Topband: Baker Island DXpedition on 160

[Steve HA0DU]

Hi Gang,

In late June my sunrise is 02:44 UTC, sunset is 18:35 UTC. It will be 
impossible from Europe not only on 160, but also 80 and even 40. Mayb 
20/17 for "the nice QSL"...

But I am happy you are going to have fun.

73 Steve HA0DU



2018.06.13. 21:26 keltezéssel, GEORGE WALLNER írta:
>
> Rob,
> You are right about the timing not being good, but it is way too late 
> now to postpone the operation. Most of us are already in the Pacific 
> or on a plane, the boat is being loaded, etc., etc.
> This is the time we could get and these are the limitations we must 
> live with. The circumstances at the FWS were conducive to issuing a 
> permit this year. There was no guarantee that those circumstances 
> would remain the same in the future. Please remember that, for Navassa 
> we had to wait 18 years for the official "stars to line up". Also, 
> fewer sunspots are supposed to be good for TB conditions.
> As for antennas, of course taller would be better, but...we got the 
> permit by agreeing, not arguing.
> We have a new 160 m antenna design that I have been testing from 
> C6AGU. With the help of a salt-water "ground" it will work OK. (NEC 
> indicates a gain of 6 dBi.)
> 73 and CU,
> George
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:55:10 -0500
>  Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I respectfully suggest the Baker Is. dxpedition be postponed for a few
>> years until band condx improve.  It makes no sense to me to mount this
>> costly undertaking to a limited access location when propagation is in
>> the toilet.   If USFWS is managing access, they've lately shown that
>> they'll only approve trips to islands under their custodianship every
>> 10 years or so.  If this is the case with Baker Is., then this trip
>> will make another one in a few years impossible.
>>
>> Another point I'd like to make is that a later trip might afford a
>> chance to renegotiate what I consider a ridiculous antenna limit,
>> which seems to be based on a ridiculous antenna design, namely the "43
>> foot all-band vertical."    Such a height with top loading might work
>> okay on 80 meters but on 160 its efficiency will be poor.
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Rob
>> K5UJ
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>

-- 
Steve HA0DU


---
Ezt az e-mailt az Avast víruskereső szoftver átvizsgálta.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus