[Fwd: Re: Skyward Yagis]
Nawvemburr Zeeero Dawg House
n0dh at comtch.iea.com
Fri Nov 1 12:16:36 EST 1996
Message-ID: <327A5A19.6302 at comtch.iea.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 1996 12:14:17 -0800
"Dave Henderson, (Nawvemburr Zeeero Dawg House)" <n0dh at comtch.iea.com>
Reply-To: n0dh at comtch.iea.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
To: Fred Kleber K9VV <k9vv at indy.net>
Subject: Re: Skyward Yagis
References: <32792993.E80 at indy.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Fred Kleber K9VV wrote:
> Antenna modeling guru K6STI had a few lines in QST a while ago regarding
> yagis pointed at the sky. Believe his modelilng in this configuration
> predicted that it should be a fairly good approximation of the real
> Fubar, K9VV
One possible reason for peoples varied experience with using the skyward
pointing approach has to do with the beam design itself. I suspect A
beam with a very good Front to Back would probably react more favorably
when tuned skyward than a beam witha poor front to back. If one buys
this logic then understanding the front to back characteristics of the
beam in question would be valuable. It would also follow that since the
F/B varies over the band that, you would get reasonable correlation
between skyward and tower top at points in the band with good F/B and
less agreement as the front to back degrades away from the optimum
Just a theory not necessarily a fact......
>From thompson at mindspring.com (David L. Thompson) Fri Nov 1 21:03:15 1996
From: thompson at mindspring.com (David L. Thompson) (David L. Thompson)
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 1996 16:03:15 -0500
Subject: ARRL SS
Message-ID: <199611012056.PAA01982 at answerman.mindspring.com>
>Another bit of interesting SS nostalgia is that it originally ran for a
>whole WEEK(or was it two?) and the exchange consisted of actual traffic
>(messages). Back in the late 50's and early 60's I seem to remember that
>there were TWO weekends for EACH mode.
>73 Bill N6CQ
I remember W5IHP telling me that the SS did run for a full week and you
chose your mode.
My first SS was 1958. The SS ran two weekends and you had to choose CW or
Phone (still 95% AM then). The real problem for front runners was to pick
the correct 40 hours from the 66 possible. I lost one year as K6EVR ran a
big last hour to beat me by 13Q's.
The 1958 exchange was a message preamble. Remember ARRL started as a
system and most of us were on the section and or national Trafiic system
(RN4, 5RN etc). This is a major difference from today. The exchange was
Number Your Call Check (RST) Place(section) Time
Date (todays date)
1 K5MDX 58 or 589 MS
1812 local Nov 8
Later the check was changed to year of first license and date to date to
your birthday MM/DD.
Most everybody ran 150 watts or less as this gave a multiplier for you
points 1.25 CW or 1.5AM.
KW's stood out. but lost often lost out in points (25 or 50% more needed).
Changing to a shorter exchange (called a preamble in 1958) and making the SS
for each mode...plus cutting down the hours from 40 to 24 was supposed to
free up the bands some and cut scores. Boy did the contestants prove that
scores would not be cut!
Have fun in sweepstakes!
73, Dave K4JRB
>From gswanson at arrl.org (Swanson, Glenn, KB1GW) Fri Nov 1 18:24:00 1996
From: gswanson at arrl.org (Swanson, Glenn, KB1GW) (Swanson, Glenn, KB1GW)
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 1996 13:24:00 -0500
Subject: FW: Vanity notes:
Message-ID: <m0vJOKL-000f5EC at mgate.arrl.org>
Er, yesterday was the 31st of October.
From: Swanson, Glenn, KB1GW
To: 'CQ-Contest (posting)'
Subject: Vanity notes:
Date: Friday, November 01, 1996 1:22PM
Some might ask what I meant by:
"Meanwhile, Gate 2 remains in temporary limbo."
To explain, here is the text of a W1AW Bulletin from
yesterday (30 Oct. 96). This is the latest as of today,
1 Nov. 96, too.
Vry 73, Glenn, KB1GW
FCC computer glitches put Gate 2 on hold
Once again, the word from Gettysburg is "next week." Maybe it was early
Halloween gremlins, but unexpected problems that have plagued the amateur
computer system at the FCC's Gettysburg office all week have all but
eliminated any chance that Gate 2 vanity call signs will be issued in time
for this weekend's ARRL November Sweepstakes CW contest. Hams antsy to learn
when they'll get one of their vanity requests have besieged the FCC with
phone calls this week. A spokesman at Gettysburg said Thursday, however,
that he doubts that the FCC will be ready to issue any vanity call signs
until sometime next week. "I'm 90% sure it's not going to make it this
week," he said.
Some optimism flared when October 30 grants appeared in some call sign
databases, leading to speculation that the vanity call signs might soon
follow. However, the FCC has announced that any grants dated after October
24, 1996, are invalid because many of them were erroneous.
The unspecified computer problems are not related to the vanity call sign
program. FCC personnel in Gettysburg already have entered data from the more
than 4500 first-day Gate 2 applications, and are poised to start granting
licenses once the computer problems are resolved, the spokesman said. The
FCC anticipates that event could happen "by the end of next week." It's not
known how long it will take to process all of the first-day applications,
since this will be the first time the FCC has run the program using "live"
data. Before processing, however, the FCC wants to "be sure everything is
going to work well," the spokesman said. In the meantime, hams are asked to
be patient and to refrain from calling the FCC to inquire about the status
of their vanity call sign applications.
>From jbarry at curia.ucc.ie (John Barry EI7DNB) Sat Nov 2 02:57:06 1996
From: jbarry at curia.ucc.ie (John Barry EI7DNB) (John Barry EI7DNB)
Date: 01 Nov 1996 18:57:06 -0800
Subject: CQWW SSB from EI7M
Message-ID: <327AB882.505E at curia.ucc.ie>
Raw Score :-
CQ WORLD WIDE DX CONTEST 1996
Call: EI7M Country: Ireland
Mode: SSB Category: Multi Single
BAND QSO QSO PTS PTS/QSO ZONES COUNTRIES
160 117 117 1.00 4 33
80 358 533 1.49 17 75
40 435 605 1.39 18 73
20 1061 1897 1.79 29 98
15 1057 2340 2.21 32 111
10 25 50 1.92 9 25
Totals 3053 5542 1.81 109 415 => 2,904,008
Op's : EI8GS, EI7DNB, EI9HC, EI5HB, EI4BZ, EI3DP & EI6BT
This contest started badly, and didn't get a whole lot better! We have to put up our beams field
day style on friday, and the 40m beam just would not tune, and it took several hours of
raising/lowering the tiltover mast to get it right. During the contest, the wx started to get
worse, and we lost the 160m dipole, and 40m beam, which meant no 160m on the second night, and only
one antenna for the low bands which restricted the multiplier station.
Having said that, a great time was had by all, conditions seemed to be well down on last year,
especially in northern Europe. We were never able to call CQ on 10m, but worked 25 mults, all of
which were weak, and had heavy QSB.
The best band for us was 15m, with a lot of juicy mults, but no big rate. In fact, we were never
able to get much of a run going, 164 being the best hour.
20m was very busy, lots of QRM which made life difficult, and we were restriced on the lowbands due
to our antenna problems. The highlight on 40m was working 9M8R when the whole of EU seemed to be in
There were quite a few stations asking us to move to 160m on Sunday night but we couldn't and we
are missing a lot of easy mults on that band.
On Sunday evening, the wind picked up, and by the end of the contest it was too windy to attempt
any antenna work. It got worse during the night, the 'tailend' of Hurricane Lily passed the south
coast of EI, with gusts of 100mph+ and which wrecked our 15m beam, and also damaged the 20m beam.
There is now a job list as long as your arm to be completed in time for the CW leg.
Thanks for all the QSO's & CU in the CW test
** QSL via EI6HB *** or Buro
More information about the CQ-Contest