I keep hearing of people putting up invertel "L"s and dipoles for topband. I
must question the logic. An inverted L radiates more horizontal than
vertical and therefore radiates mostly straight up. This is fine for
communication under 1500 Km but is a big compromise for longer haul. Maybe
its because it hears well one assumes it transmits well, not so. From the
center of europe 1500Km takes in 108 countries and 4 continents. From my QTH
it includes 8 countries and one continent. Several years ago we put up four
full size 160m antennas. The inverted L at 100', the sloper going down the
hill, and the 1/2 wave delta (opened up the 80m delta) all performed about
the same. Howeve, when I switched to the 300' vertical suspended by a
balloon I literally has to turn down the volume as it was at least 3 S units
louder. Keeping all the current in the vertical and reducing ground loss
works best. This is why elevated ground plane verticals do so well. For
those that don't have 150' towers dedicated to 160m there are some good
alternatives. When I operated as A35DX I used a G5RV flat top with the
feedline twisted together and fed against ground with an antenna tuner. I
was able to work W1BB who was water-weak. Any dipole will do. Use the
highest one and run the feedline straight down. A good ground system is best
but a resonant counterpoise will do wonders. I invite anyone not familiar
with 160m to try it this weekend during the CQ WW 160 contest. I promise to
come back to even the weakest signals for a report. The horizontal dipole
usually works better on receive even if it isn't tuned for 160. The
horizontal loop works well. Of course, if you want to favor one direction
the terminated Beverage works well even as short as 500'. Remember the
contest starts at 2 PM PST. Daytime propagation at this time of the solar
cycle can be surprising. Skeds are welcomed for DX. Will be multi-op with
both a 4 el vertical beam and a 2 el horizontal beam for high angle. Good
Luck 73, Darrell, N6DX@aol.com
>From Steve Lufcy <km0l@tyrell.net> Fri Jan 26 00:50:07 1996
From: Steve Lufcy <km0l@tyrell.net> (Steve Lufcy)
Subject: Inverted L Match
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960125184117.9070A-100000@tyrell.net>
Hi Chad-
My Inv L on 160 i
is 65' up and 65' out, and is fed direct with 50 ohm coax- suppose this is
a T match. Works well, but bandwidth is only about 20 kc's and then a
tuner is needed. Ant is made of stranded copper wire. I used the elements
of an old 80m dipole for 2 radials (buried) an also attached my
chain-link fence.
Good luck on your DXpedition es hope I can work ya.
73 de KM0L
>From prosper@iadfw.net (Brent Childers) Fri Jan 26 02:50:33 1996
From: prosper@iadfw.net (Brent Childers) (Brent Childers)
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <199601260250.UAA19377@server.iadfw.net>
CONTESTERS,
Here is the continuation of my findings about International Radio. Their
old number was no longer in service, so I had to call directory assistance.
I then got their answering machine. It stated when they took orders and
what number to contact if you had radio work done (see below). So I had to
wait until the appropriate time to call. I got thru no problem and the lady
that helped me out was very pleasant. I requested a catalog and asked about
the different CW filters available for Kenwood 850/450/etc. No problem
there, also inquired about CW filters for Yaesu and ICOM's and they sell
them also. So now I'm waiting to get the catalog, and then hopefully I'll
order. So far, so good. I'll continue the with this story as it unfolds.
73 de KI5JC
International Radio Phone Numbers:
407-489-0956 - orders are taken at this number Tues.-Fri. 1-5 p.m.
407-489-6302 - to inquire on repair work
>From Joe Subich" <subich@ramlink.net Fri Jan 26 02:56:42 1996
From: Joe Subich" <subich@ramlink.net (Joe Subich)
Subject: IRQs-the answer
Message-ID: <9601260327.AA0115@localhost>
W2UP writes ...
>
> Since several folks asked for the "answer" to my question, I'm posting
> this to the group. BTW, tnx all for the numerous, helpful replies.
> To sum it up in a nutshell, without getting technical:
> IRQ2 and IRQ9 are mapped together, and basically link the lower 8 IRQs to
> the upper 8. So, you can use IRQ2 or IRQ9, however, you cannot use both,
> as they are really one and the same.
> 73 Barry
>
In fact, IRQ2 and IRQ9 are most definately *NOT* the same. The original
IBM PC had one IRQ controller with 8 IRQ lines, numbered 0 through 7. They
were as follows:
IRQ BUS line Use
-------------------------------------
0 n/a motherboard timer
1 n/a keyboard controller (buffer full)
2 B 4 video retrace synchronization
3 B 25 COM2
4 B 24 COM1
5 B 23 hard disk controller
6 B 22 floppy disk controller
7 B 21 printer (LPT1)
In the AT a second IRQ controller was added. In adding the second controller
it became necessary hook it into the system. The way that was selected was to
run the output of the secondary controller to one of the inputs of the
original (primary) controller. IRQ 0 and 1 were not available on the bus
and were often used by BIOS (hardware) routines - using one of those inputs
would have required a significant amount of re-engineering. However, IRQ2
was rarely used and had a high priority so ...
In the AT IRQs are as follows:
IRQ BUS line Use
--------------------------------------------
0 n/a motherboard timer
1 n/a keyboard controller (buffer full)
2 n/a output of secondary controller
3 B 25 COM2
4 B 24 COM1
5 B 23 secondary printer (LPT2) (usually free!)
6 B 22 floppy disk controller
7 B 21 primary printer (LPT1)
8 n/a real time clock
9 B 4 video retrace synchronization (usually free!)
10 D 3 unassigned
11 D 4 "
12 D 5 " (often used for bus mouse)
13 n/a coprocessor error
14 D 7 fixed disk controller
15 D 6 unassigned (often used for secondary IDE
controller - IDE CD/ROM, etc.)
Thus IRQ 2 and IRQ 9 are *NOT* the same to the computer. The original
hardware designers simply chose to reuse the same bus line for the
video retrace synchronization function (which was never implemented except
in some early EGA cards). In a DOS based system (DOS, Windows, Windows95,
etc.) if one defines a device attached to "B 4" as IRQ 2 it imposes an
extra software overhead in "sorting out" which IRQ (8 through 15)
actually caused the interrupt.
73,
... Joe Subich, AD8I
<subich@ramlink.net>
>From Harri M. Mantila OH6YF-OH0MYF" <hmantila@kauha.kauhajoki.fi Fri Jan 26
>08:14:01 1996
From: Harri M. Mantila OH6YF-OH0MYF" <hmantila@kauha.kauhajoki.fi (Harri M.
Mantila OH6YF-OH0MYF)
Subject: OI6YF in CQ 160 M Contest 1996
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91.960126101003.45316A-100000@kauha.kauhajoki.fi>
Hello!
I will work CQ 160 Meter DX Contest as OI6YF. New antennas have been
tuned for the contest. See you on Top Band!
Please, your QSL via OH6YF. Every QSO will be QSL'd.
73's de Harry OH6YF
>From Ingemar.Fogelberg@cec.comm.se (Ingemar Fogelberg SM0AJV) Fri Jan 26
>09:14:47 1996
From: Ingemar.Fogelberg@cec.comm.se (Ingemar Fogelberg SM0AJV) (Ingemar
Fogelberg SM0AJV)
Subject: SM5HJZ in CQ 160 Contest
Message-ID: <199601260914.KAA01459@nic.comm.se>
Hello Contesters!
SM5HJZ has during the week built a new antenna site for 160. This includes a
gamma-matched tower of 34m (113 ft). Beverages for JA, NA and South has been
put up in the cold winter country. To get a good earth connections is'nt
easy so we try to use quarter wavelengths as stubs at the terminating end.
In addition a separate listning site is put up for chasing mults.
We will make an multi-op effort with the operators Ingo SM0AJV, Peder SM0GNS
and Jonas SM5HJZ.
See you in the CONTEST!
73 de Ingo
Ingemar Fogelberg if@cec.comm.se
Communicator CEC AB Phone: +46-8-764 41 94
Box 1310, S-171 25 Solna, Sweden Fax: +46-8-764 45 70
>From kb8pk@tc3net.com (Kevin J. Grammes) Fri Jan 26 13:39:50 1996
From: kb8pk@tc3net.com (Kevin J. Grammes) (Kevin J. Grammes)
Subject: N R replacement contest
Message-ID: <01BAEBF3.EB798560@tc3dialin24.tc3net.com>
I know alot of mail has passed about getting young new ops active the QRP ARCI
NOVICE / TECHNICIAN Roundup I believe a replacement for
the old ARRL NR starts this weekend JAN 27 thru FEB 4.
See Jan QST p 106.
I encourage all that can to give a few contacts over the next week to these
newcomers.
I know at least one op my 9 yr old daughter KC8CCQ new tech plus.
We have been helping her with the logger and shes ready to give it a try.
Thanks and 73 K.J. KB8PK
DAD to Mike KG8PE and
Sara KC8CCQ
>From scott73@best.com (Scott Lieberman) Fri Jan 26 13:52:41 1996
From: scott73@best.com (Scott Lieberman) (Scott Lieberman)
Subject: Sports Illustrated article
Message-ID: <199601261352.FAA00483@mailx.best.com>
Thank you, to the person who posted the Web address for the 1958 Sports
Illustrated article on the ARRL DX Contest. It would be great for radio
contesting if Sports Illustrated would write an article like that EVERY year
about the ARRL-DX or the CQ-WW!
I hope I am not repeating something previously posted, but I was not able to
access the article directly from the Web address originally given. I had to
go to the "root" Web address www.accessone.com/~vbook and then go to the
Jan 1996 featured articles. Note: this site has a lot of interesting ham
radio related stuff.
Scott N1EE/6
--------------------------------------------
Ham Radio Call Sign: N1EE/6
QTH: San Jose, CA
--------------------------------------------
>From Bill Parry <bill@tenet.edu> Fri Jan 26 16:16:25 1996
From: Bill Parry <bill@tenet.edu> (Bill Parry)
Subject: 160 Contest
Message-ID: <3108FE59.5F0@tenet.edu>
Looking forward to big contest from 6D2X this weekend. ops K5TSQ @ W5VX.
Be sure to stop by!
Bill, W5VX
>From Wassell, James T., Ph.D." <jtw2@NIOSR1.EM.CDC.GOV Fri Jan 26 14:59:00
>1996
From: Wassell, James T., Ph.D." <jtw2@NIOSR1.EM.CDC.GOV (Wassell, James T.,
Ph.D.)
Subject: THE BATTLE OF THE HAMS
Message-ID: <31086DC2@SmtpOut.em.cdc.gov>
Scott N1EE/6, I agree with you it would be great if we could
get publicity TODAY like the the THE BATTLE OF THE HAMS
article that originally appeared in Sports Illustrated, June 30, 1958.
http://www.accessone.com/~vbook/1996/jan/hams.htm
or as Scott noted try the "root" Web address at
http://www.accessone.com/~vbook
The spirit is still the same, for me at least, although I didn't start
contesting
until about '69. For all the excitement, I had trouble sleeping last
night just thinking about the
CQ 160 M contest that starts today. Can't make up my mind if I should try
another optional receive antenna or try to make up for lost sleep.
I'll be leaving work at noon to make some final preparations.
The amp output power has dropped to 500 watts, so I need to check that out.
I wonder where will Murphy strike during this contest?
As of last night, it seems that conditions will be outstanding and I hope
to make a few additions towards 160 DXCC.
When I reread the Sports Illustrated article
-- living in a semi-rural area where my neighbors all think I am nuts --
it helps to have a reminder that radio contesting is legitimate after all.
I think I'll keep a few copies of the article in the shack for visitors
- to explain my madness when anyone gets enough courage to stop by my shack.
73 and many good QSO's (and mults)
see you on 160 from WV Terry, K3JT
jtw2@niosr1.em.cdc.gov
>From Richard Riley #7122" <RRILEY%ESA.bitnet@listserv.gmd.de Fri Jan 26
>22:21:32 1996
From: Richard Riley #7122" <RRILEY%ESA.bitnet@listserv.gmd.de (Richard Riley
#7122)
Subject: Special Mults you may hear this weekend...
Look out for special stations FR0G and ON1ONS during the French REF CW
contest this weekend....
Invitations to join F6BEE and I for the ARRL DX SSB Contest will be
presented to those who manage to work both stations on 5 bands!
73 and have a smashin' weekend!
Richard
G0JFX/F5VCO @F6KBF(saturday)
:)
...................................
email: rriley%esa.bitnet@vm.gmd.de
packet: G0JFX@F6KBF
|