So how many of us still send the whole QSO with a key?Buttons on my Pro III do
most of the work (like mouse clicks with FT-8), I only send the other station's
call (like typing it in with FT-8)
I have a friend here in Yorba Linda running 100W to a short vertical that never
worked east of the Mississippi on CW.He now has about 25 DXCC using FT-8. There
are times when you cannot even hear an audio tone and you still make a "QSO"
DX on 160 is like a DX-pedition 5NN, RR ur 5NN 73 dit dit.
I can count on one hand the QSO's where someone sent OP HR Roger running 1KW to
phased verticals and 500 foot beverage NE/SW
Countless people have told me they never get on 160 because there is never
anyone on, except during ARRL and CQ contests.More and more are getting on
because there always seems to be guys on FT-8.
My DXCC on 160 is all CW and I may have worked a few SSB stations during
contests, only locals on SSB otherwise.
If there is a country I need, I'll work it ANY mode.
The problem is FT-8 is supposed to be a low power mode and naturally some are
running 1 KW and swamping the little guys
No matter who is in the White House, it hasn't changed how I live or how often
I go out to eat. FT-8 isn't going to change my enjoyment of ham radio.
SSB, PSK, EME, AM, Slow Scan TV etc have all fought their battles.
If FT-8 was at 1895 or prohibited during contest weekends, we probably wouldn't
even know it was on the band.
Rick N6PE
======================================================================
Dying is easy, the hard part is living
On Tuesday, April 23, 2019, 11:21:48 PM PDT, topband-request@contesting.com
<topband-request@contesting.com> wrote:
Send Topband mailing list submissions to
topband@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
topband-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
topband-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 (Andree DL8LAS)
2. Re: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22 (daraymond@iowatelecom.net)
3. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Victor Goncharsky)
4. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg)
5. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (VE6WZ_Steve)
6. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (GEORGE WALLNER)
7. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Mike Waters)
8. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (W7RH)
9. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Mike Waters)
10. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg)
11. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 16:50:57 +0000 (UTC)
From: Andree DL8LAS <dl8las@aol.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22
Message-ID: <1521797704.3392014.1556038257627@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hey topbanders,
I am also every morning 2:30 UTC? on 160m CW, check at first W1AW beacon?
1802,5 Mhz. Signal is mostly clear RST 559.
Than i call CQ and check RBN, the NA skimmer received me from 10-24dB. But no
answer from NA stations. Conditions are not bad, so please listen more for DX
from EU.
vy 73? Andy DL8LAS
www.dl8las.de
www.dl8las.com
On Dienstag, 23 April, 2019 topband-request <topband@contesting.com> wrote:
Send Topband mailing list submissions to
??? topband@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
??? http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
??? topband-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
??? topband-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
Today's Topics:
? 1. Lack of NA Activity on CW (Roger Kennedy)
? 2. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (lennart.michaelsson@telia.com)
? 3. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Peter Sundberg)
? 4. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg)
? 5. Re: Fresnel Zone (Emir Memic)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 09:16:30 +0100
From: "Roger Kennedy" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
To: <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <BF4E50FA22DA4134B83EBE8FC8BC8A57@Packard>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="us-ascii"
I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
achievement).
I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also
don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
they're on anyway)
It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to
come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
Roger G3YRO
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:25:24 +0200
From: <lennart.michaelsson@telia.com>
To: "'Roger Kennedy'" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>,
??? <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <002501d4f9ae$1a2783d0$4e768b70$@telia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"
Roger et al,
I was on early this morning and even checked in on? ON4KST.
Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see
quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out?
73 all
Len SM7BIC
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Fr?n: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy
Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17
Till: topband@contesting.com
?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
achievement).
I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also
don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
they're on anyway)
It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to
come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
Roger G3YRO
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:17:20 +0000
From: Peter Sundberg <sm2cew@telia.com>
To: <lennart.michaelsson@telia.com>,??? "'Roger Kennedy'"
??? <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <mailman.14.1556035203.29506.topband@contesting.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Let's ponder:
FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency
(passband) and their computer is transmitting
every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if
they are in contact with another computer or not
FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other
computers are making use of the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8
FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the screeen
FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied
are still presented as "heard" by use of the "a priori" functionality
FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity
CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long interrupts
CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig
in the noise in 50 Hz bandwidth
CW - without knowledge of who is where we need
good signals to attract our attention and so we can start focusing
CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for
sure, the noise is certainly higher and many have
taken their microscopes (receiving antennas) down for the season
CW - many of us also have to live with a less
effective TX antenna during the summer as we have
to roll in our extensive radial field
CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and
capable stations but most of them don't transmit every 15 seconds
CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST
Bottom line:
CW - it sure would be easier for us to only
monitor a specific world wide calling frequency, but this is not realistic
CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult
to do manual CW than single channel FT8 for reasons described above
CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-)
CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW
and continue to make noise whenever we can, despite the problems listed above
CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up
CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a
realistic way and realize what they are doing,
duly noting that our table has better food
CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the
southern hemisphere for being there all the time
during our prime season up north!
CW is King!
73
Peter SM2CEW
At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaelsson@telia.com wrote:
>Roger et al,
>I was on early this morning and even checked in on? ON4KST.
>Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see
>quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out?
>
>73 all
>Len SM7BIC
>
>-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
>Fr?n: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy
>Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17
>Till: topband@contesting.com
>?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
>
>
>I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
>
>But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
>FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
>
>It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
>the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
>ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
>
>Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
>couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
>achievement).
>
>I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also
>don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
>station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
>they're on anyway)
>
>It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to
>come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
>
>Roger G3YRO
>
>
>_________________
>Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>_________________
>Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 14:29:44 +0300
From: uy0zg <uy0zg@mksat.net>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <63c84756a384fdf4a29c0ed9846c7100@mksat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Hi All
Victor
you need to stop listening to dx via the internet!
When will you make an RX antenna?
The availability and use of RX antennas is a great pleasure.
Here is an example of the antenna Anatoly UT2XQ
http://www.topband.in.ua/2019/04/22/ut2xq-antennas/
---
Nick, UY0ZG
http://www.topband.in.ua
Victor Goncharsky via Topband ????? 2019-04-23 10:23:
> This is not always the case. I have noticed long openings to Caribbean
> during last year 6m season with signal levels good enough for reliable
> CW QSOs but only FT8 portion of the band was alive.
> Will see what will happen this year. Top band game is almost over with
> the last 3 new ones worked in April (but missed XR0) so 6m antenna is
> on its way to the tower this week.
>
>
> 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E.
> UARL Technical and VHF Committies
> DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS
> DXCC card checker (160 meters).
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:56:41 +0000
From: Emir Memic <emir.memic@emssolutions.at>
To: Ray Higgins <ray.w2re@gmail.com>, "topband@contesting.com"
??? <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Fresnel Zone
Message-ID:
???
<DBBPR08MB487006D532CE43D192F8EECB82230@DBBPR08MB4870.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
???
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Ray,
If we are talking about horizontal polarized antennas
You cant be high enough on 80m/160m
And there is no needs to think a lot about effects of fresnel zone on 160/80
Not even with 300m high tower
Of course if there are no uphills around you .....but so far understand you
That location is free with slight slope around
In my mind its? important to have flat or homogeny slope in desired direction
Effect of excellent soil is not so critical for ground reflection if you are
using horizontal polarized antennas!
On other side for vertical antennas soil is more important but directly under
the antennas and in closed flied!
In simple words if you can have antenna in saltwater or very close to it put it
in
If you are far away from good soil with vertical (even 1 wavelength) you will
need standard numbers of radials under the antenna!
Iif you are on flat terrain with excellent soil you will need very large
antenna on high tower to outperform 4SQ on 80m !
On 160m is non sense to even try something else than vertical or vertical arrays
73s
Braco
E77DX
--
Emir Memic
EMS SOLUTIONS
K?hlergasse 12/3
1180 Wien
+4369919227041
emir.memic@emssolutions.at
-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> Im Auftrag von Ray Higgins
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. April 2019 16:49
An: topband@contesting.com
Betreff: Topband: Fresnel Zone
I have two questions about fresnel zone.
I just purchased 22.5/ac near the ocean near Machiasport, ME. This is in the
Northeast corner of Maine about 30 miles south of Eastport and a Lubec. This is
going to be my personal Remote Contest station! I plan to be contesting from
this new qth starting in 2020 but will be QRV by mid 2019 for testing.
This qth is anywhere between 1-3 miles from the ocean or the bay, it sits on a
high plateau 150? asl thats slopes in all directions to saltwater (peninsula)
except N/NW. The property has a saltwater river and marsh that runs the
perimeter from south to north favoring the NE direction,? the marsh is only
50-100' wide and 1500-2000? away from the property. The land has a gradual
slope to the marsh.
My questions:
1.) Is the saltwater river bed/marsh wide enough to be an effective field in
the Fresnal Zone?
2.) What is the wavelengths needed to be within the Fresnal zone of a
river/marsh compared to an ocean?
In this photo album (last pic) I have outlined the river saltwater marsh and
property boundry from a google earth shot.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/ui79t2jFo95b29et6
I?m only concerned about 80 and 160m in the Fresnal Zone.
Any input would be welcomed.
Thanks,
Ray W2RE
Sent from my iPhone
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
------------------------------
End of Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22
****************************************
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:27:29 -0500
From: <daraymond@iowatelecom.net>
To: "Andree DL8LAS" <dl8las@aol.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22
Message-ID: <5A32F88697EF42009870AA61E60DC49A@DavidBrentPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=original
Andy, et al. . . I will try to be more diligent about getting on with my
modest off-season antenna system. 73. . . Dave, W0FLS
-----Original Message-----
From: Andree DL8LAS via Topband
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 11:50 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22
Hey topbanders,
I am also every morning 2:30 UTC on 160m CW, check at first W1AW beacon
1802,5 Mhz. Signal is mostly clear RST 559.
Than i call CQ and check RBN, the NA skimmer received me from 10-24dB. But
no answer from NA stations. Conditions are not bad, so please listen more
for DX from EU.
vy 73 Andy DL8LAS
www.dl8las.de
www.dl8las.com
On Dienstag, 23 April, 2019 topband-request <topband@contesting.com> wrote:
Send Topband mailing list submissions to
topband@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
topband-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
topband-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Lack of NA Activity on CW (Roger Kennedy)
2. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (lennart.michaelsson@telia.com)
3. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (Peter Sundberg)
4. Re: Lack of NA Activity on CW (uy0zg)
5. Re: Fresnel Zone (Emir Memic)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 09:16:30 +0100
From: "Roger Kennedy" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
To: <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <BF4E50FA22DA4134B83EBE8FC8BC8A57@Packard>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
achievement).
I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also
don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
they're on anyway)
It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to
come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
Roger G3YRO
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:25:24 +0200
From: <lennart.michaelsson@telia.com>
To: "'Roger Kennedy'" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>,
<topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <002501d4f9ae$1a2783d0$4e768b70$@telia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Roger et al,
I was on early this morning and even checked in on ON4KST.
Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see
quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out?
73 all
Len SM7BIC
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Fr?n: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy
Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17
Till: topband@contesting.com
?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
achievement).
I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also
don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
they're on anyway)
It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to
come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
Roger G3YRO
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:17:20 +0000
From: Peter Sundberg <sm2cew@telia.com>
To: <lennart.michaelsson@telia.com>, "'Roger Kennedy'"
<roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <mailman.14.1556035203.29506.topband@contesting.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Let's ponder:
FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency
(passband) and their computer is transmitting
every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if
they are in contact with another computer or not
FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other
computers are making use of the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8
FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the
screeen
FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied
are still presented as "heard" by use of the "a priori" functionality
FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity
CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long
interrupts
CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig
in the noise in 50 Hz bandwidth
CW - without knowledge of who is where we need
good signals to attract our attention and so we can start focusing
CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for
sure, the noise is certainly higher and many have
taken their microscopes (receiving antennas) down for the season
CW - many of us also have to live with a less
effective TX antenna during the summer as we have
to roll in our extensive radial field
CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and
capable stations but most of them don't transmit every 15 seconds
CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST
Bottom line:
CW - it sure would be easier for us to only
monitor a specific world wide calling frequency, but this is not realistic
CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult
to do manual CW than single channel FT8 for reasons described above
CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-)
CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW
and continue to make noise whenever we can, despite the problems listed
above
CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up
CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a
realistic way and realize what they are doing,
duly noting that our table has better food
CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the
southern hemisphere for being there all the time
during our prime season up north!
CW is King!
73
Peter SM2CEW
At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaelsson@telia.com wrote:
>Roger et al,
>I was on early this morning and even checked in on ON4KST.
>Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see
>quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out?
>
>73 all
>Len SM7BIC
>
>-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
>Fr?n: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy
>Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17
>Till: topband@contesting.com
>?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
>
>
>I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
>
>But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
>FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
>
>It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
>the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
>ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
>
>Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
>couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
>achievement).
>
>I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I
>also
>don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
>station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
>they're on anyway)
>
>It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort
>to
>come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
>
>Roger G3YRO
>
>
>_________________
>Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>_________________
>Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 14:29:44 +0300
From: uy0zg <uy0zg@mksat.net>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <63c84756a384fdf4a29c0ed9846c7100@mksat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Hi All
Victor
you need to stop listening to dx via the internet!
When will you make an RX antenna?
The availability and use of RX antennas is a great pleasure.
Here is an example of the antenna Anatoly UT2XQ
http://www.topband.in.ua/2019/04/22/ut2xq-antennas/
---
Nick, UY0ZG
http://www.topband.in.ua
Victor Goncharsky via Topband ????? 2019-04-23 10:23:
> This is not always the case. I have noticed long openings to Caribbean
> during last year 6m season with signal levels good enough for reliable
> CW QSOs but only FT8 portion of the band was alive.
> Will see what will happen this year. Top band game is almost over with
> the last 3 new ones worked in April (but missed XR0) so 6m antenna is
> on its way to the tower this week.
>
>
> 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E.
> UARL Technical and VHF Committies
> DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS
> DXCC card checker (160 meters).
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:56:41 +0000
From: Emir Memic <emir.memic@emssolutions.at>
To: Ray Higgins <ray.w2re@gmail.com>, "topband@contesting.com"
<topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Fresnel Zone
Message-ID:
<DBBPR08MB487006D532CE43D192F8EECB82230@DBBPR08MB4870.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Ray,
If we are talking about horizontal polarized antennas
You cant be high enough on 80m/160m
And there is no needs to think a lot about effects of fresnel zone on 160/80
Not even with 300m high tower
Of course if there are no uphills around you .....but so far understand you
That location is free with slight slope around
In my mind its important to have flat or homogeny slope in desired
direction
Effect of excellent soil is not so critical for ground reflection if you are
using horizontal polarized antennas!
On other side for vertical antennas soil is more important but directly
under the antennas and in closed flied!
In simple words if you can have antenna in saltwater or very close to it put
it in
If you are far away from good soil with vertical (even 1 wavelength) you
will need standard numbers of radials under the antenna!
Iif you are on flat terrain with excellent soil you will need very large
antenna on high tower to outperform 4SQ on 80m !
On 160m is non sense to even try something else than vertical or vertical
arrays
73s
Braco
E77DX
--
Emir Memic
EMS SOLUTIONS
K?hlergasse 12/3
1180 Wien
+4369919227041
emir.memic@emssolutions.at
-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> Im Auftrag von Ray Higgins
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. April 2019 16:49
An: topband@contesting.com
Betreff: Topband: Fresnel Zone
I have two questions about fresnel zone.
I just purchased 22.5/ac near the ocean near Machiasport, ME. This is in the
Northeast corner of Maine about 30 miles south of Eastport and a Lubec. This
is going to be my personal Remote Contest station! I plan to be contesting
from this new qth starting in 2020 but will be QRV by mid 2019 for testing.
This qth is anywhere between 1-3 miles from the ocean or the bay, it sits on
a high plateau 150? asl thats slopes in all directions to saltwater
(peninsula) except N/NW. The property has a saltwater river and marsh that
runs the perimeter from south to north favoring the NE direction, the marsh
is only 50-100' wide and 1500-2000? away from the property. The land has a
gradual slope to the marsh.
My questions:
1.) Is the saltwater river bed/marsh wide enough to be an effective field in
the Fresnal Zone?
2.) What is the wavelengths needed to be within the Fresnal zone of a
river/marsh compared to an ocean?
In this photo album (last pic) I have outlined the river saltwater marsh and
property boundry from a google earth shot.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/ui79t2jFo95b29et6
I?m only concerned about 80 and 160m in the Fresnal Zone.
Any input would be welcomed.
Thanks,
Ray W2RE
Sent from my iPhone
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
------------------------------
End of Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 22
****************************************
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 20:32:01 +0300
From: Victor Goncharsky <us5we@bk.ru>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <1556040721.984334208@f545.i.mail.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I wonder if there's a moderator in this forum who can deal with this UY0ZG
idiot, who was expelled from Ukrainian Contest Club,Black Sea Contest club,
caused problems to the Ukrainian Amateur Radio League that resulted in creation
of an alternative amateur radio orgainzation NGO VRL,
This guy is permanently blaming different amateurs including myself of all
kinds of "sins".
I hope the administration of this forum can get rid of flame from this kind of
people.
Thanks in advance,
73
>???????, 23 ?????? 2019, 11:30 UTC ?? uy0zg <uy0zg@mksat.net>:
>
>Hi All
>
>
>Victor
>you need to stop listening to dx via the internet!
>
>When will you make an RX antenna?
>
>
--
73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E.
UARL Technical and VHF Committies
DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 10BDXCC, 8BWAS
DXCC card checker (160 meters).
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 20:57:43 +0300
From: uy0zg <uy0zg@mksat.net>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <4863590a912bce60a4cc96d18464a0ce@mksat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Thank you all!
Many site views. Especially from the USA.
======
As for Goncharsky, we feel sorry for him.
---
Nick, UY0ZG
http://www.topband.in.ua
uy0zg ????? 2019-04-23 14:29:
> Hi All
>
>
> Victor
> you need to stop listening to dx via the internet!
>
> When will you make an RX antenna?
>
>
> The availability and use of RX antennas is a great pleasure.
>
> Here is an example of the antenna Anatoly UT2XQ
>
> http://www.topband.in.ua/2019/04/22/ut2xq-antennas/
>
> ---
> Nick, UY0ZG
> http://www.topband.in.ua
>
> Victor Goncharsky via Topband ????? 2019-04-23 10:23:
>> This is not always the case. I have noticed long openings to Caribbean
>> during last year 6m season with signal levels good enough for reliable
>> CW QSOs but only FT8 portion of the band was alive.
>> Will see what will happen this year. Top band game is almost over with
>> the last 3 new ones worked in April (but missed XR0) so 6m antenna is
>> on its way to the tower this week.
>>
>>
>> 73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE),
>> P.E.
>> UARL Technical and VHF Committies
>> DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS
>> DXCC card checker (160 meters).
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:52:22 -0600
From: VE6WZ_Steve <ve6wz@shaw.ca>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Cc: lennart.michaelsson@telia.com, Roger Kennedy
<roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>, sm2cew@telia.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <37827E25-DA05-4F04-AE34-1ACFEC564ECF@shaw.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Here are my thoughts on FACT vs FICTION regarding FT-8 and CW on 160m.
(These thoughts relate to working DX?not ?local? NA stations)
FICTION:
"All the DX has moved to FT8 on 160m like it did on 6m".
FACT:
On 160m this winter season from September till now (9 months) at VE6WZ I have
made 926 CW QSOs with Europe, (382 unique callsigns) and 156 CW QSOs with Asia.
These do NOT include any dx contest QSOs. I have worked 109 DXCC in the same 9
month period on 160m CW. The majority of these QSOs are from calling CQ for 2-3
hours at night from 400-700z.
I am sorry friends, but lets set the record straight?.."the only place to get
the DX cheese" as N6NU said is NOT just on FT8! There are still many CW ops
out there. Yes, I have a quiet rural hilltop location that is optimized for TB
DX?BUT?that is not the point. The FACT is there were 382 unique CW operators
from EU that were active and available for a CW QSO this season.
However, as others have said there are less people calling CQ and working
casual DX on 160m than years past. Perhaps some have migrated to FT8. Everyone
has there own interest. We need more ops like F5IN, LA1MFA, HA8RM, G3JMJ,
ON7PQ, RA4LW,SM5EDX?.etc. etc. who call CQ for a few hours at a time.
However, calling CQ takes time, patience and effort. Trying to answer a CW CQ,
waiting for the QSB to peak to complete the QSO takes patience, time and effort.
FACT: FT8 is easier and takes much less effort to work DX than CW
With WSJT-x set to monitor FT8, one just needs to wait until a desired DX call
pops up on the screen and a double click will give him a call. (yes, I know
there is strategy and ?skill? involved in selecting an optimal response
frequency)
Deep QSB is a HUGE factor on 160m unless the band is rocking open and stable
and this may only happen one or two nights a season.
With FT8, the decode passband is constantly being monitored by the computer
waiting for that very brief QSB peak to get the decode.
Often on CW, the only way to complete a QSO is to sit on the CQ frequency and
wait patiently for the signal to peak and come out of the noise and hopefully
complete the QSO before the station disappears again into the noise. Unlike
FT-8, we can only do this on one frequency at a time. This takes considerable
time and effort and can only be done sitting at the radio, scanning the band,
watching the waterfall and looking at the RBN spots.
Most of the time at VE6WZ, the DX signals on 160m will appear as a trace on the
waterfall and be copiable for 30 seconds to a minute or so, and then fade away
into oblivion with no copy for many minutes. Patience is required to work CW dx
on 160m. Some operators might show up on the band for a few minutes, click a
few RBN spots and hear nothing, and conclude the band is ?dead?. But that is
not how 160m works.
Meanwhile, using FT8, the computer is patiently, continuously decoding the band
for hours on end, and occasionally ?copies? a DX qso or CQ. The conclusion is
the FT-8 is ?better? at weak signal DX copy, but I suggest it is mostly because
the computer is more patient, and makes the copy on the QSB peaks. This is
also why its common on 160m FT8 to have difficulty ?completing? the QSO because
the QSB will be too fast.
It ?seems? like FT-8 has a superior ability to copy the weak ones, but this is
mostly because the computer is constantly monitoring the passband.
Calling CQ with FT8 is also much easier. Just let the computer run and keep an
eye on it to watch for a CQ watchdog run-away alert.
It really is much easier to ?operate? FT-8 while doing other things in the
shack. Checking e-mails, chatting in chat rooms, maybe even watching TV. This
is obviously very compelling for many operators. You just cant do that
operating CW.
FACT:
There is more activity on 160m FT8 than CW
I believe this is true, but perhaps many of these FT8 operators were never 160m
DX CW ops anyway. There are likely many FT-8 ops that don't know morse code,
or are not proficient at CW, and this is a great DX substitute for SSB on 160m.
This is a good thing and will encourage more interest and activity to the band.
I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I used to.
Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls in, even I have worked
them numerous times. This winter season I have had 38 QSOs with Wolf DF2PY and
20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m and enjoyed every one. The thrill of digging
the signal out of the noise is the magic of radio for me. I find operating FT8
painfully boring, but I realize for others it proves exciting.
Lets not conclude that the ONLY way to work DX on 160m is with FT8 and that
**everyone** is doing it. If we all start to believe that myth, then
eventually it might come true!
73, de steve ve6wz
> On Apr 23, 2019, at 4:17 AM, Peter Sundberg <sm2cew@telia.com> wrote:
>
> Let's ponder:
>
> FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency (passband) and their computer is
> transmitting every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if they are in
> contact with another computer or not
> FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other computers are making use of
> the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8
> FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the
> screeen
> FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied are still presented as "heard"
> by use of the "a priori" functionality
> FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity
>
> CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long
> interrupts
> CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig in the noise in 50 Hz
> bandwidth
> CW - without knowledge of who is where we need good signals to attract our
> attention and so we can start focusing
> CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for sure, the noise is
> certainly higher and many have taken their microscopes (receiving antennas)
> down for the season
> CW - many of us also have to live with a less effective TX antenna during the
> summer as we have to roll in our extensive radial field
> CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and capable stations but most of
> them don't transmit every 15 seconds
> CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST
>
>
> Bottom line:
>
> CW - it sure would be easier for us to only monitor a specific world wide
> calling frequency, but this is not realistic
> CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult to do manual CW than single
> channel FT8 for reasons described above
> CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-)
> CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW and continue to make noise
> whenever we can, despite the problems listed above
> CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up
> CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a realistic way and realize what
> they are doing, duly noting that our table has better food
> CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the southern hemisphere for being
> there all the time during our prime season up north!
>
> CW is King!
>
> 73
> Peter SM2CEW
>
>
>
>
>
> At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaelsson@telia.com wrote:
>> Roger et al,
>> I was on early this morning and even checked in on ON4KST.
>> Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see
>> quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out?
>>
>> 73 all
>> Len SM7BIC
>>
>> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
>> Fr?n: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy
>> Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17
>> Till: topband@contesting.com
>> ?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
>>
>>
>> I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
>>
>> But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
>> FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
>>
>> It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
>> the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
>> ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
>>
>> Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
>> couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
>> achievement).
>>
>> I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also
>> don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
>> station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
>> they're on anyway)
>>
>> It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to
>> come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
>>
>> Roger G3YRO
>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 16:34:50 -0400
From: GEORGE WALLNER <aa7jv@atlanticbb.net>
To: VE6WZ_Steve <ve6wz@shaw.ca>, Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Cc: <lennart.michaelsson@telia.com>, <sm2cew@telia.com>, Roger Kennedy
<roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <ximss-64143798@be3.cluster1.echolabs.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Steve,
You have summed it up perfectly.
Perhaps it will be FT8 that will keep Amateur Radio alive with the new
"smart-device-bound, multi-tasking, app-addicted" generation. Times change.
TKS and 73,
George,
AA7JV/C6AGU
PS: I just did some checking of the QSO statistics from the KH1 Baker Island
operation:
CW: 128 DXCC entities
SSB: 121
FT8: 107
RTTY: 36
CW is still King! It is RTTY that is getting killed!
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:52:22 -0600
VE6WZ_Steve <ve6wz@shaw.ca> wrote:
> Here are my thoughts on FACT vs FICTION regarding FT-8 and CW on 160m.
> (These thoughts relate to working DX?not ?local? NA stations)
>
>FICTION:
> "All the DX has moved to FT8 on 160m like it did on 6m".
>
>FACT:
> On 160m this winter season from September till now (9 months) at VE6WZ I have
> made 926 CW QSOs with Europe, (382 unique callsigns) and 156 CW QSOs with
> Asia. These do NOT include any dx contest QSOs. I have worked 109 DXCC in
> the same 9 month period on 160m CW. The majority of these QSOs are from
> calling CQ for 2-3 hours at night from 400-700z.
>
> I am sorry friends, but lets set the record straight?.."the only place to get
> the DX cheese" as N6NU said is NOT just on FT8! There are still many CW ops
> out there. Yes, I have a quiet rural hilltop location that is optimized for
> TB DX?BUT?that is not the point. The FACT is there were 382 unique CW
> operators from EU that were active and available for a CW QSO this season.
> However, as others have said there are less people calling CQ and working
> casual DX on 160m than years past.
> Perhaps some have migrated to FT8. Everyone has there own interest. We need
> more ops like F5IN, LA1MFA, HA8RM, G3JMJ, ON7PQ, RA4LW,SM5EDX?.etc. etc. who
> call CQ for a few hours at a time.
> However, calling CQ takes time, patience and effort. Trying to answer a CW
> CQ, waiting for the QSB to peak to complete the QSO takes patience, time and
> effort.
>
>FACT: FT8 is easier and takes much less effort to work DX than CW
>
> With WSJT-x set to monitor FT8, one just needs to wait until a desired DX
> call pops up on the screen and a double click will give him a call. (yes, I
> know there is strategy and ?skill? involved in selecting an optimal response
> frequency)
> Deep QSB is a HUGE factor on 160m unless the band is rocking open and stable
> and this may only happen one or two nights a season.
> With FT8, the decode passband is constantly being monitored by the computer
> waiting for that very brief QSB peak to get the decode.
>
> Often on CW, the only way to complete a QSO is to sit on the CQ frequency
> and wait patiently for the signal to peak and come out of the noise and
> hopefully complete the QSO before the station disappears again into the
> noise.
> Unlike FT-8, we can only do this on one frequency at a time. This takes
> considerable time and effort and can only be done sitting at the radio,
> scanning the band, watching the waterfall and looking at the RBN spots.
> Most of the time at VE6WZ, the DX signals on 160m will appear as a trace on
> the waterfall and be copiable for 30 seconds to a minute or so, and then fade
> away into oblivion with no copy for many minutes. Patience is required to
> work CW dx on 160m. Some operators might show up on the band for a few
> minutes, click a few RBN spots and hear nothing, and conclude the band is
> ?dead?. But that is not how 160m works.
>
> Meanwhile, using FT8, the computer is patiently, continuously decoding the
> band for hours on end, and occasionally ?copies? a DX qso or CQ. The
> conclusion is the FT-8 is ?better? at weak signal DX copy, but I suggest it
> is mostly because the computer is more patient, and makes the copy on the QSB
> peaks. This is also why its common on 160m FT8 to have difficulty
> ?completing? the QSO because the QSB will be too fast.
>
> It ?seems? like FT-8 has a superior ability to copy the weak ones, but this
> is mostly because the computer is constantly monitoring the passband.
> Calling CQ with FT8 is also much easier. Just let the computer run and keep
> an eye on it to watch for a CQ watchdog run-away alert.
>
> It really is much easier to ?operate? FT-8 while doing other things in the
> shack. Checking e-mails, chatting in chat rooms, maybe even watching TV. This
> is obviously very compelling for many operators. You just cant do that
> operating CW.
>
>
>FACT:
> There is more activity on 160m FT8 than CW
>
> I believe this is true, but perhaps many of these FT8 operators were never
> 160m DX CW ops anyway. There are likely many FT-8 ops that don't know morse
> code, or are not proficient at CW, and this is a great DX substitute for SSB
> on 160m.
> This is a good thing and will encourage more interest and activity to the
> band.
>
>
> I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I used to.
> Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls in, even I have
> worked them numerous times. This winter season I have had 38 QSOs with Wolf
> DF2PY and 20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m and enjoyed every one. The thrill
> of digging the signal out of the noise is the magic of radio for me. I find
> operating FT8 painfully boring, but I realize for others it proves exciting.
>
> Lets not conclude that the ONLY way to work DX on 160m is with FT8 and that
> **everyone** is doing it. If we all start to believe that myth, then
> eventually it might come true!
>
> 73, de steve ve6wz
>> On Apr 23, 2019, at 4:17 AM, Peter Sundberg <sm2cew@telia.com> wrote:
>>
>> Let's ponder:
>>
>> FT8 - everyone is on ONE center frequency (passband) and their computer is
>> transmitting every 15 seconds for hours on end, regardless if they are in
>> contact with another computer or not
>> FT8 - all the computers that are "hearing" other computers are making use of
>> the built in 50 Hz filter in FT8
>> FT8 - computers "heard" are lined up and presented nicely sorted on the
>> screeen
>> FT8 - some computers that are not fully copied are still presented as
>> "heard" by use of the "a priori" functionality
>> FT8 - listening in by ear on 1840 it sure sounds like high activity
>>
>> CW - people call CQ on an unspecified frequency, sometimes with long
>> interrupts
>> CW - listeners can't easily surf the band and dig in the noise in 50 Hz
>> bandwidth
>> CW - without knowledge of who is where we need good signals to attract our
>> attention and so we can start focusing
>> CW - summer conditions vary, but one thing is for sure, the noise is
>> certainly higher and many have taken their microscopes (receiving antennas)
>> down for the season
>> CW - many of us also have to live with a less effective TX antenna during
>> the summer as we have to roll in our extensive radial field
>> CW - the KST chat list a lot of interesting and capable stations but most of
>> them don't transmit every 15 seconds
>> CW - not all who are active announce themselves on KST
>>
>>
>> Bottom line:
>>
>> CW - it sure would be easier for us to only monitor a specific world wide
>> calling frequency, but this is not realistic
>> CW - we have to accept that it is more difficult to do manual CW than single
>> channel FT8 for reasons described above
>> CW - if we transmit more we will be heard :-)
>> CW - we are not lazy operators, we still love CW and continue to make noise
>> whenever we can, despite the problems listed above
>> CW - we take on a challenge, we don't give up
>> CW- we look at the surrounding actors in a realistic way and realize what
>> they are doing, duly noting that our table has better food
>> CW - we fully admire our colleagues in the southern hemisphere for being
>> there all the time during our prime season up north!
>>
>> CW is King!
>>
>> 73
>> Peter SM2CEW
>>
>>
>> At 08:25 2019-04-23, lennart.michaelsson@telia.com wrote:
>>> Roger et al,
>>> I was on early this morning and even checked in on
>>> ON4KST.
>>> Called a few CQ DX on 1826.5 without response so back to bed. Yet I did see
>>> quite a few US callsigns on the chat. Perhaps they never check out?
>>>
>>> 73 all
>>> Len SM7BIC
>>>
>>> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
>>> Fr?n: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> F?r Roger Kennedy
>>> Skickat: den 23 april 2019 10:17
>>> Till: topband@contesting.com
>>> ?mne: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
>>>
>>>
>>> I get that many stations only use FT8 these days (out of laziness?) . . .
>>>
>>> But there are plenty of Top Band DXers (like me) who would never ever use
>>> FT8 . . . but many of these people hardly ever come on the band !
>>>
>>> It takes a pretty big setup to have a decent 160m DX station . . . what's
>>> the point in having invested all that time and money if the only time you
>>> ever come on the band is to work some DX-pedition?!
>>>
>>> Personally, what gives me a buzz is working ANY station on 160m more than a
>>> couple of thousand miles away. (it's the only band where that's actually an
>>> achievement).
>>>
>>> I don't care how many times I've worked that station before . . . and I also
>>> don't waste hours trying to get through a pile-up to work a DX-pedition
>>> station, as I'm really not bothered (I've usually already worked the island
>>> they're on anyway)
>>>
>>> It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy . . . If nobody makes the effort to
>>> come on the band on CW, there will be nobody on the band !!
>>>
>>> Roger G3YRO
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________
>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>>
>>> _________________
>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:56:27 -0500
From: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
To: VE6WZ_Steve <ve6wz@shaw.ca>
Cc: Topband <topband@contesting.com>, Lennart m
<lennart.michaelsson@telia.com>, sm2cew@telia.com, Roger Kennedy
<roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID:
<CA+FxYXiYJUjjQJq1KSiR01R+Za4AkF3A8b5XiUZpFifjEof2eA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 1:52 PM VE6WZ_Steve <ve6wz@shaw.ca> wrote:
> ... perhaps many of these FT8 operators were never 160m DX CW ops anyway.
> There are likely many FT-8 ops that don't know morse code, or are not
> proficient at CW ...
>
Wow, that's a profound thought, Steve! I never thought of that, but it
makes sense. Thank you for that.
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 22:32:13 +0000
From: W7RH <midnight18@cox.net>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <7b123975-935d-2f7c-7a4a-1f7b9df6953d@cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Greetings Top Band,
I guess I?m truly an old fart, now in my 54^th year as a ham. I?ve done
contests, EME, Dxing, RTTY, Fast Scan and slow scan TV and still build a
lot of my equipment.
I do find the lack of CW activity frustrating. It?s not just 160m it?s
all bands. I operate primarily 160 and dabble in 80 and 40m operation.
Seldom do I venture higher, as my operations stem from the times I have
had available to play most of my working years. Fortunately, I find many
of the top band guys on 80 and 40m as well.
With about 46 years of operation on the 160m band there have obviously
been some changes in operating styles. In old days we would ragchew on
SSB about 1840 or so all the while listening or keeping the 2^nd VFO or
receiver for listening down band. Geeze, been over 30 years since that.
Today we have panoramic receive adapters, skimmers, reflectors, chat
rooms, Skype and RBNs. We also have numerous tools available in the form
of ionospheric predictions and tons of NASA generated solar numbers,
geomagnetic field sensors et all. In the case of RBNs which many seem to
rely upon most are dreadful in RX performance. Very seldom do I get
spotted in EU, JA, VK or ZL but work them all the time. Even with FT8
I?ve called numerous South Pacific stations for a half hour only to get
no response due to their high ambient noise levels.
On the Dark Side we have moved into the the digital world with computer
operated TVs, wall warts, direct drive washers, variable speed AC units,
clocks, WIFI, digital cable, leaky power lines, PC cabinets with glowing
lights, no shielding and bad neutral connections just to name a few. I
can honestly tell you that locally you have to go to 1296 mHz in order
to have acceptable noise levels. Hence I built a remote.
In the 33 years I?ve lived in Las Vegas I?ve seen the city increase in
population form 300K to 3 Million. The average lot size dipped from
horse properties of 5 acres or more with modest sub division plots of
12,000 sqft to Gated communities with CC&R and HOA antenna restrictions
to a minuscule 4000sqft lot. Currently the objective is high density
urban living. The resultant cramped space combined with noise sources
has forced Amateurs worldwide to go to FT8 or not operate at all. I?m
sorry but it?s true.
In the US the FCC has long since let electronic manufacturers submit
self tests for part 15 interference compliance. I?m sure the rest of the
world is even more relaxed. The amount of these devices their noise is
out of control. Add to the problem most consumer devices here are two
wire power AC power including most TVs. The only survivor of three wire
power cord in NEMA equipped desktop PCs.
I grew up in the 60?s and TV antennas and ham radio antennas were
everywhere. At that time even mid sized cities still had 2-3 radio
stores. You didn?t have to get permission or permits to stick antennas
up on the roof, or erect a tower. Most neighbors then didn?t give a crap
or least kept their mouths shut. Now the consensus is antennas damage
property values and view of the smog filled skies or are a source of
community revenue to perpetuate lazy ass building inspectors in the name
of safety.
To my top band friends, thanks to the many that have made the effort to
be heard and hear! I?m QRV most nights after 0300 pending conditions and
again in the morning 1130 UTC until sunrise. I hope I?ve put a few
things into perspective.
I am now and forever a Analog guy.
Bob, W7RH
--
W7RH DM35os
"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our
humanity." - Albert Einstein
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 17:40:05 -0500
From: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
To: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID:
<CA+FxYXhySg0Vy8+9jO5=ZrN4kpPgUrN_UfLz9Zbc2e4=ONc7jQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi Jim,
This was very nicely illustrated earlier today by Phil Frost, W8II at
https://ham.stackexchange.com/questions/13379/are-qrp-transceivers-only-meant-for-cw-communication
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
On Tue, Apr 23, 2019, 5:00 PM Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com> wrote:
> ... The bottom line is that FT8 (and other WSJT-X modes) can work deeper
> into the noise than CW with very good ops on both ends.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 08:58:29 +0300
From: uy0zg <uy0zg@mksat.net>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <ac50bf3d6d0118066fdd2bf79a17051d@mksat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Hi All
That's right, the main thing is to enjoy the process.
The popularity of FT8 (and other versions of FT .. that are possible in
the future) lies in the fact that it provides an easier way to DXCC.
It's simple - remove the FT from DXCC, and there will be no activity ...
>> I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I
>> used to. Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls in,
>> even I have worked them numerous times. This winter season I have had
>> 38 QSOs with Wolf DF2PY and 20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m and
>> enjoyed every one. The thrill of digging the signal out of the noise
>> is the magic of radio for me. I find operating FT8 painfully boring,
>> but I realize for others it proves exciting.
>> 73, de steve ve6wz
---
Nick, UY0ZG
http://www.topband.in.ua
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:20:46 +0300
From: uy0zg <uy0zg@mksat.net>
To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of NA Activity on CW
Message-ID: <a88724a79f574587ee6841711b67c265@mksat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Besides :
There are many weak people in the world. They are looking for easy ways.
It always has been.
That's the whole philosophy .....
---
Nick, UY0ZG
http://www.topband.in.ua
uy0zg ????? 2019-04-24 08:58:
> Hi All
>
> That's right, the main thing is to enjoy the process.
>
>
> The popularity of FT8 (and other versions of FT .. that are possible
> in the future) lies in the fact that it provides an easier way to
> DXCC.
>
> It's simple - remove the FT from DXCC, and there will be no activity
> ...
>
>
>
>>> I personally have less interested in collecting DXCC counters than I
>>> used to. Now I just like calling CQ and working ANY dx that calls
>>> in, even I have worked them numerous times. This winter season I
>>> have had 38 QSOs with Wolf DF2PY and 20 QSOs with Vlad RA4LW on 160m
>>> and enjoyed every one. The thrill of digging the signal out of the
>>> noise is the magic of radio for me. I find operating FT8 painfully
>>> boring, but I realize for others it proves exciting.
>>> 73, de steve ve6wz
>
> ---
> Nick, UY0ZG
> http://www.topband.in.ua
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
------------------------------
End of Topband Digest, Vol 196, Issue 23
****************************************
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|