[CW] Re: Re: GB> CW Use on Bands - Results So Far

[Thomas Beaudry]

I lived in Clearwater for five years.  Yes the lightening displays 
could be awesome.  Yes the static could be horrible.  But I had no real 
problems with operating and never had antenna problems.  I've also 
lived in El Salvador which actually is in the tropics unlike Florida.  
No problems there either.

> I really have to say, having lived in Florida (Colony Cove, on Manatee 
> R.,
> nr Ellenton & Jct. US301 & I-70), that using 80 and usually 40 is a
> nightmare due to static. Worse, an aluminum 2M vertical would not even
> last at our HQ building - lightning literally and repeatedly melted it
> completely, and destroyed the ham station in that building, and ruined
> mine in my manufactured home, several times. Great grounds. No matter.
> Just a nightmare.
>
> Low-slung antennas worked best and survived best for short-haul on 80, 
> but
> there was precious little activity. Trap dipoles strung about 20 ft off
> the ground seemed to abound in the Ellenton/ Palmetto/ Bradenton 
> /Sarasota
> area. Some trap verticals with extensive ground planes would last for a
> while, but got most of their use on 20 thru 10, not on 80 and 40 
> except on
> very quiet days, and they worked just fine if things were quiet.
>
> Debates about this are useless. Personal long-term experience is what
> counts, and copying thru lightning static was just about impossible on 
> a
> typical day, from the experience of myself and other retirees living in
> that region. We frankly had very few active operators - except for 
> elderly
> no-code techs who switched from CB to ham radio. Public service was
> important and most of it was on 2M. Excellent facilities were available
> and are even better now in that part of Florida. Enough said. If you 
> want
> to debate antennas, fine. Advantages of each are well known, and
> importance of radials and lightning grounding systems are also well 
> known.
> But try operating on 80 there. Go ahead, be my guest. :-) I assume you
> know about the origin of the cubical quad? (not an 80/40 ant.either). 
> The
> beam at Quito, Ecuador kept losing the ends of its elements. Thus began
> the existence of cubical quads. Welcome to the tropics.
>
> When I lived there, I was one of about 2 dozen hams in whole area with 
> a
> General Class or higher ticket - I ran a survey of that at the time. My
> antennas were brought indoors when not in use, and I left the state for
> good before I perfected a big HF vertical that could be hinged and 
> lowered
> to lie on the roof of my home when it was not in use, again, to prevent
> antenna and eqpt destruction in the Lightning Capital of the US. I had 
> no
> room for a low-slung dipole. One guy had one, but he lived on the 
> marina
> and had it strung about 10 ft off the ground across several properties.
> :-). He was also a loner and did almost no operating. My non-ham 
> neighbor
> was killed by lightning at the nearby golf course on a sunny afternoon 
> -
> no storm around that anyone knew of. I left. I won't return. They can 
> have
> the whole SE. Living up here, snow and all, is SO much easier and 
> safer.
> It was an interesting area, but for me, it wore out its welcome, ham
> operator or not.

-- 
Thomas M. Beaudry
k8la / ys1ztm
K2 # 3422