TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Pan-Adaptor vs. Using BandMap with Ten-Tec Transceivers

To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Pan-Adaptor vs. Using BandMap with Ten-Tec Transceivers
From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 12:06:48 +0100
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
GM Barry,

Tnx for the input.  It's a valid point.

If he's in the bandmap, I will also know that.
If not, you're right, I will go right past him and not know he was there.
Perhaps I'll miss him forever, but maybe I'll get him on the next pass.

Honestly, I estimate my cost of implementing a good band scope to be about
$1000, including the computer stuff I'll have to buy. There was I time I
would have just reached into my pocket and pulled out the money, but now
that I'm retired, that represents about 2 years of entire ham radio budget.


I have to weigh this decision against what else I could buy with that money.
I can name plenty of other things I don't have and right now and would
prefer to spend my money on. 

A higher priority is a new NAS drive.  The old one has been running day and
night for 5 years now.  I need to replace it before it breaks.  That's
already a couple hundred gone.

Then there's a high power cross-needle watt meter.  I also would like a
dual-line RF-Ammeter, so that I can measure current on both sides of
openwire at the same time.  I'd like to buy and try the Ten-Tec RF-Speech
Processor, and maybe even buy a headset with mic, just in case I ever go
back on my word and do another SSB contest.  But for that I would also need
a voice memory box.  Lots more stuff to spend the money on instead of a
bandscope.

Agn, good point.  One which I hadn't thought about.
TNX

73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)


-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Barry N1EU
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2014 11:49 AM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Pan-Adaptor vs. Using BandMap with Ten-Tec
Transceivers

When you're tuning the band in S&P, you can see in advance when coming to a
frequency that the cq'ing station is momentarily listening and you know to
pause on the frequency for a second and listen for the station to resume
cq'ing rather than possibly tune right by him.

73, Barry N1EU

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP <Rick@dj0ip.de> wrote:

> I separated this out from the "Future Radio" thread.
> Both of these features are here already today.
>
> I AM STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE BANDSCOPE (or Pan-Adaptor) 
> WILL HELP "ME" in "my way" of working DX contests.
> I know it helps for other things, but how will it improve my contest
score?
>
> For this thread, I hope you guys will focus on my specific problem 
> (which may very well be my slowness to understand), rather than try to 
> sell me the general benefits of using a Pan-Adapter for all sorts of 
> other applications.
>
> First, I understand that people have different interests and we all 
> like to play with technology.  I understand how it is fun and helpful to
others.
> But for my needs?
>
> My main interest in operating are:
>
> .1.Working DX Contests (and only those Contests),
>
> .2.Working DX-peditions (especially the ones I sponsor),
>
> .3.And rag chewing on 80 in SSB.
>
> PLEASE FOCUS ONLY ON #1 FOR THIS THREAD.  TNX.
>
>
> I am still trying to understand how a pan-adaptor or bandscope would 
> help me in a DX contest. that is, help enough that it would warrant 
> the time, effort and cost necessary to add this feature to my Eagle.  
> It will take some hardware modification to "my" Eagle to do that.  I 
> have an original version.
>
> Remember, every second spent watching that device (or anything else) 
> is one less second I could be making a QSO, and a QSO usually takes 
> just 5 seconds.
>
> So far nothing I have read has convinced me that it would be worth the 
> effort (with reference to improving DX Contest scores).
>
> Clearly it would be a big aid in chasing the DX-peditions.
> I understand that.
> It might even be an aid in my 80m rag chewing because it would help me 
> identify who is splattering up and down the band.
>
> BUT WHERE IS THE BENEFIT IN DX CONTESTING ?
>  (since I am already making full use of the BandMap with external 
> spots and skimmer)?
>
> The only thing anyone has suggested so far which I fully accept is, 
> when you decide it's time to stop S&P and call CQ, it helps locate a 
> clear frequency.
>
> In a 48 hour CW contest, I might pause S&P and call CQ for a while, 
> but I only do that 2 or 3 times each night.
> I don't do it in an SSB contest at all.
>
> I don't call CQ during the day because my signal is not strong enough 
> to hold a frequency. I have never needed longer than one minute to 
> find a frequency (160/80/40) and begin working.
>
>
> FIRST THE BANDMAP:
>
> When I am operating S&P, my BandMap which is fed by packet posts and 
> skimmers, shows me:
>
> .1.Call Sign and frequency of "Run" stations who are calling CQ
>
> .2. Whether or not I have already worked the stn.
>
> .3. If the station is a new Country, new Zone, or Both
>
> .4. All stations, including those that I cannot even hear because 
> propagation is not favorable to my QTH
>
> Of course #4 is the "gotcha" here with using the BandMap. Room for 
> improvement.
>
> But my gut feeling is, less than 25 of the posts I see are for 
> stations which I cannot hear.
> And even if they are, a few hours later propagation changes enough 
> that they now become "live" for me.
> So even though I can't hear (i.e. K3LR), I know not to call CQ on that 
> frequency.
>
> The BandMap is totally free for me, because my contest logging 
> software incorporates this feature.
> My score has sky-rocketed upwards since I began using the BandMap in 
> contests.
> This helped far more than using manual packet spots.
>
>
> SECOND THE BANDSCOPE:
>
> Question: is there a difference between a bandscope and a pan-adaptor?
>
> BENEFITS:
>
> .1. Helps identify clear spots when I'm looking for a frequency to call
CQ.
>
> GOOD POINT.
> But weak point for my type of operation because I rarely do this.
> I don't think anyone does it a lot.  If you are strong enough to hold 
> a frequency, you just stay there.  Otherwise you do S&P.
>
> .2. Lets me know what is going on around my frequency.
> Why should I care? My radio has excellent filters and in a contest, I 
> must go to cluttered frequency to work the rare multipliers, 
> regardless of what's going on around it.
>
> When working S&P, I usually don't stay on one frequency longer than 15 
> or
> 20
> seconds, then I move on.
>
> If I'm calling CQ, I still don't care.  If people are calling me and I 
> can work them, I'm on a good frequency.
> The entire band is full of signals.  Otherwise I'm on another band.
>
> If I happened to settle down on the frequency of a rare DX station, 
> plenty of people will let me know; I send a "SRI" and QSY.
>
> Besides, the Band-Scope won't tell me that I have settled on a DX 
> station's frequency, but the BandMap will!
>
> .3.I can see when other bands are open.
> GOOD POINT.  Actually EXCELLENT POINT.
>
> The packet spots show me this too, to some extent.  Certainly not as 
> well as the band-scope would.
> For stations who have full automation, and can double-click to change 
> bands, this might be a lot more benefit.
> I need too long to change bands because I have a manually tuned amp, 
> and manual antenna switch, and manual matchbox.
> The up side to "manual" is, it usually doesn't break.
> After each major contest, our BCC reflector is full of people 
> complaining about automated stuff that broke.
>
> My work-around:  I change bands and use the second VFO to scan the 
> band at a rapid rate in 1kHz steps.  I just listen to bursts (without 
> stopping).  If the band is full, I consider changing.  It takes a few 
> minutes for the BandMap to populate, so it is not any help for this 
> operation.  This process costs me about 60 to 90 seconds.
>
> .4. I don't know any others.  Other than it might be fun; but fun 
> doesn't improve my contest score.
> HELP ME OUT HERE PLEASE:  _______________________
>
> DOWNSIDE OF BANDSCOPE FOR ME:
>
> .1.Cost.  I would not only incur the cost for whatever hardware is 
> needed, I would have to purchase a new computer.  It was suggested not 
> to use a laptop. This means I would need a computer, keyboard, and 
> monitor.  However my shack is tiny and already over-crowded, which is 
> one of the reasons I use a laptop.
>
> Doing this is not out of the question, but at the end of the day, is 
> it really going to improve my score significantly?  I can't see how.
>
> It's also very difficult to find a good US-English keyboard over here.  
> I'd probably have to pay shipping from the states.
> Perhaps Scott (W4PA) could bring me one when he comes to visit next
summer.
>
> .2..Labor:  My early model Eagle motherboard does not have the 
> connection to run the IF out.  I don't mean the jack on the back, I 
> mean the connection on the printed circuit board.  I would have to 
> take a soldering iron to it.  I am technically competent, but with 
> poor eyesight.  If I do this, there is some risk that I might break 
> something. A round trip back to the factory costs $300.
>
> Again, please keep this thread focused on "how a Band-Scope can help 
> in DX-Contesting", and not break out in a general discussion of the 
> benefits of a band-scope.  I understand that there are benefits in 
> other aspects of the hobby.
>
> THANK YOU.
>
> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>