Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: TX5C

To: "Herbert Schoenbohm" <herbs@vitelcom.net>, <danilo.brelih@siol.net>, "TopBand" <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: TX5C
From: "David Raymond" <daraymond@iowatelecom.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:32:10 -0600
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
> .  The TX5 op, so far, has not been as strong on TB here as VP6 and they
> were plagued this morning with QRN.
> > 73. . . Dave
> > W0FLS
>
>
> I can not agree with Dave on the TX5C TB signal strength nor on their
> ability to RX.  VP6DX was always booming whereas TX5C was readible but not
> strong.  For some reason VP6DX was awesome on TB day after day and heard
> very very well.  I called VP6DX a couple of times and worked him. However,
> TX5C took over 4 hours of continuos calling and when he finally came back
to
> KU4FZ, K4VFZ, and everything but my correct call......seems to indicate
some
> strong QRN issues at that end.   The distance from my qth is  twice as far
> to VP6DX and consider the fact that TX5C had a similar setup, i.e. salt
> water lagoon, vertical with radials etc. same trans Pacific path
> direction...there has to be some other reasonable explanation.  Even the
> posts on VP6DX begged the question "what are they using from Ducie to put
> out such a super signal on TB.?"
>
> If this was not such a perplexing issue I would have just chaulked this up
> to conditions....but why not inquire?
>
> 73
>
> Herb Scheonbohm, KV4FZ
> St. Croix, US Virgin Islands
>

Herb. . .I'm confused.  I believe we are agreeing (rather than disagreeing)
that VP6 had a superior signal and possibly better receive capability.
That said, I hope my comments are not taken as criticism of the TX5 op.
While it is yet early on, they are clearly making a serious effort and
having some success.

73. . .Dave
W0FLS

_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>