CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

NAQP SSB from KL7 ?

Subject: NAQP SSB from KL7 ?
From: KB5YVT@aol.com (KB5YVT@aol.com)
Date: Tue Jul 4 23:55:46 1995
Have a fishing trip planned and will be in AK. weekend of NAQP SSB.  That
Sat. have no plans so thought if it was worth it would try to take rig and
some kind of antenna.  Any comments on if this is worth it prop. wise would
be appreciated.

Please respond direct not to the reflector.

73  Mike  KB5YVT

>From Frank Donovan <donovanf@sgate.com>  Wed Jul  5 04:01:45 1995
From: Frank Donovan <donovanf@sgate.com> (Frank Donovan)
Subject: 40 over 20.
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.950704224340.30485D-100000@jekyll.sgate.com>

George,
Your note reminded me of a difficult lesson I learned 20 years ago...
In November 1974 I installed a 4 band Christmas tree of 3 element 
Yagis for 40/20/15/10.  Of course, I didn't thoroughly test the system 
before the CQ WW contest!  I started the contest on the low end of 40 CW 
expecting a 100+ hour, and I was shocked to get no answers to CQs, then 
discovered the trusty full size 3 element 40M had a terrible SWR and 
absolutely no discernible pattern!  After an hour of frustration, I 
climbed the 135 foot tower, not once but twice in the dark, convinced 
that something awful had happened to the feedline...  But no, everything 
was fine (I thought...).
After pondering the situation for most of the nite (while I was on 80M...),
I concluded that the new 20M 3 element beam must have been affecting the 40 
somehow.  As soon as the morning runs to Europe slowed down a bit, I 
fabricated and installed a new boom-to-mast plate for the 20M beam, made out 
of a 1/2 inch thick phenolic plate (theorizing that the mast and 20M beam were 
acting like a top loaded 40M vertical).  Voila!  When I came down the 
tower, the 40M 3L had its previous excellent VSWR and f/b ratio!  
Saturday nite of 40M was great.  By the way, all of the elements were 
mounted in direct electrical contact with the booms...

Ever since that experience, I've always mounted my Yagi elements on 
phenolic plates, electrically isolated from the boom!  Unfortunately, if 
elements in electrical contact with the boom, all kinds of unintended
"spurious" resonances will occur.  If u are luck these unintended resonances
will not cause a problem, but I don't like to trust any of my antenna projects
to luck...

73!
Frank
W3LPL

On Tue, 4 Jul 1995, George Cutsogeorge wrote:

<<cut>>
> After a year or so a strong wind came through
> and the 402 was rotated on the mast about 20 degrees with respect
> to the 204.  The vswr was radically changed in both resonant
> point and minimum value.  Also, it seemed that it didn't play
> well.  The 204 was un changed.  I would guess there is a 40
> meter resonance in the 204 that nulls when the booms are lined
> up.
<<cut>>

>From James Wolf" <jbwolf@most.magec.com  Wed Jul  5 05:21:28 1995
From: James Wolf" <jbwolf@most.magec.com (James Wolf)
Subject: KR9U Field Day Results
Message-ID: <9507050430.AB23131@ss4.uiv>

Here are the Field Day results from KR9U.
For the second year in a row, we lost 1 1/2 hrs to Thunderstorms.
No Polyphaser devices at the Field Day site.
Class 1A
Op's   KA9A, KC9LA, K9LA, K9UWA, KR9U, KR9V.

 Band     CW    PTS      SSB     PTS
 80      117    468       41     82
 40      316   1264      195    390
 20      318   1272       68    136
 15       30    120        0      0
 10        0      0       11     22
  6        3     12       26     52
  2        1      4       12     24
SAT        1      4        0      0
PKT       64    256        0      0
-------------------------------------
        850          +    353       =   1203 QSO TOTAL

   (3400 CW QSO POINTS  +  706 SSB QSO POINTS) x 2 power multiplier
   1100 bonus points  
   5,206 Total 
----------------------------------
James Wolf, KR9U
jbwolf@most.magec.com

>From steve.steltzer@paonline.com (WF3T)  Wed Jul  5 05:18:53 1995
From: steve.steltzer@paonline.com (WF3T) (WF3T)
Subject: 40 and tribanders

Anyone having trouble with interaction between a 40 and a tribander (usually
15) might want to try KLM's recommended practice of turning them 90 degs to
each other. Taping  another scale on the bottom of the meter solves
late-in-the-contest mind fog problems. I am using a 40-2CD (100ft) and a
KT34XA (90) like this, and SWR, performance, and pattern seems to be on a
par with what should be expected from these antennas.
                                        73,
                                        Steve WF3T

*\*      NOTE - NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS       *\*
*\*  steve.steltzer@paonline.com (WF3T)  *\*
*\*     "Relax, you'll get there."       *\*


>From Mike Cizek <mcizek@CapAccess.org>  Wed Jul  5 12:21:03 1995
From: Mike Cizek <mcizek@CapAccess.org> (Mike Cizek)
Subject: 40 and tribanders
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.950705071213.21290A-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>

I put a CC 2L 40 above my TH-7 on a 70' tower.  Initially, I only had a 
10' mast with about 7' between the two antennas.  With the antennas in 
line, the 15M resonant point was raised about 200 kHz; with the antennas 
at 90 degs, the 40M beam showed no resonance any where near the 40M 
band.  I didn't bother to check the TH7 with the antennas at 90 degs. I 
had this set up for about a year and everything worked fine.   I have 
since put up an 82' tower with a 22' mast and have the antennas 16' 
apart.  The TH-7 now resonates where it originally did on all three 
bands.   The 40M beam plays noticeably better now that it is 21' higher.

Mike Cizek   KO7V

On Wed, 5 Jul 1995, WF3T wrote:

> Anyone having trouble with interaction between a 40 and a tribander (usually
> 15) might want to try KLM's recommended practice of turning them 90 degs to
> each other. Taping  another scale on the bottom of the meter solves
> late-in-the-contest mind fog problems. I am using a 40-2CD (100ft) and a
> KT34XA (90) like this, and SWR, performance, and pattern seems to be on a
> par with what should be expected from these antennas.
>                                       73,
>                                       Steve WF3T
> 
> *\*      NOTE - NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS       *\*
> *\*  steve.steltzer@paonline.com (WF3T)  *\*
> *\*     "Relax, you'll get there."       *\*
> 

>From Mike Cizek <mcizek@CapAccess.org>  Wed Jul  5 12:21:03 1995
From: Mike Cizek <mcizek@CapAccess.org> (Mike Cizek)
Subject: 40 and tribanders
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.950705071213.21290A-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>

I put a CC 2L 40 above my TH-7 on a 70' tower.  Initially, I only had a 
10' mast with about 7' between the two antennas.  With the antennas in 
line, the 15M resonant point was raised about 200 kHz; with the antennas 
at 90 degs, the 40M beam showed no resonance any where near the 40M 
band.  I didn't bother to check the TH7 with the antennas at 90 degs. I 
had this set up for about a year and everything worked fine.   I have 
since put up an 82' tower with a 22' mast and have the antennas 16' 
apart.  The TH-7 now resonates where it originally did on all three 
bands.   The 40M beam plays noticeably better now that it is 21' higher.

Mike Cizek   KO7V

On Wed, 5 Jul 1995, WF3T wrote:

> Anyone having trouble with interaction between a 40 and a tribander (usually
> 15) might want to try KLM's recommended practice of turning them 90 degs to
> each other. Taping  another scale on the bottom of the meter solves
> late-in-the-contest mind fog problems. I am using a 40-2CD (100ft) and a
> KT34XA (90) like this, and SWR, performance, and pattern seems to be on a
> par with what should be expected from these antennas.
>                                       73,
>                                       Steve WF3T
> 
> *\*      NOTE - NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS       *\*
> *\*  steve.steltzer@paonline.com (WF3T)  *\*
> *\*     "Relax, you'll get there."       *\*
> 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • NAQP SSB from KL7 ?, KB5YVT@aol.com <=