CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

w1mk ARRL 80m score

Subject: w1mk ARRL 80m score
From: es@mvuss.att.com (es@mvuss.att.com)
Date: Mon Feb 28 10:51:00 1994

ARRL DX-CW 80m Single Band Results for W1MK: 480/80 -> 115,200

System: 1.5 Kw and 4-Square, No Bevs

Observation: Hearing was the tough part.  


>From modular!eric@cs.arizona.edu (Eric Gustafson)  Mon Feb 28 15:57:11 1994
From: modular!eric@cs.arizona.edu (Eric Gustafson) (Eric Gustafson)
Subject: How Prevent Ice on Yagis?
Message-ID: <9402281557.AA24658@modular>

Dave,

There used to be a company which produced a hydrophobic paint which would
do just as you wish, prevent ice from forming on antennas.  I will look
around here for the old brochure.  If they are still in business, it may be
the answer you are looking for.  Ping me next week sometime.  I should have
found the info by then.

73,  Eric

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Gustafson  N7CL               | The mountains are high and the Emperor
6730 S. Old Spanish Trail          | is far away.
Tucson, AZ 85747                   |
INTERNET: modular!eric@arizona.edu | You can't work 'em if you can't hear 'em.
     CI$: 71750,2133               |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>From tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree)  Mon Feb 28 16:29:46 1994
From: tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Subject: Internet Sprint Announcement
Message-ID: <9402281629.AA18656@cmicro.com>


                     FOURTH INTERNET CW SPRINT CONTEST


Contest period: 00:00:00Z to 02:00:00Z on Sunday Apr 3rd (Saturday local)

Bands: 40 and 20 meters only.

Max power output: 150 watts.

Exchange: Consecutive QSO number (starting with one), name and state
          or province or DXCC country (if outside W/VE).  The name for
          the first QSO is your name.  For every QSO afterwards, the name
          you send is the name you received in the previous QSO.

Call: CQ INT

The standard sprint QSY rule must be followed.  Both callsigns must be
sent during the exchange.  Only one signal at a time please and all QSOs
are to take place on CW.  All information submitted must of been decoded
during the contest.  The use of post contest detection or verification
techniques or systems is not allowed.  Also, do not make round robin
type QSOs.  It will be very easy to spot these with the names floating
around.  A round robin QSO is one where you should QSY, but instead
hang around to work the station who is QSOing the station you gave
the frequency to.

You may work the same station multiple times provided they are separated
by at least 3 other QSOs in both logs (regardless of band).  For example,
if WN4KKN and N6TR had a QSO, they both must work at least three other
stations before they could work each other again.  Changing bands does
not eliminate the three QSO requirement.

You must not work the same station or stations using any kind of schedule
or system.  It is the intent of this rule to make sure we don't run out of
stations to work.  It is NOT the intent of this rule for you to change how
you would operate the contest if dupes were not allowed.  If, in the log
checkers opinion, you have not lived up to the intent of this rule, your
log will be disqualified!!

Total score is the number of contacts you make.  The same penalities used
in the sprint contests will apply to busted contacts with the following
exception: If any information is miscopied, it will be removed from both
logs.

Please refrain from using vulgar or inappropriate names.  If you receive
one of these names, fell free to either edit it or replace it with your
starting name.  Make sure to make a note in your log so we know what you did.

Logs must be sent in ASCII format via internet to n6tr@cmicro.com within
72 hours of the end of the contest.

Logs must show the band, time, station worked, number sent, number received,
name received and QTH received for each QSO.  Also, please tell me the
name you start the contest with.  I will assume the name you send is the
name received on your previous QSO, so you don't have to show that.

Results will be publised on CQ-CONTEST.

Good luck, tell a friend and HAVE FUN!!


Tree N6TR
tree@cmicro.com

>From dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com (Dave Curtis)  Mon Feb 28 17:59:02 1994
From: dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com (Dave Curtis) (Dave Curtis)
Subject: Visalia info, pse?
Message-ID: <9402281759.AA21679@climax.intel.com>

Could somebody send me the Visalia date/time/place info?

Thanks & 73,
Dave NG0X, dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com

>From ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.PacTel.COM (ken silverman)  Mon Feb 28 
>18:53:34 1994
From: ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.PacTel.COM (ken silverman) (ken silverman)
Subject: Summary: 2 Stations, 1 Band
Message-ID: <9401287624.AA762461614@atlas.ccmail.pactel.com>

The experience in operating 2 stations on 1 band seems to be limited to a few 
large DX-peditions and some multi-op stations.  From the limited responses I 
have received, it seems that this technique is not as widley used as I thought. 
 

Solutions on how to get 2 stations on 1 band have not been very specific.  
Essentially it comes down to phsyical antenna separation, and reducing phase 
noise.  Physical antenna separation seems to imply hundreds of feet.  No 
specific examples of someone who has tested what is a minimum separation have 
been presented.

The problem really comes down to real estate.  The next time I have access to 
lots of land, I'll let you how it works.  

One person replied that with a large packet cluster, this technique is not 
worth it.  Sorry, but I am taking editorial control:  I can guarantee you that 
I can work more mults by listening on a band, than by waiting for packet spots 
to be posted.  I'de rather work an easy but elusive Carribean Island, than 
fight it out in a huge packet pileup for an African station.  People wonder how 
single op non-assisted's beat the assisted ops?  Simple, by old fashoined 
listening.  That's why I want to have another station on the same band as I am 
running:  To increase listening exposure.

With the advent of the FT1000, TS950SDX and IC781, the second receiver can be 
used to approach the functionality of a second station on the same band...  But 
when you are running hours of 175+ rate on CW (on a contest-expedition), the 
ability to effectively work the sub-receiver is almost nil.  Having a mult 
station on the same running band IS a distinct advantage in these situations, 
and is where my question arose from.

Having your mult station on other bands feed the run station is a key to any 
contest (though easier said than done). In a typical M/S CQ WW operation, you 
stay on the best band to produce rate.  But you will miss quite a few mults 
when you are sitting on one frequency.  It is not the function of the run 
station to S&P for mults.  Having a mult station on the run band would be 
extremely helpful.

Attached are some edited comments from those of you who were kind enough to 
respond.  I am sorry that I can't offer any concrete advice on this topic.  

Best Regards,  Ken WM2C

Comments:

Forget the sharp filters, not workable.  You need physical separation
(more than 100' in most cases), as much vertical as you can abide by. One often 
overlooked item is that both transmitters need to have very low phase noise on 
the oscillators to keep from transmitting on the receive/spot frequency.

I personally do not feel like putting effort into in-band searching,
given a good packet cluster network during contests with 60 or more
nodes. 

At AH1A we used fully filtered radios, of course, but the key was getting the 
stations as far apart as possible.  Ours were about 1000 ft apart.  Laying out 
the yagis, so thatthey dont point at each other when working usa is another 
technique to use.  we never got rid of all the interstation interference, but 
were able to operate on the same band with a decent q rate.

Basically, the primary issue is antenna separation.  It might 
work with good vertical separation (two yagis on the same twr), but you 
usually want the bottom yagi higher than it probably has to be to reduce 
interference, so in the multi-op cases I've seen, we go for big 
horizontal separation (at least a few hundred feet).  When the antennas 
are sufficiently separated, and pointed "away" from each other, it seems 
to work pretty well.  The second most important issue is phase noise. 

At W2PV in late 70s, There were 2 stations on each band. One was a run station 
and the other for mults. Jim had an ingenious switching network that allowed 
the seoncd position to listen either to the run receiver or his own rcvr. Also 
was ability to switch between multiple antennas. I don't believe both stations 
were ever CQing at same time on same
band. 73 Barry

Notes from an op at W3LPL:

a) We do NOT have two independent stations.  There is one transmitter 
   amplifier for the band which feeds the chosen transmit antenna array.
   The amp can be fed by one of two transceivers.  The "valid" transmitter
   is determined by a simple interlock system: if the left transmitter is
   sending, the right transmitter would transmit into an open circuit.
   If the left transmitter is not sending, the right transmitter will send
   into the amplifier input circuit.

   Both receivers are fed with receive antennas which are chosen independently
   from the transmit antennas

b) If one transmitter is on the air, the other receiver will always be 
   affected to some degree.

c) The idea that you had about orienting antennas, etc does not work.  All
   antennas are in each others' near fields.  The behavior of the antennas
   within the near field does NOT resemble the far field antenna patterns
   that are used for design and planning.  About 10 wavelengths is required
   to form the far fields.

73's Ken WM2C









>From ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.PacTel.COM (ken silverman)  Mon Feb 28 
>19:00:18 1994
From: ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.PacTel.COM (ken silverman) (ken silverman)
Subject: Summary: 2 Stations, 1 Band
Message-ID: <9401287624.AA762462018@atlas.ccmail.pactel.com>

The experience in operating 2 stations on 1 band seems to be limited to a few 
large DX-peditions and some multi-op stations.  From the limited responses I 
have received, it seems that this technique is not as widley used as I thought. 
 

Solutions on how to get 2 stations on 1 band have not been very specific.  
Essentially it comes down to phsyical antenna separation, and reducing phase 
noise.  Physical antenna separation seems to imply hundreds of feet.  No 
specific examples of someone who has tested what is a minimum separation have 
been presented.

The problem really comes down to real estate.  The next time I have access to 
lots of land, I'll let you how it works.  

One person replied that with a large packet cluster, this technique is not 
worth it.  Sorry, but I am taking editorial control:  I can guarantee you that 
I can work more mults by listening on a band, than by waiting for packet spots 
to be posted.  I'de rather work an easy but elusive Carribean Island, than 
fight it out in a huge packet pileup for an African station.  People wonder how 
single op non-assisted's beat the assisted ops?  Simple, by old fashoined 
listening.  That's why I want to have another station on the same band as I am 
running:  To increase listening exposure.

With the advent of the FT1000, TS950SDX and IC781, the second receiver can be 
used to approach the functionality of a second station on the same band...  But 
when you are running hours of 175+ rate on CW (on a contest-expedition), the 
ability to effectively work the sub-receiver is almost nil.  Having a mult 
station on the same running band IS a distinct advantage in these situations, 
and is where my question arose from.

Having your mult station on other bands feed the run station is a key to any 
contest (though easier said than done). In a typical M/S CQ WW operation, you 
stay on the best band to produce rate.  But you will miss quite a few mults 
when you are sitting on one frequency.  It is not the function of the run 
station to S&P for mults.  Having a mult station on the run band would be 
extremely helpful.

Attached are some edited comments from those of you who were kind enough to 
respond.  I am sorry that I can't offer any concrete advice on this topic.  

Best Regards,  Ken WM2C

Comments:

Forget the sharp filters, not workable.  You need physical separation
(more than 100' in most cases), as much vertical as you can abide by. One often 
overlooked item is that both transmitters need to have very low phase noise on 
the oscillators to keep from transmitting on the receive/spot frequency.

I personally do not feel like putting effort into in-band searching,
given a good packet cluster network during contests with 60 or more
nodes. 

At AH1A we used fully filtered radios, of course, but the key was getting the 
stations as far apart as possible.  Ours were about 1000 ft apart.  Laying out 
the yagis, so thatthey dont point at each other when working usa is another 
technique to use.  we never got rid of all the interstation interference, but 
were able to operate on the same band with a decent q rate.

Basically, the primary issue is antenna separation.  It might 
work with good vertical separation (two yagis on the same twr), but you 
usually want the bottom yagi higher than it probably has to be to reduce 
interference, so in the multi-op cases I've seen, we go for big 
horizontal separation (at least a few hundred feet).  When the antennas 
are sufficiently separated, and pointed "away" from each other, it seems 
to work pretty well.  The second most important issue is phase noise. 

At W2PV in late 70s, There were 2 stations on each band. One was a run station 
and the other for mults. Jim had an ingenious switching network that allowed 
the seoncd position to listen either to the run receiver or his own rcvr. Also 
was ability to switch between multiple antennas. I don't believe both stations 
were ever CQing at same time on same
band. 73 Barry

Notes from an op at W3LPL:

a) We do NOT have two independent stations.  There is one transmitter 
   amplifier for the band which feeds the chosen transmit antenna array.
   The amp can be fed by one of two transceivers.  The "valid" transmitter
   is determined by a simple interlock system: if the left transmitter is
   sending, the right transmitter would transmit into an open circuit.
   If the left transmitter is not sending, the right transmitter will send
   into the amplifier input circuit.

   Both receivers are fed with receive antennas which are chosen independently
   from the transmit antennas

b) If one transmitter is on the air, the other receiver will always be 
   affected to some degree.

c) The idea that you had about orienting antennas, etc does not work.  All
   antennas are in each others' near fields.  The behavior of the antennas
   within the near field does NOT resemble the far field antenna patterns
   that are used for design and planning.  About 10 wavelengths is required
   to form the far fields.

73's Ken WM2C









<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>