|
1-9 of 9 messages
|
Page 1 of 1
|
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by VE2DC on August 30, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
This used to come up a lot on 40M... If possible I would call on tghe DX frequency because my beam was useless above 7.200 (high SWR)... If necessary I would call split at reduced power and hope I didn't fry the forty-shorty! On 75 I usually call on the split listening frequency.
|
| |
|
RE: 75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by WV4I on October 27, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Need keep 75M splits as close as possible because some using antennas with only 75-100kc usable bandwidth. 40m splits not usually as critical.
|
| |
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by k9yc on November 24, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Working split when you NEED to is fine, but we make enough enemies in the phone band when we are working ON frequency, and working split makes things that MUCH worse. It's one thing on 40M when BC is the primary QRM and there are few QSOs on the band. It's another thing entirely on 75M, when the band is full of QSOs. You may not hear those QSOs on your end, but they sure do hear us. This is VERY bad manners, and these guys have every reason to be angry at us.
73,
Jim K9YC
|
| |
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by K4FX on December 1, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
As WV4I said, the bandwidth is so narrow on my 75m antenna sometimes there is no other choice. Best thing on 75 is not to have really wide splits.
K4FX
|
| |
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by w1eqo on August 29, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A high SWR should not be an excuse. Before the contest add an antenna tuner that can be switched into the feedline. No antenna tuner? Then look at an "L-Network." There are eight of these, but any given antenna will probably need only one.
Another trick is to make your antenna out of 'fat' elements. For example, a vertical can have two wires spaced from a mast by 2 feet. With everything electrically tied together at the feedpoint and the top, this will almost 'look like' a four foot diameter vertical. This will greatly increase the bandwidth (and allow the antenna to be a bit shorter).
|
| |
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by w1eqo on August 29, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A high SWR should not be an excuse. Before the contest add an antenna tuner that can be switched into the feedline. No antenna tuner? Then look at an "L-Network." There are eight of these, but any given antenna will probably need only one.
Another trick is to make your antenna out of 'fat' elements. For example, a vertical can have two wires spaced from a mast by 2 feet. With everything electrically tied together at the feedpoint and the top, this will almost 'look like' a four foot diameter vertical. This will greatly increase the bandwidth (and allow the antenna to be a bit shorter).
|
| |
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by w1eqo on August 29, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A high SWR should not be an excuse. Before the contest add an antenna tuner that can be switched into the feedline. No antenna tuner? Then look at an "L-Network." There are eight of these, but any given antenna will probably need only one.
Another trick is to make your antenna out of 'fat' elements. For example, a vertical can have two wires spaced from a mast by 2 feet. With everything electrically tied together at the feedpoint and the top, this will almost 'look like' a four foot diameter vertical. This will greatly increase the bandwidth (and allow the antenna to be a bit shorter).
|
| |
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by n1kw on May 27, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Since most of us are using wire antennas on 75/80 m (dipoles/inverted Vs), be a real ham, use super low loss balanced line with an appropriate tuner and never worry about SWR bandwidth again!
|
| |
|
75/80m split or no-split
|
Reply
|
|
by KU2M on September 29, 2012
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
BAD idea, for reasons cited correctly by K9YC. And to the others worried about squeezing out every last watt of RF - forget the SWR problems - they are not germane to the issue here, which is one of good manners and preventing deliberate QRM reprisals from justifiably angry hams who were minding their own business when suddenly everyone started calling some DX station right on top of them. And yes - as someone else said - 75M is NOT 40M - but neither is it 20M or 15M. If you need a clear QSX frequency, wouldn't it be a better idea to look for something closer to your XMIT frequency, or look DOWN instead of UP - that is, closer to 3600 (or below 3600 if you can transmit there)? I often wonder why the band sounds relatively empty during phone contests below 3700 - there's usually space down there that's not being utilized - so let's utilize it!
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
Forums, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Forums Manager.
|
