Topband: Conditions for the CQWW 160 CW 1/2 wave versus 1/4 wave

[Jose M. Valdes R. YV5LIX]

Hello everyone,

Conditions were very good this weekend, I never did the calling since I just
wanted to test de two antennas, but I was able to work 14 countries and 14
US states running only 100 watts.

Countries worked:

   D4   D4B         
   DL   DL3TD       
   HA   HA3O        
   HK   HK1XX       
  KP2   KP2ZZ       
   OH   OH1MA       
  PJ2   PJ2T        
  PJ7   PJ5NA       
   S5   S50A        
   SP   SN7Q        
  UA2   RK2FWA      
   UR   UU7J        
 VP2E   VP2E        
   YV   YV5MBX      

States worked:

 KC1XX   NH     
 W3TS    PA     
 K3WW    PA     
 K8GL    MI     
 W8RT    MI     
 N2NT    NJ     
 K9NR    IL     
 W4MYA   VA     
 KT3Y    VA     
 KU1CW   MO     
 K9DX    IL     
 K0EJ    TN     
 K9OM    FL     
 K5GO    AR     
 N3OC    MD     
 N8VW    OH     
 W2GD    NJ     
 W4ZV    NC     
 NO2R    NJ     
 NQ4I    GA     
 W6NWS   NC     

As for the antenna test conducted here are the first results.

The results were very interesting, specially because for the test I only ran
100 watts;  the 1/2 was quitter than the 1/4 in all directions and signal
strength was about 3 dB stronger on AR that the 1/4 wave, and that is not
bad, after all 3 dB is twice the signal, hence weak stations, specially
Europeans, were heard better; but TX was a totally different story, here the
1/4 outperformed the 1/2 in all directions, working Europe with only a 100W
on contest night when EU activity is higher and therefore so is their local
QRM is not easy, I was not able to work any EU while using the 1/2 wave for
TX, on the other hand I worked the EUs fairly easy with the 1/4 wave, I also
worked D4B in the big pile up that he had at 02:00 UTC the first night after
my 5th call, he never came back to me with the 1/2.

I don't have a full conclusion yet, but I assume that the 1/4 is having less
ground induced losses and a lower radiation angle that the 1/2 despites the
fact that both antennas are slopers and that 1/2 wave dipoles are supposed
to have less ground losses that 1/4 waves.000

Regarding the 1/2 wave, the building that is supporting it is under
construction and the electrical service hasn't been installed yet, so
electrically speaking the structure is very quiet, that may accounts for the
lower noise level, but I'm not sure about this, it may also be that the 1/2
wave is acting more in the horizontal plane and therefore picking up less
man made noise.

I'm taking the 1/2 down tomorrow and I will try something else for the 1/2
wave, maybe a slightly different orientation and perhaps some ground redial
in may back yard, for the SSB contest ahead I will be fully active, that
means that I will be calling CQ contest, also I will be QRO so we will see
the results with the changes and comparing the 1/2 wave against the 1/4
wave.

Thanks to all the stations worked for their patience picking up my call
running low power, you guys all have very good ears, congratulations.

73/DX Jose M. Valdes R. (Joe) YV5LIX
eQSL.cc Advisory Board Member
QSL manager EA7FTR
SYSOP YV5LIX DX Cluster
telnet://yv5lix.org.ve:7300
VHF Packed: 145.430 YV5LIX
http://www.yv5lix.org.ve