Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 147, Issue 19
Mike Greenway
K4PI at BELLSOUTH.NET
Tue Mar 17 14:21:24 EDT 2015
Hi Bill, Just to see what would happen I even took the top off with the blow touch right on the material and it would just glow and never ignite. I am thinking the material has gotten old and not longer wants to ignite. I would think the blow torch would be as hot as any spark. Any other comments welcome. I am going to try another container of the igniter but they have all been stored in the same area possibly 10 years. 73 Mike
From: topband-request at contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:00 PM
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 147, Issue 19
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: CADWELLS (Bill Wichers)
2. Re: CADWELLS (Art Snapper)
3. Re: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests (Kris Mraz)
4. Re: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests (Andy Blank)
5. Re: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests
(Stan Stockton)
6. Re: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests
(W0MU Mike Fatchett)
7. Fw: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests (k1fz)
8. Re: What IS troubling about this report (Walt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 02:11:00 +0000
From: Bill Wichers <billw at waveform.net>
To: Cecil <chacuff at cableone.net>
Cc: TOPBAND <TOPBAND at CONTESTING.COM>, Mike Greenway
<K4PI at BELLSOUTH.NET>
Subject: Re: Topband: CADWELLS
Message-ID: <2FB91B25-63DD-4B9A-931F-583D0E1CA00E at waveform.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Just to add: the spark igniter is a flint-type unit. Those used for starting a torch would probably work too but would be more difficult to aim into the mold than the gun-like cadweld ones are.
-Bill
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 16, 2015, at 9:35 PM, "Cecil" <chacuff at cableone.net> wrote:
> There is a spark igniter that is used with cadweld...I've had trouble lighting them off with a propane torch. Usually if they have been stored in a dry location they are good for years. The blue tube is loaded with an igniting compound in the bottom...so it is the last thing that goes into the mold and a small amount of it is trailed over the edge to facilitate lighting once the lid is closed. So just any of the powder won't light off you have to light off the starter powder.
>
> Cecil
>
> Sent using recycled electrons.
>
>> On Mar 16, 2015, at 5:58 PM, "Mike Greenway" <K4PI at BELLSOUTH.NET> wrote:
>>
>> I some have old style Cadwell that require lighting off with a torch. I have had them for many years and apparently the chemical mixture has gotten too old to fire off as I tried one today and just no reaction. Has anyone run into this before? Don?t guess there anything easily mixed up to replace the thermo compound. 73 Mike K4PI
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 22:57:50 -0400
From: Art Snapper <art at nk8x.net>
Cc: TOPBAND <TOPBAND at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: CADWELLS
Message-ID:
<CAH6Jzym390g=L0nmzcGxRybNHnCbRE7fEspf65EqZpfB1UP1Vw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sparklers (kids fireworks) can be an effective fuse for Cadwelds. It even
works in the rain.
73
Art
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:11 PM, Bill Wichers <billw at waveform.net> wrote:
> Just to add: the spark igniter is a flint-type unit. Those used for
> starting a torch would probably work too but would be more difficult to aim
> into the mold than the gun-like cadweld ones are.
>
> -Bill
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 16, 2015, at 9:35 PM, "Cecil" <chacuff at cableone.net> wrote:
>
> > There is a spark igniter that is used with cadweld...I've had trouble
> lighting them off with a propane torch. Usually if they have been stored
> in a dry location they are good for years. The blue tube is loaded with an
> igniting compound in the bottom...so it is the last thing that goes into
> the mold and a small amount of it is trailed over the edge to facilitate
> lighting once the lid is closed. So just any of the powder won't light off
> you have to light off the starter powder.
> >
> > Cecil
> >
> > Sent using recycled electrons.
> >
> >> On Mar 16, 2015, at 5:58 PM, "Mike Greenway" <K4PI at BELLSOUTH.NET>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I some have old style Cadwell that require lighting off with a torch.
> I have had them for many years and apparently the chemical mixture has
> gotten too old to fire off as I tried one today and just no reaction. Has
> anyone run into this before? Don?t guess there anything easily mixed up to
> replace the thermo compound. 73 Mike K4PI
> >> _________________
> >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> > _________________
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 22:40:35 -0500
From: Kris Mraz <n5kilomike at gmail.com>
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter
Contests
Message-ID:
<CAL386n=iamh4kH+tQcPwz3cVsvrAa9geG9V8pHMms2zFZxE6xA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
CQWW used to have the Xtreme category that allowed/encouraged remote
internet stations.
Seems like that's the place for those who want to use remote
receivers. I haven't kept up with
that category but I believe it was dropped in 2013.
Kris, N5KM
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 10:27:53 -0400
From: Andy Blank <andyn2nt at gmail.com>
To: Kris Mraz <n5kilomike at gmail.com>
Cc: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter
Contests
Message-ID:
<CAP+eef+AXbNU_0O7cfedLnMMM50FhZYesuP8bkZo3mn=KBzfJg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Guys, please keep up this discussion.
I am reading all the comments, and it helps to hear what people are
thinking.
I won't make any personal comments until after I digest it all.
I will tell one little story about last night.
Although I am not really a DXer, I happened upon the E30 on 1811 with a
very strong signal.
There was a huge pileup of USA calling, including me.
He worked just a couple of EU stations, and no USA that I could tell.
It occurred to me he should just dial into to a Web SDR and listen.
But that is not a pure radio QSO.... If he has local noise they need to
figure out a way to hear on site. Or maybe not... I am so confused.
73, Andy N2NT
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kris Mraz <n5kilomike at gmail.com> wrote:
> CQWW used to have the Xtreme category that allowed/encouraged remote
> internet stations.
> Seems like that's the place for those who want to use remote
> receivers. I haven't kept up with
> that category but I believe it was dropped in 2013.
>
> Kris, N5KM
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:56:01 -0500
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg at gmail.com>
To: Andy Blank <andyn2nt at gmail.com>
Cc: Kris Mraz <n5kilomike at gmail.com>, "topband at contesting.com"
<topband at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter
Contests
Message-ID: <C547BE9A-D108-40D1-95C6-1C97E6BC09E8 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Andy,
> But that is not a pure radio QSO.... If he has local noise they need to
> figure out a way to hear on site.
You were not confused with that thought. It was crystal clear thinking regarding what constitutes a valid two way QSO between two station locations without other communication methods involved.
It's going to be 70 degrees today. Be the ball, Andy :-)
73...Stan, K5GO
Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 17, 2015, at 9:27 AM, Andy Blank <andyn2nt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Guys, please keep up this discussion.
> I am reading all the comments, and it helps to hear what people are
> thinking.
> I won't make any personal comments until after I digest it all.
>
> I will tell one little story about last night.
> Although I am not really a DXer, I happened upon the E30 on 1811 with a
> very strong signal.
> There was a huge pileup of USA calling, including me.
> He worked just a couple of EU stations, and no USA that I could tell.
> It occurred to me he should just dial into to a Web SDR and listen.
> But that is not a pure radio QSO.... If he has local noise they need to
> figure out a way to hear on site. Or maybe not... I am so confused.
>
> 73, Andy N2NT
>
>
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kris Mraz <n5kilomike at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> CQWW used to have the Xtreme category that allowed/encouraged remote
>> internet stations.
>> Seems like that's the place for those who want to use remote
>> receivers. I haven't kept up with
>> that category but I believe it was dropped in 2013.
>>
>> Kris, N5KM
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:07:54 -0600
From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com>
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter
Contests
Message-ID: <5508434A.7040709 at w0mu.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
We are are going to allow remote receivers, why not remote transmitters
all over the world too...It if were legal.
We might as well just get on any one of the messaging systems, Facebook,
Apple, Hangouts, Skype and have contests and free up the airwaves for
more important stuff.
You need to hear my transmitter from your location and I need to hear
yours from mine.
I am a proponent of remote radio where ALL of the receiving and
transmitting is done from the same SINGLE remote site with the same
distance radius for that equipment to be in.
Mike W0MU
On 3/17/2015 8:27 AM, Andy Blank wrote:
> Guys, please keep up this discussion.
> I am reading all the comments, and it helps to hear what people are
> thinking.
> I won't make any personal comments until after I digest it all.
>
> I will tell one little story about last night.
> Although I am not really a DXer, I happened upon the E30 on 1811 with a
> very strong signal.
> There was a huge pileup of USA calling, including me.
> He worked just a couple of EU stations, and no USA that I could tell.
> It occurred to me he should just dial into to a Web SDR and listen.
> But that is not a pure radio QSO.... If he has local noise they need to
> figure out a way to hear on site. Or maybe not... I am so confused.
>
> 73, Andy N2NT
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kris Mraz <n5kilomike at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> CQWW used to have the Xtreme category that allowed/encouraged remote
>> internet stations.
>> Seems like that's the place for those who want to use remote
>> receivers. I haven't kept up with
>> that category but I believe it was dropped in 2013.
>>
>> Kris, N5KM
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 10:12:00 -0500
From: "k1fz" <k1fz at myfairpoint.net>
To: <topband at contesting.com>
Subject: Topband: Fw: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter
Contests
Message-ID: <004201d060c4$b898c2e0$2e01a8c0 at w1tjq>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
Ham radio, like life in general, is evolving. With a lot of technology
change, it's a good time to breath some fresh air
and let it jell out.
E30FB did work a few NA, but only on signal peaks. Other wise they had
problems receiving in deep QRM. (Even VE1ZZ had to repeat his call).
73
Bruce-K1FZ
www.qsl.net/k1fz/pennantnotes.html
.
Although I am not really a DXer, I happened upon the E30 on 1811 with a
very strong signal.
There was a huge pileup of USA calling, including me.
He worked just a couple of EU stations, and no USA that I could tell.
It occurred to me he should just dial into to a Web SDR and listen.
But that is not a pure radio QSO.... If he has local noise they need to
figure out a way to hear on site. Or maybe not... I am so confused.
73, Andy N2NT
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kris Mraz <n5kilomike at gmail.com> wrote:
> CQWW used to have the Xtreme category that allowed/encouraged remote
> internet stations.
> Seems like that's the place for those who want to use remote
> receivers. I haven't kept up with
> that category but I believe it was dropped in 2013.
>
> Kris, N5KM
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:22:04 -0400
From: "Walt" <k2waltk at gmail.com>
To: <Gary at ka1j.com>
Cc: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: What IS troubling about this report
Message-ID: <7B26DEE897D94575ABF8729CF3F67423 at K2WKHOME>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hey Gary,
You took the words out of my mouth. I also listened on the calling QRG
and found the same OTers calling, calling and calling w/o listening. One
reason I like QSK so much is that I can stop calling as soon as I hear the
station come back to someone, maybe even me.
73 de Walt - K2WK
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary
> Smith
> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 10:55 AM
> To: Topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: What IS troubling about this report
>
> What is sad to me is all of the bad things that have been mentioned
> are seen affecting every DXpedetion or unusual DX working today. It's
> not just the common experience of dealing with these LIDS, it is the
> unrelenting, continuous experience of it. I'm sure there isn't one
> example of stupidity in operation I can comment on that isn't
> familiar to each of us.
>
> I was listening to a pileup from the E3 and some lid East NE from my
> oceanside QTH kept calling; NA NA NA only NA NA NA ad nauseum. Then
> came OBAMA OBAMA NA NA NA. It's obvious the guy is mentally disturbed
> but that's tough to keep listening to when you're trying to hear a
> faint DX signal through him. It sure would have been helpful if the
> E3 would have shifted Tx freq a bit. Somebody sent something back to
> the lid about his mother and amazingly the QRM stopped with that but
> moments later so did the E3. The LID got his wish.
>
> As many have mentioned, the incessant calling when the the DX is not
> calling to them is pervasive and also seemingly eternal, crosses
> international sources and is by no means confined to new hams who
> don't know the code. I was curious to listen to the people calling
> the DX, as if I were the DX, and listened with the main & sub on the
> K3, the DX in the left ear & the pileup in the right.
>
> It was incredible to hear so many older calls were completely
> ignoring who the DX was trying to pull out; The DX calls AA2? and
> W1..., KP4..., W5.. not to mention myriads of EU and SA are calling
> in the pileup, calls that long predate any no-code licensing period.
> These guys know exactly what they are doing and it is intentional QRM
> of a different sort. I do feel rankled when people blame this on the
> no-code licensees. I got my Extra back 35 years ago so I have no dog
> in this no-code = bad CW operators in the pileups hunt. Seems to me
> the vast majority of offenders are long term hams who have lost their
> upbringing.
>
> One more thing I lament tremendously (non-pileup related), is the
> lack of interest in name, real signal report & QTH with a QSO
> now-a-days. I understand computer logging makes so much irrelevant
> like name/QTH and that a signal report is sort of useless anyway as
> someone with an indoor dipole in the basement won't give or get the
> same report as a triband would give at the same QTH, but it is
> tradition. For sure, only rarely with todays radios worldwide do I
> hear bad signals. But... I feel badly when I make a non-DXpedetion Q
> and I send 579 name is Gary QTH CT and get a TU CQ CQ CQ DE XYZ
> in return.
>
> When I hear a bad signal on the air, I now-a-days send them an email
> telling them date time freq & what their signal sounds like, I would
> want to know if my signal was defective. Amazing how very few replies
> I get back from those comments. Makes me wonder if they like that
> situation as it makes their signal stand out over the clean ones.
>
> I heard JA1NUT CQing on 15M CW & remembered his QSL card from
> ragchews long ago, gave him a call & had a45 minute ragchew with him,
> the first CW ragchew I've had in years it seems. Our first QSO was in
> 87, had a couple more till 97 and hadn't heard him till this this one
> in 2014. During the QSO we both lamented the loss of CW ragchews and
> the vogue contest-like/minimalist-style QSOs of today. I really
> appreciated that QSO with him.
>
> One of the things I like about this and its brother-"contesting"
> forums is what seems to be a common bond of interest in maintaining
> dignity in Ham Radio, and achieving a station that hears well and
> transmits well. I always look to see what new email comes into this
> folder for I know that among us are the people that make Ham Radio
> fun and something to share with newcomers to the hobby.
>
> These other people who don't listen or think when they transmit are
> beyond my
> comprehension.
>
> 73,
>
> Gary
> KA1J
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
------------------------------
End of Topband Digest, Vol 147, Issue 19
****************************************
More information about the Topband
mailing list