Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Contest\s+conditions\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. TopBand: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: pcollins@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Patrick Collins)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:00:46 -0500 (EST)
After reading W4ZV's note (great job Bill) I have some interesting comparisions. Saturday night conditions started out good, but degraded has the night went on (the sunrise peak was non-existent for
/archives//html/Topband/1998-01/msg00294.html (7,301 bytes)

2. Topband: contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Nichols" <kd9sv@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:06:15 -0400
I did not contest this year however my friend Carl, K9LA came over and operated my meager station for about 3 hours Friday and 2 hours Saturday. He never called CQ once but just cruised up and down t
/archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00268.html (7,199 bytes)

3. Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Smith" <Gary@ka1j.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 22:30:27 -0500
Weird condx here for the contest, I could hear plenty of DX but even with a KW, they often couldn't hear me. Sometimes the Rx antenna was less helpful to listen with and other times it was incredibly
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00160.html (7,285 bytes)

4. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: K6UJ Bob Harmon <k6uj599@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 19:44:11 -0800
Gary, Thanks for the report. I am a newbie on 160 and now I know I cant blame all my receive issues on my lame inverted L :-) Bob K6UJ _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contes
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00161.html (7,469 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Garland" <4cx250b@miamioh.edu>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 22:04:11 -0700
I think some contest stations had directional receive antennas and omni transmitting antennas. There were times when S9 stations couldn't hear me at all, and I suspect they were just listening in a d
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00162.html (9,458 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: Mark K3MSB <mark.k3msb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 09:26:24 -0500
I put in my BOG the Saturday before the contest. Its the basic 200 feet installation with a pair of 8 foot ground rods at each end. One of those rods was almost impossible to hammer in, but thats why
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00163.html (9,612 bytes)

7. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:41:08 -0700
On good propagation years there generally is not enough band to go split. This was a luxury in this contest. I have noticed that sometimes faster is better, you beat the qsb ups and down and sometime
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00164.html (9,870 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: <n0tt1@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 20:20:32 +0000
Indeed, way too fast for conditions at the receiving end. Then they wonder why their rates are down and why they're "not in the log" because their call sign was miscopied. 73, Charlie, N0TT ________
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00165.html (7,322 bytes)

9. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 16:32:55 -0600
Well, we can look forward to the ARRL 160 and the Stew Perry, where the average speed is considerably slower. 73 Mike www.w0btu.com _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contestin
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00166.html (7,976 bytes)

10. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 14:45:42 -0800
I was also struck with one station who was calling lots of CQs with no answer - with the word "TEST" at the end about 10 WPM faster than the rest of the transmission. Nothing like changing your speed
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00167.html (9,445 bytes)

11. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 15:47:04 -0700
With a cloud-warmer antenna and only 500W in the bowels of southern Arizona working anywhere is problematic, but to the east is worse, even at SS. I heard a lot of Caribbean contest stations with big
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00168.html (10,805 bytes)

12. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: "N2TK, Tony" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 18:51:32 -0500
Hi Wes, When I operate at KP2M there are times I am told we are loud on 160M, but I just can't pull the signals out of the noise. When I am on higher bands I will get comments why I can't hear them w
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00169.html (12,084 bytes)

13. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: Steve Babcock <ve6wz@shaw.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 17:17:29 -0700
Another possible cause of the "one-way-propagation" effect has to do with different arrival angles when using rx antennas. The low-angle response difference between a beverage and vertical (esp near
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00170.html (13,713 bytes)

14. Re: Topband: Contest conditions (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 18:48:57 -0700
I ran into a number of CQ loops. I figured they went to the head and decided to hold their Freq. Not cool. W0MU Reminds me of a story I have shared perhaps before... it's almost hard to believe this
/archives//html/Topband/2016-11/msg00171.html (10,291 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu