Unbelievable! I wish we had more info re manufacturer and reseller WEB sites
posted here. With all the drivel related to two hole Alphas and 4-1000s which
serve no useful purpose, how can anyone be unhappy with a simple notice re
Tucker's site?
Bob - AG7M
>From Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com Wed Apr 24 18:51:58 1996
From: Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback)
Subject: the T***** web page
Message-ID: <9604241051.ZM12370@hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com>
I can't help but laugh and chuckle about this whole thing.
One questionable post, a ton of followups. Man, they sure got
their nickles worth for that post.
73, Jim, WA6SDM
jholly@cup.hp.com
>From Felipe J. Hernandez" <0006627542@mcimail.com Wed Apr 24 18:45:00 1996
From: Felipe J. Hernandez" <0006627542@mcimail.com (Felipe J. Hernandez)
Subject: This location is or was perfect?
Message-ID: <73960424174537/0006627542DC4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
Hola
This message is for the gurus of angles and antennas
(qhs,bv/1 etc...)
Here it goes, I was dreaming of the perfect location, so I found it
3100 feet above sea level incredible drop offs in every direction
plenty of space, etc etc etc.
After finding some not too encouraging facts about my actual contest
site, for example no propagation at all to central and south africa
(the rain forest is on the way) and incredibly low angles to the states
around 1 degree, imagine that the w6ers were as loud as the w8 and the
w1s were very weak.. but perfect to europe. that fired me and Eric kp4tk
to use all the technology posible to figure out the posibilities of the
site.(TA/YTAD/IONCAP/ICECAP)
This is what we found out, the location is so high and steep that
all the signals from everywhere come in angles so low, that the programs
say that not even playing with the height of the antennas it can be fixed.
angles of 1 and 2 degrees do not help much for europe/usa or JA, remember
this is what the programs say in terms of the angles into Puerto Rico.
All this calculations were made with the commercial programs of the colle-
ge of engineering of Puerto Rico and in the past theyve proven to be true.
So, Is hard to believe that a location like this (pedro NP4A would be
envious) according to the models and results is of not much advantage.
should I put my faith in this results or just go ahead and start putting
up aluminum and not worry about it? Please let me know what you think.
Gracias and see you in Dayton
(GO SULTANS!)
Felipe NP4Z
>From k7fd@teleport.com (John Nicholson) Wed Apr 24 19:53:38 1996
From: k7fd@teleport.com (John Nicholson) (John Nicholson)
Subject: AI7B and TUCKER'S WEB SITE!
Message-ID: <199604241853.LAA10985@desiree.teleport.com>
>Unbelievable! I wish we had more info re manufacturer and reseller WEB sites
>posted here. With all the drivel related to two hole Alphas and 4-1000s which
>serve no useful purpose, how can anyone be unhappy with a simple notice re
>Tucker's site?
>
>Bob - AG7M
Aren't we all about tuckered out on this one yet?
John, K7FD
>From Trey Garlough <TREY@tgv.com> Wed Apr 24 20:05:30 1996
From: Trey Garlough <TREY@tgv.com> (Trey Garlough)
Subject: NEW TUCKER ELECTRONICS WEB SITE!
Message-ID: <830372730.355029.TREY@tgv.com>
> Please send your questions, comments and suggestions to my e-mail
> address above. You can also send your "don't use this reflector for
> commercial purposes" flames to me as well.
Glad to hear you guys are on the Web, but CQ-Contest@TGV.COM is not the
place to tout it.
--Trey, WN4KKN/6
>From alan@ES.COM (Alan Brubaker) Wed Apr 24 22:28:56 1996
From: alan@ES.COM (Alan Brubaker) (Alan Brubaker)
Subject: Utah Centennial QSO Party
Message-ID: <199604242128.PAA19906@greely.corp.es.com>
Utah Centennial QSO Party - Utah celebrates its 100th anniversary!
Object: Stations outside of Utah work as many Utah stations in as
many Utah counties as possible. Stations in Utah work anyone.
Time: 1500Z Aug. 24 (0900 MDT) - 2100Z Aug. 25 (1500 MDT).
Maximum operation: 24 hours out of the 30 hour period. Minimum
off time is 30 minutes and must be shown clearly in the log.
Frequencies:
160 through 2 meters excluding 30, 17 and 12 meters. Phone:
1850, 3850, 7230, 14250, 21300, 28450, 50130 and 147.540 MHz.
Try 2 meters at 2000Z, 0000Z and 0400Z. Try 10 meters at 1900Z
and 160 meters at 0500Z. CW: 1810, 3550, 7050, 14050, 21050 and
28050. Try CW on the half-hour.
Exchange: Utah stations send QSO number, name and county. Stations
outside Utah send QSO number, name and state or province. DX
stations send QSO number and name.
Entry Classes:
Fixed, Mobile, Portable Single Operator, Portable Multi-
operator. One signal transmitted at a time and all QSOs must
be simplex.
QSO points:
QSOs with any fixed stations: Phone, 2 points; CW, 4 points.
QSOs with Utah Mobile or Portable stations: Phone, 4 points;
CW, 8 points.
Multipliers:
Utah stations: Count states (48), provinces (13) and CQWW
countries per band. Count Utah as a state, but do not count
Utah counties.
Other stations: Count Utah counties (29) per band.
The same station can be worked again on each band and mode
for QSO points and multiplier credit.
Here is a list of the 29 Utah counties and 4 letter
abbreviations which may be used on CW:
BEVR Beaver BOXL Box Elder CASH Cache
CRBN Carbon DAGT Daggett DAVS Davis
DCHN Duchesne EMRY Emery GFLD Garfield
GRND Grand IRON Iron JUAB Juab
KANE Kane MLRD Millard MRGN Morgan
PIUT Piute RICH Rich SLCO Salt Lake
SAJN San Juan SNPT Sanpete SEVR Sevier
SUMT Summit TOLE Tooele UNTA Uintah
UTAH Utah WSCH Wasatch WASH Washington
WANE Wayne WEBR Weber
Scoring: The claimed score will be total QSO points multiplied by
the total multipliers.
Entries: Must be postmarked no later than October 15, 1996. Logs may be
submitted to:
UCQP c/o AH3C
2150 East 6200 South
Salt Lake City UT 84121
or via e-mail to:
alan@es.com
If diskettes are submitted, please label each diskette with
call and county/state/province or country. Include a hard-copy
summary sheet. A one dollar donation to help defray the cost of
printing and mailing the results and awards will be appreciated,
but is not required. Log and summary sheets may be obtained by
sending a business sized SASE to AH3C at the address above.
Awards: A minimum of 50 QSOs is required to qualify for an award. The
high scoring entries from within Utah and from outside of Utah
will each receive the Utah Centennial QSO Party Championship
Trophy. The top 5 scoring stations from within Utah and from
outside Utah will each receive a Utah Beehive Honey Jar. Top
scoring entries from each Utah county, state, province and
country will each receive a Utah Centennial QSO Party
certificate. Other special awards may be made to selected entries
as determined by the contest committee. Decisions of the contest
committee will be final.
Operating hints:
The last six hours of the contest are a must. Roving mobile
stations will be on the air to assure that the rarest Utah
counties will be active. DX stations, try 20 meters!
>From Dean Norris <dnorris@k7no.com> Wed Apr 24 22:33:02 1996
From: Dean Norris <dnorris@k7no.com> (Dean Norris)
Subject: the T***** web page
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960424213302.00687c40@mail.syspac.com>
At 10:51 4/24/96 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>I can't help but laugh and chuckle about this whole thing.
>
>One questionable post, a ton of followups. Man, they sure got
>their nickles worth for that post.
>
>73, Jim, WA6SDM
>jholly@cup.hp.com
>
I'm confused... Is it (as the Subject says) T***** or *ucker?
C. Dean Norris
Amateur Radio Station K7NO
e-mail to dnorris@k7no.com
http://www.syspac.com/~dnorris/
>From k3za@newtech.net (Tony D'Alonzo) Wed Apr 24 19:11:17 1996
From: k3za@newtech.net (Tony D'Alonzo) (Tony D'Alonzo)
Subject: First Rig/Contest
Message-ID: <199604242119.RAA00860@wchester.newtech.net>
Wednesday April 24, 1996
Looks like you ole timers who are sharing your experience contesting with
that first rig are from about the same time zone!!
What was it that brought all us into the radio arena back in the 50's /
60's??
Perhaps the excitement of being able to work, across the pond from our bed
rooms, basement or where ever we were fortunate to have a shack. Was it
the excitement of putting together the AR-3, DX-40 and the like from that
book which was 3 inches thick? Solder a 100 ohm resister on terminal
strip postion 1 of ts-1 to pin 1 of the 807??? OH, how many times I check
those instructions and re checked them. Finally finished building the kit
. Blew all the fuses and smoked it when first turned on. Thanks for my
ELMER, good ole W3EOZ who always came to the rescue..
I know. It must have been putting up that FOLDER dipole from scrap tv
cable left over from the neighbor who just had installed an outside tv
antenna. Hey, the dipole worked and NO tuner. The antenna leads screwed
right on the rear of the Globe Chief 90-A, remember?? Worked the world,
well maybe California but what excitement...I even beat the kid down the
street in the Novice sweepstakes. He had a GOTHAM verticle, the envy of
all the hams in town..Remember the Plumber Delight???
Hey , I couldn't resist putting my 2 Cents in this "getting started"
thread.
May 1959 (13 years old) got license as KN3JGI, Novice gud fer one year
ONLY!!
First contest was the '59 Novice Round Up
First Rig: HeathKit AR-3, Globe Chief 90-A and (2) Xtals. Used it for
40 meters and
15 meters on the 2nd harmonic. Thanks for the Newspaper route or I'd
only have
1 Xtal...
May 1960 Got General License , now BIG CHEESE, K3JGI.
New Receiver, SX-110, and Globe Screen modulator for AM. @ 90Watts.
Again thanks for the Newspaper Route. (see Jon, I had a route also !!)
Got into the SS that year. Stay in Contesting until....
U S N A V Y 1963-1966 (RadioMan 3CPO)
Put KH6SP on during several contests while in Hawaii.
(At times, put NavComSta Hono on during contest. Had to stop, couldn't
get any runs!!)
Contested ever since, 1975 put on ZF1WW with W3MA
1993 put VP9DX with
W3MA,VP9AD.. Guess Op'd at several 'big gun' stations.
Hey, without 2 meter call outs or with 2meter call outs or without packet
clusters or with packet clusters or without or with the Internet, for
the past 37 years, ITS BEEN FUN....
Lets Keep it rolling and having fun....
73 all :-)
-----------------------------------------------------------
K3ZA@newtech.net (Tony D'Alonzo)
-West Chester, Dowingtown, Coatesville-
-Chester County, PA 19320-
-----------------------------------------------------------
>From Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TCP) <lyndon@ve7tcp.ampr.org> Wed Apr 24 23:21:57
>1996
From: Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TCP) <lyndon@ve7tcp.ampr.org> (Lyndon Nerenberg
(VE7TCP))
Subject: Commercial Advertising
Message-ID: <199604242221.PAA12524@ve7tcp.ampr.org>
It's typical that the amount of (self-righteous) flaming far exceeds the
traffic volume of the original offending message. I have a few brief
comments based on my experience running the DX list. (None of which
is meant to step on Trey's toes):
* Sending the mailing list guidelines to the entire list on
a regular basis helps remind people about what is and is *not*
acceptable.
* Remember that people will *not* read the above guidelines and
do silly things anyway. In those situations, *don't* compound
the problem by CCing your flame to the list. Private e-mail
works just fine, and keeps you from falling into the same camp
as the "idiot" you are flaming.
* Advertising is not inherently eeevil. Obnoxious advertising is.
Speaking *personally*, I don't have a problem with companies
or individuals sending *short* announcements to the (any) list
with words to the effect "I am Dr. Barfoonik from the Flathead
Industrial Dam Works. We manufacture professional quality
lid filters guaranteed to drown out "mobile" operators
running 10KW into the DX by-call-area-please pileups from
vehicles that change call areas as fast as the DX does. See
our web site at http://www.barFOOnik.yow/ for details." Short,
and to the point. Whether that's acceptable here is up to
Trey. (The policy should be clearly documented in the mailing
list info sheet.) I myself would like to see this sort of
announcement allowed. (I guess we've been lucky on the DX list
as this hasn't been a problem to date.)
Now then, who is interested in helping me (and a couple of other folks)
write some UNIX-based contest logging software?
--lyndon
>From N7AVK <lew@teleport.com> Wed Apr 24 23:49:52 1996
From: N7AVK <lew@teleport.com> (N7AVK)
Subject: Elevated Guy Anchors
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.92.960424144305.28058C-100000@julie.teleport.com>
On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, John Brosnahan wrote:
> Lew, I have been following the thread on the contest reflector
> about elevated guy anchors and recall that you use them
> on your big tower (even recall the misaligned guy
> attachment plates!). I have been wanting to include some
> info in my book about elevated guy anchors and wonder if
> would be so kind as to provides some details of your
> setup.
>
> 1) Height of Tower and Make/Model ** Its 110 feet of Rohn 55 configured
as a rotating tower with the rotor at 40' and the single rotating ring
support at 90 feet
> 2) Number, Height,Size, Material of Guys ** I have a total of 6 guys, 3
at the 40' level and 3 at the 90' level. All guys are the Phillystran 6600
type, which is 3/8" OD.
> 3) Distance from the tower of the Guy Anchors ** They are each 105 feet
away from the center of base of the tower
> 4) Type and Number of Antennas **All antennae are DX Engineering..
10/10 on 6M (48'booms with 7.6 sq.ft. of wind loading each) 6/6 on 10M
(30'booms with 5.7 sq.ft. of wind load each) 6/6 on 15M (36' booms with
8.5 sq.ft. of wind load each) and 5/5 on 20M (44' booms with 13 sq.ft. of
wind loading each)
> 5) Maximum Wind Velocity Design Rating ** 121 mph for tower.
> 6) Material, Diameter, Wall Thickness of Guy Posts** Each guy post is
composed of 2 seamless steel pipes, 8" OD, with a wall thickness of 3/8"
welded end to end. The bottom has legs made of 1/2" thick by 3" tall by 2
feet long steel pieces at right angles to each other, welded through the
base. The top has a guy attachment plate made of 1/2" steel thats 14" wide
by 14" tall thats welded through both walls, bisecting the pipe, flush
with the top of the pipe
> 7) Lengths Above and Below Ground ** The guy posts are 6 feet below
ground on gravel with 8 feet above ground
> 8) Filled with Concrete? ** Nope.
> 9) Size and Shape of Concrete in each Anchor Base** I attempted to have
the backhoe guy dig a cube that was 6'X 6'X 6' for each guy base. He came
close. Used a 7 sack mix from a local company and a vibrator to ensure
appropriate compacting. The adjacent ground was/is undisturbed.
> 10) Soil Type** Red clay with few significant rocks.
> 11) How Many Times Has it Fallen Down? (just kidding--
> that was the 80M crankup!** So far none! Now the crank-ups are a
different story that'll be the subject of a future talk... "Great Moments
in Mechanics & Gravity" by N7AVK.
> > Don't spend too much time on this project. From memory is
> probably good enough--unless you don't have a clue
> about some details.
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> 73 John W0UN
The rotating tower has very steady. I've had ice loading followed
by 90 mph winds that popped one of the clamps holding the 2ed director on
the top 20M beam so its now more vertically polarized than horizontally,
which also put a gentle bend in the left reflector. In anticipation of a
recent storm I scurried up the tower to "pin" the rotating part (top 70
feet) to the stationary bottom part (lower 40 feet) by using 3 long
threaded grade 8 steel rods with appropriate washers/nuts to take the
stress off of the chain/gear/rotor. The 95+ mph winds came and went, the
tower did just fine, but it fractured one of the 1" steel threaded "pins".
Tells me that there are huge forces acting on the tower...
but that the guy system I've installed works well...no tipping, leaning,
observable tower top movement during wind, etc.
I'll post this to the reflector also as there is a lot of interest of
how others have done this sort of thing.
73 and I remain, Lew
Lew Sayre N7AVK lew@teleport.com
P.O.Box 3110 Fax 503-391-2258
Salem, Oregon 97302 160M thru 1296MHz
>From k7fd@teleport.com (John Nicholson) Thu Apr 25 00:08:10 1996
From: k7fd@teleport.com (John Nicholson) (John Nicholson)
Subject: First Rig/Contest
Message-ID: <199604242308.QAA02322@desiree.teleport.com>
>To: k3za@newtech.net (Tony D'Alonzo)
>From: k7fd@teleport.com (John Nicholson)
>Subject: Re: First Rig/Contest
>
>
>Wednesday April 24, 1996
>
>
>Looks like you ole timers who are sharing your experience contesting with
>that first rig are from about the same time zone!!
>
>What was it that brought all us into the radio arena back in the 50's /
>60's??
Allied Electronics and Heathkit. World Radio Labs, too. And even Gotham!
When I was 13, I earned enough strawberry pickin' money to buy a Knight-kit
Star Roamer and an Ameco 15 watt transmitter. I do believe it was a little
easier to grow into the hobby back then...
Commercial Radio was king back then, too, with actual air personalities you
could look up. Maybe we all had a secret desire to 'be on the air'...and ham
radio was the next best thing!
73, "Wolfman" John, K7FD
>From Ward Silver <hwardsil@wolfenet.com> Thu Apr 25 00:17:12 1996
From: Ward Silver <hwardsil@wolfenet.com> (Ward Silver)
Subject: This location is or was perfect?
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.93.960424161432.4006C-100000@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
>From Felipe, NP4Z...
> All the signals come in from angles so low...1 or 2 degrees...that
> nothing will fix it...
Has anyone tried modelling the antenna tipped a little bit ( <5 degrees)
TOWARD the ground? I realize that ground reflections would normally put
the kibosh on this technique over flat terrain, but maybe Felipe's case is
special. This shouldn't affect either antenna balance or torque, just
make it look a little funny. With the ELNEC concentric grounds, it could
be reasonably modelled.
73, Ward N0AX
>From barry@w2up.wells.com (barry) Wed Apr 24 23:52:27 1996
From: barry@w2up.wells.com (barry) (barry)
Subject: Tucker and 14.195
Message-ID: <52VwmD1w165w@w2up.wells.com>
I think I finally realized what's going on here.
All the frustrated frequency cops (having nothing to do without sunspots
and DXpeditions) are here bitching and moaning about Reflector rules,
violations, etc.
Let's now follow the analogy - The DX station (or guys hitting the F1
key) has control of the frequency. He doesn't need help telling everyone
what they should do. Same here - If Trey doesn't like what is said, he
will address the issue. All the other net controls/frequency cops don't
need to help!
--
Barry N. Kutner, W2UP Internet: barry@w2up.wells.com
Newtown, PA Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
Packet Cluster: W2UP >WB2R (FRC)
.......................................................................
>From Jim Reid <jreid@aloha.net> Thu Apr 25 00:24:01 1996
From: Jim Reid <jreid@aloha.net> (Jim Reid)
Subject: Power, XMatch, and 72 ohm twn lead
Message-ID: <1.5.4b12.32.19960424232401.0067cc18@aloha.net>
Aloha, a few weeks ago I said a post would appear regarding
my experiences with the subject items. Pleased to report all,
as a group are great. On 160 meters, with the dipole
resonant at 1.79 mHz(a bit low yet, aiming for 1.83) I can
easily load the 87A to a true forward power of 1.5kW all across
the 160 band, except above 1.95 mHz or so, where I
can't tune the swr below 1.5:1, at which point the 87A
faults off(it feels too much reflected pwr, tho only 60
watts or so). On 75/80 meters, dipole resonating at about
3.67mHz, same experience, easy pwr out, 1.5kW (all measured
with a P-3000 between the Alpha and the input to the XM tuner),
again across the band, except for segment 3.95 to 4mHz. P-3000
spec equals accuracy of Bird meter(about 5%), near as I can
tell, use both.
On 40, with dipole too short and resonant at about 7.2, again
all the power that is legal from 7.0 to above 7.3. Still want
to bring the dipole down to fo below 7.1, since below there is
most useful part of band out here, as in KH6 land we have SSB op
between 7.075 and 7.1; the daily Hawaiian Afternoon Net is at
7.088 at 0200 UTC; you should have heard the guys comments
when I threw the 1.5kW on one recent afternoon--"Reid, you are
too ------ loud!" from the Island of Hawaii 350 mi SE of here.
The antenna system: XMatch tuner(N4XM's "Classic Lowbander"
tuner), a short run of 9913 out to an Amidon 1.5:1 balun and then
about 80 feet of the Amelco 72 ohm kW transmitting twin lead, is
operating very FB. Per the ARRL Handbook, the very closely
spaced 72 ohm transmitting twin lead is the lowest loss line
of them all, lower than any of the hardlines at HF; but, of
course, it is not shielded, so if your RF environment isn't
as quiet as it is out here on this island, the lack of shielding
might be a low signal level reception problem.
Appears this set up will be very helpful to this mid-pistol
contest station with a Mosley tribander(hurricane country)
and all wire antennas from 160 thru 30 meters. All four dipoles
are fed in parallel by the single set up described. The 72 ohm
twin line is soldered directly to the set of four dipole wires
at the center insulator; no balun or matching up there. SWR at
resonance is 1.2 or so on all four bands with the tuner switched
out of the path, so realizing very little Z mismatch among the
system elements at fo.
Hope this info will be of interest to others using wires and
wanting to use full power for contesting across all the
low bands.
73, Jim, AH6NB
>From Bill Turner <wrt@eskimo.com> Thu Apr 25 00:28:00 1996
From: Bill Turner <wrt@eskimo.com> (Bill Turner)
Subject: AI7B and TUCKER'S WEB SITE!
Message-ID: <199604242328.QAA20142@mail.eskimo.com>
At 01:19 PM 4/24/96 -0400, AG7M@aol.com wrote:
>Unbelievable! I wish we had more info re manufacturer and reseller WEB sites
>posted here. With all the drivel related to two hole Alphas and 4-1000s which
>serve no useful purpose, how can anyone be unhappy with a simple notice re
>Tucker's site?
>
>Bob - AG7M
-------------------------------------------------------
Useful is in the eye of the beholder. I found the thread on amplifiers
fascinating, especially since it came from contesters - the very people who
should know the most about them. The same info on a Usenet group would have
gotten a yawn.
I was glad to receive Tucker's message, but I do think they would have been
better advised to get a list of subscribers and email us individually. A
little more work for them, but lots less flamage.
73, Bill W7LZP
wrt@eskimo.com
>From Jim Reid <jreid@aloha.net> Thu Apr 25 00:58:19 1996
From: Jim Reid <jreid@aloha.net> (Jim Reid)
Subject: Firsts
Message-ID: <1.5.4b12.32.19960424235819.00716834@aloha.net>
First Call: Issued 1950, W6KPI, Class B license.
I had to pass the written test in Fresno
which was to write short sentences/paragraph
answers and even draw out several circuit
diagrams while the FCC Field Engineer was
watching. After he made marks all over my
papers, he said I had probably passed that
part, then he set up for the 13 wpm CW test.
Trembling so badly I almost couldn't hold to
the key knob, I first had to prove I could
send that fast, then next, came the receiving
test; which some how I managed to get enough
letters and numbers lined up for a minute somewhere
and just did pass that part.
First rig: ARC-5 40 meter VFO'd little war surplus rig
with the filaments rewired, and an external
power supply which I built! Had mercury vapor
rectifiers tubes that glowed a lovely purple
when the key was down; plus two, maroon glowing
voltage regulator tubes. This set up
really impressed the visiting relatives when
opperated in the evening in a darkened room!
Almost a science fiction atmosphere. All
parts and tubes for this power supply were
mail ordered from Burstein and Applebee
Electronics Parts(or a name very close to
that as I remember) I guess long out of business.
And some stuff from Allied Radio, and even Concord.
Receiver was the matching ARC or BC whtever it was
surplus rig, for which also some rewiring and PS
building was needed, but not impressive as was
the xmtr supply in operation! Antenna was a dipole
strung between two 2x4 support towers, probably
all of 20 feet high, or so.
When VHF TV hit California's Central Valley a short
time later, this transmitter was replaced with
an EF Johnson Co. Viking II, which I built up
in about 40 building hours, but again operated
only on 40 CW, and rock bound now, as I didn't have
the $40 for the VFO kit. Had to order the Viking as
soon as I had saved up enough for it, no need to
wait for VFO money!
First QSO: Stan in Oreville, CA, all I can remember, 40 CW,
his call, I have forgotten, but not the QSO.
First DX: Volt, DU7SV, in the Phillipines, also 40CW, will
never forget my shock and excitment when he answered
my CQ early one morning, again, was able to complete
a short ragchew only after my excited trembling had
calmed down--the Phillipines, wow!
First Contest: Not until I retired and moved to Hawaii in
1991, then messed around in the Spring 92
ARRL test and others following. Logs
submitted, none yet, too embarassing to
send them in, still learning. But
enjoying the DX which comes along.
Enough from out here. This sort of thing I know is appealing only
to the older among us, not sure it is of any interest to the younger
crowd. They will come to understand after a few more decades of
their lives.
Mahalo and 73 from Kauai, Jim, AH6NB, jreid@aloha.net
>From k6sti@n2.net (Brian Beezley) Thu Apr 25 02:20:34 1996
From: k6sti@n2.net (Brian Beezley) (Brian Beezley)
Subject: This location is or was perfect?
Message-ID: <199604250120.SAA18532@ravel.n2.net>
>>From Felipe, NP4Z...
>
>> All the signals come in from angles so low...1 or 2 degrees...that
>> nothing will fix it...
>
>Has anyone tried modelling the antenna tipped a little bit ( <5 degrees)
>TOWARD the ground? I realize that ground reflections would normally put
>the kibosh on this technique over flat terrain, but maybe Felipe's case is
>special. This shouldn't affect either antenna balance or torque, just
>make it look a little funny. With the ELNEC concentric grounds, it could
>be reasonably modelled.
>
>73, Ward N0AX
The concentric-ground model in ELNEC or any other MININEC-based
antenna-modeling program can't provide accurate results for terrain other
than flat ground. (This includes unlikely terrain that looks exactly like
the stairstep terrain profile assumed by MININEC's concentric-ring ground
model). MININEC ignores diffraction from terrain discontinuities. This is
a first-order error (about as large as correct results) that invalidates any
practical conclusions based on the model.
73--Brian, K6STI
k6sti@n2.net
>From Steve Lufcy <km0l@tyrell.net> Thu Apr 25 02:47:13 1996
From: Steve Lufcy <km0l@tyrell.net> (Steve Lufcy)
Subject: Sacrifice to RF Gods
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960424203643.7996A-100000@tyrell.net>
Richard-
Now I understand how you beat me so badly a few years back in WPX cw 80m
single band. I was 2nd in U.S. but you were 1st with almost double my
score. And I thot it was because you were on east coast running Europeans
I couldn't hear. My next tower will have my prize DL card at the bottom
of it- and many
On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Richard L. King wrote:
> >I don't know what would appease Murphy...maybe cut
> >yourself while putting the cards in the hole....
> >
> > About the only thing that will truly appease
> > the GREAT ALMIGHTY MURPHY is to sacrifice a complete
> > copy of the annotated GREAT ALMIGHTY MURPHY"S
> > BOOK OF CONTESTING/DX LAWS.
>
> This is a serious subject that shouldn't be joked about! The proper
> sacrifice to the God of RF (G0RF) must be made with each new tower
> installation. To not do so will result in your having an ineffective tower
> system, personal ruin, and sexual impotence. If you are laughing now, then
> DON'T READ FURTHER! You just don't get the importance of this new tower
> ritual and you probably never will! The following is not a joke!
>
> Around 1969, my first tower in Texas (a 35 ft crankup) was properly
> initiated by dropping a JT1 QSL card in the hole before pouring the
> concrete. The ritual was performed with all due solemnity and respect. K5ZJK
> (now NX7K) participated in the ceremony before helping me stir and pour the
> many bags of sackcrete. A TA-33 topped the tower off with inverted vees
> hanging from the 30 foot level. The tower performed well with a result of
> making 5BDXCC (#190), working 300 DXCC countries, and making the top 10 once
> (10th exactly) in SS CW.
>
> My second tower, at the same Texas site, was 90 feet of Rohn 45G and the
> base was immediately alongside the previous tower base. In 1972, W5RMC (now
> W5NA) and I bowed our heads and offered a prayer to G0RF while I dropped a
> YA QSL card into the bottom of the hole. We then proceeded to wheelbarrow
> about a yard of already-hardening concrete from the concrete carrier to the
> backyard. This tower had stacked yagis for 10 through 40, sloping, phased
> verticals (guywires) for 80, and was shunt-fed for 160 meters. The tower
> worked like a dream. The DXCC honor roll was achieved, dual top-ten finishes
> in the 1975 SS (5th CW and 10th phone as K5PFL), many division winning
> single-op efforts in the DX contests (was 11th once in ARRL DX CW), and
> several top-ten finishes in the ARRL 160 meter contest.
>
> After moving to New York in 1980, I decided a new approach was in order. The
> decision was made to go more for QSOs rather than DX. So all the new towers
> there had not only a rare DX QSL sacrifice, but I also started adding a few
> cards from some of the louder JA stations along with some DL and IK QSLs.
> This seemed to work well as the more recent K5NA contesting record speaks
> for itself. G0RF smiled on us for the 15 years we lived in New York.
>
> So you can see that this is no joke and it is serious business. If you want
> your new tower system to be successful, then you must make the proper
> sacrifice to G0RF. To do otherwise is to eternally condemn yourself to
> hearing the DX station say other people's callsigns in the pileup or to have
> someone with a dipole steal your run frequency. I hope this is useful for
> some of you new tower people. It has been a big-gun secret for many years
> and I am probably in trouble for sharing it.
>
> 73, Richard - K5NA
> K5NA@BGA.COM
>
-and many Amens to G0D/RF.
73 de KM0L
>
>From Richard Hallman <ki3v@rnodx.org> Thu Apr 25 03:53:20 1996
From: Richard Hallman <ki3v@rnodx.org> (Richard Hallman)
Subject: More on Cluster Virus (tm) & Internet....
Message-ID: <317EE924-00000001@rnodx.org>
Sent this message out on the Cluster mailer and havent heard if this
problem is in the works to be fixed.....Since this affects all of us
contesters and DXers, I'd thought I would share it here. Hope its OK.
Better than the Tucker thread....Not as good at the Internet and Contest
Thread...ha
I have sent a message to VE3CDX and informed him that I no longer
will be connected to the Internet link as long as we have the problem
with bad announces crashing all of the networks. I feed the Northern
Cal and Southern Cal systems with Internet announces. When a bad
announce comes through my connect from VE3CDX on internet, the entire
west coast is killed. Since I work full time and am unble to monitor
the announces when they arrive, I need to shutdown the link for now.
W6GO has spent many hours in getting our network back up on line after
this happends. Since I was at work both times this happend, this is
why he took the time to get everybody back up and not me. I feel this
is my problem and not Jay's. Thanks to Jay for doing this anyway...I
know its a pain!!
This is an amazing problem that has the ability to crash EVERY
Cluster node WORLDWIDE!! W6GO is able to duplicate the problem and
has informed me that the latest version AK1A has released (5.4-51)
still does not fix the problem. I think this is GREAT that AK1A is
helping out on this and hope he can find a fix REAL SOON (thanks
dick!)..... Will have W6GO test any newer versions to see if the
problem persists...
So if you dont see KI3V connected to the Mega Cluster on internet anymore,
now you know why....
See Ya! Rich KI3V Reno
**********************************************************
Richard Hallman ki3v@rnodx.org
11870 Heartpine St
Reno Nv 89506 ki3v@w7ta.#nonev.nv
**********************************************************
>From Dean Norris <dnorris@k7no.com> Thu Apr 25 04:07:59 1996
From: Dean Norris <dnorris@k7no.com> (Dean Norris)
Subject: Sacrifice to RF Gods
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960425030759.0067f6bc@mail.syspac.com>
At 20:47 4/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Richard-
>Now I understand how you beat me so badly a few years back in WPX cw 80m
>single band. I was 2nd in U.S. but you were 1st with almost double my
>score. And I thot it was because you were on east coast running Europeans
>I couldn't hear. My next tower will have my prize DL card at the bottom
>of it- and many
Perhaps you should put Richard at the bottom of it... {$->
C. Dean Norris
Amateur Radio Station K7NO
e-mail to dnorris@k7no.com
http://www.syspac.com/~dnorris/
>From millersg@dmapub.dma.org (Steve Miller) Thu Apr 25 04:10:54 1996
From: millersg@dmapub.dma.org (Steve Miller) (Steve Miller)
Subject: This location is or was perfect?
Message-ID: <m0uCHSI-00028NC@dmapub.dma.org>
Hola Felipe,
> Here it goes, I was dreaming of the perfect location, so I found it
> 3100 feet above sea level incredible drop offs in every direction
> plenty of space, etc etc etc.
Sounds awesome!
> that fired me and Eric kp4tk to use all the technology posible to
> figure out the posibilities of the site.(TA/YTAD/IONCAP/ICECAP)
Good idea.
> This is what we found out, the location is so high and steep that
> all the signals from everywhere come in angles so low, that the programs
> say that not even playing with the height of the antennas it can be fixed.
I presume you're talking about TA and YTAD terrain analysis. These codes
are based on UTD (Uniform Theory of Diffraction). For this technique
to be accurate, the model must be carefully implemented - this is
especially true near 'grazing incidence' or low elevation angles. Also,
since your location is very high in terms of wavelengths, you will need
much finer angular resolution in the ray tracing than most locations.
I tried some tests on N6BV's program and found the total number of rays
were insufficient for certain applications. I have not tried K6STI's
software.
There are a few other shortcomings with these terrain models:
- you are modeling 3-D terrain with a 2-D profile.
- the terrain is modelled as straight line segments (somewhat inaccurate)
- UTD diffraction is based on wedge angle (angle between two line
segments) which is determined by discretization the elevation profile,
most terrain is smoother than the distinct angles used in the model
- I'm not certain, bit I suspect the UTD diffraction terms are for
perfectly conducting ground
- diffration effects between changes in ground conductivy (i.e. earth/sea)
are not modelled
- the terrain illumination (antenna) model in YTAD is an approximation
(not sure about YA)
- no 'double-diffraction' terms are included
In summary, the model is of limited accuracy with lower elevation angles
less accurate than higher angles. That being said, I must also state for
many sites (particularly those with relatively simple terrain), this
analysis is good enough to provide valuable insight.
(For those of you wondering, I've seen multiple diffraction computer runs
that have taken days to complete at the workplace.)
> angles of 1 and 2 degrees do not help much for europe/usa or JA, remember
> this is what the programs say in terms of the angles into Puerto Rico.
This would be IONCAP, ICEPAC or VOACAP data ... a few points here:
Low angle propagation modes are the most stable for HF F-layer
propagation, this is best if there is no E or D-layer cutoff
Low angle F-modes open sooner and close later than higher angle modes
this means more QSOs (and DX mults)
These programs also employ ray tracing. Although it is different from the
UTD ray tracing, low angle data is generally considered less reliable. In
fact, the instructions I have for IONCAP suggest specifying the 'low angle
cutoff' at no less than 3 degrees.
> So, Is hard to believe that a location like this (pedro NP4A would be
> envious) according to the models and results is of not much advantage.
> should I put my faith in this results or just go ahead and start putting
> up aluminum and not worry about it? Please let me know what you think.
In your case, I suspect the data from your models is not accurate enough.
Electromagnetic modelling of antennas, structures, and environment is
difficult when things are complex. Propagation models are much worse in
this respect (electrodynamics and all...), but IONCAP and it's descendents
incorporate statistics so they will give you 'most likely' results.
Put up the aluminum and enjoy!!!
> Gracias and see you in Dayton
> (GO SULTANS!)
Yep - we can talk more then.
adios,
--
Steve Miller WD8IXE
millersg@dma.org
http://www.dma.org/~millersg
>From w2vjn@rosenet.net (George Cutsogeorge) Thu Apr 25 12:22:22 1996
From: w2vjn@rosenet.net (George Cutsogeorge) (George Cutsogeorge)
Subject: This location is or was perfect?
Message-ID: <M.042596.042223.01@ppp048.rosenet.net>
> >>From Felipe, NP4Z...
> >
> >> All the signals come in from angles so low...1 or 2 degrees...that
> >> nothing will fix it...
> >From N0AX...
> >Has anyone tried modelling the antenna tipped a little bit ( <5 degrees)
> >TOWARD the ground? I realize that ground reflections would normally put
> >the kibosh on this technique over flat terrain, but maybe Felipe's case
>
> The concentric-ground model in ELNEC or any other MININEC-based
> antenna-modeling program can't provide accurate results for terrain other
> than flat ground. (This includes unlikely terrain that looks exactly like
>
>
> 73--Brian, K6STI
> k6sti@n2.net
>
In the 1930s there were experiments run to determine the effects of tilting
arrays in the presence of ground to raise the elevation angle. Somewhere in my
files I have the IRE paper reporting on the results. Basically what it shows
is, yes the angle does go up somewhat, but the gain goes down. This is due to
the reduction in the help from the ground reflection. When looking into free
space as from a mountain top this probably doesn't happen.
My interest in this was to improve my signal on 40 meters to W8/9 in the SS. I
used a 2 element phased wire beam and with ropes tilted it up about 20 degrees.
It worked well, but it was much easier to use a reflector directly under a
dipole as was pointed out by W4KFC.
No I'm not THAT old (30s) however in my serious contest days of the 60s I read
every antenna article in the IRE proceedings from 1920 to 1950 after which I
could no longer understand the math.
George
----
George Cutsogeorge, W2VJN
Umpqua, OR.
>From Larry Tyree <n6tr@akorn.net> Thu Apr 25 06:47:20 1996
From: Larry Tyree <n6tr@akorn.net> (Larry Tyree)
Subject: Elevation rotation of HF arrays
Message-ID: <199604250547.BAA13994@paris.akorn.net>
Back in the 70's, Brad Fisher, WB6YBL, operated contests from Rainbow Ridge
("home" of N6DX). This is a cliff top type station with very little ground
to reflect off of.
They had a big 20 meter beam with an elevation rotator and Brad would
report a 10 db improvement with it pointing about 45 degrees up in the
air on stateside signals.
Just an empirical data point to factor into the discussion.
Tree (don't forget the internet sprint) N6TR
tree@contesting.com
|