Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:wes_n7ws@triconet.org: 286 ]

Total 286 documents matching your query.

21. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 16:36:26 -0700
In the context of this discussion I think RTTY is an "in between" mode. Decoding is done with a computer (or in the radio if you have a K3) but I've never seen a decode on a signal that I couldn't he
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00134.html (10,473 bytes)

22. Re: Topband: Inverted L successes (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 21:53:24 -0700
As the real estate people say, "Location, location, location." Wes N7WS On 8/28/2017 3:22 PM, JAYB1943@OPTONLINE.NET wrote: Last fall I installed an S-9 43 ft vertical, added a tapped loading coil at
/archives//html/Topband/2017-08/msg00075.html (7,770 bytes)

23. Re: Topband: underground cables question (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 11:56:38 -0700
It's really dangerous to make these "all" statements. I've been keeping rainfall numbers and reporting them to rainlog.org for 11 years.  My last measurable rain was 0.02 inches on Sept 14. The total
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00020.html (9,086 bytes)

24. Re: Topband: H40GC (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 06:00:51 -0700
Congrats Gary! I've worked H40GC twice now and he's good copy this morning an hour before local SR. The antenna is a still-in-work inverted-L with a too sparse radial field and no separate RX antenna
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00079.html (9,678 bytes)

25. Re: Topband: FT8 - the end of 160m old school DXing? (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:34:08 -0700
Peter has written elsewhere about this.  Perhaps he is too modest to refer to it, but I am not: http://www.sm2cew.com/jt65.html Additionally, traditional RTTY is still a "hear it" mode.   I actually
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00159.html (14,908 bytes)

26. Re: Topband: FT8 - the end of 160m old school DXing? (long) (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:51:25 -0700
On 10/25/2017 12:38 PM, Charlie Young wrote: ...The first big thrill was hearing my own CW echo several days in a row, before getting my 8877 amp finished and firing up JT65A. One of the biggest thri
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00163.html (9,912 bytes)

27. Re: Topband: FT8 (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:56:51 -0700
On 10/25/2017 7:03 AM, Donald Moth via Topband wrote: There was no thrill in the first FT8 contact I made  like the one I received when I worked W1BB using a Central Electronics 20A and a homebrew am
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00164.html (8,537 bytes)

28. Re: Topband: K2AV Counterpoise (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 15:26:58 -0700
I would forget the counterpoise and add more ground radials. See https://www.w8ji.com/counterpoise_systems.htm Wes  N7WS Should I disconnect the few ground radials when I install the FCP or leave the
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00171.html (7,463 bytes)

29. Re: Topband: FT8. (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 20:25:32 -0700
Try leaving FT8 unattended, and see how many QSOs it makes by itself? 73 de Vince, VA3VF _________________ I've unsubscribed but the WSJT-X Yahoo group can be searched for a thread where a guy said h
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00186.html (8,146 bytes)

30. Re: Topband: K2AV Counterpoise (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 20:49:15 -0700
I posted what I would, and am doing.  I subscribe to the idea that the radials should be about the length of the vertical as a minimum and using my friend, N7CL's rule of thumb, their number should b
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00188.html (9,327 bytes)

31. Re: Topband: K2AV Counterpoise (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 05:50:53 -0700
I'm not sure why you say that but I disagree. I cannot recommend highly enough Rudy's site: http://www.antennasbyn6lf.com It's all there. Wes  N7WS Radials need to be much shorter and I am trying to
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00200.html (8,226 bytes)

32. Re: Topband: Shortened Radial Experiments (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 14:44:35 -0700
No need to do it on my account. On 10/26/2017 6:31 AM, k8bhz@alphacomm.net wrote: This issue does indeed keep coming up, so  I am posting my response (of 3 years ago) again for K7EG, N7WS, VA3MVW, W0
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00230.html (7,252 bytes)

33. Re: Topband: 160m Vertical Ideas? (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:06:27 -0700
Trying to figure out my scheme for 160m. I currently have three crank up towers about 35 apart from one another. One cranks up to 106, the next to 70 and third, to 89. I figured I could shunt feed on
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00256.html (8,322 bytes)

34. Re: Topband: Conditions Last Night (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 08:13:07 -0700
V26 seemed to be deaf to the whole west coast. _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00280.html (7,618 bytes)

35. Re: Topband: (no subject) (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 08:54:03 -0700
On 10/29/2017 6:02 AM, StellarCAT wrote: ahhh.... forgive me if Im wrong but all of this discussion was relative to ELEVATED radials correct? No. _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http:/
/archives//html/Topband/2017-10/msg00291.html (6,566 bytes)

36. Re: Topband: 160m Vertical matching Help (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 10:42:19 -0700
Trevor, You haven't really provided enough information to solve your problem.  If you want to use a shunt coil then I suggest that you consider measuring the R-jX at your frequency of interest and th
/archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00004.html (8,919 bytes)

37. Re: Topband: 160m Vertical matching Help (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 20:25:01 -0700
Well, yes, the transmitter is looking into the transmission line and then the antenna load, so they are different.  To be fair you need to place the analyzer at the input (TX) end of the line.  Now t
/archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00030.html (9,992 bytes)

38. Re: Topband: FT8 qrm (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:50:14 -0700
So what's the protocol when a CW man checks a frequency, hears nothing, sends a couple of QRL? and hears nothing and begins to run stations.  Then sometime later a guy running an imaginary mode...oop
/archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00168.html (7,789 bytes)

39. Re: Topband: FT8 qrm (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 05:29:55 -0700
My scenario had the CW man on the frequency FIRST. But the digital guys e.g. FT8 have 2khz wide filters. So there is a fundamental assymetry here. Tim N3QE Sent from my VAX-11/780 So what's the proto
/archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00174.html (9,276 bytes)

40. Re: Topband: ARRL 160 (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:33:36 -0700
Shh.  You're giving away my secrets. Wes  N7WS On 12/7/2017 10:07 AM, marsh@ka5m.net wrote: I respectfully disagree with Don Kirk. My experience has been different. I don't how many pileups I've brok
/archives//html/Topband/2017-12/msg00040.html (8,336 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
This search system is powered by Namazu