[RTTY] Lack of RTTY on 40 and 80 Meters

[Kai]

Chen,
In a fortuitous combination of insomnia, persistence and luck, I worked K5D 
(Desecheo Island) on 160 m SSB. So what's so special about that?
I was pumping 100 W PEP into an inverted "L" in my attic (see /An All-band Attic 
Antenna/, */QST/*, Oct 2007, pp 33-37.). I estimate about 2 W EIRP from that 
radio/tuner/"L" combinations. "Just for grins" I tuned around their 160m band 
announced spot and heard a carrier signal, tuning up. Not to clear headed at 4 
AM, I sent my call sign twice. They came back with "again, K4 what?". It took 
several minutes to get that full exchange, an I have the QSL card for proof. 
More than just luck, the gentlemanly behavior of other hams was a big factor. 
When we were finally through, pure bedlam burst out on the frequency. But I was 
the lucky number one in the log that day - and I tried! (The story of my bleary 
eyed XYL coming into shack asking "why are you yelling into the mic at 4 AM?" is 
for another time...solved by roses and dinner. She's a ham, she understood.)

The moral? Rub amber against silk near a wet noodle at 45.45 baud so that the 
sparks look like RTTY if you must, but try anything. My wet noodle in the attic 
is particularly effective at receiving 160 m (a nise figure consideration), I 
heard them when others locally couldn't on their full length dipoles. But the 
antenna is terribly inefficient on transmit.

Use what ever you can fit on you postage stamp sized lot, but TRY! The 
satisfaction of a completed QSO under non-ideal circumstances is difficult to 
express. There are effective small directional receive antennas for 160 m, and 
you can top load a tower, or use a dipole as a top hat for its feed line for 
transmit, but try! My DXCC count on 160m is just 7 with that antenna, because I 
tried.

A RTTY QSO can be 13 dB more effective than SSB, and just 4 dB worse than CW 
[/How much "punch" can you get from different modes?/*/QST/, Dec 2013* pp 
30-32], so try!

Good luck, and TRY! Get your call sign out there on any available "wet noodle". 
Chen's words ring true! See [ /"160 Meters - or bust" *QST Mar*/*2014* pp 38-39.]

73
Kai, KE4PT

On 3/25/2014 7:00 PM, Kok Chen wrote:
> On Mar 25, 2014, at 9:45 AM, Tom Osborne wrote:
>
>> I'd have to disagree on that one.  If someone wants to get an antenna for 160, they can do it.  I have seen designs for 160 antennas that are only 33 feet tall.
> This story is not about RTTY, but CW:
>
> Up until the 2007 N8S Swains Island DXpedition, I have never in my life worked 160m.
>
> However, I heard them on 160 with really good SNR.    So, I though... reciprocity theory :-).
>
> I have no 160m antenna.  The closest is a HF-2V with elevated radials for 40m and 80m (fitting the description of Tom's "33 foot vertical" but without a loading coil to match it for 160m).
>
> When I tried it, I could not tune it with either the FT-1000MP's internal antenna tuner, or a Ten-Tec 238 manual tuner.  But, with the two of them in tandem, I managed to get the Yaesu's PA to see an SWR of less than 3.0:1.
>
> After a few diditdahdahdidit from N8S, they finally got my callsign correctly.  I have never dared tried the same stunt after that, so the N8S QSO remains my one and only 160m QSO.
>
> I am guessing that I was probably only getting a couple of percent efficiency, so the other 90+ watts has to be heating something up :-).
>
> If DX can be worked with such a set up, a properly built capacitance loaded 33 foot tall antenna (with a decent counterpoise) will probably do OK.
>
> 73
> Chen, W7AY
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>