|
bands in need
|
This is a great question.
1st, you can't win from down here unless it is the top of the cycle. Second, it takes some really good hardware.
From down here there are two trouble makers:
1) 20M When the NE can run here all day single-skip to Europe, it means bad news for us DubyaFours. Unless 10 & 15 are open at the same time. Not sure there is anything you can do about it though.
2) 80M My friend W8JI tells me we could compete with the NE on this band with enough stuff. Unfortunately, a 4-square doesn't seem to be enough. Maybe some day I'll have a real station [tm]. :)
73
W4AN
Posted by
W4AN
on October 15, 2001
|
|
160m
|
|
With no antennas for 160m thats pretty much a no brainer. While not having a 160m antenna hasn't affected my score so far time may be running out!
Posted by
N1SV
on October 10, 2001
|
|
NHAB
|
That's, "Needs Help All Bands"
I currently have no antennas up. I guess that says it all.
However, one aspect that seems to be missing in the responses - if you just look at my operating (where I could use improvement as well) I need more experience with 80-20 propagation, especially long and skew path openings. Probably 160 as well, but that band is less important to me until I grasp the others. :)
Posted by
N2MG
on October 10, 2001
|
|
160-10 needs work.
|
|
Guess I'm on the "fringe", but need big help on 160-10. The VHF+ stuff plays really well. 160 plays OK when I have it installed (tear down beverages for the spring/summer). Need to put up a tribander, and some wires on 40/80 to at least be heard (let alone competitive!). Got a stinky GP on 75m now.
Posted by
K2AXX
on October 5, 2001
|
|
15/10m
|
|
my worst antenna situation is on 10/15m . I only have a wire-doublet which works very good at 40 and 20m, quite OK on 80m and also good on 160m as a top-loaded vertical against ground. 15 and 10m are my weakest bands. I consider putting up a 10m HB9CV, but a beam for 15m would be too big for our garden :(
Posted by
DJ1YFK
on October 4, 2001
|
|
Band improvements
|
|
I voted for 160m, although it could just as well have been 80m. I use dipoles on both bands, but have a (large) Carolina Windom for 160, which is going up before the contest season. It will only be at 40 feet, but should be an improvement. It would be useful to have an aerial with some directional gain for contesting, but that will have to wait for a while.
Posted by
g4iiy
on October 1, 2001
|
|
re: 80 is hard.
|
|
A good vertical goes a long way on 80 meters.
Posted by
N8VW
on October 1, 2001
|
|
Band improvements
|
|
From an internationial contest perspective 80 meters needs the most work, but from a domestic perspective, 10 meters is my poorest band.
Posted by
wa3ses
on October 1, 2001
|
|
all of them...
|
|
A lot to improve on my antennas consisting of a 3 elt. 3-bander + wires, all at some 15 m high.
Posted by
on5mf
on October 1, 2001
|
|
80 is hard
|
|
I miss a lot of easy multipliers on 80 because I'm not loud enough there. It's not a QSO band, but missing those mults puts me well down in the pack overall. Everything else works pretty well.
Posted by
k2ua
on September 30, 2001
|
|
To post a comment, you must be logged in.
If you are not a member, become one now!
|
37% (203)