[CQ-Contest] CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 205, Issue 39
CHUCK CULLIAN
k6rf at aol.com
Thu Jan 23 10:09:26 EST 2020
Try an open 20 m half wave (open 40 m quarter wave) across the 20 m antenna. If it is front end overload this should fix it.
Good luck.
Chuck
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 23, 2020, at 7:30 AM, cq-contest-request at contesting.com wrote:
>
> Send CQ-Contest mailing list submissions to
> cq-contest at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cq-contest-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cq-contest-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CQ-Contest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. ARRL DX SSB Contest March 2020 (CEPitts)
> 2. 40m to 20m interference (William Hendrick)
> 3. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (Joe)
> 4. Re: 40m to 20m interference (Jim Brown)
> 5. Re: 40m to 20m interference (donovanf at starpower.net)
> 6. Re: 40m to 20m interference (Jeff Blaine)
> 7. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (ku8e)
> 8. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (rjairam at gmail.com)
> 9. CQWW 160 CW: Listen South! (jmaass at k8nd.com)
> 10. Re: 40m to 20m interference (Edward Sawyer)
> 11. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (Edward Sawyer)
> 12. Re: 40m to 20m interference (john at kk9a.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 16:01:56 -0500
> From: CEPitts <cpitts at ec.rr.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX SSB Contest March 2020
> Message-ID: <05259860-71ce-b52b-34fc-44d9c190654b at ec.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Hello fellow contesters,
>
> I am interested in operating with a Multi team (any category?single,
> multi two, multi multi) for the upcoming ARRL DX SSB Contest March 2020
> If any team would like to have another operator. Although a drive to a
> location within approximately six-seven hours from my home QTH (southern
> outer banks of NC) would be ideal I am posting this at this time in the
> event an air fare purchase may be necessary. A Multi effort within
> NC/VA/SC that are within driving distance is feasible however a location
> further out such as GA, etc. (air fare considerations?) is not out of
> the question.
>
> I had been a guest operator for several years at the now QRT W4RM
> station. Bill is getting ready to retire and move on to other endeavors.
> Bills station was located outside Manassas VA which was a six to
> seven-hour drive for me from my QTH. I miss the great times and efforts
> we had at his fine station.
>
> Operated in other multi efforts at other stations SK W4MYA Bob, W4IY VHF
> MULTI efforts, WZ8P Everett in OH, NR4M Steve, and some dxpeditions. I
> would like to contribute to a team effort if there is a need for another
> operator. Love the comradery and knowing the team is doing is its best.
> Really enjoy contesting and having fun as well as helping provide the
> needs of a multi effort if one becomes available.
>
> Besides operating I enjoy contributing in the team efforts in regards to
> station prep, food contribution, and I even climb if the need arises.
> (Have a full body harness).
>
> Please reply off the reflector directly and I will gladly respond to any
> queries or offers.
>
> Thank you and 73! Charles ?Ed? Pitts, K5OF zip 28589
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 23:00:29 +0000 (UTC)
> From: William Hendrick <whhendrick at yahoo.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID: <506467261.10487753.1579734029255 at mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help. Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
> Bill, N0AC
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:26:35 -0600
> From: Joe <nss at mwt.net>
> To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli at alice.it>,
> "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID: <cd006889-dfe6-b766-bb02-b22d907c51db at mwt.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> I just love this WRTC Competition.
>
> Well at least the part where they all use almost the same modest
> stations part.
>
> And that's just it. (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now)? I
> would like to see this Qualification procedure run say two ways.
>
> Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now, anything goes, balls to the wall
> competition. Mega super stations and all that. Giant towers stacked
> yagis etc..
>
> Then the other half,? have the qualification be like the stations they
> will be using.
> A 3 element tribander at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot
> rigs. Of course no spotting too.
>
> I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just as good
> and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but these
> other guys never will be able to go because their stations just cant
> compete with multiple stacked towers etc.
>
> Level the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,
>
> that would be a neat experiment yes?
>
> Joe WB9SBD
> Sig
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>> On 1/22/2020 7:40 AM, Claudio Veroli wrote:
>> An important update to the qualification standings is available.
>>
>> It includes:
>>
>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added
>> CQWW SSB 2019 Claimed scores added.
>> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added
>> IARU HF 2019 Final scores added
>> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.
>> ARRL DX CW 2019 final scores (fixed)
>>
>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at www.wrtc2022.it
>>
>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 15:29:54 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <k9yc at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <60ced4d8-3f55-3aa9-781c-d081cb12c0de at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> This sort of issue is one of many addressed in this talk I've done at
> Visalia, to NCCC, and a few other local clubs.
>
> http://k9yc.com/Multi-Station.pdf
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>> On 1/22/2020 3:00 PM, William Hendrick via CQ-Contest wrote:
>> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help. Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:06:06 -0500 (EST)
> From: donovanf at starpower.net
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <84519070.7005380.1579737966938.JavaMail.root at starpower.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Hi Bill,
>
>
> Please describe the interference you're experiencing, you described
> it only as "a lot of interference"
>
>
> Is the interference only directly on the second harmonic of the 40 meter
> transmitter or does it have buzz sidebands that cover much of the 20 meter
> band?
>
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "William Hendrick via CQ-Contest" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 11:00:29 PM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
>
> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help. Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
> Bill, N0AC
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:32:33 -0600
> From: Jeff Blaine <KeepWalking188 at ac0c.com>
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID: <279c9d86-af0e-286e-9abb-bf8a7e3fc6ef at ac0c.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Bill,
>
> There is no such thing as an easy answer on this.? But with a bit of
> study, you can get a handle on the issue and the magnitude of the fix
> needed.? I would recommend you track down the W2VJN book "Managing
> Interstation Interference."? It's got everything you need to get this
> under control.
>
> https://toptendevices.com/products/managing-interstation-interference-2nd-edition-by-george-custogeorge-w2vjn/
>
> 73/jeff/ac0c
> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> www.ac0c.com
>
>
>> On 1/22/20 5:00 PM, William Hendrick via CQ-Contest wrote:
>> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help. Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
>> Bill, N0AC
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 21:57:27 -0500
> From: ku8e <ku8e at ku8e.com>
> To: Joe <nss at mwt.net>, Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli at alice.it>,
> "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID: <mailman.2912.1579789664.19421.cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Joe,You don't have to have a big station to compete.? If you do low power you will only compete against other low power stations. Bryant, KG5HVO is in first place in my region NA5. He has done a bunch of low power efforts with little competition and has got the maximum points for those contests. His score is higher than the top HP station K4AB, which has a big station. But to be fair to Larry he hasn't done as many contests and will probably leap back to 1st place.JeffSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
> -------- Original message --------From: Joe <nss at mwt.net> Date: 1/22/20 8:18 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli at alice.it>, cq-contest at contesting.com Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update I just love this WRTC Competition.Well at least the part where they all use almost the same modest stations part.And that's just it. (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now)? I would like to see this Qualification procedure run say two ways.Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now, anything goes, balls to the wall competition. Mega super stations and all that. Giant towers stacked yagis etc..Then the other half,? have the qualification be like the stations they will be using.A 3 element tribander at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot rigs. Of course no spotting too.I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just as good and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but these other guys never will be able to go becau
> se their stations just cant compete with multiple stacked towers etc.Level the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,that would be a neat experiment yes?Joe WB9SBDSigThe Original Rolling Ball ClockIdle TymeIdle-Tyme.comhttp://www.idle-tyme.comOn 1/22/2020 7:40 AM, Claudio Veroli wrote:>?? An important update to the qualification standings is available.>> It includes:>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added> CQWW SSB 2019 Claimed scores added.> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added> IARU HF 2019 Final scores added> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.> ARRL DX CW 2019 final scores (fixed)>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at www.wrtc2022.it>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ>>> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list> CQ-Contest at contesting.com> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>_______________________________________________CQ-Contest mailing listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman
> /listinfo/cq-contest
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 23:21:01 -0500
> From: "rjairam at gmail.com" <rjairam at gmail.com>
> To: ku8e <ku8e at ku8e.com>
> Cc: Joe <nss at mwt.net>, Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli at alice.it>,
> "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID:
> <CAMCyBs46ZD5Gx2Y0GupjeuncV59DgJcgHc+SFdm02fWYJRpjhQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> The problem I have is that W2 competes with all of W1, including
> Maine. You can't beat Maine. The difference is significant even though
> both are East coast.
>
> When they had it in the US, it went by US call districts which made more sense.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 22:35, ku8e <ku8e at ku8e.com> wrote:
>>
>> Joe,You don't have to have a big station to compete. If you do low power you will only compete against other low power stations. Bryant, KG5HVO is in first place in my region NA5. He has done a bunch of low power efforts with little competition and has got the maximum points for those contests. His score is higher than the top HP station K4AB, which has a big station. But to be fair to Larry he hasn't done as many contests and will probably leap back to 1st place.JeffSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
>> -------- Original message --------From: Joe <nss at mwt.net> Date: 1/22/20 8:18 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli at alice.it>, cq-contest at contesting.com Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update I just love this WRTC Competition.Well at least the part where they all use almost the same modest stations part.And that's just it. (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now) I would like to see this Qualification procedure run say two ways.Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now, anything goes, balls to the wall competition. Mega super stations and all that. Giant towers stacked yagis etc..Then the other half, have the qualification be like the stations they will be using.A 3 element tribander at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot rigs. Of course no spotting too.I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just as good and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but these other guys never will be able to go bec
> ause their stations just cant compete with multiple stacked towers etc.Level the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,that would be a neat experiment yes?Joe WB9SBDSigThe Original Rolling Ball ClockIdle TymeIdle-Tyme.comhttp://www.idle-tyme.comOn 1/22/2020 7:40 AM, Claudio Veroli wrote:> An important update to the qualification standings is available.>> It includes:>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added> CQWW SSB 2019 Claimed scores added.> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added> IARU HF 2019 Final scores added> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.> ARRL DX CW 2019 final scores (fixed)>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at www.wrtc2022.it>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ>>> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list> CQ-Contest at contesting.com> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>_______________________________________________CQ-Contest mailing listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailm
> an/listinfo/cq-contest
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 02:39:27 -0500
> From: jmaass at k8nd.com
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 160 CW: Listen South!
> Message-ID: <1579765167.0w4c0e04g0ss08cc at mail.k8nd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> When Topband conditions are good, it is easy to get enthralled by working stations via the trans-Atlantic path.
>
> This is a reminder to not ignore stations to the South! Every year, there are many South American stations who struggle to get noticed by North America and European stations. We hear many of them from our Northern South America location in Curacao, calling CQ and not receiving answers.
>
> Also, after a dozen years operating as PJ2T in this contest, we find the first few hours very? frustrating. North Americans are 'feeding on" other North Americans. Europeans are similarly "feeding upon" other Europeans.? Europe, in particular, is loud at PJ2T in the first few hours, but breaking their pileups has proven impossible.
>
> Kindly feed the Southern stations this weekend!
>
> 73,? Jeff PJ2ND / K8ND
> ?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 04:45:21 -0500
> From: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at sbelectronics.com>
> To: Jeff Blaine <KeepWalking188 at ac0c.com>, "cq-contest at contesting.com"
> <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <0D39B6681B67B44DAEC5D6AD99294A8E04ECDC8A0D85 at SBEMAIL.sbelectronics.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Jeff, 150ft of separation is plenty for 100W and 40M/20M 2 radio operation. You will hear the 2nd harmonic on 20M when transmitting on 40M. But that harmonic shouldn?t be higher than S9+40db and it shouldn't affect more than 5 - 10khz on SSB or 1 - 2 khz on CW.
>
> If the coax cables are solid shield across your entire system, the BPFs work, and 2 radios are commonly grounded, this should be the result.
>
> The stub would be to suppress the harmonic described above.
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=sbelectronics.com at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Blaine
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 8:33 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
>
> Bill,
>
> There is no such thing as an easy answer on this.? But with a bit of
> study, you can get a handle on the issue and the magnitude of the fix
> needed.? I would recommend you track down the W2VJN book "Managing
> Interstation Interference."? It's got everything you need to get this
> under control.
>
> https://toptendevices.com/products/managing-interstation-interference-2nd-edition-by-george-custogeorge-w2vjn/
>
> 73/jeff/ac0c
> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> www.ac0c.com
>
>
>> On 1/22/20 5:00 PM, William Hendrick via CQ-Contest wrote:
>> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help. Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
>> Bill, N0AC
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 05:09:16 -0500
> From: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at sbelectronics.com>
> To: ku8e <ku8e at ku8e.com>, Joe <nss at mwt.net>, Claudio Veroli
> <claudio.veroli at alice.it>, "cq-contest at contesting.com"
> <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID:
> <0D39B6681B67B44DAEC5D6AD99294A8E04ECDC8A0D89 at SBEMAIL.sbelectronics.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I would suggest that anyone who really wants to go to WRTC this round put a good effort in. What was before very unlikely for most of us is changing.
>
> If you take a look at the competition, or should I say lack of competition, in many of the US areas, its pretty stark to say the least. I was number 1 for a while in NA1 and now I am number 3. And Number 4 is significantly below me. I am not even trying to go this time. And I am in W1. What does that tell you?
>
> Why is this? My theory is that the competition format is no longer the desire for many of us. M2 with 2 operators virtually all of which can multitask on SO2R if not do dual band CQing for some si just not representative of "the best of the best" any more. That?s my opinion.
>
> Whatever you think the cause might be. Take a look at WRTC 2014 or 2018 at this point and look at 2022. Its amazing the difference.
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=sbelectronics.com at contesting.com] On Behalf Of ku8e
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 9:57 PM
> To: Joe; Claudio Veroli; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
>
> Joe,You don't have to have a big station to compete.? If you do low power you will only compete against other low power stations. Bryant, KG5HVO is in first place in my region NA5. He has done a bunch of low power efforts with little competition and has got the maximum points for those contests. His score is higher than the top HP station K4AB, which has a big station. But to be fair to Larry he hasn't done as many contests and will probably leap back to 1st place.JeffSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
> -------- Original message --------From: Joe <nss at mwt.net> Date: 1/22/20 8:18 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli at alice.it>, cq-contest at contesting.com Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update I just love this WRTC Competition.Well at least the part where they all use almost the same modest stations part.And that's just it. (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now)? I would like to see this Qualification procedure run say two ways.Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now, anything goes, balls to the wall competition. Mega super stations and all that. Giant towers stacked yagis etc..Then the other half,? have the qualification be like the stations they will be using.A 3 element tribander at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot rigs. Of course no spotting too.I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just as good and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but these other guys never will be able to go becau
> se their stations just cant compete with multiple stacked towers etc.Level the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,that would be a neat experiment yes?Joe WB9SBDSigThe Original Rolling Ball ClockIdle TymeIdle-Tyme.comhttp://www.idle-tyme.comOn 1/22/2020 7:40 AM, Claudio Veroli wrote:>?? An important update to the qualification standings is available.>> It includes:>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added> CQWW SSB 2019 Claimed scores added.> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added> IARU HF 2019 Final scores added> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.> ARRL DX CW 2019 final scores (fixed)>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at www.wrtc2022.it>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ>>> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list> CQ-Contest at contesting.com> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>_______________________________________________CQ-Contest mailing listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman
> /listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 06:16:58 -0600
> From: john at kk9a.com
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <20200123061658.Horde.6CVrGRHwyC-gq5awuvUhiWH at www11.qth.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes
>
> You're not asking too much. One of my homebrew 20m beams has a 40m
> OptiBeam interlaced on the same boom and at 100 watts there is no 20m
> interference at all except right on the harmonic. Make sure that you
> are using quality coax, good chokes at the antennas and perhaps try
> better bandpass filters or converting your verticals to monoband
> verticals.
>
> GL,
> John KK9A
>
>
> William Hendrick N0AC wrote:
>
> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on
> each K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem
> to help. Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I
> asking too much for the filters with the same antenna polarization and
> spacing?
>
> Bill, N0AC
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 205, Issue 39
> *******************************************
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list