Try an open 20 m half wave (open 40 m quarter wave) across the 20 m antenna. If
it is front end overload this should fix it.
Good luck.
Chuck
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 23, 2020, at 7:30 AM, cq-contest-request@contesting.com wrote:
>
> Send CQ-Contest mailing list submissions to
> cq-contest@contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cq-contest-request@contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cq-contest-owner@contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CQ-Contest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. ARRL DX SSB Contest March 2020 (CEPitts)
> 2. 40m to 20m interference (William Hendrick)
> 3. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (Joe)
> 4. Re: 40m to 20m interference (Jim Brown)
> 5. Re: 40m to 20m interference (donovanf@starpower.net)
> 6. Re: 40m to 20m interference (Jeff Blaine)
> 7. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (ku8e)
> 8. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (rjairam@gmail.com)
> 9. CQWW 160 CW: Listen South! (jmaass@k8nd.com)
> 10. Re: 40m to 20m interference (Edward Sawyer)
> 11. Re: WRTC2022 Qualification standings update (Edward Sawyer)
> 12. Re: 40m to 20m interference (john@kk9a.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 16:01:56 -0500
> From: CEPitts <cpitts@ec.rr.com>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX SSB Contest March 2020
> Message-ID: <05259860-71ce-b52b-34fc-44d9c190654b@ec.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Hello fellow contesters,
>
> I am interested in operating with a Multi team (any category?single,
> multi two, multi multi) for the upcoming ARRL DX SSB Contest March 2020
> If any team would like to have another operator. Although a drive to a
> location within approximately six-seven hours from my home QTH (southern
> outer banks of NC) would be ideal I am posting this at this time in the
> event an air fare purchase may be necessary. A Multi effort within
> NC/VA/SC that are within driving distance is feasible however a location
> further out such as GA, etc. (air fare considerations?) is not out of
> the question.
>
> I had been a guest operator for several years at the now QRT W4RM
> station. Bill is getting ready to retire and move on to other endeavors.
> Bills station was located outside Manassas VA which was a six to
> seven-hour drive for me from my QTH. I miss the great times and efforts
> we had at his fine station.
>
> Operated in other multi efforts at other stations SK W4MYA Bob, W4IY VHF
> MULTI efforts, WZ8P Everett in OH, NR4M Steve, and some dxpeditions. I
> would like to contribute to a team effort if there is a need for another
> operator. Love the comradery and knowing the team is doing is its best.
> Really enjoy contesting and having fun as well as helping provide the
> needs of a multi effort if one becomes available.
>
> Besides operating I enjoy contributing in the team efforts in regards to
> station prep, food contribution, and I even climb if the need arises.
> (Have a full body harness).
>
> Please reply off the reflector directly and I will gladly respond to any
> queries or offers.
>
> Thank you and 73! Charles ?Ed? Pitts, K5OF zip 28589
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 23:00:29 +0000 (UTC)
> From: William Hendrick <whhendrick@yahoo.com>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID: <506467261.10487753.1579734029255@mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each
> K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help. Both
> antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much for
> the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
> Bill, N0AC
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:26:35 -0600
> From: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
> To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli@alice.it>,
> "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID: <cd006889-dfe6-b766-bb02-b22d907c51db@mwt.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> I just love this WRTC Competition.
>
> Well at least the part where they all use almost the same modest
> stations part.
>
> And that's just it. (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now)? I
> would like to see this Qualification procedure run say two ways.
>
> Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now, anything goes, balls to the wall
> competition. Mega super stations and all that. Giant towers stacked
> yagis etc..
>
> Then the other half,? have the qualification be like the stations they
> will be using.
> A 3 element tribander at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot
> rigs. Of course no spotting too.
>
> I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just as good
> and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but these
> other guys never will be able to go because their stations just cant
> compete with multiple stacked towers etc.
>
> Level the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,
>
> that would be a neat experiment yes?
>
> Joe WB9SBD
> Sig
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>> On 1/22/2020 7:40 AM, Claudio Veroli wrote:
>> An important update to the qualification standings is available.
>>
>> It includes:
>>
>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added
>> CQWW SSB 2019 Claimed scores added.
>> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added
>> IARU HF 2019 Final scores added
>> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.
>> ARRL DX CW 2019 final scores (fixed)
>>
>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at www.wrtc2022.it
>>
>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 15:29:54 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <60ced4d8-3f55-3aa9-781c-d081cb12c0de@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> This sort of issue is one of many addressed in this talk I've done at
> Visalia, to NCCC, and a few other local clubs.
>
> http://k9yc.com/Multi-Station.pdf
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>> On 1/22/2020 3:00 PM, William Hendrick via CQ-Contest wrote:
>> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each
>> K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help.
>> Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much
>> for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:06:06 -0500 (EST)
> From: donovanf@starpower.net
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <84519070.7005380.1579737966938.JavaMail.root@starpower.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Hi Bill,
>
>
> Please describe the interference you're experiencing, you described
> it only as "a lot of interference"
>
>
> Is the interference only directly on the second harmonic of the 40 meter
> transmitter or does it have buzz sidebands that cover much of the 20 meter
> band?
>
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "William Hendrick via CQ-Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 11:00:29 PM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
>
> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each
> K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help. Both
> antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much for
> the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
> Bill, N0AC
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:32:33 -0600
> From: Jeff Blaine <KeepWalking188@ac0c.com>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID: <279c9d86-af0e-286e-9abb-bf8a7e3fc6ef@ac0c.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Bill,
>
> There is no such thing as an easy answer on this.? But with a bit of
> study, you can get a handle on the issue and the magnitude of the fix
> needed.? I would recommend you track down the W2VJN book "Managing
> Interstation Interference."? It's got everything you need to get this
> under control.
>
> https://toptendevices.com/products/managing-interstation-interference-2nd-edition-by-george-custogeorge-w2vjn/
>
> 73/jeff/ac0c
> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> www.ac0c.com
>
>
>> On 1/22/20 5:00 PM, William Hendrick via CQ-Contest wrote:
>> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each
>> K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help.
>> Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much
>> for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
>> Bill, N0AC
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 21:57:27 -0500
> From: ku8e <ku8e@ku8e.com>
> To: Joe <nss@mwt.net>, Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli@alice.it>,
> "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID: <mailman.2912.1579789664.19421.cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Joe,You don't have to have a big station to compete.? If you do low power you
> will only compete against other low power stations. Bryant, KG5HVO is in
> first place in my region NA5. He has done a bunch of low power efforts with
> little competition and has got the maximum points for those contests. His
> score is higher than the top HP station K4AB, which has a big station. But to
> be fair to Larry he hasn't done as many contests and will probably leap back
> to 1st place.JeffSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
> -------- Original message --------From: Joe <nss@mwt.net> Date: 1/22/20 8:18
> PM (GMT-05:00) To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli@alice.it>,
> cq-contest@contesting.com Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification
> standings update I just love this WRTC Competition.Well at least the part
> where they all use almost the same modest stations part.And that's just it.
> (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now)? I would like to see this
> Qualification procedure run say two ways.Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now,
> anything goes, balls to the wall competition. Mega super stations and all
> that. Giant towers stacked yagis etc..Then the other half,? have the
> qualification be like the stations they will be using.A 3 element tribander
> at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot rigs. Of course no
> spotting too.I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just as
> good and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but these
> other guys never will be able to go becau
> se their stations just cant compete with multiple stacked towers etc.Level
> the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,that
> would be a neat experiment yes?Joe WB9SBDSigThe Original Rolling Ball
> ClockIdle TymeIdle-Tyme.comhttp://www.idle-tyme.comOn 1/22/2020 7:40 AM,
> Claudio Veroli wrote:>?? An important update to the qualification standings
> is available.>> It includes:>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added> CQWW SSB
> 2019 Claimed scores added.> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added> IARU
> HF 2019 Final scores added> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.> ARRL DX CW
> 2019 final scores (fixed)>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at
> www.wrtc2022.it>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ>>>
> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list>
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>_______________________________________________CQ-Contest
> mailing listCQ-Contest@contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman
> /listinfo/cq-contest
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 23:21:01 -0500
> From: "rjairam@gmail.com" <rjairam@gmail.com>
> To: ku8e <ku8e@ku8e.com>
> Cc: Joe <nss@mwt.net>, Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli@alice.it>,
> "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID:
> <CAMCyBs46ZD5Gx2Y0GupjeuncV59DgJcgHc+SFdm02fWYJRpjhQ@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> The problem I have is that W2 competes with all of W1, including
> Maine. You can't beat Maine. The difference is significant even though
> both are East coast.
>
> When they had it in the US, it went by US call districts which made more
> sense.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 22:35, ku8e <ku8e@ku8e.com> wrote:
>>
>> Joe,You don't have to have a big station to compete. If you do low power
>> you will only compete against other low power stations. Bryant, KG5HVO is in
>> first place in my region NA5. He has done a bunch of low power efforts with
>> little competition and has got the maximum points for those contests. His
>> score is higher than the top HP station K4AB, which has a big station. But
>> to be fair to Larry he hasn't done as many contests and will probably leap
>> back to 1st place.JeffSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
>> -------- Original message --------From: Joe <nss@mwt.net> Date: 1/22/20
>> 8:18 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli@alice.it>,
>> cq-contest@contesting.com Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification
>> standings update I just love this WRTC Competition.Well at least the part
>> where they all use almost the same modest stations part.And that's just it.
>> (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now) I would like to see this
>> Qualification procedure run say two ways.Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now,
>> anything goes, balls to the wall competition. Mega super stations and all
>> that. Giant towers stacked yagis etc..Then the other half, have the
>> qualification be like the stations they will be using.A 3 element tribander
>> at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot rigs. Of course no
>> spotting too.I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just
>> as good and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but
>> these other guys never will be able to go bec
> ause their stations just cant compete with multiple stacked towers etc.Level
> the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,that
> would be a neat experiment yes?Joe WB9SBDSigThe Original Rolling Ball
> ClockIdle TymeIdle-Tyme.comhttp://www.idle-tyme.comOn 1/22/2020 7:40 AM,
> Claudio Veroli wrote:> An important update to the qualification standings
> is available.>> It includes:>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added> CQWW SSB
> 2019 Claimed scores added.> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added> IARU
> HF 2019 Final scores added> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.> ARRL DX CW
> 2019 final scores (fixed)>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at
> www.wrtc2022.it>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ>>>
> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list>
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>_______________________________________________CQ-Contest
> mailing listCQ-Contest@contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailm
> an/listinfo/cq-contest
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 02:39:27 -0500
> From: jmaass@k8nd.com
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 160 CW: Listen South!
> Message-ID: <1579765167.0w4c0e04g0ss08cc@mail.k8nd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> When Topband conditions are good, it is easy to get enthralled by working
> stations via the trans-Atlantic path.
>
> This is a reminder to not ignore stations to the South! Every year, there are
> many South American stations who struggle to get noticed by North America and
> European stations. We hear many of them from our Northern South America
> location in Curacao, calling CQ and not receiving answers.
>
> Also, after a dozen years operating as PJ2T in this contest, we find the
> first few hours very? frustrating. North Americans are 'feeding on" other
> North Americans. Europeans are similarly "feeding upon" other Europeans.?
> Europe, in particular, is loud at PJ2T in the first few hours, but breaking
> their pileups has proven impossible.
>
> Kindly feed the Southern stations this weekend!
>
> 73,? Jeff PJ2ND / K8ND
> ?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 04:45:21 -0500
> From: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
> To: Jeff Blaine <KeepWalking188@ac0c.com>, "cq-contest@contesting.com"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <0D39B6681B67B44DAEC5D6AD99294A8E04ECDC8A0D85@SBEMAIL.sbelectronics.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Jeff, 150ft of separation is plenty for 100W and 40M/20M 2 radio operation.
> You will hear the 2nd harmonic on 20M when transmitting on 40M. But that
> harmonic shouldn?t be higher than S9+40db and it shouldn't affect more than 5
> - 10khz on SSB or 1 - 2 khz on CW.
>
> If the coax cables are solid shield across your entire system, the BPFs work,
> and 2 radios are commonly grounded, this should be the result.
>
> The stub would be to suppress the harmonic described above.
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=sbelectronics.com@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of Jeff Blaine
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 8:33 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
>
> Bill,
>
> There is no such thing as an easy answer on this.? But with a bit of
> study, you can get a handle on the issue and the magnitude of the fix
> needed.? I would recommend you track down the W2VJN book "Managing
> Interstation Interference."? It's got everything you need to get this
> under control.
>
> https://toptendevices.com/products/managing-interstation-interference-2nd-edition-by-george-custogeorge-w2vjn/
>
> 73/jeff/ac0c
> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> www.ac0c.com
>
>
>> On 1/22/20 5:00 PM, William Hendrick via CQ-Contest wrote:
>> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on each
>> K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem to help.
>> Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I asking too much
>> for the filters with the same antenna polarization and spacing?
>> Bill, N0AC
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 05:09:16 -0500
> From: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
> To: ku8e <ku8e@ku8e.com>, Joe <nss@mwt.net>, Claudio Veroli
> <claudio.veroli@alice.it>, "cq-contest@contesting.com"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
> Message-ID:
> <0D39B6681B67B44DAEC5D6AD99294A8E04ECDC8A0D89@SBEMAIL.sbelectronics.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I would suggest that anyone who really wants to go to WRTC this round put a
> good effort in. What was before very unlikely for most of us is changing.
>
> If you take a look at the competition, or should I say lack of competition,
> in many of the US areas, its pretty stark to say the least. I was number 1
> for a while in NA1 and now I am number 3. And Number 4 is significantly
> below me. I am not even trying to go this time. And I am in W1. What does
> that tell you?
>
> Why is this? My theory is that the competition format is no longer the
> desire for many of us. M2 with 2 operators virtually all of which can
> multitask on SO2R if not do dual band CQing for some si just not
> representative of "the best of the best" any more. That?s my opinion.
>
> Whatever you think the cause might be. Take a look at WRTC 2014 or 2018 at
> this point and look at 2022. Its amazing the difference.
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=sbelectronics.com@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of ku8e
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 9:57 PM
> To: Joe; Claudio Veroli; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification standings update
>
> Joe,You don't have to have a big station to compete.? If you do low power you
> will only compete against other low power stations. Bryant, KG5HVO is in
> first place in my region NA5. He has done a bunch of low power efforts with
> little competition and has got the maximum points for those contests. His
> score is higher than the top HP station K4AB, which has a big station. But to
> be fair to Larry he hasn't done as many contests and will probably leap back
> to 1st place.JeffSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
> -------- Original message --------From: Joe <nss@mwt.net> Date: 1/22/20 8:18
> PM (GMT-05:00) To: Claudio Veroli <claudio.veroli@alice.it>,
> cq-contest@contesting.com Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC2022 Qualification
> standings update I just love this WRTC Competition.Well at least the part
> where they all use almost the same modest stations part.And that's just it.
> (I'm puttying my Flame retardant suit on now)? I would like to see this
> Qualification procedure run say two ways.Divide them up, 1/2 as it is now,
> anything goes, balls to the wall competition. Mega super stations and all
> that. Giant towers stacked yagis etc..Then the other half,? have the
> qualification be like the stations they will be using.A 3 element tribander
> at like 40 feet or less, and dipoles. and barefoot rigs. Of course no
> spotting too.I bet there are quite a few operators out there that are just as
> good and even possibly better than many of the guys that get to go, but these
> other guys never will be able to go becau
> se their stations just cant compete with multiple stacked towers etc.Level
> the Qualification playing field some too. for at least 1/2 the field,that
> would be a neat experiment yes?Joe WB9SBDSigThe Original Rolling Ball
> ClockIdle TymeIdle-Tyme.comhttp://www.idle-tyme.comOn 1/22/2020 7:40 AM,
> Claudio Veroli wrote:>?? An important update to the qualification standings
> is available.>> It includes:>> CQWW CW 2019 Claimed scores added> CQWW SSB
> 2019 Claimed scores added.> RUSSIAN DX CONTEST 2019 Final scores added> IARU
> HF 2019 Final scores added> CQWW WPX CW 2019 Final scores added.> ARRL DX CW
> 2019 final scores (fixed)>> Please visit, share and support WRTC2022 at
> www.wrtc2022.it>> 73 de Claudio I4VEQ>>>
> _______________________________________________> CQ-Contest mailing list>
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>_______________________________________________CQ-Contest
> mailing listCQ-Contest@contesting.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman
> /listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 06:16:58 -0600
> From: john@kk9a.com
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m to 20m interference
> Message-ID:
> <20200123061658.Horde.6CVrGRHwyC-gq5awuvUhiWH@www11.qth.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes
>
> You're not asking too much. One of my homebrew 20m beams has a 40m
> OptiBeam interlaced on the same boom and at 100 watts there is no 20m
> interference at all except right on the harmonic. Make sure that you
> are using quality coax, good chokes at the antennas and perhaps try
> better bandpass filters or converting your verticals to monoband
> verticals.
>
> GL,
> John KK9A
>
>
> William Hendrick N0AC wrote:
>
> I have a lot of interference on 20m when TXing on 40m even with BPF on
> each K3 running 100w. A 23' shorted stub at the 40m rig doesn't seem
> to help. Both antennas are Butternut verticals about 150' apart. Am I
> asking too much for the filters with the same antenna polarization and
> spacing?
>
> Bill, N0AC
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 205, Issue 39
> *******************************************
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|