Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Strange propagation

To: cx6vm.jorge@gmail.com, mikewate@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Strange propagation
From: Louis Parascondola via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Reply-to: Louis Parascondola <gudguyham@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:50:58 -0500
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Jorge, Many years ago the rules for these awards required that one had to stay 
within a radius of 250 miles from any of the various locations they operated 
and accumulated contacts for awards.  At some point in time that rule was 
changed.  Now the rule is (regarding US hams) that they can be anywhere in the 
continental 48 states and the accumulation of contacts for awards are all 
valid.  But at one time you would be correct in assuming that this was not the 
case.

HelloI have one doubt about thatCan you confirm me that before RHR nobody 
worked DXCC and WAS from different locations?For example someone that move from 
east coast to Texas and them to west coast and compute all his/her qsos from 
this 3 QTH,




-----Original Message-----
From: Jorge Diez CX6VM <cx6vm.jorge@gmail.com>
To: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
Cc: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>; Herbert Schoenbohm 
<herbs@vitelcom.net>; Dave Blaschke, w5un <w5un@wt.net>
Sent: Thu, Jan 14, 2016 6:39 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: Strange propagation

HelloI have one doubt about thatCan you confirm me that before RHR nobody 
worked DXCC and WAS from different locations?For example someone that move from 
east coast to Texas and them to west coast and compute all his/her qsos from 
this 3 QTH,s? 73,JorgeCX6VM/CW5WEnviado desde mi iPhone> El 14 ene. 2016, a las 
19:42, Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com> escribió:> > Dave, Herb, et al:> > 
Respectfully, RHR is likely here to stay, like it or not. If you want to> try 
and change that, fine. But I am not going to let that --or how others> use RHR 
to their advantage-- bother me. :-)> > I get a warm fuzzy feeling of deep 
contentment operating the 160 meter> station that I built --and largely 
designed-- at minimal cost with my own> two hands and with what's left of my 
brain. (Well, my XYL, KD0LAJ helped> with those antennas. ;-) The inverted-L 
and the tuner. Both 2-wire Beverage> antennas and the control systems for them. 
The preamps.> The only things I paid money for were parts, such as ferrite 
cores,> connectors, wire/coax, and other components. I also built a unique> 
legal-limit amplifier for 160 from junk and hamfest parts.> > Others might 
disagree (and I have no problem whatsoever with that), but> that's why I enjoy 
amateur radio: build something, and then get on the> radio and see how well it 
works. And when it does (like breaking a DX> pileup with only 100 watts), I run 
upstairs all exited so that I can share> my excitement with my wife.> > And I'm 
not alone.* So, why should we let what others do upset us?> Gentlemen, let's 
just have fun doing our own thing on 160 (at least most of> the time. :-)*> > 
Having said that, I can appreciate that you might want to win a contest,> and 
feel that RHR is unfair. I don't disagree with that. But is it> realistic to 
think that anyone can change that? From what I've read, that's> not likely. 
(End of psychology dissertation. ;-)> > > On another note ...> > I'm now at the 
point where I'm actually getting somewhat bored with 160m.> It has nothing to 
do with what anyone else is doing.> The "new" has worn off; after operating for 
over 5 years with the same> setup, I now pretty much know what to expect from 
my existing antennas now.> (Spectacular band openings are nice; however, they 
just don't 'pop my> clutch'. It's what we can accomplish during "normal" band 
conditions that> excites me.)> > The only thing that will change that and 
restore my enthusiasm is modifying> what I have here. And I have several things 
on the list:> > - Modifying our Beverage antennas so that I can remotely switch 
the> lengths from 580' to over 800', and perhaps adding a third E-W Beverage.> 
> - Adding the ability to phase them against the inverted-L during receive> to 
null out unwanted signals and noise, using the MFJ-1025 that I've hardly> ever 
used> > - And adding a few more elevated radials to the inverted-L> > > When 
some of that is done, it'll be SO EXCITING again! I won't even care> about 
getting involved in discussions like this! ;-)> > > I'm not at all against 
anyone trying to change the RHR (or any other)> rules. *But let's keep in mind 
that at least part of the time, we can shut> that out of our minds and enjoy 
160 meters like we used to.*> > 73, Mike> www.w0btu.com> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 
at 12:33 PM, Herbert Schoenbohm <herbs@vitelcom.net>> wrote:> >> ... a former 
160 meter DX pioneer ... used a 1/4 wave bent Marconi and 25>> watts to work a 
G station.  This is what we are or what we used to be. RHR>> I am afraid is the 
end of an era were perseverance and not vast amounts of>> QRO muscle and money 
decided who was on top. ...>> >>> On 1/14/2016 12:43 AM, Dave Blaschke, w5un 
wrote:>>> >>>  ... operating a remote station (for money) owned and managed by 
someone>>> else will never be as satisfying as operating your own station, 
built by>>> your hands. But than again, if you have no station, and are unable 
to build>>> one up, what's your choice? [snip]> _________________> Topband 
Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband_________________Topband 
Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>