[HCARC] 10 Meter Net

Gary and Arlene Johnson qltfnish at omniglobal.net
Fri Aug 10 00:43:55 EDT 2012 

Yes Bill in my naivete, when I say 40 meters and above I am meaning 40, 80, 
160 etc.  And yes I realize that the Freq is getting lower.  In fact to be 
honest, half the time I am not quite sure if I should be talking in meter 
bands or in frequencies.

As far as 6 meters vs 10 meters, I have to try and remember that not all HF 
radios have 6 meter capability - you see, all the radios I have been 
researching to buy do have the 50 mhz or 6 meter capability and my naive 
assumption is that all HF radios have this capability.  Sorry about that.  I 
can see where quite a few of the even "not so old radios" don't have 6 meter 
capability and by using 6 meters we would actually be increasing the number 
of people unable to communicate vs increasing the number.  OOPS.  It's tough 
when your whole range of reference is less than 6 months.

I can see where elevation has a function in the being able to communicate. 
I am somewhere around 2300 feet elevation here in Pecan Valley.  I have a 
clear view of most of Kerrville except for the part over behind River Hills. 
I used to get my internet from Omniglobal from both their tower on Ranchero 
road and before that their tower at the River Hills water tower.

I will agree whole heartedly about the good discussions.  The more I find 
out about HF the more glad I am that I have already upgraded to General 
Class so I can get in on the "fun" easier.  For anyone who has not 
upgraded - it wasn't that hard - actually easier than from zero trying to 
pass the Tech exam.  However, studying for Extra - that is a whole nother 
ball game.  I won't be going to take that test anytime soon.

Gary J
N5"BAA"



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Tynan" <billandmattie at windstream.net>
To: "Gary and Arlene Johnson" <qltfnish at omniglobal.net>
Cc: <HCarc at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: [HCARC] 10 Meter Net


Gary:

Right you are. I assume when you say, "40 meters and above" you mean above
in wavelength, lower in frequency.

I think the main thing is height. K5XA was the loudest station at my QTH, 6
to 7 miles north of Kerrville. He is about equal distance south of
Kerrville. But, he has a 100+ foot tower and can run high power. I don't
know what he was running but with 1/10 the power, (10dB less) he would have
still been loud. I am on a high hill, about 2100 feet above sea level.
Downtown Kerrville is about 1700. Although I was using my 6 meter beam,
which shouldn't work too well on 10 meters, I have a 70 foot tower, which
makes up for some of it.

The advantage of using 6 meters would be that smaller antennas would work.
But, the disadvantages are that not everyone has a radio that includes 6
meters. The other disadvantage is that the idea of the get together is to
acquaint hams that aren't on HF and don't know much about it, to get on.

Yes, VHF and above are best for local work. With similarly equipped stations
to mine, I can work stations in Houston and Dallas on 6 or 2 at any time if
we have beams pointed at each other. My closest active microwave station is
K5LLL at Page, TX 120 miles from me. I worked him last Sunday morning on
222, 432, 902, 1296 2304 and 3456 MHz. Signals were S-9. We did have good
tropospheric propagation at the time. I probably can't work him on 2304 and
3456 all of the time, but usually can on the lower bands if he's not
bothered by all the noise from the Austin area on 902. He has to shoot
through Austin, about 40 miles from him to get to me.

One thing the 10 meter get together has done, is cause a lot of good
discussion on this reflector.

73,

Bill, W3XO/5

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary and Arlene Johnson" <qltfnish at omniglobal.net>
To: "Bill Tynan" <billandmattie at windstream.net>
Cc: <HCarc at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: [HCARC] 10 Meter Net


> Bill,
>
> I realize that NVIS at 10 meters is not a reality, and only mentioned NVIS 
> and the loop antenna at 40 meters and above - that part I have down pat. I 
> was just wondering if a loop antenna might work at 10 meters, since 
> nothing anyone else is trying at 10 meters is working for local coms. When 
> Center Point can't hear Kerrville, which is line of sight for many places, 
> it is a fair bet that 10 meters isn't going to work.  Maybe it would work 
> if someone took two 10 meter beams and pointed them directly at each other 
> and pumped a KW through them.
>
> http://www.sanantoniohams.org/nets/index.htm    This group operates 
> numerous nets across the area including one on 6 meters at 50.130 mhz. 
> Since they apparently are successful with this Freq, maybe it's something 
> we should try on a different night from their net.
>
> Gary J
> N5"BAA"
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bill Tynan" <billandmattie at windstream.net>
> To: "Gary and Arlene Johnson" <qltfnish at omniglobal.net>
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 1:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [HCARC] 10 Meter Net
>
>
> Gary:
>
> You cannot use NVIS at 10 meters because 28 MHz is ALWAYS above F0 (the
> Critical Frequency) - that frequency (wavelength) which is returned back 
> to
> Earth from directly above the transmitting antenna. This technique can be
> used on 160, 80, 60 and even 40 meters, but on none of them all the time.
>
> On 30, 20, 17, 15, 12, 10 and shorter wavelengths (higher frequencies),
> signals impacting the ionosphere at any angles except very small ones, are
> not refracted enough by the ionosphere to be returned to Earth and are
> passed through to space. Thus on 10 meters, signals are NEVER reflected 
> back
> directly form above - hence no NVIS. The fact that signals are NOT 
> reflected
> straight back down causes the so-called "skip zone" which can be anywhere
> from a few hundred miles to thousands of miles, depending on the ionized
> state of the ionosphere and the wavelength (frequency). In the skip zone,
> generally no signal is heard. For various reasons, sometimes, a very weak
> signal can be heard. One of these reasons is backscatter (the transmitted
> signal is refracted back to Earth in the ionosphere and then reflected by
> the Earth back to the ionosphere and then refracted back to Earth again. 
> But
> at 10 meters, that effect will NEVER occur at distances less that a few
> hundred miles. So called "short skip occurs when the E region of the
> ionosphere (about 60 miles above Earth) becomes very heavily ionized. This
> is called Sporadic E and can also affect 6 meter (50 MHz) signals and even 
> 2
> meter (144 MHz) signals. I got in on one of these rare 2 meter openings 
> two
> weeks ago, working stations in New York State, Ontario and Ohio. But, even
> during the summer months, when Sporadic E is most prevalent, it does not
> occur all the time. That's why it is called "sporadic." And it NEVER 
> returns
> 10 meter signals directly back to Earth (NVIS). About the highest 
> frequency
> that Sporadic E will return directly back to Earth is roughly 10 MHz (30
> meters).
>
> The reason that Sporadic E, or any ionosphere layer, will return signals
> back to Earth is because of the lower angle which the signals hit the 
> layer.
> You can see this in water. If you look directly up through the water, you
> don't see a reflection, You see what is above the water, generally the 
> sky.
> But if you look at a smaller angle, you can see reflections from the 
> surface
> of the water.
>
> There is nothing wrong with full wave loops, but unless erected in an
> inverted V type configuration, they require four supports instead of just
> two. The principal advantage of full wave loops is that they don't exhibit
> extremely high voltages. Half wave dipoles exhibit a curve with the 
> voltage
> (impedance) low at the center and very high at the ends, simply because 
> the
> ends are open and there is no place for current to flow.
>
> One of the first uses of the full wave loop was at short wave station, 
> HCJB,
> at Quito Ecuador. Because of the high altitude and high power of the
> transmitters, corona discharges were often experienced off the ends of the
> antennas. An engineer at the station, concluded that the problem could be
> alleviated by closing the ends with another halfwave length of wire., Thus
> the was born the "cubical quad" antenna. Many UHF and microwave antennas
> employ this principal - the so-called "loop Yagi". I have several loop
> Yagis, including a 73 element monster for 2304 MHz still not up. My 902,
> 1296 and 3456 MHz antennas are all loop Yagis (full wavelength elements).
>
> I hope this responds to your suggestion for employing NVIS for the HCARC 
> 10
> meter net and gives you a little incite into HF and VHF propagation and 
> full
> wave loops.
>
> 73,
>
> Bill, W3XO/5
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Gary and Arlene Johnson" <qltfnish at omniglobal.net>
> To: "Bill Tynan" <billandmattie at windstream.net>
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [HCARC] 10 Meter Net
>
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> I have been reading about local HF nets and one of the antennas they 
>> recommend (on 40 meters) is a full wave loop as they say full wave loops 
>> are inherently quieter and more effective at NVIS.  I wonder if a full 
>> wave loop would work at 10 meters.  I have enough wire to donate (80 
>> feet - enough for 2 loops) for two people to find out if they can hear 
>> one another.  I guess the other side of the question is what have we got 
>> to lose, since nothing else we have been trying seems to work.  At approx 
>> 9 feet per side they could be hung vertically and connected to be either 
>> Horizontally or Vertically polarized.
>>
>> Gary J
>> N5"BAA"
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Bill Tynan" <billandmattie at windstream.net>
>> To: <galeheise at windstream.net>; "HCARC Reflector" <HCARC at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: [HCARC] 10 Meter Net
>>
>>
>>>I listened - no 10 meter antenna.
>>>
>>> I heard most of the stations with my 6 meter beam, some quite weak. K5XA 
>>> was
>>> by far the strongest.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Bill, W3XO/5
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: <galeheise at windstream.net>
>>> To: "HCARC Reflector" <HCARC at mailman.qth.net>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 9:35 PM
>>> Subject: [HCARC] 10 Meter Net
>>>
>>>
>>>> To All-
>>>>
>>>>  Thanks to the following hams who checked into the 10 meter net tonight
>>>> and provided excellent encouragement to the hams who spoke from the 
>>>> Club
>>>> Station.
>>>>
>>>> K5HV - Harvey
>>>> KF5NHK - Terry
>>>> W0LPD – Fred
>>>> K5XA – John
>>>> WD5ENH – Steve
>>>> K5YB – Bob
>>>> AF5AO – Charlie
>>>> AD5UZ – Curtis
>>>> KK5IA - Frank
>>>> N4YPT - Jeff
>>>> AC4CA – John
>>>> W5QXX – Andy
>>>>
>>>>  We also had three Club Members visit the Club Station this evening.
>>>> KF5QXN, Joe Vaughn, K5AFC, Alan Cone and KF5NHP, Mike Connor.  While
>>>> meeting at the Club Station provided a centralized meeting place, it 
>>>> wasn’t
>>>> the best location for net control.  Although there were 12 stations 
>>>> that
>>>> checked into the net I had either difficult or no copy on 6 of these
>>>> stations.
>>>>
>>>>  I’m certainly open to any suggestions as to how we can increase the
>>>> coverage and provide encouragement to those interested in HF 
>>>> operations.
>>>>
>>>> Gale
>>>> KM4DR
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> HCARC mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hcarc
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:HCARC at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> HCARC mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hcarc
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:HCARC at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>

More information about the HCARC mailing list