Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Lack of DX CW Activity

To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Lack of DX CW Activity
From: Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 20:33:18 -0500
List-post: <mailto:topband@contesting.com>

A note from the peanut gallery.

This is topband@CONTEST.com

I am on a postage stamp lot and the house & garage occupy approximately the 
middle one third. The frontage is not usable for antenna systems due to the 
underground utilities and overhead power lines. I am limited to compromise 
antennas for this band and those must be further compromised from published 
designs to fit into the space. I can be heard in Canada and the eastern United 
States. Most of the daily signals are for dx only. In some contests I can work 
a few stations on the north American continent. I can hear a lot of them but 
they don't hear me. I don't have an antenna for 160 at the moment and not a lot 
of motivation to put one up. Other bands seem more productive given these 
conditions. I would be satisfied with QSOs in the continental range but most 
are DX hounds and can't waste their time on more local rag chews. I am ready to 
just sign off from this list and get out of your way. Am I missing something?

Happy New Year to all and...

73,

Bill  KU8H

> On Jan 5, 2024, at 7:04 PM, VE6WZ_Steve <ve6wz@shaw.ca> wrote:
> George,
> 
> Yes. I fully agree that many ops don’t understand that RBN is NOT to be 
> relied on.
> 
> I operate 3 RBN skimmers, each on a different RX antenna, and auto switched 
> for the RX antennas to follow the darkness DX path.
> 2 of these are Broadside phased Beverage pairs. My QTH is a quiet rural 
> location.
> 
> However, the skimmer will only detect a very SMALL FRACTION of what I can 
> hear with my ears.
> If I look at my CW skimmer, often I can “see” the EU DX CQing, but the 
> skimmer will not always decode it.
> Many times I can work lots of EU, but never get a RBN skimmer decode from EU.
> BUT, the opposite is also true.  If I am getting EU RBN decodes, then the 
> band is probably in very good shape.
> 
> Either way, as George said, do NOT rely on RBN to determine if the band is 
> open or not.
> Just keep calling CQ.
> 
> BTW…FT-8 will decode “deep into the noise” however, with the common very fast 
> QSB on 160m, a big reason FT-8 seems to work better is the PC sends EVERY 15 
> seconds, for as long as the op lets the PC go.
> Sometimes on CW, the QSB can be so fast, the QSO needs to be completed within 
> 30 seconds, or the DX has faded into oblivion under the noise.
> (That’s why we usually don’t have time on 160m CW for exchanging more than a 
> signal report…..quickly!!)
> That’s also why on CW we need to keep CQing into what seems like a dead band. 
>  The difference on FT-8, is the PC does the CQing for you.  Yeah…that IS 
> easier!
> 
> 
> Steve, ve6wz
> 
> 
>> Noise is up.
>> 80 is becoming the new 160!
>> 
>> Also, it is noise that is driving a lot of ops onto FT8.
>> 
>> Another contributor is RBN! While RBN is great tool, most RBN RX antennas 
>> are poor on 160. Those that rely on a quick scan of RBN for 160 meter 
>> activity will incorrectly assume that the band is dead.
>> 
>> In the past 10 years noise has gone up by something like 10 dB in many 
>> areas. What worked 10 years ago, no longer works today. We need to learn to 
>> live with it. Invest in better RX antennas and other noise reduction 
>> techniques. (Petition the FCC to increase the power limit by 10 dB :-)
>> 
>> And keep calling CQ!
>> 
>> 73,
>> 
>> George,
>> 
>> AA7JV
> 
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>