?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an achievement). I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island they're on anyway) It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! Roger G3YRO _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:17:20 +0000 From: Peter Sundberg <sm2...@telia.com> To: <lennart.michaels...@telia.com>,??? "'Roger Kennedy'" ??? <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk>, <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <mailman.14.1556035203.29506.topb...@contesting.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Let's ponder: FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency (passband) and their computer is transmitting every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if they are in contact with another computer or not FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other computers are making use of the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8 FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the screeen FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied are still presented as "heard" by use of the "a priori" functionality FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long interrupts CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig in the noise in 50 Hz bandwidth CW - without knowledge of who is where we need good signals to attract our attention and so we can start focusing CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for sure, the noise is certainly higher and many have taken their microscopes (receiving antennas) down for the season CW - many of us also have to live with a less effective TX antenna during the summer as we have to roll in our extensive radial field CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and capable stations but most of them don't transmit every 15 seconds CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST Bottom line: CW - it sure would be easier for us to only monitor a specific world wide calling frequency, but this is not realistic CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult to do manual CW than single channel FT8 for reasons described above CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-) CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW and continue to make noise whenever we can, despite the problems listed above CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a realistic way and realize what they are doing, duly noting that our table has better food CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the southern hemisphere for being there all the time during our prime season up north! CW is King! 73 Peter SM2CEW At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaels...@telia.com wrote: >Roger et al, >I was on early this morning and even checked in on? ON4KST. >Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see >quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out? > >73 all >Len SM7BIC > >-----Ursprungligt meddelande----- >Fr?n: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy >Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17 >Till: topband@contesting.com >?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW > > >I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . > >But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use >FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! > >It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's >the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you >ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! > >Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a >couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an >achievement). > >I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also >don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition >station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island >they're on anyway) > >It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to >come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! > >Roger G3YRO > > >_________________ >Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector > >_________________ >Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 14:29:44 +0300 From: uy0zg <uy...@mksat.net> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <63c84756a384fdf4a29c0ed9846c7...@mksat.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Hi All Victor you need to stop listening to dx via the internet! When will you make an RX antenna? The availability and use of RX antennas is a great pleasure. Here is an example of the antenna Anatoly UT2XQ http://www.topband.in.ua/2019/04/22/ut2xq-antennas/ --- Nick, UY0ZG http://www.topband.in.ua Victor Goncharsky via Topband ????? 2019-04-23 10:23: > This is not always the case. I have noticed long openings to Caribbean > during last year 6m season with signal levels good enough for reliable > CW QSOs but only FT8 portion of the band was alive. > Will see what will happen this year. Top band game is almost over with > the last 3 new ones worked in April (but missed XR0) so 6m antenna is > on its way to the tower this week. > > > 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E. > UARL Technical and VHF Committies > DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS > DXCC card checker (160 meters). > _________________ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:56:41 +0000 From: Emir Memic <emir.me...@emssolutions.at> To: Ray Higgins <ray.w...@gmail.com>, "topband@contesting.com" ??? <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Fresnel Zone Message-ID: ??? <dbbpr08mb487006d532ce43d192f8eecb82...@dbbpr08mb4870.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> ??? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Ray, If we are talking about horizontal polarized antennas You cant be high enough on 80m/160m And there is no needs to think a lot about effects of fresnel zone on 160/80 Not even with 300m high tower Of course if there are no uphills around you .....but so far understand you That location is free with slight slope around In my mind its? important to have flat or homogeny slope in desired direction Effect of excellent soil is not so critical for ground reflection if you are using horizontal polarized antennas! On other side for vertical antennas soil is more important but directly under the antennas and in closed flied! In simple words if you can have antenna in saltwater or very close to it put it in If you are far away from good soil with vertical (even 1 wavelength) you will need standard numbers of radials under the antenna! Iif you are on flat terrain with excellent soil you will need very large antenna on high tower to outperform 4SQ on 80m ! On 160m is non sense to even try something else than vertical or vertical arrays 73s Braco E77DX -- Emir Memic EMS SOLUTIONS K?hlergasse 12/3 1180 Wien +4369919227041 emir.me...@emssolutions.at -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> Im Auftrag von Ray Higgins Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. April 2019 16:49 An: topband@contesting.com Betreff: Topband: Fresnel Zone I have two questions about fresnel zone. I just purchased 22.5/ac near the ocean near Machiasport, ME. This is in the Northeast corner of Maine about 30 miles south of Eastport and a Lubec. This is going to be my personal Remote Contest station! I plan to be contesting from this new qth starting in 2020 but will be QRV by mid 2019 for testing. This qth is anywhere between 1-3 miles from the ocean or the bay, it sits on a high plateau 150? asl thats slopes in all directions to saltwater (peninsula) except N/NW. The property has a saltwater river and marsh that runs the perimeter from south to north favoring the NE direction,? the marsh is only 50-100' wide and 1500-2000? away from the property. The land has a gradual slope to the marsh. My questions: 1.) Is the saltwater river bed/marsh wide enough to be an effective field in the Fresnal Zone? 2.) What is the wavelengths needed to be within the Fresnal zone of a river/marsh compared to an ocean? In this photo album (last pic) I have outlined the river saltwater marsh and property boundry from a google earth shot. https://photos.app.goo.gl/ui79t2jFo95b29et6 I?m only concerned about 80 and 160m in the Fresnal Zone. Any input would be welcomed. Thanks, Ray W2RE Sent from my iPhone _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list Topband@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband ------------------------------ End of Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 **************************************** ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:27:29 -0500 From: <daraym...@iowatelecom.net> To: "Andree DL8LAS" <dl8...@aol.com>, <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 Message-ID: <5A32F88697EF42009870AA61E60DC49A@DavidBrentPC> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original Andy, et al. . . I will try to be more diligent about getting on with my modest off-season antenna system. 73. . . Dave, W0FLS -----Original Message----- From: Andree DL8LAS via Topband Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 11:50 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 Hey topbanders, I am also every morning 2:30 UTC on 160m CW, check at first W1AW beacon 1802,5 Mhz. Signal is mostly clear RST 559. Than i call CQ and check RBN, the NA skimmer received me from 10-24dB. But no answer from NA stations. Conditions are not bad, so please listen more for DX from EU. vy 73 Andy DL8LAS www.dl8las.de www.dl8las.com On Dienstag, 23 April, 2019 topband-request <topband@contesting.com> wrote: Send Topband mailing list submissions to topband@contesting.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to topband-requ...@contesting.com You can reach the person managing the list at topband-ow...@contesting.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Lack of NA Activity on CW (Roger Kennedy) 2. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (lennart.michaels...@telia.com) 3. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Peter Sundberg) 4. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg) 5. Re: Fresnel Zone (Emir Memic) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 09:16:30 +0100 From: "Roger Kennedy" <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk> To: <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <BF4E50FA22DA4134B83EBE8FC8BC8A57@Packard> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an achievement). I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island they're on anyway) It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! Roger G3YRO ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:25:24 +0200 From: <lennart.michaels...@telia.com> To: "'Roger Kennedy'" <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk>, <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <002501d4f9ae$1a2783d0$4e768b70$@telia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Roger et al, I was on early this morning and even checked in on ON4KST. Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out? 73 all Len SM7BIC -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr?n: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17 Till: topband@contesting.com ?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an achievement). I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island they're on anyway) It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! Roger G3YRO _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:17:20 +0000 From: Peter Sundberg <sm2...@telia.com> To: <lennart.michaels...@telia.com>, "'Roger Kennedy'" <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk>, <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <mailman.14.1556035203.29506.topb...@contesting.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Let's ponder: FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency (passband) and their computer is transmitting every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if they are in contact with another computer or not FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other computers are making use of the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8 FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the screeen FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied are still presented as "heard" by use of the "a priori" functionality FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long interrupts CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig in the noise in 50 Hz bandwidth CW - without knowledge of who is where we need good signals to attract our attention and so we can start focusing CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for sure, the noise is certainly higher and many have taken their microscopes (receiving antennas) down for the season CW - many of us also have to live with a less effective TX antenna during the summer as we have to roll in our extensive radial field CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and capable stations but most of them don't transmit every 15 seconds CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST Bottom line: CW - it sure would be easier for us to only monitor a specific world wide calling frequency, but this is not realistic CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult to do manual CW than single channel FT8 for reasons described above CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-) CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW and continue to make noise whenever we can, despite the problems listed above CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a realistic way and realize what they are doing, duly noting that our table has better food CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the southern hemisphere for being there all the time during our prime season up north! CW is King! 73 Peter SM2CEW At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaels...@telia.com wrote: >Roger et al, >I was on early this morning and even checked in on ON4KST. >Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see >quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out? > >73 all >Len SM7BIC > >-----Ursprungligt meddelande----- >Fr?n: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy >Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17 >Till: topband@contesting.com >?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW > > >I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . > >But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use >FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! > >It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's >the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you >ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! > >Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a >couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an >achievement). > >I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I >also >don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition >station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island >they're on anyway) > >It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort >to >come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! > >Roger G3YRO > > >_________________ >Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector > >_________________ >Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 14:29:44 +0300 From: uy0zg <uy...@mksat.net> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <63c84756a384fdf4a29c0ed9846c7...@mksat.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Hi All Victor you need to stop listening to dx via the internet! When will you make an RX antenna? The availability and use of RX antennas is a great pleasure. Here is an example of the antenna Anatoly UT2XQ http://www.topband.in.ua/2019/04/22/ut2xq-antennas/ --- Nick, UY0ZG http://www.topband.in.ua Victor Goncharsky via Topband ????? 2019-04-23 10:23: > This is not always the case. I have noticed long openings to Caribbean > during last year 6m season with signal levels good enough for reliable > CW QSOs but only FT8 portion of the band was alive. > Will see what will happen this year. Top band game is almost over with > the last 3 new ones worked in April (but missed XR0) so 6m antenna is > on its way to the tower this week. > > > 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E. > UARL Technical and VHF Committies > DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS > DXCC card checker (160 meters). > _________________ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:56:41 +0000 From: Emir Memic <emir.me...@emssolutions.at> To: Ray Higgins <ray.w...@gmail.com>, "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Fresnel Zone Message-ID: <dbbpr08mb487006d532ce43d192f8eecb82...@dbbpr08mb4870.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Ray, If we are talking about horizontal polarized antennas You cant be high enough on 80m/160m And there is no needs to think a lot about effects of fresnel zone on 160/80 Not even with 300m high tower Of course if there are no uphills around you .....but so far understand you That location is free with slight slope around In my mind its important to have flat or homogeny slope in desired direction Effect of excellent soil is not so critical for ground reflection if you are using horizontal polarized antennas! On other side for vertical antennas soil is more important but directly under the antennas and in closed flied! In simple words if you can have antenna in saltwater or very close to it put it in If you are far away from good soil with vertical (even 1 wavelength) you will need standard numbers of radials under the antenna! Iif you are on flat terrain with excellent soil you will need very large antenna on high tower to outperform 4SQ on 80m ! On 160m is non sense to even try something else than vertical or vertical arrays 73s Braco E77DX -- Emir Memic EMS SOLUTIONS K?hlergasse 12/3 1180 Wien +4369919227041 emir.me...@emssolutions.at -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> Im Auftrag von Ray Higgins Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. April 2019 16:49 An: topband@contesting.com Betreff: Topband: Fresnel Zone I have two questions about fresnel zone. I just purchased 22.5/ac near the ocean near Machiasport, ME. This is in the Northeast corner of Maine about 30 miles south of Eastport and a Lubec. This is going to be my personal Remote Contest station! I plan to be contesting from this new qth starting in 2020 but will be QRV by mid 2019 for testing. This qth is anywhere between 1-3 miles from the ocean or the bay, it sits on a high plateau 150? asl thats slopes in all directions to saltwater (peninsula) except N/NW. The property has a saltwater river and marsh that runs the perimeter from south to north favoring the NE direction, the marsh is only 50-100' wide and 1500-2000? away from the property. The land has a gradual slope to the marsh. My questions: 1.) Is the saltwater river bed/marsh wide enough to be an effective field in the Fresnal Zone? 2.) What is the wavelengths needed to be within the Fresnal zone of a river/marsh compared to an ocean? In this photo album (last pic) I have outlined the river saltwater marsh and property boundry from a google earth shot. https://photos.app.goo.gl/ui79t2jFo95b29et6 I?m only concerned about 80 and 160m in the Fresnal Zone. Any input would be welcomed. Thanks, Ray W2RE Sent from my iPhone _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list Topband@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband ------------------------------ End of Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 **************************************** _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 20:32:01 +0300 From: Victor Goncharsky <us...@bk.ru> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <1556040721.984334...@f545.i.mail.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I wonder if there's a moderator in this forum who can deal with this UY0ZG idiot, who was expelled from Ukrainian Contest Club,Black Sea Contest club, caused problems to the Ukrainian Amateur Radio League that resulted in creation of an alternative amateur radio orgainzation NGO VRL, This guy is permanently blaming different amateurs including myself of all kinds of "sins". I hope the administration of this forum can get rid of flame from this kind of people. Thanks in advance, 73 >???????, 23 ?????? 2019, 11:30 UTC ?? uy0zg <uy...@mksat.net>: > >Hi All > > >Victor >you need to stop listening to dx via the internet! > >When will you make an RX antenna? > > -- 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E. UARL Technical and VHF Committies DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 10BDXCC, 8BWAS DXCC card checker (160 meters). ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 20:57:43 +0300 From: uy0zg <uy...@mksat.net> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <4863590a912bce60a4cc96d18464a...@mksat.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Thank you all! Many site views. Especially from the USA. ====== As for Goncharsky, we feel sorry for him. --- Nick, UY0ZG http://www.topband.in.ua uy0zg ????? 2019-04-23 14:29: > Hi All > > > Victor > you need to stop listening to dx via the internet! > > When will you make an RX antenna? > > > The availability and use of RX antennas is a great pleasure. > > Here is an example of the antenna Anatoly UT2XQ > > http://www.topband.in.ua/2019/04/22/ut2xq-antennas/ > > --- > Nick, UY0ZG > http://www.topband.in.ua > > Victor Goncharsky via Topband ????? 2019-04-23 10:23: >> This is not always the case. I have noticed long openings to Caribbean >> during last year 6m season with signal levels good enough for reliable >> CW QSOs but only FT8 portion of the band was alive. >> Will see what will happen this year. Top band game is almost over with >> the last 3 new ones worked in April (but missed XR0) so 6m antenna is >> on its way to the tower this week. >> >> >> 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), >> P.E. >> UARL Technical and VHF Committies >> DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS >> DXCC card checker (160 meters). >> _________________ >> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband >> Reflector > _________________ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:52:22 -0600 From: VE6WZ_Steve <ve...@shaw.ca> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Cc: lennart.michaels...@telia.com, Roger Kennedy <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk>, sm2...@telia.com Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <37827e25-da05-4f04-ae34-1acfec564...@shaw.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Here are my thoughts on FACT vs FICTION regarding FT-8 and CW on 160m. (These thoughts relate to working DX?not ?local? NA stations) FICTION: "All the DX has moved to FT8 on 160m like it did on 6m". FACT: On 160m this winter season from September till now (9 months) at VE6WZ I have made 926 CW QSOs with Europe, (382 unique callsigns) and 156 CW QSOs with Asia. These do NOT include any dx contest QSOs. I have worked 109 DXCC in the same 9 month period on 160m CW. The majority of these QSOs are from calling CQ for 2-3 hours at night from 400-700z. I am sorry friends, but lets set the record straight?.."the only place to get the DX cheese" as N6NU said is NOT just on FT8! There are still many CW ops out there. Yes, I have a quiet rural hilltop location that is optimized for TB DX?BUT?that is not the point. The FACT is there were 382 unique CW operators from EU that were active and available for a CW QSO this season. However, as others have said there are less people calling CQ and working casual DX on 160m than years past. Perhaps some have migrated to FT8. Everyone has there own interest. We need more ops like F5IN, LA1MFA, HA8RM, G3JMJ, ON7PQ, RA4LW,SM5EDX?.etc. etc. who call CQ for a few hours at a time. However, calling CQ takes time, patience and effort. Trying to answer a CW CQ, waiting for the QSB to peak to complete the QSO takes patience, time and effort. FACT: FT8 is easier and takes much less effort to work DX than CW With WSJT-x set to monitor FT8, one just needs to wait until a desired DX call pops up on the screen and a double click will give him a call. (yes, I know there is strategy and ?skill? involved in selecting an optimal response frequency) Deep QSB is a HUGE factor on 160m unless the band is rocking open and stable and this may only happen one or two nights a season. With FT8, the decode passband is constantly being monitored by the computer waiting for that very brief QSB peak to get the decode. Often on CW, the only way to complete a QSO is to sit on the CQ frequency and wait patiently for the signal to peak and come out of the noise and hopefully complete the QSO before the station disappears again into the noise. Unlike FT-8, we can only do this on one frequency at a time. This takes considerable time and effort and can only be done sitting at the radio, scanning the band, watching the waterfall and looking at the RBN spots. Most of the time at VE6WZ, the DX signals on 160m will appear as a trace on the waterfall and be copiable for 30 seconds to a minute or so, and then fade away into oblivion with no copy for many minutes. Patience is required to work CW dx on 160m. Some operators might show up on the band for a few minutes, click a few RBN spots and hear nothing, and conclude the band is ?dead?. But that is not how 160m works. Meanwhile, using FT8, the computer is patiently, continuously decoding the band for hours on end, and occasionally ?copies? a DX qso or CQ. The conclusion is the FT-8 is ?better? at weak signal DX copy, but I suggest it is mostly because the computer is more patient, and makes the copy on the QSB peaks. This is also why its common on 160m FT8 to have difficulty ?completing? the QSO because the QSB will be too fast. It ?seems? like FT-8 has a superior ability to copy the weak ones, but this is mostly because the computer is constantly monitoring the passband. Calling CQ with FT8 is also much easier. Just let the computer run and keep an eye on it to watch for a CQ watchdog run-away alert. It really is much easier to ?operate? FT-8 while doing other things in the shack. Checking e-mails, chatting in chat rooms, maybe even watching TV. This is obviously very compelling for many operators. You just cant do that operating CW. FACT: There is more activity on 160m FT8 than CW I believe this is true, but perhaps many of these FT8 operators were never 160m DX CW ops anyway. There are likely many FT-8 ops that don't know morse code, or are not proficient at CW, and this is a great DX substitute for SSB on 160m. This is a good thing and will encourage more interest and activity to the band. I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I used to. Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls in, even I have worked them numerous times. This winter season I have had 38 QSOs with Wolf DF2PY and 20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m and enjoyed every one. The thrill of digging the signal out of the noise is the magic of radio for me. I find operating FT8 painfully boring, but I realize for others it proves exciting. Lets not conclude that the ONLY way to work DX on 160m is with FT8 and that **everyone** is doing it. If we all start to believe that myth, then eventually it might come true! 73, de steve ve6wz > On Apr 23, 2019, at 4:17 AM, Peter Sundberg <sm2...@telia.com> wrote: > > Let's ponder: > > FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency (passband) and their computer is > transmitting every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if they are in > contact with another computer or not > FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other computers are making use of > the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8 > FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the > screeen > FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied are still presented as "heard" > by use of the "a priori" functionality > FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity > > CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long > interrupts > CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig in the noise in 50 Hz > bandwidth > CW - without knowledge of who is where we need good signals to attract our > attention and so we can start focusing > CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for sure, the noise is > certainly higher and many have taken their microscopes (receiving antennas) > down for the season > CW - many of us also have to live with a less effective TX antenna during the > summer as we have to roll in our extensive radial field > CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and capable stations but most of > them don't transmit every 15 seconds > CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST > > > Bottom line: > > CW - it sure would be easier for us to only monitor a specific world wide > calling frequency, but this is not realistic > CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult to do manual CW than single > channel FT8 for reasons described above > CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-) > CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW and continue to make noise > whenever we can, despite the problems listed above > CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up > CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a realistic way and realize what > they are doing, duly noting that our table has better food > CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the southern hemisphere for being > there all the time during our prime season up north! > > CW is King! > > 73 > Peter SM2CEW > > > > > > At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaels...@telia.com wrote: >> Roger et al, >> I was on early this morning and even checked in on ON4KST. >> Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see >> quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out? >> >> 73 all >> Len SM7BIC >> >> -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- >> Fr?n: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy >> Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17 >> Till: topband@contesting.com >> ?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW >> >> >> I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . >> >> But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use >> FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! >> >> It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's >> the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you >> ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! >> >> Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a >> couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an >> achievement). >> >> I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also >> don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition >> station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island >> they're on anyway) >> >> It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to >> come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! >> >> Roger G3YRO >> >> >> _________________ >> 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 ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 16:34:50 -0400 From: GEORGE WALLNER <aa...@atlanticbb.net> To: VE6WZ_Steve <ve...@shaw.ca>, Topband <topband@contesting.com> Cc: <lennart.michaels...@telia.com>, <sm2...@telia.com>, Roger Kennedy <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <ximss-64143...@be3.cluster1.echolabs.net> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="utf-8"; format="flowed" Steve, You have summed it up perfectly. Perhaps it will be FT8 that will keep Amateur Radio alive with the new "smart-device-bound, multi-tasking, app-addicted" generation. Times change. TKS and 73, George, AA7JV/C6AGU PS: I just did some checking of the QSO statistics from the KH1 Baker Island operation: CW: 128 DXCC entities SSB: 121 FT8: 107 RTTY: 36 CW is still King! It is RTTY that is getting killed! On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:52:22 -0600 VE6WZ_Steve <ve...@shaw.ca> wrote: > Here are my thoughts on FACT vs FICTION regarding FT-8 and CW on 160m. > (These thoughts relate to working DX?not ?local? NA stations) > >FICTION: > "All the DX has moved to FT8 on 160m like it did on 6m". > >FACT: > On 160m this winter season from September till now (9 months) at VE6WZ I have > made 926 CW QSOs with Europe, (382 unique callsigns) and 156 CW QSOs with > Asia. These do NOT include any dx contest QSOs. I have worked 109 DXCC in > the same 9 month period on 160m CW. The majority of these QSOs are from > calling CQ for 2-3 hours at night from 400-700z. > > I am sorry friends, but lets set the record straight?.."the only place to get > the DX cheese" as N6NU said is NOT just on FT8! There are still many CW ops > out there. Yes, I have a quiet rural hilltop location that is optimized for > TB DX?BUT?that is not the point. The FACT is there were 382 unique CW > operators from EU that were active and available for a CW QSO this season. > However, as others have said there are less people calling CQ and working > casual DX on 160m than years past. > Perhaps some have migrated to FT8. Everyone has there own interest. We need > more ops like F5IN, LA1MFA, HA8RM, G3JMJ, ON7PQ, RA4LW,SM5EDX?.etc. etc. who > call CQ for a few hours at a time. > However, calling CQ takes time, patience and effort. Trying to answer a CW > CQ, waiting for the QSB to peak to complete the QSO takes patience, time and > effort. > >FACT: FT8 is easier and takes much less effort to work DX than CW > > With WSJT-x set to monitor FT8, one just needs to wait until a desired DX > call pops up on the screen and a double click will give him a call. (yes, I > know there is strategy and ?skill? involved in selecting an optimal response > frequency) > Deep QSB is a HUGE factor on 160m unless the band is rocking open and stable > and this may only happen one or two nights a season. > With FT8, the decode passband is constantly being monitored by the computer > waiting for that very brief QSB peak to get the decode. > > Often on CW, the only way to complete a QSO is to sit on the CQ frequency > and wait patiently for the signal to peak and come out of the noise and > hopefully complete the QSO before the station disappears again into the > noise. > Unlike FT-8, we can only do this on one frequency at a time. This takes > considerable time and effort and can only be done sitting at the radio, > scanning the band, watching the waterfall and looking at the RBN spots. > Most of the time at VE6WZ, the DX signals on 160m will appear as a trace on > the waterfall and be copiable for 30 seconds to a minute or so, and then fade > away into oblivion with no copy for many minutes. Patience is required to > work CW dx on 160m. Some operators might show up on the band for a few > minutes, click a few RBN spots and hear nothing, and conclude the band is > ?dead?. But that is not how 160m works. > > Meanwhile, using FT8, the computer is patiently, continuously decoding the > band for hours on end, and occasionally ?copies? a DX qso or CQ. The > conclusion is the FT-8 is ?better? at weak signal DX copy, but I suggest it > is mostly because the computer is more patient, and makes the copy on the QSB > peaks. This is also why its common on 160m FT8 to have difficulty > ?completing? the QSO because the QSB will be too fast. > > It ?seems? like FT-8 has a superior ability to copy the weak ones, but this > is mostly because the computer is constantly monitoring the passband. > Calling CQ with FT8 is also much easier. Just let the computer run and keep > an eye on it to watch for a CQ watchdog run-away alert. > > It really is much easier to ?operate? FT-8 while doing other things in the > shack. Checking e-mails, chatting in chat rooms, maybe even watching TV. This > is obviously very compelling for many operators. You just cant do that > operating CW. > > >FACT: > There is more activity on 160m FT8 than CW > > I believe this is true, but perhaps many of these FT8 operators were never > 160m DX CW ops anyway. There are likely many FT-8 ops that don't know morse > code, or are not proficient at CW, and this is a great DX substitute for SSB > on 160m. > This is a good thing and will encourage more interest and activity to the > band. > > > I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I used to. > Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls in, even I have > worked them numerous times. This winter season I have had 38 QSOs with Wolf > DF2PY and 20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m and enjoyed every one. The thrill > of digging the signal out of the noise is the magic of radio for me. I find > operating FT8 painfully boring, but I realize for others it proves exciting. > > Lets not conclude that the ONLY way to work DX on 160m is with FT8 and that > **everyone** is doing it. If we all start to believe that myth, then > eventually it might come true! > > 73, de steve ve6wz >> On Apr 23, 2019, at 4:17 AM, Peter Sundberg <sm2...@telia.com> wrote: >> >> Let's ponder: >> >> FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency (passband) and their computer is >> transmitting every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if they are in >> contact with another computer or not >> FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other computers are making use of >> the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8 >> FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the >> screeen >> FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied are still presented as >> "heard" by use of the "a priori" functionality >> FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity >> >> CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long >> interrupts >> CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig in the noise in 50 Hz >> bandwidth >> CW - without knowledge of who is where we need good signals to attract our >> attention and so we can start focusing >> CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for sure, the noise is >> certainly higher and many have taken their microscopes (receiving antennas) >> down for the season >> CW - many of us also have to live with a less effective TX antenna during >> the summer as we have to roll in our extensive radial field >> CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and capable stations but most of >> them don't transmit every 15 seconds >> CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST >> >> >> Bottom line: >> >> CW - it sure would be easier for us to only monitor a specific world wide >> calling frequency, but this is not realistic >> CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult to do manual CW than single >> channel FT8 for reasons described above >> CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-) >> CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW and continue to make noise >> whenever we can, despite the problems listed above >> CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up >> CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a realistic way and realize what >> they are doing, duly noting that our table has better food >> CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the southern hemisphere for being >> there all the time during our prime season up north! >> >> CW is King! >> >> 73 >> Peter SM2CEW >> >> >> At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaels...@telia.com wrote: >>> Roger et al, >>> I was on early this morning and even checked in on >>> ON4KST. >>> Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see >>> quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out? >>> >>> 73 all >>> Len SM7BIC >>> >>> -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- >>> Fr?n: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy >>> Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17 >>> Till: topband@contesting.com >>> ?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW >>> >>> >>> I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . . >>> >>> But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use >>> FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band ! >>> >>> It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's >>> the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you >>> ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?! >>> >>> Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a >>> couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an >>> achievement). >>> >>> I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also >>> don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition >>> station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island >>> they're on anyway) >>> >>> It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to >>> come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !! >>> >>> Roger G3YRO >>> >>> >>> _________________ >>> 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 ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:56:27 -0500 From: Mike Waters <mikew...@gmail.com> To: VE6WZ_Steve <ve...@shaw.ca> Cc: Topband <topband@contesting.com>, Lennart m <lennart.michaels...@telia.com>, sm2...@telia.com, Roger Kennedy <ro...@wessexproductions.co.uk> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <ca+fxyxiyjujjqjq1ksir01r+za4akf3a8b5xiuzpfifjeof...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 1:52 PM VE6WZ_Steve <ve...@shaw.ca> wrote: > ... perhaps many of these FT8 operators were never 160m DX CW ops anyway. > There are likely many FT-8 ops that don't know morse code, or are not > proficient at CW ... > Wow, that's a profound thought, Steve! I never thought of that, but it makes sense. Thank you for that. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 22:32:13 +0000 From: W7RH <midnigh...@cox.net> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <7b123975-935d-2f7c-7a4a-1f7b9df69...@cox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Greetings Top Band, I guess I?m truly an old fart, now in my 54^th year as a ham. I?ve done contests, EME, Dxing, RTTY, Fast Scan and slow scan TV and still build a lot of my equipment. I do find the lack of CW activity frustrating. It?s not just 160m it?s all bands. I operate primarily 160 and dabble in 80 and 40m operation. Seldom do I venture higher, as my operations stem from the times I have had available to play most of my working years. Fortunately, I find many of the top band guys on 80 and 40m as well. With about 46 years of operation on the 160m band there have obviously been some changes in operating styles. In old days we would ragchew on SSB about 1840 or so all the while listening or keeping the 2^nd VFO or receiver for listening down band. Geeze, been over 30 years since that. Today we have panoramic receive adapters, skimmers, reflectors, chat rooms, Skype and RBNs. We also have numerous tools available in the form of ionospheric predictions and tons of NASA generated solar numbers, geomagnetic field sensors et all. In the case of RBNs which many seem to rely upon most are dreadful in RX performance. Very seldom do I get spotted in EU, JA, VK or ZL but work them all the time. Even with FT8 I?ve called numerous South Pacific stations for a half hour only to get no response due to their high ambient noise levels. On the Dark Side we have moved into the the digital world with computer operated TVs, wall warts, direct drive washers, variable speed AC units, clocks, WIFI, digital cable, leaky power lines, PC cabinets with glowing lights, no shielding and bad neutral connections just to name a few. I can honestly tell you that locally you have to go to 1296 mHz in order to have acceptable noise levels. Hence I built a remote. In the 33 years I?ve lived in Las Vegas I?ve seen the city increase in population form 300K to 3 Million. The average lot size dipped from horse properties of 5 acres or more with modest sub division plots of 12,000 sqft to Gated communities with CC&R and HOA antenna restrictions to a minuscule 4000sqft lot. Currently the objective is high density urban living. The resultant cramped space combined with noise sources has forced Amateurs worldwide to go to FT8 or not operate at all. I?m sorry but it?s true. In the US the FCC has long since let electronic manufacturers submit self tests for part 15 interference compliance. I?m sure the rest of the world is even more relaxed. The amount of these devices their noise is out of control. Add to the problem most consumer devices here are two wire power AC power including most TVs. The only survivor of three wire power cord in NEMA equipped desktop PCs. I grew up in the 60?s and TV antennas and ham radio antennas were everywhere. At that time even mid sized cities still had 2-3 radio stores. You didn?t have to get permission or permits to stick antennas up on the roof, or erect a tower. Most neighbors then didn?t give a crap or least kept their mouths shut. Now the consensus is antennas damage property values and view of the smog filled skies or are a source of community revenue to perpetuate lazy ass building inspectors in the name of safety. To my top band friends, thanks to the many that have made the effort to be heard and hear! I?m QRV most nights after 0300 pending conditions and again in the morning 1130 UTC until sunrise. I hope I?ve put a few things into perspective. I am now and forever a Analog guy. Bob, W7RH -- W7RH DM35os "It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity." - Albert Einstein ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 17:40:05 -0500 From: Mike Waters <mikew...@gmail.com> To: Jim Brown <j...@audiosystemsgroup.com> Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <CA+FxYXhySg0Vy8+9jO5=ZrN4kpPgUrN_UfLz9Zbc2e4=onc...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Jim, This was very nicely illustrated earlier today by Phil Frost, W8II at https://ham.stackexchange.com/questions/13379/are-qrp-transceivers-only-meant-for-cw-communication 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Tue, Apr 23, 2019, 5:00 PM Jim Brown <j...@audiosystemsgroup.com> wrote: > ... The bottom line is that FT8 (and other WSJT-X modes) can work deeper > into the noise than CW with very good ops on both ends. > > 73, Jim K9YC > > ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 08:58:29 +0300 From: uy0zg <uy...@mksat.net> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <ac50bf3d6d0118066fdd2bf79a170...@mksat.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Hi All That's right, the main thing is to enjoy the process. The popularity of FT8 (and other versions of FT .. that are possible in the future) lies in the fact that it provides an easier way to DXCC. It's simple - remove the FT from DXCC, and there will be no activity ... >> I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I >> used to. Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls in, >> even I have worked them numerous times. This winter season I have had >> 38 QSOs with Wolf DF2PY and 20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m and >> enjoyed every one. The thrill of digging the signal out of the noise >> is the magic of radio for me. I find operating FT8 painfully boring, >> but I realize for others it proves exciting. >> 73, de steve ve6wz --- Nick, UY0ZG http://www.topband.in.ua ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:20:46 +0300 From: uy0zg <uy...@mksat.net> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW Message-ID: <a88724a79f574587ee6841711b67c...@mksat.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Besides : There are many weak people in the world. They are looking for easy ways. It always has been. That's the whole philosophy ..... --- Nick, UY0ZG http://www.topband.in.ua uy0zg ????? 2019-04-24 08:58: > Hi All > > That's right, the main thing is to enjoy the process. > > > The popularity of FT8 (and other versions of FT .. that are possible > in the future) lies in the fact that it provides an easier way to > DXCC. > > It's simple - remove the FT from DXCC, and there will be no activity > ... > > > >>> I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I >>> used to. Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls >>> in, even I have worked them numerous times. This winter season I >>> have had 38 QSOs with Wolf DF2PY and 20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m >>> and enjoyed every one. The thrill of digging the signal out of the >>> noise is the magic of radio for me. I find operating FT8 painfully >>> boring, but I realize for others it proves exciting. >>> 73, de steve ve6wz > > --- > Nick, UY0ZG > http://www.topband.in.ua > _________________ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list Topband@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband ------------------------------ End of Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 23 **************************************** _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector