Roger
I had a great night working Asia HS0 and lots of JA also USA. Conditions here
seemed good. Was using my Dipole!
Mike G 3 SED
Sent from my iPhone
> On 16 Jan 2020, at 17:01, topband-request@contesting.com wrote:
>
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
> topband@contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> topband-request@contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> topband-owner@contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Topband resource (W0MU Mike Fatchett)
> 2. Re: Topband resource (Roger Parsons)
> 3. Re: Topband resource vertical vs. horizontal (David Olean)
> 4. Re: Topband resource (Jim Brown)
> 5. Hamvention related updates (Tim Duffy)
> 6. Re: Topband resource (Jim Brown)
> 7. Topband resource (Lee STRAHAN)
> 8. Re: Topband resource (Jim Brown)
> 9. Re: Topband resource (Arthur Delibert)
> 10. Re: Topband resource (Roger Parsons)
> 11. Re: Topband resource (Jim Brown)
> 12. Re: Topband resource (Roger Parsons)
> 13. Topband resource (Jim Thomson)
> 14. Wednesday 160m DX CW Activity Night (Roger Kennedy)
> 15. Re: Wednesday 160m DX CW Activity Night (Sam Josuweit)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 10:53:32 -0700
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID: <7702344f-b0a0-1a2a-f943-3b69a509d683@w0mu.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> I was only really able to work Carib/CA/SA with my inverted v at 70 ft.?
> With the inverted L I get our far better.? I am a very long way from any
> salt water in any direction.
>
> W0MU
>
>> On 1/15/2020 9:17 AM, donovanf@starpower.net wrote:
>> Roger has 27 topband QSOs in my log since February 1993,
>> well done!
>>
>>
>> Its interesting how our transmitting antenna experiences are exactly
>> opposite on both 160 and 80 meters. I've had little success with
>> 160 meter horizontal dipoles 100 to 200 feet high compared to
>> my 4-square vertical array which always perform superbly.
>>
>>
>> I use only vertically polarized antennas f or topband receiving ,
>> a 350 foot diameter W8JI/W5ZN/N4HY passive 8-circle array,
>> 580 foot Beverages and my transmitting 4-square array. All
>> receive 6 to 10 dB better for DX than horizontal dipoles at my QTH.
>> Many easily copied DX signals on the verticals are completely
>> inaudible on the horizontal dipoles.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 80 meters I use only horizontally polarized 2 element quads
>> 170 feet high for transmitting which are far superior to any verticals
>> I've tried although I've never tried anything more sophisticated than
>> a 4-square transmitting array.
>>
>>
>> My 80 meter quads perform very well as receiving antennas, on
>> some -- but not all -- very weak signals they outperform the
>> 175 foot diameter passive 8-circle array and 580 foot Beverages.
>>
>>
>> You can never have too many antennas...
>> Unless they interfere with each other, a non-trivial issue.
>>
>>
>> 73
>> Frank
>> W3LPL
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: "Roger Kennedy" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 10:48:51 PM
>> Subject: Topband: Topband resource
>>
>>
>> "However, 160 needs vertical polarization for consistent long DX."
>>
>> So how is it that I consistently work all over the world on 160m with my
>> horizontal dipole at 50ft?! (and my signals seem to often be pretty
>> comparable with other Brits using verticals}
>>
>> You certainly need a Vertical to work DX on 80m . . . but in my experience
>> 160m propagation is very different . . . I'm guessing it's often quite high
>> angle due to multi-hop or ducting.
>>
>> Also, I don't understand why on the Web page they are talking about NA
>> stations coming on Top Band at 1730 UTC to work Europe . . . I don't find
>> the band opens to NA until at least 2200 . . . and for me signals are always
>> much better after midnight.
>>
>> Roger G3YRO
>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 17:55:15 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Roger Parsons <ve3zi@yahoo.com>
> To: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>
> Cc: "Manuals@ArtekManuals.com" <Manuals@ArtekManuals.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID: <951245210.13893125.1579110915703@mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> NR1DX wrote: "Apples and oranges." regarding my antennas.
>
> Not really.
>
> There is very little pattern difference between a purely horizontal dipole
> and an inverted V provided that the angle of the V is not too acute. A
> horizontal dipole 5/8 wavelength high has predominantly low angle? radiation.
>
> W4RNL is sadly an SK. However, he designed and described a great many antenna
> systems one of which is a half wave vertical array for 160m. I have one. Here.
>
> 73 Roger
> VE3ZI
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 18:07:38 +0000
> From: David Olean <k1whs@metrocast.net>
> To: donovanf@starpower.net, topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource vertical vs. horizontal
> Message-ID: <e131a7d6-c187-c45d-b38b-9221c54e477a@metrocast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> I was always intrigued by the success of our "Down Under" friends in
> VK6. They tried vertical polarization and it was horrible. They had much
> better luck with horizontal wires.? I think this had much to do with the
> gyro frequency.? It depends on where you are in the world.? I am about
> 30 miles away from salt water. My ground is poor with hills and rocky
> soil.? The tops of the local hills are solid rock. ? I tried an inverted
> vee antenna for 160. It worked, but not very well.? My signal was sort
> of like chopped liver. No one would answer me when I called!? I did
> catch an opening, however, where it worked very well and I nabbed two JA
> stations. I have a recording of one of the? QSOs , and my signal got
> very loud in JA at times. Switching to a vertical here, there was no
> comparison. I went from chopped liver to meat loaf and gravy. Still it
> was a long time before I worked another JA, and when I did, it was a
> squeaker!
>
> 73
>
> Dave K1WHS
>
>> On 1/15/2020 4:17 PM, donovanf@starpower.net wrote:
>> Roger has 27 topband QSOs in my log since February 1993,
>> well done!
>>
>>
>> Its interesting how our transmitting antenna experiences are exactly
>> opposite on both 160 and 80 meters. I've had little success with
>> 160 meter horizontal dipoles 100 to 200 feet high compared to
>> my 4-square vertical array which always perform superbly.
>>
>>
>> I use only vertically polarized antennas f or topband receiving ,
>> a 350 foot diameter W8JI/W5ZN/N4HY passive 8-circle array,
>> 580 foot Beverages and my transmitting 4-square array. All
>> receive 6 to 10 dB better for DX than horizontal dipoles at my QTH.
>> Many easily copied DX signals on the verticals are completely
>> inaudible on the horizontal dipoles.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 80 meters I use only horizontally polarized 2 element quads
>> 170 feet high for transmitting which are far superior to any verticals
>> I've tried although I've never tried anything more sophisticated than
>> a 4-square transmitting array.
>>
>>
>> My 80 meter quads perform very well as receiving antennas, on
>> some -- but not all -- very weak signals they outperform the
>> 175 foot diameter passive 8-circle array and 580 foot Beverages.
>>
>>
>> You can never have too many antennas...
>> Unless they interfere with each other, a non-trivial issue.
>>
>>
>> 73
>> Frank
>> W3LPL
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: "Roger Kennedy" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
>> To: topband@contesting.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 10:48:51 PM
>> Subject: Topband: Topband resource
>>
>>
>> "However, 160 needs vertical polarization for consistent long DX."
>>
>> So how is it that I consistently work all over the world on 160m with my
>> horizontal dipole at 50ft?! (and my signals seem to often be pretty
>> comparable with other Brits using verticals}
>>
>> You certainly need a Vertical to work DX on 80m . . . but in my experience
>> 160m propagation is very different . . . I'm guessing it's often quite high
>> angle due to multi-hop or ducting.
>>
>> Also, I don't understand why on the Web page they are talking about NA
>> stations coming on Top Band at 1730 UTC to work Europe . . . I don't find
>> the band opens to NA until at least 2200 . . . and for me signals are always
>> much better after midnight.
>>
>> Roger G3YRO
>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 10:44:36 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID:
> <44c7f6e0-6802-364d-d982-3678a67d0d2c@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> It's more than antennas. There's also propagation. You're 700 miles ESE
> of me, which gives you a path to EU over less of the auroral zone.
>
> AND there's noise, which has been increasing over time. My first years
> in W6 were more productive for CW on Topband than now -- I have a dozen
> or so countries in the log from the solar minimum of those earlier years.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>> On 1/15/2020 6:21 AM, Wes wrote:
>> Roger is in my logbook, along with at least five other "G" stations.? My
>> station is described on my QRZ page.? I receive on the TX antenna.
>>
>> Wes? N7WS
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 13:44:46 -0500
> From: "Tim Duffy" <k3lr@k3lr.com>
> To: <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Hamvention related updates
> Message-ID: <005001d5cbd3$dc680440$95380cc0$@k3lr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 2020 Dayton Contest University Professors and the 2020 Course Outline have
> been posted.
>
> <https://www.contestuniversity.com/> https://www.contestuniversity.com/
>
> <https://www.contestuniversity.com/course-outline/>
> https://www.contestuniversity.com/course-outline/
>
>
>
> 2020 Dayton TopBand Dinner speaker is Glenn Johnson, W0GJ
>
> <https://www.topbanddinner.com/> https://www.topbanddinner.com/
>
> Info about Glenn's talk is here:
>
> <https://www.topbanddinner.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/VP6R-pg1-3.pdf>
> https://www.topbanddinner.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/VP6R-pg1-3.pdf
>
>
>
> The 28th Annual Dayton Contest Dinner
>
> <https://www.contestdinner.com/> https://www.contestdinner.com/
>
> Our dinner speaker is Bryant, KG5HVO - his bio is here:
>
>
> <https://www.contestdinner.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Bryant-Rascoll-KG5
> HVO.pdf>
> https://www.contestdinner.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Bryant-Rascoll-KG5H
> VO.pdf
>
>
>
> 73
>
> Tim K3LR
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 10:59:02 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID:
> <95b6203b-23e9-b2e4-1f0a-4f59174130d4@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
>> On 1/15/2020 9:55 AM, Roger Parsons via Topband wrote:
>> There is very little pattern difference between a purely horizontal dipole
>> and an inverted V provided that the angle of the V is not too acute. A
>> horizontal dipole 5/8 wavelength high has predominantly low angle? radiation.
>
> But there IS a difference in efficiency that looking ONLY at the pattern
> misses. To understand this, take a look at
>
> http://k9yc.com/VertOrHorizontal-Slides.pdf
>
> starting around slide #18, which plots the pattern of an 80M dipole as
> it's height is varied ON THE SAME AXES, and the following slide, which
> picks points off of those curves to show gain vs height at vertical
> angles of 5, 10, 15, 20, and 70 degrees. Slide #19 clearly shows that
> gain at low angles increases with mounting height. To apply these data
> to 160M, simply multiply height by 2.
>
> There is, of course, also the matter of how horizontally and vertically
> polarized waves propagate, and how they are affected by nearby earth.
> Vertically polarized waves encounter a very strong loss component from
> poor soil conductivity, while horizontally polarized waves are almost
> unaffected.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 19:13:43 +0000
> From: Lee STRAHAN <k7tjr@msn.com>
> To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID:
>
> <MWHPR05MB28163BDA6E7E5B04DB0719C9F5370@MWHPR05MB2816.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> And from the Northwest I have a slightly different observation of
> horizontal/vertical questions. What I have noticed is this. I more or less
> equate Horizontal antennas with high angle and vertical with low. The EU
> stations are usually mostly looking West into the setting sun. The East coast
> stations are looking into the total darkness toward EU mostly. Here in the
> Northwest we look into darkness toward EU and the East coast. I mention this
> because observations of high angle signals are VERY rare looking East toward
> EU. Maybe twice in 10 years. However looking West toward the setting sun and
> JA and UA0 I often see signals start early on the low angle vertical antennas
> and progress toward high angle signals in a same setting. The low horizontal
> takes over as the signals apparently get to a higher angle. I am about 200
> miles from the Pacific. I have on my project list (way way down it) to build
> a high angle, low elevation horizontal array with a high RDF and gain just to
> see what it
> would do. Unfortunately it stays way down the list.
> For me Frank LPL says it all " You can never have too many antennas...
> Unless they interfere with each other, a non-trivial issue."
> Lee K7TJR OR
>
>
> It's more than antennas. There's also propagation. You're 700 miles ESE of
> me, which gives you a path to EU over less of the auroral zone.
>
> AND there's noise, which has been increasing over time. My first years in W6
> were more productive for CW on Topband than now -- I have a dozen or so
> countries in the log from the solar minimum of those earlier years.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>> On 1/15/2020 6:21 AM, Wes wrote:
>> Roger is in my logbook, along with at least five other "G" stations.?
>> My station is described on my QRZ page.? I receive on the TX antenna.
>>
>> Wes? N7WS
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:56:34 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID:
> <7145684d-f7eb-21e9-5624-5c9a4d466b97@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
>> On 1/15/2020 11:13 AM, Lee STRAHAN wrote:
>> And from the Northwest I have a slightly different observation of
>> horizontal/vertical questions.
>
> Your analysis makes lots of sense, Lee. It's consistent with what I've
> read from trustworthy sources about propagation.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 20:06:36 +0000
> From: Arthur Delibert <radio75a3@msn.com>
> To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>,
> "jim@audiosystemsgroup.com" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID:
>
> <SN6PR10MB26089AC28AC176BF2ABC746FE4370@SN6PR10MB2608.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Back in the late 90s, there were a pair of articles in QST about a receiving
> antenna for 80 and 160 that rejects local noise. The antenna was low and
> horizontal, it was exceptionally quiet even in a somewhat noisy location, and
> it had a very high reception angle. I recall that the authors said they
> could hear pretty much everything the "big boys" could hear, but for a
> shorter window of time. Also seems consistent with what Lee said.
>
> Overall, I have to say that 160M propagation is still somewhat mysterious,
> and we should be careful about judging too quickly what others describe as
> their experience. We're like the three blind men describing the elephant:
> each of us has hold of a different part and so we have different experiences.
> We won't understand the full picture until we respect and appreciate each
> other's experiences.
>
> 'Nuf said.
>
> Art Delibert, KB3FJO
>
> ________________________________
> From: Topband <topband-bounces+radio75a3=msn.com@contesting.com> on behalf of
> Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 2:56 PM
> To: topband@contesting.com <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
>
>> On 1/15/2020 11:13 AM, Lee STRAHAN wrote:
>> And from the Northwest I have a slightly different observation of
>> horizontal/vertical questions.
>
> Your analysis makes lots of sense, Lee. It's consistent with what I've
> read from trustworthy sources about propagation.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:25:15 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Roger Parsons <ve3zi@yahoo.com>
> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>, "jim@audiosystemsgroup.com"
> <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID: <1518173527.14041626.1579123515579@mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> K9YC wrote: "But there IS a difference in efficiency that looking ONLY at the
> pattern misses."
>
> Your point is unclear to me. Of course the pattern of a horizontal antenna
> changes with changing height and with other environmental factors. If the
> antenna is actually on the ground the efficiency is pretty terrible, but it
> does not have to be very high before efficiency does not change meaningfully
> with height - assuming that total radiation is considered rather than just
> that which is useful.
>
> However, I was only describing a horizontal dipole at around 5/8 wavelength
> high. NR1DX suggested that because the ends are lower than the centre that
> there was now an additional "significant vertical component". There is not if
> the included angle is shallow, which in my case it is.*
>
> 73 Roger
> VE3ZI
>
> *(I stated that the ends were at 250' - they are at least that, and could be
> up to about 290' - but I have not accurately measured the tension in the
> support rope nor allowed for stretch so I cannot be specific about the
> catenary.)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:05:29 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID:
> <67e9dc98-c95d-7d1e-73ad-86c466694923@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
>> On 1/15/2020 1:25 PM, Roger Parsons via Topband wrote:
>> Your point is unclear to me.
>
> Did you study the slides?
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 23:36:22 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Roger Parsons <ve3zi@yahoo.com>
> To: Topband <topband@contesting.com>, "jim@audiosystemsgroup.com"
> <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID: <1797291964.14123383.1579131382152@mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Yes
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:05:27 -0800
> From: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
> To: "TopBand List" <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Topband resource
> Message-ID: <9F9A9A2454FD459D8243CE20F30DE4CE@DESKTOPSV54DBH>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:58:57 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Roger Parsons <ve3zi@yahoo.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Topband resource
>
> <W8JI's experience with a horizontal dipole at 300 ft is often quoted as
> proof that only vertical antennas are useful for 160m DX. This is not my
> experience with a dipole with the centre at 320 ft and the ends at over 250'.
> In its favoured directions it is equal to a <W4RNL half wave vertical array
> over a very large radial system. It is unsurprisingly not as good off the
> ends, and quite is useless for relatively local communications.
> <I am also inclined to support Roger, G3YRO, in his use of a low dipole,
> having myself successfully used relatively low horizontal antennas for DX in
> the past. There are most certainly times when higher angles are useful for DX
> - and possibly more frequently than <we imagine. There actually have to be,
> otherwise Roger would never work any DX at all. Note, this does not mean that
> a good vertical antenna is not often or even usually better than a low
> horizontal one. Finally, the UK is small compared to many other <countries,
> but it is not actually a tiny island. Roger's path to North America is over
> about 300 km of land, and he is more than 10km from the sea in any direction.
>
> <73 RogerVE3ZI/G3RBP
>
> ## AFAIK, W8JIs.. dipole was actually an inverted vee, with the
> apex at 300 feet....with no info on enclosed angle.
> Per the older arrl ant books, Inverted vees...with a 90 deg
> enclosed angle are omni directional.
> But they conducted that test on 80m, with an inverted vee up 60
> feet, with a 90 deg enclosed angle. The vee was rotated 90 degs....
> and signals 900 miles away did not change. No mention whether a
> real CM balun was used.
>
> ## Plenty of 80m rotary dipoles and 80m yagis that perform
> exceptionally well..at heights of 100-150 ft. That would extrapolate
> to 200-300 ft
> on 160m. Years ago, a fellow In Ore had installed the 1st F12
> 160 rotary dipole.... which I believe was up aprx 120 ft. His
> 1st contact
> was a 4X4. Several folks with 2 el....shorty 40 yagis up 70 ft,
> report that the shorty 40 yagi ate their 40m 4 squares hands
> down.
> Some have had great success with a half wave sloper......used in
> conjunction with a delta loop reflector...apex up. In some cases, a
> half wave sloper
> was used on either side of the delta loop REF. So 2 switchable
> directions were obtained.
>
> Jim VE7RF
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 16:00:42 -0000
> From: "Roger Kennedy" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
> To: <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX CW Activity Night
> Message-ID: <8A0C7DAFAD1D4A90BF2B36830597E599@Packard>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Well sadly conditions seemed very poor last night . . .
>
> My own signals were 20 to 30dB down on what I would normally see on NA RBN
> sites
>
> I managed just 4 NA QSOs . . . but heard several other people calling me
> that were way down in the noise.
>
> Not sure how many stations were on across the pond, but heard lots of other
> EU stations calling CQ, but getting few replies.
>
> Thanks to all those that made the effort to come on the band . . . let's
> hope conditions are better next Wednesday !
>
> 73 Roger G3YRO
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 11:20:41 -0500
> From: "Sam Josuweit" <samjos@epix.net>
> To: "'Roger Kennedy'" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>,
> <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX CW Activity Night
> Message-ID: <003f01d5cc88$e5fb2e00$b1f18a00$@epix.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Lots of static crashes from a storm front moving into the NE US. Very noisy
> last night.
>
> Sam(N3XZ)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces+samjos=epix.net@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of Roger Kennedy
> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 11:01 AM
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX CW Activity Night
>
>
> Well sadly conditions seemed very poor last night . . .
>
> My own signals were 20 to 30dB down on what I would normally see on NA RBN
> sites
>
> I managed just 4 NA QSOs . . . but heard several other people calling me
> that were way down in the noise.
>
> Not sure how many stations were on across the pond, but heard lots of other
> EU stations calling CQ, but getting few replies.
>
> Thanks to all those that made the effort to come on the band . . . let's
> hope conditions are better next Wednesday !
>
> 73 Roger G3YRO
>
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 205, Issue 21
> ****************************************
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|