Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 22
Bill Aycock
billaycock at centurytel.net
Mon Sep 17 11:21:02 EDT 2012
JOHN--
We are fortunate that you are only allowed an opinion, not a directie.
Also-- Most posters give their call when yelling.
Bill--W4BSG
-----Original Message-----
From: John Nemo
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 9:19 AM
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 22
Digimodes on top band.NO THANK YOU.
________________________________
From: "topband-request at contesting.com" <topband-request at contesting.com>
To: topband at contesting.com
Sent: Sunday, 16 September 2012, 23:38
Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 22
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. Re: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20 (Jim Brown)
2. Re: Old Radios (Eddy Swynar)
3. Re: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20 (Mike Armstrong)
4. Re: American Samoa on TB? (Greg Chartrand)
5. Re: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20 (Tom W8JI)
6. Re: American Samoa on TB? (Bernie McClenny, W3UR)
7. Re: American Samoa on TB? (Herb Schoenbohm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 12:19:29 -0700
From: Jim Brown <jim at audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20
Message-ID: <50562641.9040508 at audiosystemsgroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 9/16/2012 11:53 AM, Tom W8JI wrote:
> Another part is they just may not recognize CW, or what the CW station
> is doing.
You would be surprised how many old timers and experienced CW ops are
using digital modes. I think that even in this no-code world, almost ANY
ham would at least RECOGNIZE CW, even if they couldn't copy it, but I'd
bet that very few CW or SSB ops who don't work digital modes would
recognize any of them as being signals, let alone recognize the mode.
73, Jim K9YC
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 16:03:49 -0400
From: Eddy Swynar <deswynar at xplornet.ca>
To: "ZR" <zr at jeremy.mv.com>
Cc: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Old Radios
Message-ID: <3F3B67B9-0788-4DAF-B924-E306F49F99FE at xplornet.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On 2012-09-16, at 3:49 PM, ZR wrote:
>
> I'll try to get a 210 on 160 for ARRL and see how many states I can work.
> If not the modified 1928 Radiola 60 superhet is all ready to at least
> listen.
>
> It took 2 1/2 years to work DXCC on 80 with PP 211's which were very
> stable but Ive taken that apart and now building a 160-20 rig starting off
> with a 27 and ending in a 860.
>
>
Hi Carl,
It'd be just great to hear you on Topband with that 210 rig...
As for garnering W.A.S. during the QSO Party, I should forewarn you:
historically I don't think ANYONE has EVER netted 60 (or more) QSOs during
the entire two-weekends of the event! The west coast is only now beginning
to make its presence known in the past few years in the person of Steve
(VE7SL---forgive me if I have your callsign incorrect, Steve). Most activity
is from the north-eastern USA, although there IS a VERY strong contingent
that joins the group from the mid-west.
No matter, it's a laid-back, leisurely, fun exercise, & it'd be nice if you
could join the fray, Carl.
~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:07:02 -0700
From: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj at aol.com>
To: Tom W8JI <w8ji at w8ji.com>
Cc: "<k6xt at arrl.net>" <k6xt at arrl.net>, "<topband at contesting.com>"
<topband at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20
Message-ID: <29B9F29C-E9C1-47D8-BCB0-627CF97C90C7 at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Tom, "on point" ....... I am, almost exclusively, a CW and Digi op in that
order. I will say, anecdotally, that I have not experienced any
interference caused by one or the other to the other on 160. I admit that I
am not THE most active op on 160, but I am there a fair amount of time.
Since most 160 band plans, like the DX window, seem to have gone by the
wayside, it would be incumbent upon us as those who love the band, to come
up with one that includes the newer modes. The reason? Better utilization
by those who have WAY LESS than optimal stations for 160. Particularly
those who are antenna and power limited. With the advent of modes like
JT65, this has been a godsend for the apartment dweller or those who live in
a yard-nazi environment that makes it virtually impossible to put up
anything larger than a mobile whip. Ask those folks about JT65 and they
practically bow to the software writer as being the savior of their
operating.
Having said that, I think there is room for all who want to try to operate
160 (not really that many people out of the whole ham population, truth be
told). Digi modes make it possible for those who have that intense desire
but lack the room for antennas that are anything like what we would call
decent. WE just need to come up with a plan and get some of the 160 heavy
hitters to endorse it, right? We cannot hold back digital progress, but we
certainly can come up with plans that work...... My opinion, but there it
is. We should try to include everyone we can.
If it were only up to me, I would ban SSB from any band that has less than
300 khz total space available. It takes up way too much room for the
intelligence it conveys. BUT.... I am not the gawd of ham radio and must
tolerate its presence on bands like 160 and 40, both of which have band
limitations (size and/or broadcasters interference which makes the bands
effectively smaller). Not wanting to start a flame war about SSB, just
mentioning my own personal usage prejudices....... And that really IS one of
mine. Like I said early on..... CW and Digi for me. Phone belongs on
VHF/UHF...... LOL.
So whaddaya guys think? It really IS up to "us"........ The users and
lovers of 160 ( or any other band for that matter). I find CW and DIGI ops
to be VERY cognizant of each others presence and have rarely seen
intentional interference between those two...... Except when digi ops stray
below the "digi borders" into the 20 meter CW portions..... At which point
the CW ops lay a carrier on them to get them to move. I do 't believe I
have seen it go the other way..... But I am sure it has on occasion. Since
both modes are definitely "space saving" and very efficient, I think there
is room for all....... As I seem to have stated in this lengthy tome.
Mike A (AB7ZU)
Kuhi no ka lima, hele no ka maka
On Sep 16, 2012, at 11:53, "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com> wrote:
>> An additional issue for weak sig CW folks is the nature of digi
>> operations. Digi operators don't always check for pre-existing activity.
>> The result is the digi setup begins its 1 minute of howling, irrespective
>> of some CW activity already in progress. No problem to the digi operator
>> whose setup will mindlessly repeat until acknowledged. A deal breaker to
>> the CW activity.
>
> I think some of the problem you notice, if not most of it, is the digi op
> (like most operators) tends to think in terms of his system's processed
> bandwidth and not the receiver bandwidth other surrounding operators use.
>
> Another part is they just may not recognize CW, or what the CW station is
> doing.
>
> This is why the FCC, wisely, did not mix modes.
>
>> Like Tom I neither endorse nor object to digi activity, except as it jams
>> existing CW. I share his opinion that the frequency choice for digi
>> activity could not have been more poorly chosen.
>
> It would be great to have a real discussion about this (and other things),
> because it might help the overall band long term. I'm starting to think
> rational non-personal on-point discussions of fact are not possible in
> America any longer. It's actually called the Brooklyn syndrome, but it
> seems to be spreading.
>
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,852006,00.html
>
> 73 Tom
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 15:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Greg Chartrand <w7my at yahoo.com>
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: American Samoa on TB?
Message-ID:
<1347833105.51483.YahooMailClassic at web125606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
You got that right Herb, I have never heard it on let alone work it.Greg
I wonder if anyone here knows N7CQQ or N6XT and can convince them how rare
American Samoa is on 160 meters.? They probably can't do much from the
Tradewinds Hotel but from the AH8LG "QRO" station it might work well enough
to get some of the faithful a contact from AS on TB.
Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
**********
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:14:50 -0400
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji at w8ji.com>
To: "Mike Armstrong" <armstrmj at aol.com>
Cc: k6xt at arrl.net, topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20
Message-ID: <30245B0223B94F92B5F02AE0726405A8 at tom0c1d32a93f0>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
> Tom, "on point" ....... I am, almost exclusively, a CW and Digi op in that
> order. I will say, anecdotally, that I have not experienced any
> interference caused by one or the other to the other on 160. I admit that
> I am not THE most active op on 160, but I am there a fair amount of time.
Every experience will be different because of geographical location, antenna
and equipment, noise floor, and operating habits.
Proper frequency planning requires understanding potential problems and how
to handle them, not pretending if everything works perfectly and appears OK
at the moment, it will always be OK.
Again, a good thing to consider is Collins. They assumed running a clean
audio tone into the audio of SSB transceivers and transmitters was a good
way to generate CW, and a good system to release into the field.
They must have assumed carriers were always balanced, there was never
harmonic distortion, and there was never hum or noise. They probably assumed
equipment would always perform like new, and always be properly operated.
They got bit pretty hard by that. The lesson from that should have been
audio injection of tones produces a limited signal-to-distortion ratio and
is subject to equipment and operator malfunction.
If It goes in the front of a SSB bandwidth system, it should be treated as
SSB bandwidth for distortion products.
Yaesu, for a more recent example, generated an almost square rise and fall
waveform CW signal and processed it through a SSB system as a CW signal. The
filter BW used was a few kHz. If they didn't waveshape properly later in the
system, they should have ran it through a CW filter.
There is also a problem with NDB harmonics on 160. This is another case of
poorly engineered systems that depend on perfect linearity to prevent
interference. For all who think low level modulation followed by linear
stages is a good system to prevent spurious, we can find many examples where
that assumption caused problems. I can hear some 5th and 7th harmonics from
25-50 watt NDB transmitters from over 1000 miles away, and getting them
fixed is like telling a digimode guy he has an issue with spurious.
This isn't a new, or unheard of, engineering problem. I would think Hams in
particular would be more in tune with proper planning that considers less
than perfect systems.
> Since most 160 band plans, like the DX window, seem to have gone by the
> wayside, it would be incumbent upon us as those who love the band, to come
> up with one that includes the newer modes. The reason? Better
> utilization by those who have WAY LESS than optimal stations for 160.
The real concern I have is growth in popularity of multiple modes that all
go into a SSB transmitter audio channel, and that are all dependent on
virtually no distortion or noise to maintain modest quality.
An example I would use for this is PSK31, where many users almost lynch
other users who run more than a barely discernable signal. While the blame
is placed on amplifiers, the root problem is very limited dynamic range of
the system. Because it is so difficult to keep distortion and spurious TX
levels down, and because receivers often pass much more BW than the desired
signal, they decided to make everyone stay somewhat close to noise floor.
Like a used car dealer would do, limited dynamic range is presented as a
"feature". Saying "No one needs power or good antennas because the mode is
so efficient" is a good way to mask issues caused by amplitude changes in an
audio tone driving a SSB transmitter, and using a wide SSB channel in a
receiver of a narrow band signal.
You won't find many CW operators who think 2.7 kHz IF filters followed by a
31 Hz wide audio filter is a good system for dynamic range.
As audio into SSB transmitters and back through SSB receiver modes become
more popular, it will be tougher to keep a *lid on shortfalls*. There also
won't be a *shortfall of lids* (intended as a pun) who mis-adjust things, or
wire things wrong.
Ask yourself this...
If digimodes get more and more popular, where will they expand if we start
them smack in the middle of what was a weak signal area? Does anyone here
really think the best place to have started digital modes was in the middle
of the most popular DX weak signal area?
Or are we really just pretending 1835-40 was a good idea, and there will
never be more than 30 operators using digital modes, all QRP, and all with
perfectly adjusted radios?
73 Tom
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:21:48 -0400
From: "Bernie McClenny, W3UR" <bernie at dailydx.com>
To: "'Greg Chartrand'" <w7my at yahoo.com>, <topband at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: American Samoa on TB?
Message-ID: <021801cd9459$ac86fba0$0594f2e0$@dailydx.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Both KH8 and 5W are somewhat rare on Topband.
Looking back in the log I see the following:
KH8/N5OLS (1996 and 1997) and KH8Q (2006)
5W0VF (W7TVF in 2001)
Bernie
Bernie McClenny, W3UR
W3UR started The Daily DX on March 17, 1997.
http://www.dailydx.com/trial.htm
https://twitter.com/#!/dailydx
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Chartrand
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 6:05 PM
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: American Samoa on TB?
You got that right Herb, I have never heard it on let alone work it.Greg
I wonder if anyone here knows N7CQQ or N6XT and can convince them how
rare American Samoa is on 160 meters.? They probably can't do much from
the Tradewinds Hotel but from the AH8LG "QRO" station it might work well
enough to get some of the faithful a contact from AS on TB.
Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
**********
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 22:38:13 +0000
From: "Herb Schoenbohm" <herbs at vitelcom.net>
To: bernie at dailydx.com, "'Greg Chartrand'" <w7my at yahoo.com>,
topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: American Samoa on TB?
Message-ID:
<1054057909-1347835093-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1236248014- at b16.c3.bise6.blackberry>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
With so many skilled ops descending on Am Samoa for some R and R I hope that
one of them would enjoy some TB operation putting a rare one on the air.
Herb, KV4FZ
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: "Bernie McClenny, W3UR" <bernie at dailydx.com>
Sender: "Topband" <topband-bounces at contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:21:48
To: 'Greg Chartrand'<w7my at yahoo.com>; <topband at contesting.com>
Reply-To: bernie at dailydx.com
Subject: Re: Topband: American Samoa on TB?
Both KH8 and 5W are somewhat rare on Topband.
Looking back in the log I see the following:
KH8/N5OLS (1996 and 1997) and KH8Q (2006)
5W0VF (W7TVF in 2001)
Bernie
Bernie McClenny, W3UR
W3UR started The Daily DX on March 17, 1997.
http://www.dailydx.com/trial.htm
https://twitter.com/#!/dailydx
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Chartrand
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 6:05 PM
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: American Samoa on TB?
You got that right Herb, I have never heard it on let alone work it.Greg
I wonder if anyone here knows N7CQQ or N6XT and can convince them how
rare American Samoa is on 160 meters.? They probably can't do much from
the Tradewinds Hotel but from the AH8LG "QRO" station it might work well
enough to get some of the faithful a contact from AS on TB.
Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
**********
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
------------------------------
End of Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 22
****************************************
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
More information about the Topband
mailing list