[FQP]Mobile Station Signals

[W4GFQ]

I replied earlier to your question of propagation and provided my input
on the stations I heard.  But when you put the issue below of
propagation and skip zones below I wanted to echo that.  There was a
definitive "movement" of the propagation zone on both Saturday and
Sunday as the day moved on.  Early it was in northern FLA with nearly no
southern stations audible and this slowly worked its way to the south
and then could be heard to nearly turn and come back up.

Very interesting to hear from Maryland.

Don, W4GFQ


-----Original Message-----
From: fqp-bounces at kkn.net [mailto:fqp-bounces at kkn.net] On Behalf Of Jim
White, K4OJ
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 2:50 PM
To: ku8e at bellsouth.net
Cc: fqp at kkn.net
Subject: Re: [FQP]Mobile Station Signals


Bad news, Jeff... while I keep getting e-mails regarding signal reports 
of the mobiles I am afraid you have never been at the top of the heap - 
obviously you got out ok with so many QSOs but the relative reports have

both you and Charlie down at the bottom....

WHAT IS MOST FASCINATING is that to a large degree I think we are 
looking at of all things propagation and skip zones!  The same mobile 
can have luminating reports or pw reports... I never would have thought 
that starting with a compromised signal that would matter but I gues my 
logic is just backwards... if anything having all the factors in your 
favor possible, including being the right distance away, is even MORE 
important when you start with a compromised signal....

I will summarize the reports when they stop coming in...

OJ






ku8e at bellsouth.net wrote:
> Charlie,
> 
>  I used the Hustler tri-mount with the 20/15/10 meter resonators on it

> and we seemed to get out pretty good. I was using the short mast - the

> 3 ft - not the 6 ft.  The GQP was the first time I used it this way. 
> In the past I used the Hustler resonators seperately. The 2nd antenna 
> on the car was a Hamstick for 40. Also, I am also a firm believer if 
> you take the time to tune your antennas and not rely on an antenna 
> tuner your signal is going to be better too...
> 
> 
> This combination seeemed to work well for us and I never felt like our

> signal was "weak". I did notice the rate picked up the further south 
> we got so I'm sure propagation and skip zones played a big role on who

> was strong/weak....
> 
>                     Jeff KU8E
> 
> 
>>From: "nf4a" <nf4a at knology.net>
>>Date: 2003/05/01 Thu PM 05:33:24 EDT
>>To: w3dya at juno.com,  fqp at kkn.net
>>Subject: Re: [FQP]Mobile Station Signals
>>
>>The first day of the contest, I "felt" weak....I assumed it was 
>>conditions
>>because on Sunday, I didn't have any problems with stations hearing me
or 
>>working me if I called them....I can now say that after reading some
of the 
>>comments, I wasn't that loud on Sunday either....
>>
>>I will have a different antenna system for the next FQP....
>>
>>I really think that if you mount more than 2 resonators on a mast, you
>>begin to have reduced radiation...I was running 4 (40-10) on the same 
>>mast....I think I will have one mast for 40 and 20 CW and then a
second 
>>mast with 40 SSB and 15 and 10 (next year, I doubt 10 will be a 
>>factor)....This time last week, I had a 12 foot mast with 40 and 20 on
it 
>>and it was working great, but when I added 15 and 10, I had to take
the 
>>mast to 8 feet to make it work on 15 and 10....I could tell something
was 
>>happening, although the analyzer seemed to say everything was
ok...maybe 
>>the load was ok (after all, an analyzer will like a dummy load) but 
>>radiation wise, I was sucking....
>>
>>Charlie NF4A
>>_______________________________________________
>>FQP mailing list
>>FQP at kkn.net
>>http://kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/fqp
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FQP mailing list
> FQP at kkn.net
> http://kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/fqp
> 



_______________________________________________
FQP mailing list
FQP at kkn.net
http://kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/fqp