Better...for sure
|
Defintiely better for me on the left coast (AZ). With simple antennas I was able to complete my Low Band Monitor 160M WAC in 7 weeks, by 10/25/05.(Three weeks if Eu wasnt counted, hi). That took me almost 8 weeks more last yr. 9M2AX was my best, a good catch for anyone on 160. Finished the 40K mile 160M WAC by mid-January. Fun things to work towards on 160 each season. See you next Fall for more Topband fun.
Posted by
K8IA
on March 30, 2006
|
Worse, by far...
|
But, I moved from 9V to YB5 and entered the black hole of Asia. Hope it gets better or I take up VHF (80m).
Posted by
g4vgo
on March 27, 2006
|
Yes, better, but...
|
I'd be tempted to say that condx on 160 were much better but I have to take into account that -- after 42 years as a ham -- I finally was able to put up a *real* 160m antenna! A Carolina Windom is in place located 225 feet from the shack in an RF-friendly environment. Of course, the only option was to erect it in the wrong direction, but, hey, at least it's radiating.
Posted by
W2RBA
on March 2, 2006
|
Definitely Better but...
|
you ain't seen nothin' yet! The cycle low will be about this time next year and 160 conditions are often better on the upslope of the new cycle, so 2007 and 2008 will likely be even better than this season.
Posted by
W4ZV
on March 1, 2006
|
|
To post a comment, you must be logged in.
If you are not a member, become one now!
|