[Mldxcc] FD Analysis

Wed Oct 19 12:31:51 EDT 2005

1.  I was using the 13 ft whip on my van, parked under the trees.
Increasing the takeoff angle wouldn't help because the signals
are at a low angle.  They never reach us in the first place, because
the mountain blocks them.  A 2nd element is worth a few dB.  That
isn't going to make much difference when you can't even tell the
signal is there.

2.  Working 20 CW and phone requires that both rigs have low phase
noise, because both transmitter and receiver contribute to 
reciprocal mixing.  They also need low transmitter noise floors.
However, the real fix is to locate the antennas far apart and
have them "orthogonal" in some way, such as tip to tip or
cross polarization.  I have 250 feet of flexible large diameter
(3/4 inch) coax I can bring to implement the separation without
excessive feedline loss.

An interesting aspect of the K2/100 is that there is presumably
a coax cable connecting the optional amplifier to the QRP radio.
It might be interesting to investigate putting a filter in this
cable to clean up the transmitter.  If there is a few dB of excess
drive available at this point, then a 1% bandwidth filter might
be feasible.  The 5W power level in this cable means that the
heat dissipation will be manageable.

If we are going to get on digital modes, we are going to have
to get a lot better at the computer thing.  Which we should do
anyway.

Rick N6RK

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mldxcc-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:mldxcc-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jeff Stai
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 5:02 PM
> To: MLDXCC
> Subject: Re: [Mldxcc] FD Analysis
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Where was the 15m antenna located, and what was it? The next 
> question is what can we do to increase takeoff angle or to simply 
> widen the vertical pattern? I think we need to be there on 15 
> when it opens. And ready for 10 if it happens (like it did this 
> past weekend on RTTY). Perhaps a 2 element antenna like a Moxon 
> would serve us better at that location...
> 
> 2. Being on 20 on two modes makes sense. The K2/100 is especially 
> known for its ability to handle nearby strong signals in-band.
> 
> 3. How many digital contacts did REDXA make? We are giving up a 
> lot of CW-equivalent contacts by not being on PSK or RTTY when CW 
> or phone get slow.
> 
> 4. We're never going to get that number of VHF contacts. But we 
> can do better by trying to get as many stations as possible in 
> all three modes. Perhaps somehow we can get the word out to try 
> CW and even PSK on 6m, and move stations from 6m phone to the 
> other modes and bands as much as possible...
> 
> just my random thoughts - j
> 
> 
> At 03:51 PM 10/18/2005, Richard (Rick) Karlquist (N6RK) wrote:
> >15 seemed to be location dependent.  I could hear W6YX running
> >stations on 15 that we could not even hear.  This is because
> >(I am speculating) the mountains to the east block low angle
> >signals.  Being on the cliff doesn't help with this issue.
> >The best thing we can hope for is that next year, nobody
> >can do anything on 15.
> >
> >This is consistent with my observation that the guy on the
> >hill or with very high towers has the advantage during marginal
> >band conditions.  If the band is closed, even he doesn't work
> >anything.  If it is wide open, then everybody can work everything.
> >2005 was the "perfect storm".
> >
> >What we can do to get on 20 phone and 20 CW at the same time,
> >in case 40 isn't doing well.  As I remember, 40 CW was pretty
> >good Sunday morning, so maybe we weren't missing much.
> >
> >Rick N6RK
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: mldxcc-bounces at contesting.com
> >> [mailto:mldxcc-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jim Venneman
> >> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 4:45 PM
> >> To: MLDXCC
> >> Subject: [Mldxcc] FD Analysis
> >> 
> >> 
> >> OK,
> >>  
> >> I did the analysis of our FD score vs. that of REDXA that I 
> >> mentioned in my previous posting. Here's the results,
> >>  
> >> While we made 250 more QSOs than they did on 80 meters and we 
> >> pretty match broke even on 40 meters, they really "cleaned our 
> >> clocks" on 20 and 15 meters. They made 550 more QSOs on 20 than 
> >> we did and around 600 more than we did on 15. (Note - we went 
> >> into this year's FD with an assumption that conditions on 15 
> >> would not be that great, based on 2004 results - guess we were 
> >> wrong). REDXA also maxed out their GOTA station allowance of 400 
> >> QSOs and had 147 6-meter QSOs to our 56. 
> >>  
> >> Is their location really that much better than ours? I ask that 
> >> question because I am not familiar with their FD location. It did 
> >> not appear, based on what we were hearing over at the GOTA 
> >> station, that 15 meters was that great, except on Sunday morning. 
> >> I would imagine that having a pool of fresh operators available 
> >> was good for several hundred extra contacts. We were  stretched 
> >> pretty thin for operators this year, although both stations 
> >> stayed on all night for the first time.
> >>  
> >> Any comments or suggestions relevant to this analysis that we 
> >> could use for our 2006 FD entry are appreciated.      
> >>  
> >> Thanks,
> >>  
> >> Jim  -WX6V-
> >> MLDXCC FD Coordinator
> >>  
> >> (Note to Rick - Please put this analysis in our club newsletter 
> >> for November for those that did not see this reflector posting 
> - Thanks!)
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Mldxcc mailing list
> >> Mldxcc at contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/mldxcc
> >> 
> >> 
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mldxcc mailing list
> >Mldxcc at contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/mldxcc
> 
> --
> Jeff Stai               jds at twistedoak.com
> Twisted Oak Winery      http://www.twistedoak.com/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mldxcc mailing list
> Mldxcc at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/mldxcc
> 