[UK-CONTEST] 23cm UKCC
Chris Parnell
chris-g0hfx at hotmail.co.uk
Wed Mar 21 11:39:42 PDT 2012
Hi Ray,
Sorry you were one of many stations not worked, but perhaps another time.
This was my first ever time on 23cm and although not that many Q`s in the log, I found it exciting.
Using here also only 10w to a 23 ele tonna, it seemed to be an evening of two halves, from 2000 til circa 2100 most
sigs were 59+ and during this time the best distances were worked several over 250Km but from 2100 onwards sigs
were more usually around s2 with deep QSB and several were missed. Although CW was used in calling no Q`s
were made.
No KST help and no use of 2m talk back (perhaps a future improvement)was made and unfortunately no station north
of 83 loc were heard or worked.
Located in IO80 at approx 270m asl with clear take-off to NW thru E I expected a few
more in the log, but I guess not many beaming my way.
Thanks to all for Q`s and sorry to those missed in QSB, looking fwd to next one.
de Chris G0HFX (TDARC)
> From: uk-contest-request at contesting.com
> Subject: UK-Contest Digest, Vol 111, Issue 38
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 08:28:42 -0700
>
> Send UK-Contest mailing list submissions to
> uk-contest at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> uk-contest-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> uk-contest-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of UK-Contest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. March 23cm UKAC - Report (Ray James)
> 2. Re: New HF CW Field Day rules (Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee)
> 3. Re: New HF CW Field Day rules (dave at g4buo.com)
> 4. Re: New HF CW Field Day rules (Ken Chandler)
> 5. Re: New HF CW Field Day rules (dave at g4buo.com)
> 6. Re: New HF CW Field Day rules (Robert Chipperfield)
> 7. Re: New HF CW Field Day rules (Ken Chandler)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 11:49:09 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Ray James <gm4cxm at yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] March 23cm UKAC - Report
> To: ukmicrowaves at yahoogroups.com
> Cc: UK Contesting <uk-contest at contesting.com>,
> gmbeacon at yahoogroups.com
> Message-ID:
> <1332330549.82443.YahooMailClassic at web171003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi all,
> Last nights 23cm UKAC continued the trend of increasing activity month on month and benefitted with slightly above average conditions in most directions from my location.
>
> It was impossible to work everyone in the allotted time which always makes for an interesting time as you race the clock.
>
> At least 13 stations were active from GM this month. ?
>
> I managed to crack the 40 QSO's barrier for the first time, finishing with 42 and a good number of G's finished with over 50. I expect Ian at G8OHM to surpass 60, maybe even 70!
> These are incredible figures considering it wasn't that many years ago when single figure totals were the norm and reflect the ever increasing migration of stations looking for a new challenge in the hobby.
>
> Though high ERP certainly makes life a wee bit easier, many stations run 10w or less and getting consistantly good results and in particular if using CW.
> Examples this month for me include Keith G4ODA IO92 (10w), Tim M0AFJ IO92 (9w), Mike G0CDA IO83 (10w SSB) and Richard G4HGI IO83 (3w).
>
> ODX this month was Kjeld OZ1FF in JO45 with a very quick exchange made by aircraft reflection. David M0GHZ IO81 presented the most impressive contact by this method with a booming s9 contact done and dusted at typical "HF" speed in a matter of seconds!
>
> My QSO Map can be viewed at http://maps.google.com/maps?q=http://www.rsgbcc.org/vhf/kml_files/2012/uTvqSSCqi7feUDXovLY7eHFhCh4rMaQ
>
> 73 Ray GM4CXM IO75TW
> 150w 4x44 + LNA
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:17:16 +0000
> From: "Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee" <g3sqx at edtaylor.org>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] New HF CW Field Day rules
> To: "uk-contest at contesting.com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <4F69E2EC.1020602 at edtaylor.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
> Just a postscript -- the initial ideas about antenna rules for the
> Restricted Section were suggested by GM3SEK and GM3ZBE (SK) -- thanks to
> both.
>
> 73,
>
> Ed Taylor, GW3SQX
> Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee
>
> ===========================
>
> On 2012-03-20 12:57, Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee wrote:
> >
> > As some of you have already noticed, we have published new rules for
> > CW Field Day -- please see
> > http://www.rsgbcc.org/hf/rules/2012/rnfd.shtml
> >
> > The rules for this contest have not changed for many years, and
> > although that has had the benefit of stability, it has also not kept
> > pace with modern equipment and the way that entrants now generally
> > operate (or would like to operate).
> >
> > The main areas of change relate to the equipment used and to
> > antennas. You will know that transceivers with a second receiver have
> > been permitted in Field Day as a means of seeking additional
> > contacts. This has limited the scope for those groups without an
> > appropriate rig, so the rules for all sections have therefore been
> > changed to allow two transceivers provided only one signal is
> > transmitted at a time.
> >
> > As far as antennas are concerned, the previous rules allowed a single
> > element antenna with a maximum of 2 elevated support points and a
> > maximum height of 11m. This offered limited scope for innovation &
> > experimentation, so the new rules have been designed to allow more
> > possibilities without a large increase in club resources.
> >
> > There are other changes, and explanations are given in a set of
> > Frequently Asked Questions referred to in the main rules. These FAQS
> > will be expanded as a result of questions and comments from entrants
> > -- please email nfd.logs at rsgbcc.org .
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Ed Taylor, GW3SQX
> > Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:39:36 -0000
> From: dave at g4buo.com
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] New HF CW Field Day rules
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <2843eb95923ede898911d564441a4ad4.squirrel at localhost>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Perhaps Ed or Ian could explain how the Restricted section is really
> restricted any more.
>
> Granted, you can still go out with your two 11m masts but does anyone
> seriously doubt that a doublet at 22m will outperform a doublet at 11m?
>
> So, to be competitive in the Restricted section you now need a tower. Add
> a 4m cross-arm and you can build a very effective 2 element driven array,
> with balanced feeders down to ground level youve got gain and instant
> direction reversal, on several bands. So the group that currently drives
> to NFD with a few scaffold poles on the car roof rack is going to be
> marginalised.
>
> While the 22m total height is a good idea, allowing for example a
> horizontal loop on three 7m masts if you want, I think it is a mistake to
> remove the 11m height restriction for the so-called Restricted and QRP
> sections.
>
> And, to be competitive you are also going to have to invest in an
> interlock, bandpass filters and perhaps a triplexer. This was great fun in
> WRTC but I simply do not feel it is appropriate for the *Restricted*
> section of NFD.
>
> Dave G4BUO
>
> >
> > Just a postscript -- the initial ideas about antenna rules for the
> > Restricted Section were suggested by GM3SEK and GM3ZBE (SK) -- thanks to
> > both.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Ed Taylor, GW3SQX
> > Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:06:41 +0000
> From: Ken Chandler <g0orh at sky.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] New HF CW Field Day rules
> To: "dave at g4buo.com" <dave at g4buo.com>
> Cc: "uk-contest at contesting.com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <998981E5-8882-4CFA-A0BB-D042346C56D4 at sky.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Dave
> As I see it, and I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong on this, but that 4m or so cross arms will need to come off the 22m total support length as its will be deemed as part of the support!!!
>
> regards
>
> Ken..G0ORH
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 Mar 2012, at 14:39, dave at g4buo.com wrote:
>
> > Perhaps Ed or Ian could explain how the Restricted section is really
> > restricted any more.
> >
> > Granted, you can still go out with your two 11m masts but does anyone
> > seriously doubt that a doublet at 22m will outperform a doublet at 11m?
> >
> > So, to be competitive in the Restricted section you now need a tower. Add
> > a 4m cross-arm and you can build a very effective 2 element driven array,
> > with balanced feeders down to ground level youve got gain and instant
> > direction reversal, on several bands. So the group that currently drives
> > to NFD with a few scaffold poles on the car roof rack is going to be
> > marginalised.
> >
> > While the 22m total height is a good idea, allowing for example a
> > horizontal loop on three 7m masts if you want, I think it is a mistake to
> > remove the 11m height restriction for the so-called Restricted and QRP
> > sections.
> >
> > And, to be competitive you are also going to have to invest in an
> > interlock, bandpass filters and perhaps a triplexer. This was great fun in
> > WRTC but I simply do not feel it is appropriate for the *Restricted*
> > section of NFD.
> >
> > Dave G4BUO
> >
> >>
> >> Just a postscript -- the initial ideas about antenna rules for the
> >> Restricted Section were suggested by GM3SEK and GM3ZBE (SK) -- thanks to
> >> both.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >>
> >> Ed Taylor, GW3SQX
> >> Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > UK-Contest mailing list
> > UK-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:11:42 -0000
> From: dave at g4buo.com
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] New HF CW Field Day rules
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <4052a4a867c48b124f5f73e805a26784.squirrel at localhost>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Good point, but that system at 18m would still be an awful lot better than
> a doublet at 11m. So I repeat my question, is this really much of a
> restriction? And if you choose just to use a doublet you are still getting
> the full benefit of 22m height.
>
> Dave G4BUO
>
> > Dave
> > As I see it, and I\'ll stand corrected if I\'m wrong on this, but that
> 4m or
> > so cross arms will need to come off the 22m total support length as its
> > will be deemed as part of the support!!!
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Ken..G0ORH
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 21 Mar 2012, at 14:39, dave at g4buo.com wrote:
> >
> >> Perhaps Ed or Ian could explain how the Restricted section is really
> >> restricted any more.
> >>
> >> Granted, you can still go out with your two 11m masts but does anyone
> >> seriously doubt that a doublet at 22m will outperform a doublet at 11m?
> >>
> >> So, to be competitive in the Restricted section you now need a tower.
> >> Add
> >> a 4m cross-arm and you can build a very effective 2 element driven
> >> array,
> >> with balanced feeders down to ground level youve got gain and instant
> >> direction reversal, on several bands. So the group that currently drives
> >> to NFD with a few scaffold poles on the car roof rack is going to be
> >> marginalised.
> >>
> >> While the 22m total height is a good idea, allowing for example a
> >> horizontal loop on three 7m masts if you want, I think it is a mistake
> >> to
> >> remove the 11m height restriction for the so-called Restricted and QRP
> >> sections.
> >>
> >> And, to be competitive you are also going to have to invest in an
> >> interlock, bandpass filters and perhaps a triplexer. This was great fun
> >> in
> >> WRTC but I simply do not feel it is appropriate for the *Restricted*
> >> section of NFD.
> >>
> >> Dave G4BUO
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Just a postscript -- the initial ideas about antenna rules for the
> >>> Restricted Section were suggested by GM3SEK and GM3ZBE (SK) -- thanks
> >>> to
> >>> both.
> >>>
> >>> 73,
> >>>
> >>> Ed Taylor, GW3SQX
> >>> Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee
> >>>
> >>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:18:28 +0000
> From: Robert Chipperfield <robert at syxis.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] New HF CW Field Day rules
> To: dave at g4buo.com
> Cc: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <4F69F144.70403 at syxis.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Well, it's a doublet at 22m in the centre, but 0m (well, as high as you
> can pull the strings out) at the ends, since you only have a single 22m
> support.
>
> The new rules seem to open the contest up to a lot of really exciting
> innovations - you can't use commercial beams, so if you want something
> directional, you'll have to build it yourself, and there's no doubt
> going to be some interesting trade-offs in the number of supports vs
> height vs amount of support used for elements.
>
> And don't forget you'll need to save enough of the 120m wire allowance
> for the low bands - so no using a half-wave dipole on top band and 80m
> if you want anything the rest of the bands!
>
> I might be wrong, but my impression was that previously "restricted"
> basically meant you used "the field day doublet", and if you did
> anything else, you were silly. Now, we've got rules that allow for all
> sorts of experimentation and variation with some interesting restrictions.
>
> To me, it's made it a much more exciting section that it was before...
>
> 73,
> Rob, M0VFC
>
> On 21/03/2012 15:11, dave at g4buo.com wrote:
> > Good point, but that system at 18m would still be an awful lot better than
> > a doublet at 11m. So I repeat my question, is this really much of a
> > restriction? And if you choose just to use a doublet you are still getting
> > the full benefit of 22m height.
> >
> > Dave G4BUO
> >
> >> Dave
> >> As I see it, and I\'ll stand corrected if I\'m wrong on this, but that
> > 4m or
> >> so cross arms will need to come off the 22m total support length as its
> >> will be deemed as part of the support!!!
> >>
> >> regards
> >>
> >> Ken..G0ORH
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 21 Mar 2012, at 14:39, dave at g4buo.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> Perhaps Ed or Ian could explain how the Restricted section is really
> >>> restricted any more.
> >>>
> >>> Granted, you can still go out with your two 11m masts but does anyone
> >>> seriously doubt that a doublet at 22m will outperform a doublet at 11m?
> >>>
> >>> So, to be competitive in the Restricted section you now need a tower.
> >>> Add
> >>> a 4m cross-arm and you can build a very effective 2 element driven
> >>> array,
> >>> with balanced feeders down to ground level youve got gain and instant
> >>> direction reversal, on several bands. So the group that currently drives
> >>> to NFD with a few scaffold poles on the car roof rack is going to be
> >>> marginalised.
> >>>
> >>> While the 22m total height is a good idea, allowing for example a
> >>> horizontal loop on three 7m masts if you want, I think it is a mistake
> >>> to
> >>> remove the 11m height restriction for the so-called Restricted and QRP
> >>> sections.
> >>>
> >>> And, to be competitive you are also going to have to invest in an
> >>> interlock, bandpass filters and perhaps a triplexer. This was great fun
> >>> in
> >>> WRTC but I simply do not feel it is appropriate for the *Restricted*
> >>> section of NFD.
> >>>
> >>> Dave G4BUO
> >>>
> >>>> Just a postscript -- the initial ideas about antenna rules for the
> >>>> Restricted Section were suggested by GM3SEK and GM3ZBE (SK) -- thanks
> >>>> to
> >>>> both.
> >>>>
> >>>> 73,
> >>>>
> >>>> Ed Taylor, GW3SQX
> >>>> Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee
> >>>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > UK-Contest mailing list
> > UK-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:28:36 +0000
> From: Ken Chandler <g0orh at sky.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] New HF CW Field Day rules
> To: "dave at g4buo.com" <dave at g4buo.com>
> Cc: "uk-contest at contesting.com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <D2B98604-C9B8-44BA-B299-0243B54938EB at sky.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Dave
> Don't forget you will have not have any height on the ends, not even tree's will be allowed to hold the ends up as these become part of the 22m allocation!!
> But even having the apex at 18m its still fairly good!!
>
> Ken..G0ORH
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 Mar 2012, at 15:11, dave at g4buo.com wrote:
>
> > Good point, but that system at 18m would still be an awful lot better than
> > a doublet at 11m. So I repeat my question, is this really much of a
> > restriction? And if you choose just to use a doublet you are still getting
> > the full benefit of 22m height.
> >
> > Dave G4BUO
> >
> >> Dave
> >> As I see it, and I\'ll stand corrected if I\'m wrong on this, but that
> > 4m or
> >> so cross arms will need to come off the 22m total support length as its
> >> will be deemed as part of the support!!!
> >>
> >> regards
> >>
> >> Ken..G0ORH
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 21 Mar 2012, at 14:39, dave at g4buo.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> Perhaps Ed or Ian could explain how the Restricted section is really
> >>> restricted any more.
> >>>
> >>> Granted, you can still go out with your two 11m masts but does anyone
> >>> seriously doubt that a doublet at 22m will outperform a doublet at 11m?
> >>>
> >>> So, to be competitive in the Restricted section you now need a tower.
> >>> Add
> >>> a 4m cross-arm and you can build a very effective 2 element driven
> >>> array,
> >>> with balanced feeders down to ground level youve got gain and instant
> >>> direction reversal, on several bands. So the group that currently drives
> >>> to NFD with a few scaffold poles on the car roof rack is going to be
> >>> marginalised.
> >>>
> >>> While the 22m total height is a good idea, allowing for example a
> >>> horizontal loop on three 7m masts if you want, I think it is a mistake
> >>> to
> >>> remove the 11m height restriction for the so-called Restricted and QRP
> >>> sections.
> >>>
> >>> And, to be competitive you are also going to have to invest in an
> >>> interlock, bandpass filters and perhaps a triplexer. This was great fun
> >>> in
> >>> WRTC but I simply do not feel it is appropriate for the *Restricted*
> >>> section of NFD.
> >>>
> >>> Dave G4BUO
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Just a postscript -- the initial ideas about antenna rules for the
> >>>> Restricted Section were suggested by GM3SEK and GM3ZBE (SK) -- thanks
> >>>> to
> >>>> both.
> >>>>
> >>>> 73,
> >>>>
> >>>> Ed Taylor, GW3SQX
> >>>> Chairman, RSGB Contest Committee
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
> End of UK-Contest Digest, Vol 111, Issue 38
> *******************************************
More information about the UK-Contest
mailing list