Topband: overposting
David Raymond
daraymond at iowatelecom.net
Mon Nov 9 10:07:55 PST 2009
With due respect, I guess I have never understood the logic of "bottom
posting" (and perhaps I'm missing something). The entire business and email
world overpost (and for good reason). . . no one wants to have to
continually sort down through a litany of old messages just to find the most
recent message.
73. . .Dave
W0FLS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Clark" <jcclark at radiusnorth.net>
To: <topband at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 7:16 AM
Subject: Topband: overposting
> Can we stop over posting like I have done. I get the digest and this
drives
> me crazy.
>
> Ok. I have taken another swig of coffee and am calmer. :-)
>
> Please?
>
> 73 Craig
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: topband-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com]
> On Behalf Of topband-request at contesting.com
> Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 02:33 AM
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 83, Issue 27
>
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
> topband at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> topband-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> topband-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. ASCII diagram Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper A TEST
> (Mike & Coreen Smith)
> 2. Re: good condx (srikanth murthy)
> 3. Re: First JA !. . .NB report. (Art)
> 4. Re: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna here -
> howcan that be? A TEST (Guy Olinger K2AV)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 16:41:56 -0400
> From: "Mike & Coreen Smith" <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>
> Subject: Topband: ASCII diagram Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper A TEST
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <01b701ca5fea$bf948c90$6501a8c0 at II>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> ______long 30' 6m yagis 48/64'
> |
> |
> ___|___ ^
> ||| 48' / TEE \ (tophat wires @ 45?) Top @ 55' hung in a
> tree.
> ||| / | \
> ||| / | \
> ||| / | \
> / |||24'\ <A-D,DX-A twin sloper
> / ||| \ |
> / ||| \ /
> ||| \ /
> ||| / \
> |||((coil))_ / \
> -----------------------------------24 radials, only connected to TEE
> antenna, 60-130' long (varies). The vertical portion is around 60?
vertical
> (ie: slightly more upright than 45?) TEE vertical matched with a 5-10uH
> coil for near perfect SWR 1800-1860 2.1:1 resonant on 1823kcs
>
>
> Hard to draw a 3-D diagram in ASCII.....the T and the sloper are around
20'
> apart and don't really "cross" like in the diagram.
>
> The sloper actually stretches out much farther than my ASCII art shows.
It's
>
> nearly horizontal !
>
> For tonight. I have unhooked the A-D DX-A and shorted the coax's PL-259
> together.
> I am running just the T vertical 55' up, and 55' per side on the 2 sloping
> tophat wires @ 45? down towards the ground.
>
> EU's been audible for an hour and a half before SS. . . .
>
> Mike ve9aa
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey Smith
> 699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge
> NB
> Canada
> E6L 1T1
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joe Subich, W4TV
> To: 'Mike & Coreen Smith'
> Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 4:22 PM
> Subject: RE: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna
> here -howcan that be? A TEST
>
>
>
> Mike,
>
> > sEE MY COMMENTS BELOW
> > Where is your T bottom with respect to the tower,
> >
> > INCHES AWAY FROM BASE OF TOWER.
>
> The T (vertical) is very heavily coupled to the tower and
> sloper if they are that close - particularly if the sloper
> is shorted to the tower when not used. The sloper/tower
> is effectively a vertical on its side (sloper is the
> vertical, the tower is the "ground"). The two antennas
> are so closely coupled that you could even consider them
> a single antenna.
>
> > how many and kind of radials do you have below the T,
> > A COUPLE DOZEN 1/8->1/4 WL RADIALS
> >
> > is there a direct connection to the tower, and does the
> > tower base have radials?
> >
> > BASE OF TOWER SUNK INTO HUGE BLOCK OF CONCRETE. NOT
> > GROUNDED TO RADIAL SYSTEM.
>
> You would be far better to attach wires (one = "L", two =
> "T") to the top of your mast (or attach them just below
> the top yagi) and shunt feed the tower. Connect the
> radials to the base of the tower and add as many more
> as you can.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> >
> > Guy.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Mike & Coreen Smith
> > <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > OK, on a lark, I am going to try something. I just
> > unhooked my A-D twin
> > drooper, err, I mean sloper from the
> > switchbox, then took a chunk of wire and shorted it out @
> > the PL-259 end
> > at
> > the base of the tower.
> >
> > The SWR on my T-vertical changed dramatically. (for the
> > better). There
> > must
> > have been a lot of interaction, either through the
> > switchbox itself, or
> > just
> > proximity??
> >
> > I'll leave it unhooked for a day or two and see how I
> > make out with no
> > reference antenna at all.
> >
> > I'll be the 30/S9 signal on the band tonight.......(hee hee)
> >
> > Thanks for all the emails. If this fails or produces
> > mixed results, I
> > may
> > modify the antenna swaitch back to original if I can
> > remember what I did
> > to
> > begin with(?) or put a new remote switch in
> > there........or do as a
> > couple
> > suggested and mount an inverted VEE up near the top of my
> > tower (44'),
> > however that's really a last resort....I don't want a
> > cloud burner.
> >
> > Another option I guess , is to lay out 100 more radials.
> > Do-able, but
> > wouldn't look forward to it ;-)
> >
> > Mike VE9AA
> >
> > Mike, Coreen & Corey Smith
> > 699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge
> > NB
> > Canada
> > E6L 1T1
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Kenneth D. Grimm, K4XL
> > To: Wes Attaway (N5WA)
> > Cc: 'Mike & Coreen Smith' ; topband at contesting.com
> > Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 11:49 AM
> > Subject: Re: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper
> > BEST antenna
> > here -
> > howcan that be?
> >
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > The procedure described by Wes below is exactly the
> > approach I would
> > take. If you do this, I'm betting that you are left
> > with #1 below,
> > since you said you previously had your antennas over
> > "soggy ground."
> > Rocky and soggy are significantly different.
> > Good luck with your gremlin chasing.
> >
> > 73,
> > Ken - K4XL
> >
> > Wes Attaway (N5WA) wrote:
> > > Mike:
> > >
> > > 1. Maybe the type of rocky ground is the reason.
> > > 2. Take down all the other wires and check the L (or
> > T) by itself,
> > still
> > > using switchbox.
> > > 3. Take out the switchbox and just feed the antenna
> > directly (still
> > by
> > > itself, no other wires)
> > > 4. If things are still bad then the problem probably
> > has something to
> > do
> > > with your location.
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------ Wes Attaway (N5WA) ------------------
> > > 1138 Waters Edge Circle - Shreveport, LA 71106
> > > 318-797-4972 (office) - 318-393-3289 (cell)
> > > Computer Consulting and Forensics
> > > -------------- EnCase Certified Examiner ---------------
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: topband-bounces at contesting.com
> > [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com]
> > > On Behalf Of Mike & Coreen Smith
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 6:44 AM
> > > To: topband at contesting.com
> > > Subject: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper
> > BEST antenna
> > here -
> > > howcan that be?
> > >
> > > Sorry for the long and rambling post. . . .
> > >
> > > OK gang, I know antennas "fairly" well, but this has me
> > stumped...really
> > > REALLY stumped. I've beat myself up over this for 2
> > yrs. straight. I
> > just
> > > can't get it. I am (almost) ready to rip everything
> > down and start
> > from
> > > scratch)
> > >
> > > I posed a ~similar~ question last year and have tried
> > some different
> > things,
> > >
> > > but I'm losing my patience with the wire here (hi)
> > >
> > > BACKGROUND:
> > > At my old QTH, I ran an inverted L...5/16thWL and fed
> > with a 800pF
> > cap
> > in
> > > series. A dozen to two dozen 1/4wl radials(depending
> > on how many got
> > broken
> > >
> > > in the summer)over soggy ground. It meandered up
> > 50-ish or so feet
> > with
> > the
> > >
> > > remaining 117' up/down/over/under trees --even the tip
> > sloped back
> > towards
> > > the ground 20' or more.....and it ROCKED....I mean, I
> > wasn't any
> > VE1ZZ
> > or
> > > anything but I felt I was upper middle crust of the
> > W1/VE1 pileup. I
> > also
> > > had the exact same tower and exact same Alpha Delta
> > DX-A twin sloper
> > up
> > (for
> > >
> > > reference) and it s*cked...really bad. Easily several
> > S units below
> > > anything else on 40-80-160m
> > >
> > > NOWADAYS:
> > > Fast forward to new QTH...same 48' DElhi self
> > supporting tower set in
> > > concrete....same 2 long 6m yagis on tower
> > (48/64')....same lil'
> > sloper
> > > mounted @ 24' off side of tower....
> > > I have tried 2 iterations of a plain inverted
> > L.....currently it's a
> > "T"
> > > antenna. Sloping 55' or so up and 2 T's @ 55' or so
> > each sloping @
> > aprox
> > 45?
> > >
> > > to the ground....loads nicely with a few uH @ the base. Seems
> > quieter
> > than
> > > the A-D twin.
> > > I have tried shunt -and- series feeding my 48' tower
> > (no problem to
> > do).
> > > They have all loaded well and I got a good SWR match
> > with a usually
> > narrow
> > > window 50Kcs maybe of 2.1:1 SWR of which to operate
> > in. I have 25 or
> > so
> > > 1/8wl to 1/4wl radials - 1" below the grass. Ground
> > is rocky shale?
> > sort of
> > >
> > > stuff. My QTH is on a nice high ridge and I do quite
> > well on VHF and
> > other
> > > HF bands.
> > >
> > > My signal is pitiful on **all** the 160m antennas I've
> > tried....with
> > the
> > > exception of the 1/4WL Dx-A twin sloper @ 24' !!!
> > (it's best but it
> > barely
> > > works)
> > >
> > > The little/low twin sloper off the side of the towe is
> > ALWAYS the
> > loudest on
> > >
> > > the band....by usually 6dB or more........I know this
> > can't be right.
> > >
> > > How can this be? I am using a 4-1 antenna switchbox
> > (Ameritron I
> > think)
> > @
> > > the base of the tower which the antennas all share.
> > Many years back
> > I
> > > modified it so all antennas "floated" (instead of
> > being grounded)
> > when
> > not
> > > selected as I was using this as a K8UR sloper system
> > switchbox at one
> > time.
> > > I am pretty sure (but not 100%) that I even ran a
> > separate chunk of
> > coax
> > > right out to an inverted L last fall in desperation.
> > I do lots of
> > antenna
> > > experimenting, so it's sometimes hard to remember the
> > 45th iteration
> > of
> > a
> > > trial I had a couple years ago, hi.
> > >
> > > I *DO* notice significant SWR curve changes on the
> > lil' wee sloper if
> > I
> > make
> > >
> > > any mods to any of the other "REAL" 160m antennas.
> > >
> > > I either have interactions in the switchbox, or
> > proximity between
> > antennas
> > > or something that I am totally missing. All 160m
> > antennas are quite
> > close
> > > (less than 20-30' away).
> > >
> > > Logic tells me there is no way in heck the very low
> > Alpha-Delta DX-A
> > twin
> > > sloper can __always__ be the best antenna to transmit
> > and receive on.
> > YET
> > > is is !!? From what I see on the cluster, web and
> > hear on the air, I
> > can
> > > hear quite well, but DX stations normally have to be
> > 559-579 before I
> > even
> > > get a QRZ.....I am currently running ~750W.........
> > >
> > > I'm cracking up.....too much listening to
> > QRN.......sorry for the
> > long
> > post.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any insight. I am ready to put a Webster
> > Bandspanner on
> > my
> > > mobile and go sit out in the yard and DX.
> > > <hi>
> > >
> > > VE9AA Mike
> > >
> > > Mike, Coreen & Corey Smith
> > > 699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge
> > > NB
> > > Canada
> > > E6L 1T1
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated
> > with respect. -
> > TF4M
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated
> > with respect. -
> > TF4M
> > >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > >
> > >
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > > Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.53/2486 -
> > Release Date:
> > 11/07/09 02:38:00
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ken K4XL
> > k4xl at arrl.net
> >
> > *** BoatAnchor Manual Archive ***
> > On the web at http://bama.sbc.edu and http://bama.edebris.com
> > FTP site info: bama.sbc.edu login: anonymous p/w: youremailadr
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with
> > respect. - TF4M
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------
> >
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.52/2485 -
> > Release Date:
> > 11/06/09
> > 19:39:00
> > _______________________________________________
> > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with
> > respect. - TF4M
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------
> >
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.52/2485 - Release
> > Date: 11/06/09
> > 19:39:00
> > _______________________________________________
> > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with
> > respect. - TF4M
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.52/2485 - Release Date:
11/06/09
>
> 19:39:00
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 16:17:04 -0800 (PST)
> From: srikanth murthy <vu2gsm at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: good condx
> To: topband at contesting.com, David Jorgensen <wd5cov at vtc.net>
> Message-ID: <10735.25718.qm at web51010.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi every one
>
> ?????????????????? Please give all timings in GMT. It will help us to look
> out for u guys
> 73
> de
> vu2gsm
>
> --- On Sun, 11/8/09, David Jorgensen <wd5cov at vtc.net> wrote:
>
> From: David Jorgensen <wd5cov at vtc.net>
> Subject: Topband: good condx
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 1:22 AM
>
> Hi everyone,
> Wow great to hear all the signals on 160 the past two evenings into EU and
> Asia before sunrise.
>
> Worked five new ones and my 34th zone since Sept 1st this year on top
band!
> Hope these condx continue for a while longer. The past two mornings have
> logged over 50 JA stations. Thanks for the fun times.
>
> Good DX from New Mexico/
>
> 73 Dave WD5COV
> _______________________________________________
> 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:40:29 -0700
> From: Art <k6xt at arrl.net>
> Subject: Re: Topband: First JA !. . .NB report.
> To: TopBand List <topband at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <4AF64BBD.8040505 at arrl.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Unfortunately we can rant on about this heinous practice but it doesn't
> seem to help. As in my rant over J5C in 07. Some of the same players
> (not all, the mix changes) just keep on QRMing on. And teaching their
> acolytes how to jam. Thank goodness for superior ops such as at TX3A and
> sometimes XR0Y that they persist in the face of intentional jamming to
> make the QSO regardless! My hope is that expeditions and DXers persist
> in either going QRT or resisting the jammers to provide training to
> jamming initiates who are just following along in the footsteps of their
> instructors, or maybe actually changing one or two dedicated jammers'
> behavior.
> 73 Art
>
> Mike & Coreen Smith wrote:
> [Snip]
>
> Now, what's up with the TX3A pileup? <on soapbox> He would call WO0OOO
> (ficticious callsign) and a dozen guys with calls like KH5EEE
> (ficticious callsign) would reply....I have to give them credit...they
> pretty much stuck to whatever call they had (even if a partial) until
> the QSO was made, or nothing was copied on their end....things were
> going painfully slow @ times, so I can just imagine the horrendous noise
> on their end......C'mon, let us each make our own QSO. <off soapbox>
>
> Respectfully and with bleeding eardrums,
>
> Mike VE9AA (FN66na)......1/4WL ? sloper @ 24' on 48' tower.........700W,
> Ic-736
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 02:33:12 -0500
> From: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger at bellsouth.net>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna
> here - howcan that be? A TEST
> To: "Mike & Coreen Smith" <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>
> Cc: topband at contesting.com
> Message-ID:
> <46f338980911072333v2b47abc3o5bc68c90bb800d8b at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Several things...
>
> The tower and any feedlines are in play. The tower should be connected to
> the radials. This would be an issue whether the vertical antenna was an L,
a
> T, or a folded monopole. This was worth nearly 5 db at one installation.
> Feedlines and rotor cables up the tower should be at RF ground at the
base.
>
> Without the ground connection the various antennas will be connected by
the
> feedline shields via switches presenting strange changes if one or the
other
> cable is removed from the switch. Sound familiar?
>
> Good luck. 73, Guy.
>
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Mike & Coreen Smith
> <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>wrote:
>
> >
> > sEE MY COMMENTS BELOW
> >
> > Where is your T bottom with respect to the tower,
> >
> > INCHES AWAY FROM BASE OF TOWER.
> >
> > how many and kind of radials do you have below the T,
> > A COUPLE DOZEN 1/8->1/4 WL RADIALS
> >
> > is there a direct connection to the tower, and does the tower base have
> > radials?
> > BASE OF TOWER SUNK INTO HUGE BLOCK OF CONCRETE. NOT GROUNDED TO RADIAL
> > SYSTEM.
> >
> > Guy.
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Mike & Coreen Smith
> <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>wrote:
> >
> >> OK, on a lark, I am going to try something. I just unhooked my A-D
twin
> >> drooper, err, I mean sloper from the
> >> switchbox, then took a chunk of wire and shorted it out @ the PL-259
end
> >> at
> >> the base of the tower.
> >>
> >> The SWR on my T-vertical changed dramatically. (for the better). There
> >> must
> >> have been a lot of interaction, either through the switchbox itself, or
> >> just
> >> proximity??
> >>
> >> I'll leave it unhooked for a day or two and see how I make out with no
> >> reference antenna at all.
> >>
> >> I'll be the 30/S9 signal on the band tonight.......(hee hee)
> >>
> >> Thanks for all the emails. If this fails or produces mixed results, I
> may
> >> modify the antenna swaitch back to original if I can remember what I
did
> >> to
> >> begin with(?) or put a new remote switch in there........or do as a
> couple
> >> suggested and mount an inverted VEE up near the top of my tower (44'),
> >> however that's really a last resort....I don't want a cloud burner.
> >>
> >> Another option I guess , is to lay out 100 more radials. Do-able, but
> >> wouldn't look forward to it ;-)
> >>
> >> Mike VE9AA
> >>
> >> Mike, Coreen & Corey Smith
> >> 699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge
> >> NB
> >> Canada
> >> E6L 1T1
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Kenneth D. Grimm, K4XL
> >> To: Wes Attaway (N5WA)
> >> Cc: 'Mike & Coreen Smith' ; topband at contesting.com
> >> Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 11:49 AM
> >> Subject: Re: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna
here
> >> -
> >> howcan that be?
> >>
> >>
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> The procedure described by Wes below is exactly the approach I would
> >> take. If you do this, I'm betting that you are left with #1 below,
> >> since you said you previously had your antennas over "soggy ground."
> >> Rocky and soggy are significantly different.
> >> Good luck with your gremlin chasing.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Ken - K4XL
> >>
> >> Wes Attaway (N5WA) wrote:
> >> > Mike:
> >> >
> >> > 1. Maybe the type of rocky ground is the reason.
> >> > 2. Take down all the other wires and check the L (or T) by itself,
> >> still
> >> > using switchbox.
> >> > 3. Take out the switchbox and just feed the antenna directly (still
by
> >> > itself, no other wires)
> >> > 4. If things are still bad then the problem probably has something
to
> >> do
> >> > with your location.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ------------------ Wes Attaway (N5WA) ------------------
> >> > 1138 Waters Edge Circle - Shreveport, LA 71106
> >> > 318-797-4972 (office) - 318-393-3289 (cell)
> >> > Computer Consulting and Forensics
> >> > -------------- EnCase Certified Examiner ---------------
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: topband-bounces at contesting.com
> >> [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com]
> >> > On Behalf Of Mike & Coreen Smith
> >> > Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 6:44 AM
> >> > To: topband at contesting.com
> >> > Subject: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna
here -
> >> > howcan that be?
> >> >
> >> > Sorry for the long and rambling post. . . .
> >> >
> >> > OK gang, I know antennas "fairly" well, but this has me
> >> stumped...really
> >> > REALLY stumped. I've beat myself up over this for 2 yrs. straight.
I
> >> just
> >> > can't get it. I am (almost) ready to rip everything down and start
> >> from
> >> > scratch)
> >> >
> >> > I posed a ~similar~ question last year and have tried some different
> >> things,
> >> >
> >> > but I'm losing my patience with the wire here (hi)
> >> >
> >> > BACKGROUND:
> >> > At my old QTH, I ran an inverted L...5/16thWL and fed with a 800pF
cap
> >> in
> >> > series. A dozen to two dozen 1/4wl radials(depending on how many
got
> >> broken
> >> >
> >> > in the summer)over soggy ground. It meandered up 50-ish or so feet
> >> with
> >> the
> >> >
> >> > remaining 117' up/down/over/under trees --even the tip sloped back
> >> towards
> >> > the ground 20' or more.....and it ROCKED....I mean, I wasn't any
VE1ZZ
> >> or
> >> > anything but I felt I was upper middle crust of the W1/VE1 pileup.
I
> >> also
> >> > had the exact same tower and exact same Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper
> up
> >> (for
> >> >
> >> > reference) and it s*cked...really bad. Easily several S units below
> >> > anything else on 40-80-160m
> >> >
> >> > NOWADAYS:
> >> > Fast forward to new QTH...same 48' DElhi self supporting tower set
in
> >> > concrete....same 2 long 6m yagis on tower (48/64')....same lil'
sloper
> >> > mounted @ 24' off side of tower....
> >> > I have tried 2 iterations of a plain inverted L.....currently it's a
> >> "T"
> >> > antenna. Sloping 55' or so up and 2 T's @ 55' or so each sloping @
> >> aprox
> >> 45?
> >> >
> >> > to the ground....loads nicely with a few uH @ the base. Seems
quieter
> >> than
> >> > the A-D twin.
> >> > I have tried shunt -and- series feeding my 48' tower (no problem to
> >> do).
> >> > They have all loaded well and I got a good SWR match with a usually
> >> narrow
> >> > window 50Kcs maybe of 2.1:1 SWR of which to operate in. I have 25
or
> >> so
> >> > 1/8wl to 1/4wl radials - 1" below the grass. Ground is rocky shale?
> >> sort of
> >> >
> >> > stuff. My QTH is on a nice high ridge and I do quite well on VHF
and
> >> other
> >> > HF bands.
> >> >
> >> > My signal is pitiful on **all** the 160m antennas I've tried....with
> >> the
> >> > exception of the 1/4WL Dx-A twin sloper @ 24' !!! (it's best but it
> >> barely
> >> > works)
> >> >
> >> > The little/low twin sloper off the side of the towe is ALWAYS the
> >> loudest on
> >> >
> >> > the band....by usually 6dB or more........I know this can't be
right.
> >> >
> >> > How can this be? I am using a 4-1 antenna switchbox (Ameritron I
> >> think)
> >> @
> >> > the base of the tower which the antennas all share. Many years back
I
> >> > modified it so all antennas "floated" (instead of being grounded)
when
> >> not
> >> > selected as I was using this as a K8UR sloper system switchbox at
one
> >> time.
> >> > I am pretty sure (but not 100%) that I even ran a separate chunk of
> >> coax
> >> > right out to an inverted L last fall in desperation. I do lots of
> >> antenna
> >> > experimenting, so it's sometimes hard to remember the 45th iteration
> of
> >> a
> >> > trial I had a couple years ago, hi.
> >> >
> >> > I *DO* notice significant SWR curve changes on the lil' wee sloper
if
> I
> >> make
> >> >
> >> > any mods to any of the other "REAL" 160m antennas.
> >> >
> >> > I either have interactions in the switchbox, or proximity between
> >> antennas
> >> > or something that I am totally missing. All 160m antennas are quite
> >> close
> >> > (less than 20-30' away).
> >> >
> >> > Logic tells me there is no way in heck the very low Alpha-Delta DX-A
> >> twin
> >> > sloper can __always__ be the best antenna to transmit and receive
on.
> >> YET
> >> > is is !!? From what I see on the cluster, web and hear on the air,
I
> >> can
> >> > hear quite well, but DX stations normally have to be 559-579 before
I
> >> even
> >> > get a QRZ.....I am currently running ~750W.........
> >> >
> >> > I'm cracking up.....too much listening to QRN.......sorry for the
long
> >> post.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for any insight. I am ready to put a Webster Bandspanner on
my
> >> > mobile and go sit out in the yard and DX.
> >> > <hi>
> >> >
> >> > VE9AA Mike
> >> >
> >> > Mike, Coreen & Corey Smith
> >> > 699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge
> >> > NB
> >> > Canada
> >> > E6L 1T1
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. -
> TF4M
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. -
> TF4M
> >> >
>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >> > Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.53/2486 - Release Date:
> >> 11/07/09 02:38:00
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ken K4XL
> >> k4xl at arrl.net
> >>
> >> *** BoatAnchor Manual Archive ***
> >> On the web at http://bama.sbc.edu and http://bama.edebris.com
> >> FTP site info: bama.sbc.edu login: anonymous p/w: youremailadr
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. -
TF4M
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >> Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.52/2485 - Release Date:
> >> 11/06/09
> >> 19:39:00
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M
> >>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.52/2485 - Release Date:
11/06/09
> > 19:39:00
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 83, Issue 27
> ***************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M
>
More information about the Topband
mailing list