[UK-CONTEST] FW: propagation SSB CC

Tue Feb 3 19:16:30 EST 2009

Horizontal loops can be excellent DX antennas, but shape and height play a big part in their performance in that respect.

73 James M3YOM

-----Original Message-----
From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Nigel
Sent: 04 February 2009 00:14
To: UK-Contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] propagation SSB CC

Steve, This is what every one tells me. It is a lovely sky warmer. No good 
for DX etc. But I work DX with it. I use it for all bands, except topband. 
Although it is used for the Sunday morning topband net. Which does not 
count.

    But one is allways looking for the ultimate antenna. I do belive that 
each location is suited to is own antenna. Also I have never tried a Windom 
so I want to have a thrash with it.

    When I say the loop meanders around the garden It does just that. It is 
not any real shape on would recognise. But I can hear quite well with it. I 
can also allways work what I hear. Also I need an excuse why others are 
ahead of me. Did I mention that it might also be my deep bass voice that is 
the trouble. Well that is another excuse.

 All the best Nigel G0VDZ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Knowles" <g3ufy at blueyonder.co.uk>
To: "Nigel" <nubsey at ntlworld.com>; <UK-Contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] propagation SSB CC

> Nigel
>
> A full-wave horizontal loop antenna is an almost perfect omnidirectional 
> high-angle radiator.  A simple dipole at the same height produces more 
> low-angle and has a dgree of directivity.  If, as has been suggested, 
> levels of high-angle absorption were elevated, the advantage the loop 
> would normally give for 'local' working would have been nullified.  Wet 
> ground should certainly not detract from an aerial's performance - quite 
> the opposite in fact.
>
> Steve  G3UFY
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Nigel" <nubsey at ntlworld.com>
> To: <UK-Contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 7:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] propagation SSB CC
>
>
>>I have to agree with Nigel G3TXF. I only live about 3 miles from him, but
>> last night I was 90 qso's behind him. Now I know he is a much better op 
>> than
>> me, but 90 in an hour and a half is a bit too much to put down to 
>> operating
>> style. (At least I hope I am not that bad) I thought that I as doing ok.
>> Called CQ most of the time, and most callers scores were behind me. Then
>> someone gives you a huge score and they are so far in front, it could 
>> make a
>> grown man cry. I dare say what antenna you are using plays a big part. I 
>> use
>> an 80 metre loop at the moment at about 45 ft at it's highest, and draped
>> around the garden. I seems to work ok. But it does not seem to be what I
>> would call a killer signal. A G5RV has been used and seems to be a total
>> failure. Never even managed to get across the pond with it. I dare say
>> location plays a big part. My ground is always wet. I often wonder if 
>> this
>> is acts as a bit of an attenuator.
>> Will be building an 80 metre Windom, to try sometime in the near future.
>> This I will be able to get up in a straight line, so we will see how it
>> performs.
>> Nigel G0VDZ
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Nigel G3TXF" <nigel at G3TXF.com>
>> To: "UK Contest Reflector" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 12:24 PM
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] propagation SSB CC
>>
>>
>>> Yes, there's more to this propagation stuff than anyone of us knows.
>>> Antenna
>>> height, antenna orientation as well as the propagation must play a 
>>> bigger
>>> role than we suspect. G3WVG (aka G0AAA) is about five miles from me. And
>>> yet
>>> we get remarkably different results in different CC's. Sometimes WVG is
>>> way
>>> ahead. And sometimes, like last night, TXF is ahead. Being lucky with a
>>> 'good' frequency also makes a huge difference. Unusually for me I had 
>>> just
>>> such a frequency last night. The whole 90 minutes was spent CQing. As I
>>> recall there were only two 'dull patches' when absolutely no-one came 
>>> back
>>> for four or five minutes. Otherwise it was a steady trickle.
>>>
>>> 73 - Nigel G3TXF
>>>
>>> PS : Although the K3 is supposed to be the dream-radio for CW ops,
>>> seemingly
>>> it isn't too bad on SSB either!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>>> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Don Beattie
>>> Sent: 03 February 2009 11:23
>>> To: Uk-Contest at Contesting.Com
>>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] propagation SSB CC
>>>
>>> Yes, I too was puzzled, Malcolm. I was running my dipole at about 55 ft,
>>> and
>>> found it really hard going here in Shropshire. I was kept pretty busy, 
>>> but
>>> with a lousy channel - I know there were callers I could not copy - and
>>> yet
>>> by the end of the contest I was some 40 QSOs below the leaders. I think
>>> most
>>> of these were in the South-East, so wonder if a relatively high density 
>>> of
>>> "local" stations helps in this contest ? It was noticeable that the Eu
>>> stations (DJ and beyond) were very strong, but (for me) few in number. 
>>> So
>>> yes, skip was long, I think, and high-angle absorption was high.
>>>
>>> Ended up with 132, but a real struggle to emulate the leaders.
>>>
>>> 73
>>>
>>> Don, G3BJ
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "g3pdh" <g3pdh at btopenworld.com>
>>> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 9:50 AM
>>> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] propagation SSB CC
>>>
>>>
>>>> Does anyone have an explanation of last nights 80m CC conditions. From
>>>> this
>>>> area (Norwich) the band was just mushy noise with a few signals, mainly
>>>> continental and a few G's. More noticeably the few G's heard could 
>>>> hardly
>>>> hear me, as if one way paths existed, and despite this some were still
>>>> exchanging relatively high numbers. It would be interesting to see some
>>>> analysis of this phenomena as to whether it was propagation, antennae
>>>> etc.
>>>> All stations in our group did poorly despite running decent rigs and 
>>>> full
>>>> size dipoles. Such conditions hardly seem to reflect text book theory.
>>>>
>>>> Malcolm G3PDH
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.17/1931 - Release Date:
>>> 02/02/2009 19:21
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.17/1931 - 
> Release Date: 02/02/2009 19:21
> 

_______________________________________________
UK-Contest mailing list
UK-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest