Herb,
Congratulations on the 160 contact! I still haven't heard a peep but
its good to know some of us are getting the Q.
Last night was a bit irritating on 80 in that I heard their weak
signal, building over 45 minutes and then peaking at close to S9 on
the Hi-Z, but they were only calling JA. Calling JA lasted well past
the peak and well until they were back to being S2 here. By that time
a Q wasn't likely for most of the horde I saw calling them on the
scope. Perhaps they're going to cover different geographic areas on
different days, we'll have to see.
It is a challenge!
Gary
KA1J
> EP6T was easy to work on 160 meters last night perhaps due to some
> equatorial skewing and some skilled operators who had a NA set aside on
> 1828. without this breaking the EU wall would have been impossible.
> This has not been the case on 80 meters as there appears to be some
> local noise problem. The 80 meter CW signals here were at time 599 plus
> 10 and there were many QRO East coast callers with no joy. When EP6T
> would QSX up 2 for NA only they did not appear to hear anything except
> maybe now and then a partial. So apparently in frustration they
> returned to working EU. The question remains if they can be easily
> worked on 160 and then not on 80 will the same rig and antenna(s) on
> this end what could be the problem. After five days of calling on 80 for
> six hours every night I have come to the conclusion that their 80 meter
> RX antenna may not favor the Western hemisphere. It almost seems like
> the front end of the RX section is hurting. With an 80 meter Q rate of
> one contact in five minutes and then
>
> Even a 200 foot BOG favoring the America's at the end of a 1000' piece
> of RG6 away from the local noise might help make it possible for some
> NA/SA stations to get in the log on 80. Certainly EP6T being able to
> hear me with ease on 160 so they should be able to do the same on 80.
> Maybe the solution is not that difficult. The awesome skill of the
> operators on 160 is well established but the 80 position might be
> different. with different equipment and different ops. On this side
> there may come a point where it is point where calling for days with no
> chance in even having a chance must be considered.
>
>
> Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:19 AM, Bill and Liz wrote:
> > Last night the expedition had a pretty good signal on 80M...workable,I
> > thought, by anyone running a bit of power, some long deep QSB but also some
> > surprisingly long peaks too. In the time that I spent listening, they
> > worked no NA stations, so either propagation is causing great difficulties
> > for them on receive, their noise level is high (this may be the real
> > reason-there is heavy industry on the island not very far from their QTH)
> > or the oeEU wall? is just too high and deep. At no time did I hear a
> > request to stand by for NA even as their sunrise approached and propagation
> > would be tops for us.
> >
> > And not a peep on 160M here (EN93) through the first few evenings. So far
> > just 3 NA stations have made it into the log on topband with some 71 on
> > 80M. Not good for NA!!
> >
> > Bill VE3NH
> > _________________
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|