Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+160m\s+at\s+solar\s+max\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: Carl <k9la@gte.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 18:42:46 -0500
I recently took a look at Tom W8JI's 160m log for the period September 1999 through July 2002 - when the smoothed sunspot number for Cycle 23 was above 100. After deleting Tom's W/VE QSOs, I saw that
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00100.html (7,763 bytes)

2. Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 07:39:23 -0500
from the high latitude ionosphere (unlike those of us poor souls farther north), his log data tends to confirm that the quiet (undisturbed) nighttime ionosphere in terms of absorption isn't all that
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00109.html (8,848 bytes)

3. Re: Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: "Ivo Pezer" <9a3a@libero.it>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 22:36:44 +0100
Carl, congrats on the detailed analysis. Out of curiosity, I checked only 5B4-USA QSOs between 1 Sept 1999 - 1 July 2002, when the smoothed sunspot number for Cycle 23 was above 100. As 5B4ADA/C4A I
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00114.html (8,452 bytes)

4. Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: Carl <k9la@gte.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 18:00:53 -0500
Bill, My point was simply that based on W8JI's log data there's a lot of DX to be worked on 160m around solar maximum, and it appears to be dependent on how high in latitude your paths go. I think th
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00116.html (9,649 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:58:59 -0600
Well, my experience over the past 20 years strongly support a big difference between solar minimum and maximum. But, I am in the high latitude category and the aurora oval sits right between me and
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00117.html (7,692 bytes)

6. Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: Carl <k9la@gte.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:04:58 -0500
Tree, Well, my experience over the past 20 years strongly support a big difference between solar minimum and maximum. But, I am in the high latitude category and the aurora oval sits right between me
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00119.html (7,360 bytes)

7. RE: Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: "Ragnar Otterstad" <otterstad@enter.vg>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:44:16 +0100
Tree, I agree totally with W4ZV for your scenario to EU - your best shot is at solar min. Carl K9LA _ ......................... You guys treat EU as one entity. I can tell you, up here in the North t
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00122.html (8,145 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: Bob Eldridge <r.c.eldridge@ieee.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:44:22 -0800
Hi Carl: At 18:00 2004-03-09 -0500, you wrote: My point was simply that based on W8JI's log data there's a lot of DX to be worked on 160m around solar maximum, and it appears to be dependent on how h
/archives//html/Topband/2004-03/msg00140.html (8,326 bytes)

9. RE: Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: Eric Scace K3NA <eric@k3na.org>
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 16:03:11 -0500
Many years ago W8LRL gave a presentation at a PVRC meeting about 160m DXing. He had a histogram showing the number of NEW countries he worked in each calendar month over the years. The histogram was
/archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00021.html (7,354 bytes)

10. RE: Topband: 160m at solar max (score: 1)
Author: "Garry Shapiro" <garry@ni6t.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 22:58:37 -0800
Eric: That is OK as general advice for general topband DXing. But I am not sure it applies in the case of a difficult location. For example, I doubt if time of year or time of cycle matters much on t
/archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00024.html (8,158 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu