[UK-CONTEST] W6EL

[Ian White GM3SEK]

Nigel G3TXF wrote:
>Hullo UK Contesters,
>
>I like W6EL too, but it tends to be a bit on the "generous" side. It's great
>for doing Single-Band entries (on the HF bands) because it encourages you to
>keep going even if the band sounds completely dead and no-one is coming back
>to the CQ's! The display is good. My only concern is that it hasn't been
>up-dated for a number of years. I just wonder whether there haven't been
>useful improvements in the general understanding of HF propagation in the
>meantime. It shows multi-hop skip zones nicely too. No good for LF though,
>because it doesn't 'do' greyline propagation.
>
>73 - Nigel G3TXF
>

VK4OQ/G3HCT is a long-time W6EL user, and recommended HamCap as another 
one to look at. HamCap is a program that runs the broadcast industry 
standard propagation program VOACAP for you, and displays the results in 
a very readable way.

http://www.dxatlas.com/HamCap/

The HamCap page tells you how to download VOACAP as well. Both programs 
are freeware, although HamCap with its small display window is 'bait' 
for the author's shareware program DXatlas.

Not something to run during the contest on your logging PC, because each 
time HamCap launches a VOACAP calculation, it eats up all your CPU time.


73 from Ian GM3SEK


>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Alan Jubb - 5B4AHJ" <g3pmr at shacklog.co.uk>
>To: "Andy swiffin" <a.l.swiffin at dundee.ac.uk>; <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:16 AM
>Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] BERU
>
>
>> Hi Andy
>> I use W6EL Prop, which is easy to use and gives results in the graphical
>> form that I prefer. I've found it's accuracy to be fairly good. Don't have
>> the URL to hand but I'm sure you'll find it easily enough with Google.
>> 73
>> Alan 5B4AHJ  P3J
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Andy swiffin" <a.l.swiffin at dundee.ac.uk>
>> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 12:26 PM
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] BERU
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Incidentally, apropos of Andy oeg's comment, I see the report "in
>>> them
>>>> days"
>>>> often included a synopsis of call areas worked each hour by band from
>>>
>>>> the
>>>> UK.  This could still play a part in kindling the interest of
>>> potential
>>>> entrants who may have missed Gerry's piece and would be a lot less
>>>> effort to
>>>> extract today than when it was a question of wading through a raft of
>>>
>>>> paper
>>>> logs.
>>>
>>>
>>> LOL-  Great minds think alike (fools seldom differ :-) !
>>>
>>> I didn't know that was part of the original report - honest.
>>>
>>> I really do find the kind of information you posted a real help to
>>> understanding where to be and when.  And if I do, many of those who've
>>> come after who never had the fun of being an SWL should certainly value
>>> it.
>>>
>>> One thing I've been meaning to mention to Don (XTT) for a while is, is
>>> there any chance of returning to the old format of band reports in
>>> Radcom?  In the olden days when I was an SWL you used to get the reports
>>> for each band broken down by time so that you knew what really was
>>> workable at a particular time rather than just the theoretical output
>>> from prediction programs.
>>>
>>> Which brings me to - propogation prediction programs -  which ones do
>>> people use and are they any good?
>>>
>>> 73
>>>
>>> Andy
>>> gm8oeg