Captive Rovers

N0bsh at N0bsh at
Thu Oct 6 17:33:53 EDT 1994

I don't have a big problem with "captive" or "affiliated" rovers
per se.  If I happen to be operating near a 4 grid intersection and
my friend Joe Tech decides to throw his 144, 220, and 440 
handhelds in the car and throw on three 1/4 wave magmounts and
drive out to the intesection I can work him 12 times!  But it is 
unlikely that he will be able to work anyone else so he could be
considered "captive" (though I would encourage him to work others
if he could.)  And I would encourage him to send in his log of these
Qs or at least give me a copy to submit with my log.

What puzzles me is why, so often, you never see a log or checklog
submitted for/by the "captive" rovers.  So what if your line score
reads something like 42 Qs x 42 Gs (that's 7 bands, one Q on each,
from 6 grids.)  Why the reluctance to send in the logs??

BTW, CT v8.52 (and up I believe) allows you to flag the mode in 
VHF 'tests (C, S, or F.)  I think someone inquired about that.

Mike  N0BSH
n0bsh at

>From k2mm at MasPar.COM (John Zapisek)  Fri Oct  7 01:12:01 1994
From: k2mm at MasPar.COM (John Zapisek) (John Zapisek)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 94 17:12:01 PDT
Subject: (fwd) VHF QSO Mfg
Message-ID: <9410070012.AA15334 at greylock.local>

MGEF'er Don/KE2TP tried to post this reply to CQ-CONTEST, but it bounced.
I volunteered to QSP for him.  73.  --John/K2MM

> From: perley at (Don Perley)
> Subject: Re: VHF Manufactured Contacts
> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 94 5:05:57 PDT
> > [Gary/K9GS/garyk9gs at]  Would it also be OK to tune the
> > WARC bands during CQWW looking for multipliers that could be moved to
> > the contest bands??
> > 
> > I think not..........just my thoughts.  It seems that VHF contest
> > operators have a very different set of radio ethics that govern them.
> > It seems that this would violate the "spirit" of the competition and
> > possibly encourage the writing of new rules every time a new "loophole"
> > is discovered.
> The ethics wrt skeds and contacts have a different thrust in vhf contests,
> at least as coded in the rules.  Its mostly geared towards not pissing off
> users of the band who are not participating in the contest.  So, generally
> no liason or contacts on 2 meter repeaters, standard simplex (FM) calling
> channels, 6 meter DX area is left clear, etc.
> As someone who doesn't do HF contests, I can say that it is very difficult
> to do "normal" hamming while one is going on.
> -don perley - ke2tp
> By the way, I am not on the CQ-contest list;  if you reply, make sure my 
> address is in the copy list.

>From Randy A Thompson <K5ZD at>  Thu Oct  6 21:19:04 1994
From: Randy A Thompson <K5ZD at> (Randy A Thompson)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 21:18:04 +0059 (EDT)
Subject: FYI
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9410062109.C24838-0100000 at>

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Hodge Thorgerson David Cameron-INBA wrote:

> Concerning the rules, I always thought the full rules were in CQ magazine.
> I'm sorry to say that this one sublety has escaped me these past 25 years.
> Thanks for the info about the Handbook.   73,  David   XE1/AA6RX
If there are "supplemental" rules...there should be some reference in the 
official rules telling us where to find them.

Dear K3EST, think of it as a source of free advertising.  You can suggest 
that everyone purchase the supplemental rules...

k5zd at

>From Fred Hopengarten" <k1vr at  Thu Oct  6 07:13:14 1994
From: Fred Hopengarten" <k1vr at (Fred Hopengarten)
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 1994 02:13:14 EDT
Subject: Baluns/Weatherproofing/Short Towers
Message-ID: <2e939583.k1vr at>

On Tue, 4 Oct 94 14:15 EST, "Lee Hiers" <0006701840 at> wrote:
> My question is: is there any advantage
> in placing the balun in a piece of PVC (like many of the commercial ones), or
> is it OK to just put a PL-259 on the coax and seal it up well?  The only
> advantages I see to using the PVC are 1) aesthetics and 2) maybe easier to
> weatherproof; or, am I missing something?  Any comments would be appreciated.
The problem is that beads are brittle - especially when cold.
One way or another, you must protect them from bouncing in the wind aga
against the boom and chipping.
                      Fred Hopengarten K1VR
           Six Willarch Road * Lincoln, MA 01773-5105
     home + office telephone:  617/259-0088 (FAX on demand)
                   internet:  k1vr at
"Big antennas, high in the sky, are better than small ones, low."

>From pub703 at (Rod Greene)  Fri Oct  7 03:20:57 1994
From: pub703 at (Rod Greene) (Rod Greene)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 20:20:57 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Phased Verticals
Message-ID: <m0qt4vZ-00010nC at>

I've had so many requests for the phased vertical detail responses that I
decided to take the easy way out and post it here. From: W7ZRC
Re: Vertical Antenna Phasing
Here are the responses:
Message 35/44  From Andy Burns                      Sep 27, 94
01:29:40 pm -0400  
 Rod, couldnt resist replying to your note on phasing arrays.  
 I now have two 4 square phased arrays, one for 40m and one for 80m and   
 have a few years experience of them.  
 All mine use the Collins hybrid coupler technique to phase the power   
 properly (as per ON4UN's book-an absolute must if you are doing this).  
 On 80m I started last year with a 2 el array, each vertical being only   
 38' high (linear loaded to resonate on 3.750). The phase box was a copy   
 of the circuit in ON4UN's book using 50 ohm cables. Providing you can   
 measure capacitance and inductance it is very easy to build it all   
 yourself. I used the amidon cores suggested in the book.   
 With this system and only 10 radials I had about 2 s units f/b or abt   
 10db. It was orientated e/w so I could work the US without all the 'crap'   
 from Europe of the back. The 2 sunits reduction in Eu noise helped   
 dramatically in picking up lots more US signals - but I could still   
 receive more on the beverage.  
 With this, I came #3 world in CQWW SSB last year which I was pleased   
 with. So this summer I converted it to a 4 square. Again all elements are   
 38' high with 10 radials each. Used the same phase box but a few more   
 relays as per ON4UN's book. ...... I then saw the new ON4UN's book which   
 has a few more hints and hence I have just added the circuit to measure   
 power reflected to the dummy load and am adding relays to the bottom of   
 each element to enable them to resonate on 3.5 or 3.65 meq.  
 Some observations. Now get between 2 to 4 s units abt 10 -20 db front to   
 back. I doubt if I will need the beverage now to the US. I will let you   
 know in November! Super directivity to 4 points with good rejection off   
 the sides. Actually one of the 4 elements is 50' which I think is causing   
 some degredation of the f/b. Elnec shows this up quite well. All my   
 elements are wires hung from overhead ropes between trees. SWR bandwidth   
 is very wide. 3.5 to 3.8 no problem! (as described in the book) ..but   
 more than 100 Kcs away from design freq, you loose power to the dummy   
 load. At 3.5 meg I loose 75% of the power hence the need to switch each   
 antenna. Well worth building the power meter mod in the book.  
 I used 50 ohm cable in the system despite ON4UN's view that 75 is best   
 (to match better) because I couldnt afford more 75 ohm cable but find it   
 doesnt seem to matter. If you have lots of money then buy the commercial   
 unit, but it will only take you 10 hours to build it. (and about 3,789   
 hours to put the 4 verticals up, trim the phasing lines, put down the   
 On 40m I started 4 years ago with a 2 el quad spaced 1/4 wave using this   
 type of phasing design -wires again almost on the ground. Super signal   
 but only good for 2 directions (not a good idea from hear). I managed #8   
 in ARRLDX SSB a few years back with this antenna against CT1BOP ON4UN and   
 G3FXB all with big beams. This summer again I have converted it into a 4   
 square vertical array exactly as for the 80m but this time with fullsize   
 elements. I swear it works as well as a 3 ele yagi at 80' except I can   
 switch it in seconds to beam other ways. F/B is often 5 sunits on the   
 strong Eu signals or 25 db and sometimes more. I put the improvement in   
 F/B down to the symmetry of the antenna (compared to the 80m) again   
 believing the Elnec programme. If you can get a full size 4 square for   
 80m then you should get the same.  
 As for transmitting power on both arrays, I will have to wait and see   
 what reports I get in CQWW SSB. I know I am usually loud but will I still   
 be? I hope so. My problem is usually hearing stations through the noise   
 so this should help me.   
 I'll be on single band 80 or 40 in CQWW so see you then.  
 Let me know if you want clarification on anything  
 burns_al at  
 Message 2/26  From Jim Koehler                      Sep 24, 94 06:42:06 am
 Return-Path: <aj956 at>  
 I have been using the Comtek box for two years now. I have a 40 meter  
 4 square array and it seems to work well. I did experience a situation  
 last year where the box at the antennas burned up. I was able to repair  
 it and everything appears OK now. I am not totally sure why it burned  
 up but I did notice one of the direction indicating LED's was not  
 working on the control box about the same time. The LED's on the control  
 box must be operating for the switching box at the antennas to work  
 properly. They are more than just an 'indicator'! Overall the system  
 works well and it does work with 2 antennas per the instructions (I have  
 never tried it with 2 antennas).  
 Good luck with the project. I would be interested in seeing a summary of   
 the comments you receive if you publish it.  
 73   Jim WG8M   aj956 at  
 Message 8/26  From C. Frank Gilmore                 Sep 23, 94 08:50:18 pm
 Return-Path: <fgilmore at>  
 Rod my earliest experience was with three ten meter verticals and a crude   
 but effect switching system...this was in 1958.  Very effective for DXing.  
 Later in the mid sixties I was a Hy-Gain dealer (owned a ham store) and   
 sold a lot of their verticals...I have had three 18HT Hytowers myself and   
 still have one I use regularly....and quite a few people experimented   
 with phasing three 14AVQ verticals,  later 14AVS models.  They worked   
 pretty well.  Hy-gain had a good pamphlet they provided those who   
 requested it on systems that had been experimented with in their test   
 grounds and ideas submitted by others.  I don't think I still have a copy   
 in my files.  
 If memory serves me Mosely (sold them too) also had a single page info on   
 how to phase theirs.  They vertical was very inferior to the Hy-Gains   
 though.  They built a good beam but never got it together in some other   
 On ten meters I found approx 6 db gain in the favored direction.  The   
 front to back ratio was not that great as compared to a beam.    
 That's about all I can contribute on the subject.  Good luck with your   
 73, de K0JPJ ex-W5PVX  ...-.-  
 Frank Gilmore  
 fgilmore at  
 Message 10/26  From ken silverman                     Sep 23, 94 04:06:15
pm PST  
 Return-Path: <ken.silverman at atlas.ccmail.AirTouch.COM>  
 Only times I've phased verticals, I've gone the simple T-connector
 ON4UN's NEW (as well as old, but the new book is fantastic) book is chock
 of phasing schemes for verticals.  It is a must read for this kind of work.  
 Best of Luck, Ken WM2C  
 Message 12/26  From Marc Willis                       Sep 23, 94 04:54:54
pm PDT  
 Return-Path: <willis at>  
 For W6REC Duane Ausherman has 4 phased 80 meter verticles in Galt, CA.  
 He may be able to help you with this.  
 You will be very pleased with the results of the antennas and the way they
         Duanes phone number is (209)745-3935  
 Good Luck, 73's Marc Willis KN6SO   
 Message 13/26  From Alan Kaul                       Sep 23, 94 04:07:06 pm
 Return-Path: <kaul at>  
 Rod .. suggest you read Devoldere's ''Low Band DX'' for various ways to   
 phase 2 verticals.  2nd edition now available from ARRL -- and various  
 book stores.  Radio Shack doesn't handle them, but I bought a copy this  
 week at Ham Radio Outlet in LA-area.  Several goodie stores will sell  
 via telephone and a few even ship postpaid.    
                      [<Alan Kaul, W6RCL>] kaul at  
 Message 16/26  From Steve Kelly                     Sep 23, 94 02:53:38 pm
 Return-Path: <srkelly at>  
 I have been using one of the Comtek boxes for about 5 years now.  It is  
 installed as part of a 4-square array for 75/80m.  I have never had any  
 trouble with the switchbox.  I beleive the units currently being built by  
 Comtek use much heavier components (torroids etc.) than the ones in mine.   
 I only know of a few of the Dx Engineering boxes in use and believe they  
 are just as rugged if not more so, compared to the Comtek.  I consistently  
 get fb/fs of 20 to 30dB depending on the angle of arrival.  I homebrewed  
 my vertical elements using 40 feet of 4" irrigation tubing and 24 feet of  
 3" tubing (total height 64').  The swr on my system which has 90 1/4 wave  
 radials under each element is less than 1.4:1 across the entire band.   
 More important is the amount of power being dissapated in the 50 ohm dummy  
 load.  In my case its about 8% at 3.500 and less than 1% at 3.800. I   
 recently measured the feedpoint impedance of each of the radiating   
 elements with an Autek RF-1 analyzer and found them to be 38 ohms at the   
 resonant point (3.575).    
 If you want any other info or have other questions let me know.  
 73,   Steve Kelly, KC7EM  
 srkelly at  
 Return-Path: <"AMGATE::ANDRSKAA">  
 From: Anderson, Ken  
 To: .W7ZRC  
 When I was in England as G5CFJ in the early 80's our club station had a 4   
 vertical phased array on 40.  It was built from an article in QST and the
 handbook of the late 70's as I recall.  It used relays and phasing lines. 
 was a tremendous ant!  I ran a number of test with W6 land and it would   
 consistently show 20-30 db front to back and 40-50 front to side.  These
were S   
 meter readings on both ends so not too scientific.  The main thing is the
 really played.  I could hold my own with most of europe in contests (it's
 to compete with some of the Italian boys).  Took first on both modes in 82
 for England using it.  I might add though, the array was in an open field
 no buildings, etc close by.  Also we had 120 buried radials under each
 Ken, K6PU  anderson.ken at  
Regards and Good Luck! Rod, W7ZRC pub703 at
Thanks to all who responded. Good luck on the low bands..... 73, Rod
Rod Greene, W7ZRC
InterNet: pub703 at
CompuServe: 71551,2401

>From John L. Rouse" <jrouse at  Thu Oct  6 19:59:50 1994
From: John L. Rouse" <jrouse at (John L. Rouse)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 14:59:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Another two cents worth
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9410061450.C22238-9100000 at>

I, too, enjoy seeing scores (log envy) and comments post-contest. 
73 de John KA3DBN/VP2EBN

John L. Rouse
Capital-Gazette Communications      FAX: 301-464-7027
jrouse at                  PHONE: 301-262-3700
KA3DBN at                         410-268-5000

>From fish at (Bill Fisher, KM9P  Concentric Systems, Inc.)  Fri Oct  7 14:10:13 1994
From: fish at (Bill Fisher, KM9P  Concentric Systems, Inc.) (Bill Fisher, KM9P  Concentric Systems, Inc.)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 06:10:13 -0700
Subject: Score Postings
Message-ID: <199410071310.AA27999 at>

May I make a suggestion?

If you have nothing of value to add to your line score then simply forward
your score to KA9FOX.

Something of value would be a neat experience, general comments, ect...  

It makes no sense to post your line score ONLY to the entire reflector.
Send those to Scott and we'll all see your score anyway.


Bill Fisher, KM9P
Concentric Systems, Inc.  (CSI)
404-442-5821  Fax 404-667-1975

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list