CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] 160m SWL report

Subject: [CQ-Contest] 160m SWL report
From: jmellis@ihug.co.nz (Martin Ellis)
Date: Mon Mar 2 23:24:42 1998
Several ZLs were operating this weekend hoping to give the ZL
multiplier to North American contesters...but it was not to be.

We read a lot about new techniques to hear better on 160m - but we had
the opposite problem- we could hear all the top stations, but repeated
calls were met by more CQ-ing in our face! So my question is:
*hearing great with a half-wave dipole, but how can we get out better?*

For the record here is my band-plan of stations S9 or better on
the first night:

February 28, 1998:
1812.0  VE3DC   0705Z
1822.0  W3TS    0706z
1825.0  N0KOV   0710z
1836.0  KD9SV   0710z
1841.9  WR8C    0720z
1846.4  WB9Z    0736z (strongest) 5x9+5
1852.0  K6HNZ   0736z
1860.0  K9JF/7  0736z
1889.0  K0XG    0736z
1908.0  VE7NS   0736z
1921.6  KF9IF   0736z

All of these stations were S9 or better, against an S7 noise level,
and were speaker quality, and easily copied on first call.
Best copy was ahead of our local nightfall.
After numerous calls to different stations, a successful exchange
was made with only one: WB9Z/ IL. 
Using 400w at this end -is power a factor?

Sunday March 1, 1998:
1840.9  WB9Z    0620Z
1849.3  WR8C    0624Z
1847.5  K8LN    0625Z
1851.5  N7KQ    0630z
1838.5  KZ5MM   0644Z
1814.6  K1ZM    0650z
1845.6  W6YRA   0655z
1856.0  N8TR    0700z
1842.0  KF9IF   0715Z
1834.0  XE1RCS  0804z
1852.2  WB9Z    0810z calling him were ZL2CD, ZL2JR, ZL2WB,
                        but no contacts.        
Signals were all much weaker, around S4 against an S3-4 noisse level.

Regards,
Martin ZL1ANJ


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] 160m SWL report, Martin Ellis <=