FOC Test ???

Sat Feb 1 11:54:59 EST 1997

What's the FOC test on CW this week-end....???
Some nice stuff on...9J on 15..etc
Some kind of six digit number exchange.
Can't find anything on any of the Web pages..
Proves the bands are open, just no one on...

>From jreid at aloha.net (Jim Reid)  Sat Feb  1 19:28:05 1997
From: jreid at aloha.net (Jim Reid) (Jim Reid)
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 09:28:05 -1000
Subject: Verticals and Radials
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970201192805.0066aac4 at aloha.net>

At 12:16 AM 2/1/97 EST, you wrote:
>Fred Hopengarten, K1VR
>On Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:49:03 -0500 (EST) W8JITom at aol.com writes:

>>Antenna's are the same way. but the only proof is in a measurement.

For years Telex has made field strength measurments of their own
(and now Hy-gain) antennas.  One of particular interest to this 
discussion is the Hy-Tower:   50+ foot tall,  1/4 high
or odd multiple thereof for 80 up to 10 meters,  no traps,  but
needs radials as is ground mounted on insulators from ground.
Operates as does a parallel dipole set up:  current only flows
at a particular frequency to the open lengthed section that is
at or near 1/4 resonance at the operating frequency,  the rest
of the structure appears to be non-existant to the siganal.

Telex measurments and discussion,  taken from the Hy-Tower 
manual follow.  Perhaps this info may help.  Note their
disticntion between ground plane and ground mounted verticals.

"  Installation of Radials

There is no need to make radials exactly 1/4 wave long for the
Hy-Tower.  In fact,  the only case where you should have 1/4
wavelength radials(for the lowest desired/planned operating
frequency)  would be for approximately 90 radials.  This
differs rather dramatically from the case of a Ground-Plane
antenna where resonant radials are installed above ground.
Since the radials of a Ground-Mounted vertical are actually
on, if not in, the ground,  they are coupled by capacitance or
conduction to the ground,  and thus resonance effects are not
important.  Basically, the function of radials is to provide a 
low-loss return path for ground currents.  The reason that short
radials are sufficient, when few are used,  is that at the perimeter
of the circle to which the ground system extends,  the radials are
sufficiently spread aparrt, and most of the return currents(in this case)
are already in the ground between the radials rather than in the radials
themselves.  As more radials are added,  the spaces between them are
reduced and longer radial lengths help to provide (lower resistance)
paths  for currents still farther out. 

Since the Hy-Tower is a multi-band vertical antenna,  the radial system
should be optimized on the lowest frequency you plan to use.
Higher frequencies will benefit equally from the ground
system. 

You must decide what is the limiting factor for your installation:

1.  Cost of radial wires

2.  Land available for radials

3.  Efficiency of your antenna"

Telex then provides a large table showing the improvement in
antenna radiating efficiency,  in dB pick up over no radials;
the impact on radiation take-off angle in degrees;  and
the feed point impedance all vs.  the number and length of
ground mounted radials.

In short for sixteen radials,  each about 0.1 wavelength long
at the lowest operating frequency desired,  22.5 degree
radial spacing,  the power gain over no radials is 3.0 dB.
The angle of max radiation is about 30 degrees over
poor conductivity ground.  Over excellent ground conductivity
this angle may drop 5 to 8 degrees.  For 16 radials the feed
point impedance is 52 ohms.

Going all the way to 120 ground mounted radials,  spaced
3 degrees apart and 0.4 wavelengths long,  the operating
numbers improvement to gain over no radials,  6 dB;  max
radiation take off angle,  24 degrees(poor ground) down
to 16 degrees over sea water; feed point impedance, 24 ohms.

Also see QST,  June, 1985 for a lot more info on radial systems
for verticals.

So,  there you have it,  from one of the more respected
manufactures of classic ground mounted vertical antennas
as well as beam antennas.  Telex/Hy-gain measures 'em.

73,  Jim,  KH7M
On the Garden Island of Kauai and about to order a Hy-Tower!

>From n4kg at juno.com (T. A. Russell)  Sat Feb  1 20:15:27 1997
From: n4kg at juno.com (T. A. Russell) (T. A. Russell)
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 15:15:27 EST
Subject: n4kg at juno.com (T. A. Russell): Re: Rotatable Dipole
Message-ID: <19970201.141554.3238.5.N4KG at juno.com>

--------- Begin forwarded message ----------
From: n4kg at juno.com (T. A. Russell)
To: k0wa at southwind.net, N4KG at juno.com
Subject: Re: Rotatable Dipole
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:09:15 EST
Message-ID: <19970131.160944.4670.3.N4KG at juno.com>
References: <1.5.4.32.19970131175847.006cf6a8 at southwind.net>

Lee -

The answer to your question about 40M rotary dipoles is:

KLM - if you like linear loading and lots of tiny little parts and
enjoyed 	
          playing with erector sets as a child...

Hy-Gain - if you like linear loading and plastic insulators

Force 12 - if you like linear loading and big wire loops

Mosley - if you like big coils and center  loading (which is less
efficient IMHO)

Cushcraft - if you like simple effective solutions...It's a good idea to
double wall the first piece of tubing out to the first joint on each
side...raises safe wind speed from 73 mph to over 90 mph by my
calculations.

Gamma match the boom of any 24 ft tri-bander or 3L20 as a rotary dipole
on 	40M (and 30M as well)...actually, it's easier to use an Omega
match...if you like to tinker on the tower.

I have a beefed up Cushcraft 2L40 at 95 ft which performs most
satisfactorially.  It is very competitive on CW where it is tuned and
works OK but not as well on SSB.  It withstood 80-90 mph winds that took
down 30 some trees on my 4 acres, including a couple of 75 year old Oaks.
 (I have no association with Cushcraft other than as a satisfied
customer.)

I have omega matched a Telrex 3L20 boom as a rotary dipole on 40M and a
TH6 boom as a rotary dipole on 40 and 30M.  A 24 ft boom with 20M
elements endloading it is self resonant around 7.5 MHz.  

BTW, before I ever had any gain antennas on 40M, I worked over 300
countries with rotary dipoles at 80 ft.  They are very effective!

73, Tom - N4KG
:
--------- End forwarded message ----------

>From n1jm at dreamscape.com (John L. Merrill)  Sun Feb  2 01:21:45 1997
From: n1jm at dreamscape.com (John L. Merrill) (John L. Merrill)
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 20:21:45 -0500
Subject: DX and CT reflector
Message-ID: <32F3EC29.6B50 at dreamscape.com>

Maybe I've missed something, but I havent received anything from these
reflectors in awhile. Any info would be appreciated. Sorry for taking up
space on this reflector with this question.

John

>From 0006125879 at mcimail.com (Brian Bogh)  Sun Feb  2 05:56:00 1997
From: 0006125879 at mcimail.com (Brian Bogh) (Brian Bogh)
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 97 00:56 EST
Subject: sprint exchange
Message-ID: <25970202055652/0006125879DC4EM at MCIMAIL.COM>

When its your freq you send your callsign at the end of the exchange. 
If its not going to be your freq you send the other stations call then  
your call then the exchange.  Seems like almost everyone gets the order screwed 
up.  It really helps to do it right. 
N7LOX    190  35 = 6650

>From six at knoware.nl (Frank E. van Dijk)  Sun Feb  2 09:41:12 1997
From: six at knoware.nl (Frank E. van Dijk) (Frank E. van Dijk)
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:41:12 +0100
Subject: PACC CONTEST 8/9 FEB
Message-ID: <199702020941.KAA22807 at utrecht.knoware.nl>

--=====================_854902820==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

--=====================_854902820==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

ANNOUNCING THE 1997 DUTCH PACC CONTEST

ORGANIZED BY VERON, DUTCH NATIONAL RADIO SOCIETY
IARU AFFILIATE FOR THE NETHERLANDS

Dates
February 8 and 9, 1997; 1200Z - 1200Z

Bands
160, 80, 40, 20, 15 and 10 meters
SSB QSOs on 160 are not allowed

Modes
CW and SSB

Entry classes
single operator; multi operator; SWL 

Exchange
RS(T)+serial number, start from 001
Dutch stations transmit their Province abbreviation:
GR, FR, DR, OV, GD, UT, NH, ZH, FL, ZL, NB, LB (12)

QSO Points
each QSO with a PA/PB/PI station yields one point
a station may be worked only once per band, regardless
of the mode

Multiplier
1 multiplier per Province, per band. Maximum 6*12=72

Final score
the total of all QSO points on all bands, multiplied by the
total of all multiplier points on all bands (a la CQ WW)

SWLs
each different Dutch station per band counts for 1 point
complete exchange of both Dutch and foreign station must
be logged. Single operator only.

Logs
separate sheet per band, submit score calculation
multipliers should appear only when new
please sign log for observation of the contest rules
mail log no later than March 31st, 1997 to:

                            PACC Contest Organiser
                            Frank E. van Dijk PA3BFM
                            Middellaan 24
                            3721 PH  Bilthoven
                            Netherlands, Europe

Awards
a contest certificate will be awarded to the high scorers in each 
country in each entry class. No fee.

The PACC Award can be obtained for working 100 different PA/PB/PI stations
in the PACC Contest, without submitting QSLs. Send application together with
contest log and USD 6,- fee to contest organizer.

--=====================_854902820==_--

>From n4kg at juno.com (T. A. Russell)  Sun Feb  2 13:47:37 1997
From: n4kg at juno.com (T. A. Russell) (T. A. Russell)
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 08:47:37 EST
Subject: FREE E-MAIL SERVICE (JUNO)
Message-ID: <19970202.074823.10006.1.N4KG at juno.com>

Free E-Mail service is available from JUNO.
Call 1-800-654-JUNO to order your free software.

de Tom - N4KG

>From k5zd at ultranet.com (Randy Thompson)  Sun Feb  2 15:37:11 1997
From: k5zd at ultranet.com (Randy Thompson) (Randy Thompson)
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:37:11 -0500
Subject: sprint exchange
Message-ID: <01BC10F6.1FAF1B60 at k5zd.ultranet.com>

I guess I was one of those people who was a 'lid' last night.  Not being =
too serious, I sent the exchange the way I felt like it.  Everyone =
seemed to copy it OK...

There is nothing in the rules which dictates the order of the Sprint =
exchange.  What you describe has evolved as the most efficient operating =
practice (i.e., it keeps people from calling you at the wrong time).  =
Until it is in the rules, you can't complain about how people send their =
exchange!

Randy, K5ZD

----------
From: 	Brian Bogh[SMTP:0006125879 at mcimail.com]
Sent: 	Sunday, February 02, 1997 12:56 AM
To: 	cq-contest
Subject: 	sprint exchange

When its your freq you send your callsign at the end of the exchange.=20
If its not going to be your freq you send the other stations call then =20
your call then the exchange.  Seems like almost everyone gets the order =
screwed=20
up.  It really helps to do it right.=20
N7LOX    190  35 =3D 6650

>From kg5u at hal-pc.org (Dale Martin)  Sun Feb  2 15:51:35 1997
From: kg5u at hal-pc.org (Dale Martin) (Dale Martin)
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 09:51:35 -0600
Subject: sprint exchange
Message-ID: <01BC10F8.AB66B4E0 at pm5-48.hal-pc.org>

On Saturday, February 01, 1997 23:56 PM, Brian Bogh[SMTP:0006125879 at mcimail.com] wrote:
>When its your freq you send your callsign at the end of the exchange. 
>If its not going to be your freq you send the other stations call then  
>your call then the exchange.  Seems like almost everyone gets the order screwed 
>up.  It really helps to do it right. 
>N7LOX    190  35 = 6650
>
>
>

Brian,
I checked the latest Rules in NCJ that I could find (Rules for the North
American Sprint Contests, NCJ Jan/Feb 1996, V24, No.1, page 19).

There's nothing in the rules which states the order that is supposed to
be used in the contest.  There are two examples of exchanges in which 
all exchange elements are represented in different order, but no reference 
as to which is to be used when. 

What you are referring to is an informal operating practice; it's not a 
rule.  An operator does not 'screw up' if the procedures/formats are not
a rule. 

Seems to me if 'almost everybody' uses an 'informal operating practice'
other than what you are suggesting, then what you are suggesting is 
not very widely accepted or recognized...yet. 

I don't disagree with what you are saying in regards to which exchange
to use in which situation.  In fact, I have set up my NA exchanges for 
just those formats.  

I think the problem is that the differences between the two formats and 
when to use them has not been widely disseminated to the NA Sprint 
perators. When more operators are made aware of the differences and 
understand what benefits they offer, NA Sprint will be an even more
efficient and fun contest.  When I heard about the different exchange 
formats from a friend in TDXS, I thought about it a bit, and quickly understood the need to use them and the benefit.  I had simply never
given it much thought. 

73 and see you next weekend,

Dale Martin, KG5U
kg5u at hal-pc.org
http://www.hal-pc.org/~kg5u