Vanity callsigns are long overdue. I anticipate the pressure
at Gettysburg will be tremendous twice. Once during the comments
period. And again on the first application day. (Get your
hotel reservations early?!?)
I want x1BS. That is not a political statement, just my favorite
initials.
Who gets to go first? How about doing by date of first license?
We have suffered the longest without being able to request personal
callsigns. Anyone can spend the bucks on an earlier postage date.
My date is April 1973 - WN4EOU.
73 and enjoy the holidays.
Bob Smith ND1H
>From John W. Brosnahan" <broz@csn.org Thu Dec 16 17:14:37 1993
From: John W. Brosnahan" <broz@csn.org (John W. Brosnahan)
Subject: 160M verticalsTO: K0SF
Message-ID: <199312161714.AA14207@teal.csn.org>
Steve, you are quite right in your comments about vertical arrays IN GENERAL
and I think anyone who designs antenna array professionally (as I do) or
even as a serious amateur is well aware of the recent works that you list that
helped refine the state of the art to the current level of sophistication.
But if you are going to list a litany of authors you had better list the
works done in the 30s for the AM broadcast industry by Brown and by Smith,
who really started all of this.
But I think Bill's (AA6TT) point was that he had optimized a very specific
design that is currently popular with the ham community for 160 meters,
and I refuted his claim that he was the first to do so on 160 by pointing out
that I had done it two years earlier. But please note that I DIDN'T CLAIM TO
BE FIRST, only to have preceded Bill. In fact my incentive to do some
optimization was based on the optimization work that K1EA had previously done
on his 80M four-square, and I did fail to acknowledge the phone conversations
that I had with Ken, who provided the inspiration to carry the work from
80 to 160.
But the real point here is that the original four square design by Atchley
et al. was done with computer methods but without optimization. The original
0.25 wavelength spacing on a side was just a convenient number that worked
well and no attempt was made to optimize it. Actually, optimization is a
many headed beast and depends on what the criteria are. Max gain, max F-B,
max F-all rear lobes (and at what elevation angles), best driving point
impedances to minimizes losses in the matching/phasing networks, etc, pick
your poison.
In any case, a square vertical array using simple phase differences such as
0, 90, 180 degrees can be improved by increasing the spacing. And the
original POWER dividing scheme (Wilkerson divider) was a disaster and the
quadrature based systems are only a little better. I learned a lot from
the early work that Roy, W7EL, did and I would also like to acknowledge the
copy of his notes that he provided me previous to publishing his work.
I would also point out an interesting little book that may not be in print
anymore but covers the mathematics of phased vertical arrays for the
broadcast industry for up to 12 antennas. Directional Antenna Handbook
by Robert A. Jones, PE. Published by Intertec Publishing Corp, 9221 Quivira
Road, Overland Park, KS 66212. This was copyrighted in 1978 and is a 0.25
inch thick, 8.5 X 11 Iinch paperback that is well worth owning if you can
find it.
The matching of a four square should be done by classical techniques that
provide the correct current at each element, such as W7EL's techniques as
described in the ARRL Antenna handbook, if optimum performance is desired.
But many hams don't have the motivation or equipment to do so and choose to
use commercially available phasing/matching units that are less than optimum.
And a kind note to N8ET/KS8S. Get rid of the GAPs. They are very
inefficient on 160 as you have found out. If short is important, use the
aluminum to make Battle Creek or Minooka specials.
73 John W0UN broz@csn.org
PS: My other hobby is collecting antenna books and the two biggest gaps
in my collection are the original book by Schelkunoff (1943?) (I have
the Schelkunoff and Friis (1952) book). And somehow I missed Volume 1
of Collin and Zucker (think I was too poor at the time to buy it new).
I would also like to get another copy of Laport in cherry condition.
Mine is quite worn--I love the photos with all the guys working on antennas
and wearing fedoras (I think that is the kind of hat they are wearing).
If anyone has any leads on the above books (or originals of the works of
Smith and Brown--I only have photcopies) I would appreciate hearing from you.
Thanks!
>From sellington" <sellington@mail.ssec.wisc.edu Thu Dec 16 11:20:48 1993
From: sellington" <sellington@mail.ssec.wisc.edu (sellington)
Subject: CW callsigns
Actually, Glenn K6NA gets the credit for the near optimum call pattern. He
first chose W6MAR, which worked well on cw, and on phone even without
phonetics. When K6NA became available, he grabbed that one. K5TA and
I sort of followed Glenn's lead.
Another former W9YT contester is W3XU. Bill must have had a reason for
following another pattern.
Scott K9MA
>From Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton@engineer.clemsonsc.NCR.COM Thu Dec 16 20:07:00
>1993
From: Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton@engineer.clemsonsc.NCR.COM (Skelton, Tom)
Subject: FW: callsigns, what else?
Message-ID: <2D10C11C@admin.ClemsonSC.NCR.COM>
Off to get a life, now...
73, Ward N0AX
PS (enough, already!) Is there ANY alternative to X-Ray?
NO! I have been trying for years to come up with an alternative, and
only now has the FCC given me the opportunity. However, there are
a lot of times (and I give my call in full!) a dx station gets me by
saying "Who was the X-Ray?".
73, Tom WB4IUX
(future K4??)
>From Chris Gay" <KU4A@LEXVMK.VNET.IBM.COM Thu Dec 16 15:08:06 1993
From: Chris Gay" <KU4A@LEXVMK.VNET.IBM.COM (Chris Gay)
Subject: ethics question
A week or so ago we were talking about run frequencies and how to deal
with the fact that you might be on the same frequency with another
running station within your skip zone. Here is a question about this
situation from the other end.
The following happened during the ARRL 10M contest while I was S&P in
the phone band. I came across two stations (we'll call them W3XYZ and
W1XYZ) running, perfectly zero-beat. I had already worked W3XYZ but I
needed W1XYZ. Let's pick up the action as they are calling CQ:
Simultaneously: W1XYZ: "CQ contest from W1XYZ."
W3XYZ: "CQ contest from W3XYZ."
KU4A: "W1XYZ from Kilowatt Uniform Four Alpha"
(I had to include the call of the station I was calling
so they would know which one I was calling. I don't do
this otherwise)
Simultaneously: W1XYZ: "KU4A 59 my-New-England-state."
W3XYZ: "The frequency is in use."
KU4A: "59 Kentucky."
Simultaneously: W1XYZ: "Thank you; QRZ contest from W1XYZ"
W3XYZ: "CQ contest from W3XYZ."
Now, it could be asserted that this is "no harm, no foul". It could
also be argued that I was causing "QRM" to W3XYZ's operation, and
interfere with his ability to copy the stations he might be trying to
work. There are certainly places where W3XYZ and W1XYZ would not both
be audible at the same time, and so calling stations would probably not
be heard by both, and so both could conduct their runs with no problem.
What do YOU do in the circumstance of two (or more :-)) audible running
stations on the same (or nearly the same) frequency? Work one or more
if you need them? Avoid them so as to not cause QRM?
73 de Chris KU4A
ku4a@lexvmk.vnet.ibm.com
>From Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> Thu Dec 16 18:07:18 1993
From: Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> (Trey Garlough)
Subject: Callsign Selection Algorithms
Message-ID: <756065238.361885.GARLOUGH@TGV.COM>
> As a guest op I've used a lot of different calls. My favorite contesting one
> is K3RT, nice rhythm on CW, decent phonetics on phone. My favorite CW
> call, though, is the call of the first Alaskan station I ever worked:
> KL7FSV - CW poetry. The worst I have ever tried to send: NV3V.
Easiest to send on a non-iambic paddle for 48 hours: K4GSU
Hardest to send on a non-iambic paddle for 48 hours: N4AR
--Trey, WN4KKN/6
|