[CQ-Contest] I need a cloudwarmer!

[Robert Chudek - K0RC]

/"Band open to CA from NM, but you need the IA station you can't hear.  
Both of you should point west for best copy."/

I find this true, especially trying to work ND and SD, the next states 
west of MN. At least 95% of the time their signal is stronger if I 
'bounce' my signal off the electronic curtain to the east of me. The 
signals usually drop into the noise if I turn my beam west, in their 
direction. The other 5% of the time, the signal might be the same 
strength, but the ambient noise floor comes up when pointing to the 
west, making the copy more difficult. Both of these states have been WAS 
hold-outs on 15 and 20 meters for me, although I logged 3 out of 4 needs 
this past weekend.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 11/19/2013 4:10 PM, Barry wrote:
> In my empiric experience, backscatter, like any scatter, works best 
> with power and high antennas pointed in the direction that the band is 
> open.
>
> For example, how do you work EU on 10m when the band is closed to EU, 
> but open to AF?  Point your antenna at AF.
>
> Band open to CA from NM, but you need the IA station you can't hear.  
> Both of you should point west for best copy.
>
> Barry W2UP
>
> On 11/19/2013 13:48, Steve London wrote:
>> Related to this topic are these questions...
>>
>> What does it take to have a big backscatter signal on the high bands 
>> ? Azimuth diversity (i.e. multiple antennas pointing in different 
>> directions) ? Take-off angle diversity ? Is the optimum take-off 
>> angle for backscatter the same as the optimum take-off angle for 
>> 1-hop, non-backscatter ? I don't think I have ever seen empirical 
>> studies or models that address this.
>>
>> I ask these questions, as it comes right on the heels of my SS Phone 
>> effort. For a number of reasons, I did single-10. I know, no such 
>> category in SS. It was fun and made for a lively Sunday. About 1160 
>> QSO's and 80 mults. Missed IA, NE, OK - all in that backscatter range 
>> from here in NM.
>>
>> 73,
>> Steve, N2IC
>>
>> On 11/19/2013 10:15 AM, Tim Shoppa wrote:
>>> Hans, I feel in the same situation on the high bands at least. I can 
>>> work
>>> CA over and over again on 10M but what's the fun in that? On sweeps 
>>> this
>>> isn't a great loss because it's once per contest, but in a once per 
>>> band
>>> contest like NAQP I end up with decidedly few multipliers on 10M.
>>>
>>> I built some low dipoles and vees, which according the models had 
>>> more high
>>> angle radiation. But in actual tests, I find they are uniformly down 
>>> 6-10dB
>>> no matter what the distance compared to my high wire.
>>>
>>> I think the only solution to picking up more mults on the high bands is
>>> more gain, but that comes with the cost of narrower beamwidth. I 
>>> have heard
>>> some of the top-notch midwest contest stations in domestic tests: They
>>> either have multiple transmit antennas, or some kind of easily 
>>> switchable
>>> array, because I hear them cycling through directions on each CQ and 
>>> then
>>> when I call them they go "loud" in my direction. I do something 
>>> similar but
>>> receive-only with my K9AY loop in a 160 test, because I use 
>>> foot-switches
>>> to pick the direction, and the nulls are so deep that when I'm 
>>> listening SE
>>> that a loud New England station just isn't there, that I routinely 
>>> cycle
>>> direction after each CQ.
>>>
>>> Tim N3QE.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>