Where were you ... 75 and 40 were terrible. Where I was living. Usually
75 and 40 are good at the low time.
Paul
On Sunday, May 29, 2016, Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net> wrote:
> Therein lies the issue Rick: I'm sure having lived in OKC you have dealt
> with
> the very frequent S9++ QRN on the lower bands this time of year. I just
> made
> a quick spot check of the AM BC band and 80M on my little SW portable RX
> (it
> doesn't cover 160.) With Vaisala's Free Lightning Explorer showing 130K+
> lightning events what I heard will be pretty obvious: QRN bordering on
> frying
> pan sounds at times. By contrast, 20M CW was wall-to-wall with "CQ test..."
> and only occasional QRN.
>
> BTW if anyone is interested here's the link to the Vaisala - Free Lightning
> Explorer map: http://thunderstorm.vaisala.com/explorer.html
>
> 73, Al
>
> On Sun May 29 2016 2:29:06 am rick@dj0ip.de <javascript:;> wrote:
> > I don't know what planet you live on Paul, but here on Earth, 160m still
> > works fine during low sunspots.
> > All you need is a good antenna, which most people do not have on that
> band
> > - and a relatively quite QTH, which most people don't have these days
> > either.
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com <javascript:;>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|