Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] DXCC, WAS, QCWA, Antennas and heights

To: "towertalk@contesting.com" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] DXCC, WAS, QCWA, Antennas and heights
From: "Roger (K8RI) on TT" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 21:46:10 -0400
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
DXCC? I've been a ham for over 55 years and a life member of the ARRL for over 50 years. I don't even have WAS although It's most likely because I've never tried nor had the Inclination. I came the closest to WAS while as a Novice and my first year in the General class. OTOH working from 6 different locations may have played a part as well. I would like to get my CW speed back up to where it was at one time. Back then, just listening to high speed CW was like listening to someone talking. No way could I write that fast. A good CW copying program is about the best I could hope for now.

"To me", Ham Radio has been about "getting things to work" and shooting the breeze, rather than awards, or clubs. I get a station working and I end up trying something else. I'll start listening to a contest, make a few contacts and lose interest. I was far more active when I had rudimentary equipment than with my current and fairly elaborate stations. (SO2R)

I've never had an interest in digital form of communication as I have a degree with work toward my masters in computer science. I spent years working 10 to over 16 hours a day working with and on computers. Add to that years as a computer systems project manager (IOW - getting things to work) which meant quite a few years off-the-air.

I've had antennas that worked well (for me) and some that didn't. I have been able to run A/B comparisons on a few over a number of years.

The A/B comparisons are a valid data point while all other antenna performances are nothing more than an anecdotal report on those antennas other than the shared dismal performance of multiband trap verticals. Sure, people have worked many countries and states with them, but where another reasonable alternative is available, they don't compare favorably.

OTOH any given antenna height is playing the odds. I like big antennas, but "on paper" there is little difference between, 3,4, and 5 element full size antennas. Antenna modeling based on physics still places odds on the optimal antenna height, or any given height. Whether above or below the calculated height by reasonable heights, there will be a time when band conditions favor these heights over the statically derived optimal antenna height for that band. Hence the big contesters run antennas at multiple heights and diversity reception, selecting the antenna with the strongest signal for the desired distance. I've wanted one of these systems for years, but I have neither the land, nor the budget to do more than imagine building a station like one of these I have little desire to log into one of the "super stations" and play, over the Internet.

In the end it comes down to having a good antenna at the right height, at the right time, as well as operator skill.

--

73

Roger (K8RI)


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [TowerTalk] DXCC, WAS, QCWA, Antennas and heights, Roger (K8RI) on TT <=