Okay.
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 10:52 PM terry burge <ki7m@comcast.net> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> Would not count on it, huh? Well, if the Echo 1 and echo 2 would work
> (which we know they did work and prove the method for bouncing signals off
> a satellite to elsewhere on the earth, why not something as large as the
> space station. I would think some of the Oscar folks might have already
> tried it. After all, the space station is larger than those echo ballons.
>
> Oh, by the way. I just finished putting on one of my new screw down
> PL-259's after scaping the shields where they clamp together and continuity
> wise they seem OK. The real proof will be putting some power thru them
> measuring the 'dump' power between the 4 square 80 meter comtek switching
> unit and the dummy load. Take a look at a 4-square and you should see what
> dump power is. Both the Comteks and the DXEngineering models use dummy
> loads on them.
>
> Terry
> KI7M
>
> > On February 3, 2019 at 8:12 PM Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I wouldn't count on it!
> >
> > 73, Mike
> > www.w0btu.com
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 9:25 PM terry burge <ki7m@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe the International Space Station could reflect a 160 meter signal
> or
> > > reradiate it. It's larger than a football field. Just a thought. Let's
> see,
> > > people could use the space station to bounce signals off of. Another
> reason
> > > to keep it from falling in the Pacific Ocean someday.
> > >
> > > Terry
> > > KI7M
> > >
> > > > On February 3, 2019 at 2:44 PM Arthur Delibert <radio75a3@msn.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Back in the early 60s, NASA launched a couple of satellites named
> Echo I
> > > and Echo II that were essentially huge reflecting balloons. You could
> tune
> > > to WWV on 20 MHz at a time of day when that was above the MUF. When
> the
> > > Echo satellite came by, WWV would pop up out of nowhere for a few
> seconds
> > > and then disappear again. To the best of my knowledge, the Echo
> satellites
> > > are long gone; but this sounds like a similar phenomenon.
> > > >
> > > > Art Delibert, KB3FJO
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> on behalf of Paul
> Kiesel
> > > via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
> > > > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 2:10 PM
> > > > To: topband@contesting.com
> > > > Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Phenomenon
> > > >
> > > > I don't have an explanation for this, but I had a similar experience
> > > during the contest. My receiveantenna is an unterminated BOG running
> > > alongside the road in front. I struggled to get F4HEC's call because
> he was
> > > so weak. He persisted and I finally got it. He was the first European
> that
> > > I heard in the contest. When we finished the QSO, EI0R dumped his call
> and
> > > he was 579. Unbelievable because I almost never hear Europe on 160 CW.
> I
> > > gave him a report and turned it back. By then he was barely copyable
> as his
> > > signal had dropped back down to the noise floor and I never heard him
> > > again. I managed to work several other Europeans whose calls I had to
> work
> > > at digging out. I would say conditions were generally good for me to
> hear
> > > those European stations, but the momentary signal from EI0R was very
> strong
> > > and unexpected.
> > > > 73, Paul K7CW
> > > >
> > > > On Sunday, February 3, 2019, 9:38:50 AM PST, Dan Atchison via
> > > Topband <topband@contesting.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > During the CQ WW 160 CW contest a week ago while operating at the
> N1LN
> > > > M/S station, I happened to be in a fantastic run of EU.
> > > >
> > > > On one and only one QSO, I worked a "G" station whose callsign's last
> > > > suffix letter was at least 20dB stronger than the rest of his call.
> I
> > > > mentioned this to NR4M while discussing the contest with Steve at the
> > > > Richmond Frostfest and he said he experienced the same on one
> occasion;
> > > > he thought meteor and I was thinking airplane.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone else experience this on topband and if so, have a "scientific"
> > > > explanation?
> > > >
> > > > 73,
> > > > Dan -- N3ND
> > > > _________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> > _________________
> > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
>
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|