Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

To: Guy Olinger K2AV <k2av.guy@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2
From: David Olean <k1whs@metrocast.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2018 14:45:38 +0000
List-post: <mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Hello Guy,

a very interesting evaluation of the 1000MP.  Your diagnosis coincides with my observations with the K3. I did not own an FT-1000MP, but I was using my K3 for listening on the very crowded 160 meter band in the CQ 160 Contest a few years ago and noted the same thing.  I was playing around and tuned right next to KC1XX trying to see how close I could get and still copy weak DX.  (I am a newbie to HF and was curious) I was playing with the variable bandwidth and noted that, as the 400 Hz filter got switched in, the noise floor dropped and other signals appeared where noise and crud was only audible before. My wider filter was a 1 kHz filter bandwidth.  I tried it again and again on different frequencies, switching in the 400 Hz filter, and saw the same effect more or less. I figured that the crud and junk in the noise floor were IMD products generated within the receiver. It was weak, but it was there. The 400 Hz filter eliminated much of it and I wondered if a 200 or 250 Hz filter would be better?  I immediately ordered some narrow filters from the good folks at Aptos!

I have a small collection of boat anchor radios. Small as in a 51J4, 75A4, and a 1946 Hallicrafters S-40.  I recently re capped the 75A4 and just for kicks tried it out on 160 meters, listening on my beverages. This radio is so highly modified that I hesitate to even call it a 75A4. It has a new front end tube, new mixers, a second 2 kHz mechanical filter in the IF stage, a re vamped AVC system, and a 300 Hz Collins crystal filter in position 3 of the mech filter bank. Other than the rapid tuning rate, it is a top notch performer and sounds real sweet on 160. I listened to it for awhile in the Stew Perry with all the QRM. I did test the 2 kHz dynamic range and came up with 89 dB which is pretty good. The only problem is that BC stations seem to get in and overload it. It needs a BC band filter all the time at night. The K3 does not except occasionally, when things are really hot.

I am going to use the 75A4 on 160 for SKN along with my trusty Central Electronics 20A. I hope I can work NO3M with his 1930's MOPA rig!

Dave K1WHS

On 12/31/2018 4:31 AM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
Hi Chet,

Before we start, a disclaimer: I still have my MP, maybe I'm a radio
hoarder. I do have a 75A3 and a Johnson Ranger and Courier and an FT 101ZD.
The only long used radios I don't still have are my SB300 and SB400, and I
wish I hadn't sold those. So my MP bashing is technical and proven, and I
still love my MP enough to keep it. I hope its feelings aren't hurt by lack
of use since the K3.

Back in the heyday of FT1000MP, when that was one of the best contest
radios available (IF you fixed the clicks), I used to take mine out to N4AF
for the multi-op DX wars as NY4A. I used my MP on 40 meters out there,
which at that time was listening to a 5 element quad stretched out on 190
feet of catenary between towers, end-on to 45 degrees. Loads of incoming RF
off the big quad.

With the MP, the bottom layer of signals was usually all the DL/OK basement
noodle antenna QRP signals. When the K3 showed up, the DL/OK basement
noodle QRP crowd became essentially workable and the new bottom layer of
signals was all the European Russians running 100 watts to a dipole up 20
feet on the southeast side of a big hill.  Goaded by the astonishing
improvement, some K3 to MP comparisons showed very convincingly that what
we always thought was the bottom atmospheric level in the MP was actually
being generated IN the MP, because it was absent in the K3. A/B there, not
there, couldn't possibly be that much. Repeat test 50 times at least,
there, not there. After a half hour of doing the same test over and over,
with exact same result over and over, "Gee, guess the K3 has improved a
lot."

N4AF switched to K3's, and very quickly all the "drug-in-with" radios were
K3's, except for one Orion I. Within a couple years, 11 FT1000MP's in the
NY4A crowd morphed into 14 K3's.

There definitely WERE some separate sensitivity issues in the MP, a bunch
caused by too much RF coming in the line in RX mode. Your deaf as a
door-nail kind of spot reports screams as a repeat of one of those MP
insensitivities.

There is a little itty-bitty choke in the RX on TX antenna circuit, which
can burn but NOT GO OPEN. It goes resistive because what's left over after
the wire burn is still conductive. The DEGREE of resistive is unpredictable
and can change. I know because over the years I've replaced a half dozen of
them. You can find them in the schematic. The quick no-solder,
no-disassembly fix to get around the problem and listen on the TX antenna
with full sensitivity is 1) on the back panel patch the RX OUT RCA jack
(connected to TX ant when not transmitting) to RX IN RCA jack right next to
it, and 2) on the front panel use ANT RX. The coil is not in the RX ANT
circuit. If you suddenly hear better, you know what to do. If you never do
SO2R or operate the MP at a multi transmitter site, you maybe don't need
the choke. The K3 has a COR relay for this.

We always replaced the @%#@^&!! chokes because we were afraid to run the
MPs at the multi site without those as protection for some cross-antenna
backfeed we had unknowingly reintroduced.

I can't explain the MP engineering there. That's just how it is.

If you bought the MP second-hand and in its other life it was operated at
high power multi sites, it could have been that way since you had it,
therefore no suddenly worse performance as a clue to check things out.

Anyway, I would check that out before you go tearing up all your antennas.

73 & HNY all,

Guy K2AV

On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 8:35 PM chet moore <chetmoore@cox.net> wrote:

Todd,

Thanks for sharing. I've been following your post.  I too wondered about
sharing the radial field like you did.  My situation is somewhat similar in
that I feed a 90 foot tower which has a c31 at 95  feet and a two el xm 240
40m beam  at 75 feet beneath it on a gate....the antennas should give me
some top loading but it has never been modeled.  Shunt wire presently comes
down from 70 feet about 3 feet out from the tower to the base of my tower.
The Tower(AB-105) Is guyed at 40 and 70 feet, guys are broken up with
insulators. I have tried to find the resonant  freq of the tower  and at
one
time or another I have moved that tap from 40 feet to up 50  60 70 feet in
2
foot increments. (that's a lot of climbing)and  never found the sweet spot
if there is one. I saw your post and  Like you I  wondered what  would
Happen if I  ran an inverted L up to 90 feet. (I already had a pulley and
rope up there) and run the tail out to the west since I seem to be "deaf"
to
the west and north west (and really everywhere) and would share The same
radial field which  has 2 radials that I was able to stretch out to 100
feet
(in a very crooked line)  and a couple of others  that are 60 feet  and 56
others  of various lengths from 20 to 50 feet. The correct word is probably
not "share" as only one of the antennas would be hooked to the xmtr at a
time.  My salt water swimming pool Is about 8 feet from the base of the
tower. Not sure if the pool helps or hurts in any way. In the fall, once I
cover the pool,I run out 30 radials of varying lengths  which I have to
roll
back up again come spring when we uncover the pool.   I remotely tune the
tower with a motorized vacuum variable capacitor to tune  the tower for
minimum swr.  I've only played with this since I saw your post.  5 years
ago
Before trying the shunt fed tower,  I put up the inverted L with 4 buried
radials mainly to be able get some points for PVRC in the DX contests. 160m
has a way of hooking you in to trying to do just a little more than the
bare
minimum  I then added 6 more radials,  then  a few more and then a few more
after that. I noticed that things got better Up until I had 20 radials or
so
and then adding more radials didn't  seem to help or hurt anything .
Bandwidth went down at first and then like it says in the on4un book,
leveled out. The real problem for me is RX. I have never heard a KL7 on 160
even though guys locally  3 or 4 miles away hear and work KL7's in every
arrl  or cq 160 contest. (I'm located 7 miles off the water at Virginia
beach)  I have managed 1 KH6 QSO (could not hear either of the two I saw
spotted last night in the stew)  Things are up and down here. Stuff I don't
expect to hear. I sometimes get,  but  other easier stuff I never hear.
Example,  when I was able to work the ET3 on 160 a while back. I also got
Yemen when K1ZM  was in sanaa,  I got bouvet last time out,  the last 2
FT-8's but still no KL7.  Never expected to work the VP6 or whatever the
latest big dxpedition  was a few weeks ago , the one that  had to leave
early due to weather. Vp6di Ducie? Xmas? Either one would have been new one
for me on 160. I just knew I wouldn't hear them so I did not check for
them........Until the night before they left,   I turned on the rig, I was
on 40 m and  saw them spotted. Figured ok I'll waste my time and Clicked on
the spot.  I could actually hear them on my 40 m beam,   switched to the
shunt fed tower and zip, nada, nothing. Back to the 40m beam and they were
still there.  Went down to feed point and found that  the dogs toy was
entangled in the shunt feed and in trying to remove it, the dog had ripped
the feed wire off  of the  top of the vacuum variable with his toy still
attached.  It was pouring rain so since this expedition was gonna be there
2
more days I figured I'd fix it at first light or as soon as the rain
stopped
and be ready that night. I was  WRONG. The weather apparently got so bad
they left early so I never got to call them.

In the Stew I tried out a couple of quick swap outs between the inverted L
and the tower on both G4AMT & KV4FZ last night  in the stew when both were
running em and I could not discern any  difference on receive between the L
and the tower. I worked both of them with 100 watts. I called N6RK on both
antennas. On the inverted L I got an imi, and on the shunt fed tower no
response. Lots of qrm.  n6rk was not loud but he was the ONLY w6 I heard.
N2IC was loud from new mexico all night.

When I try to call cq I can hear partial calls and I know there are
stations
calling  me. I know I was called by an  EU4, 9A2 and a TF2 last night but I
couldn't pull any of them thru.

The shunt fed tower seems to radiate  pretty well on xmit but  on rx its an
alligator.  I definitely get out better than I hear but its  still pretty
discouraging  to call CQ and  to look at dx summit  and
see.....................spots like these from the europeans


N4FX  ZZZZ ?????.
N4FX  no receiver
N4fx  don't waste your time calling,  rx broken
N4FX  No ears
N4FX  Unmanned beacon station??
N4FX  Big signal does not hear
N4fx  code reader failure???
N4FX  op asleep at key???
N4fx  where is he listening?? is he even listening?
N4FX   working crossband???

I have tried a 200 foot BOG which actually runs across the street and cars
drive over it. (I roll it out after dark but not a busy street). And roll
it
back up when I am finished) It works pretty well sometimes but last night
was not one of those times.  tried a W2UP rotatable Loop which lost all
directivity when I ran some radials out in its direction. A VE3DO loop (no
joy at all)

I just had my mp1000 tweaked and have a 756 pro II and don't think either
of
them has an rx problem.

Talked to Lee K7TJR about his antennas and because my tower sits almost
smack dab in the center of my lot  he didn't seem to think it would work
well even if
I were to detune the tower.  I'm not sure that a K9AY or SAL would work for
the same reasons.

Like you I think I will just take down the inverted L.  I learned quite a
bit from some of the comments you got. I  didn't fix anything but
definitely
know a lot of things that won't work. It was not particularly reassuring
that when AA1K was here last year, I asked him if he thought a choke at the
feed point would help anything?  He said he didn't think one was needed on
a
vertical. Then I asked what else I could do he suggested that I might want
to consider putting up a FOR SALE sign.

Thanks again for sharing your results.

73


Chet      N4FX   KP4EAJ, VP2A, ZD8W, VQ9Xx, KL7AIZ, KG4ZO, N6Zo/HH9
N6ZO/6Y5






-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Rob
Atkinson
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2018 9:52 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvement question - Part 2

Hmmm....you DID relocate or rebuild your ground system so it converges
on a point below the bottom of the 100 foot tall wire right?  I mean,
you aren't using the 43 foot vert. ground system with the 100' wire?
A series fed vertical isn't rocket science so let's not over think
this.  If it doesn't work well it is probably inefficient.  I'd make
sure your ground system is adequate.  No, you can't use an existing
ground system that converges on a point 30 or 40 feet away from the
100' wire.  Yes, I've had people ask me if they can do that, so it is
worth mentioning.

You can go the elevated route, but it is _critical_ that it be
constructed correctly to adequately replace a full ground system at or
below grade.   You need four radials parallel to earth extending out
90 degrees from each other and their lengths must be equal and 90
degrees long (1/4 w.) at frequency.   The ends must be h.v. insulated.
They should be elevated 20 feet on 160 m. to completely de-couple from
earth.

73
Rob
K5UJ
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
Reflector


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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