[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [IRCA] Puyallup, WA Twisted Propagation for 3-23

--- Begin Message --- 
Sorry to be a bit slow getting back to the fine points (re Latin American DX in western US/Canada) raised by Nick, Bruce, and Gary.

Non-splits are a negative factor here in the east too.  Those off-channel stations of yesteryear were the only way to hear some of the deeper South Americans and lower-power Central American and Caribbean stations.

Clear channels went away on this side of the US too.  The departure of some Canadians has helped some (e.g. Maritimers on 720 & 780; Montreal 940) but has not completely counterbalanced the more crowded band in the US that includes many low power "nuisance stations" cluttering up the former clear channels.

Cubans are another can of worms.  Depending on the station, these may be either considered pests or DX.  Sort of like Mexico out west, Spain if you're in the UK / Ireland / Newfoundland, or the now ever-growing crowd of Iranians on the DX dial in western Asia.

We do have the waterpath advantage going south.  That is quite obvious in that my former QTH (Billerica, MA: 15 miles inland) got Latins noticeably diminished from what I get here at South Yarmouth (about 3 miles from the ocean going south / southeast) and that actual beach sites in Orleans, MA or Rockport, MA produce Brazilians and other subequatorial South Americans not heard here at the house even on antennas much better than the car-roof set-up I use for the beach DXpeditioning.

By the time you get to the midwest, only those using serious antennas - Neil Kazaross, Tim Tromp, and maybe a few others - get deeper South Americans such as Brazil and Argentina.

So I imagine by the time you're on the West Coast, there aren't many South Americans left, even big Colombians such as 760 that are in the "garden variety" category in New England.

There is the thought of Pacific-based waterpaths but (after a peek at a globe), West Coast Chile to West Coast North America only really looks viable in southwestern Alaska or in Mexico.  South America to the tip of Mexico's Baja peninsula (Cabo San Lucas) would be feasible I suppose but there haven't been any DXpeditions of note there (= serious receivers and antennas).

Everyone's comments have been useful to help me understand the situation better.

Mark Connelly, WA1ION
South Yarmouth, MA

<<
The quick answer to your question Mark, is
"clear channels", or more 
properly, lack of them.   And, that has led to at
least myself, not 
actively hunting for even Central Americans or Colombians.  
|Most of 
my loggings of the past were on splits, 834, 725. 655  etc.,  most of

which no longer exist, or clears, 660, 830, 840 etc. A lot of the 
infilling
of the clears with higher power transmitters took place 
nearer or in, the
Northwest....650, 660, 670,  720, 750, 1020, 1030, 
1040, 1120, and auroras
don't wipe out the domestics in the west like 
they do in the east.

Having
said that, 1220 is a relatively clear frequency here once 
again, should
probably check them.  Others might be 540, or 760, and 
even 700, 830 and 840
don't really have western powerhouses on 
them.  So, I think I could say that
I've gotten out of the habit of 
trying. That coupled with the lack of deep
auroral conditions for 
quite a few years now.  At the moment, I don't even
have an antenna 
that would favor the south.

Thanks for bringing up the
topic.   Maybe we need more retired types 
out here, with time on their hands,
hi.

best wishes,

Nick
>>

<<
Mark

I well remember the LA logs of  the late 60's through
early 80's. I 
personally logged about 40 Colombians, a half dozen Ecuadorians,
several 
Peruvians, 3-4 Brazilians, and others during that period. All of this
DX 
took place in the comfort of my own home.

Nowadays, even Cuba is a rare
event.  I think the big difference is a 
more crowded band.  For example, the
Managua station used to dominate 
750 during the evenings in  the 1970s. 
Colombia would often be there 
after the Nicaraguan signed off, and Venezuela
was also sometimes 
present.  Their only domestic competition  was WSB and
KFQD.   Then, the 
clear channels were broken down in the 1980s.  Today,
there's a Portland 
station dominating 750. If I null it, I can hear Montana,
Saskatchewan, 
or Nevada The Latin Americans on 750 are now a fond but distant
memory.

The situation is repeated on other formerly hot or moderately good

frequencies.   I can remember when WBAP was my pest on 820; since the

mid-80s I've had a 50kw local on 820 so WBAP is now the hot DX target on

820.   660 was at one time wide open, but now has stations in WA, AZ, 
AB,
and CA.  DXwise, we were hit quite hard when the FCC relaxed 
nighttime
operation rules, especially at the low end of the dial.

One other factor for
us - the great circle path from Seattle to Latin 
America is over land,  so to
hear that part of the world we need to 
point our antennas at a few domestics. 
>From New England, you've got a 
mostly water path as far west as Colombia. 
Plus, you can phase down or 
null much of the co-channel
interference.

Another factor is distance.  Boston to Bogota is about 2600
miles.  
Seattle to Bogota is 4100 miles.

I hate to sound negative, but
that's what we're up against in this part 
of the country.  I would love to
receive Latin Americans again, but it 
would be a difficult endeavor.  TP's by
comparison are easier and more 
predictable targets.

Bruce
>>

<<
Hi Mark, 
? 
Thanks to Nick and Bruce for their
excellent?descriptions of the challenges that we face in tracking down Cental
and South American DX here in the Northwest. 
? 
Speaking for the wild ocean
cliff / FSL antenna contingent of the TP-DXing group, I've noticed that on
certain relatively-open frequencies like 530 and 1610 stations from the
Caribbean can be received at good strength during auroral conditions after our
local sunset, but both domestic QRM and propagation are almost always against
any one of us that wishes to try?for?South American?or Central American
stations. The station bearings are almost always close to the bearings of
domestic pests, and ocean cliff operations are most successful when the cliffs
attenuate signals from those troublesome bearings. This type of cliff-provided
F/B ratio is critical for the?performance of the figure-8 pattern FSL antenna to
be competitive in transoceanic DXing. 
? 
Another important factor is that
ocean cliff operations are usually scheduled around local sunrise, when the
chances of tracking down long-range DU-DX are the greatest. Propagation to
Central and South America is long gone by this time. These Highway 101 ocean
cliff turnouts are also dicey locations, usually subject to wacky weather and
wacky visitors (non-DXers, that is). Scheduling one of these ocean cliff visits
after local sunset (when propagation to Central and South America might be
theoretically possible, although unlikely because of domestic QRM and?ocean
cliff filtering) would probably make you the center of attraction for certain
bizarre and unsavory individuals-- at the peak time of their?congregation. These
particular individuals are unlikely to allow you to concentrate on your "wishful
thinking" type of DX search without full receiving full explanations of what you
are doing at the site, what is that bizarre contraption on the white pipes, do
you want to share so
 me of their "stuff," etc. So, Mark, maybe?now you
can?understand a little of what we are up against? 
? 
73, Gary DeBock (in
Puyallup, WA) 
? 
???? 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Mark
Connelly via IRCA" <irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
To: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent:
Monday, March 23, 2015 7:00:28 PM 
Subject: Re: [IRCA] Puyallup, WA Twisted Propagation for 3-23 
On 3/23/2015 19:00, Mark Connelly via CIRCA wrote:


For the past week here on the East Coast we have been milking a rather
productive auroral "cow" while the discourse from out west tends to be one
gloomy lack-of-TP's posting after the next. 

Is Latin America from out there
- other than pest Mexicans / Cubans - a total non-starter? 

I seem to
remember '70s era logs of West Coast South America from West Coast North
America. ?Chile, Peru, Ecuador, and western Colombia had some representation.
?Central America - admittedly aided by splits that aren't there anymore - was
reported almost as much as from the midwest and east. 

Even some reports of
Brazil and eastern Caribbean region stations - DX more often associated with
eastern US / Canada - wasn't completely off the table. 

The Pacific Northwest
(to some extent combined with CA, AZ, etc.) has more active DXers with more
different bags of tricks - ultralights / FSL's, SDR's / QDFA and Wellbrook
arrays, and so on - than the (at best) half dozen reasonably active DXers in New
England, NY, and NJ. ?Yet where are the Latin American logs? 

Is it "all
about the TP's - the TP's - no Latins" (to echo that massively overplayed "all
about the bass" song)? 

TA's of course are always a big interest around here.
?During this aurora only a handful of stations (e.g. Algeria 549, Canaries 621,
Mauritania 783, Sao Tome 1530) have reasonably beefy signals. ?Boring, yes BUT
South Americans are SCREAMING in as they had not done for months, so no one in
the northeast is throwing up the hands or hanging up the headphones. 

So as
one who has only DX'ed from the West Coast for two weeks in 1991 (business trip
to HP in Mountain View, CA), what's the deal on Latin America from the West
Coast? ?Certainly harder than from coastal NJ, MA, ME, PEI, NS, and NL (or even
Scotland and Finland it would seem), but impossible? 

There are a lot of big
gun DXers in BC, WA, OR, etc. with serious and varied expertise, motivation, and
technological power tools of all sorts at their disposal. ?DXpeditions seem to
be done more often out there - Grayland, Haida Gwaii, Rockworks, et al. 

I
have to wonder if there are times of the year when sunset or dawn greylines ever
vector signals from Valparaiso, Chile or Lima, Peru into that area? ?Those
cities were certainly well represented when Richard Wood was DXing from Hawaii
but, of course, those were shorter and easier routes to that part of the
Pacific. 

Would hearing those South Americans be easier from Alaska (away
from the mainland US / Mexican rabble) better than from closer sites along the
US West Coast, just as hearing Uruguay and Argentina is easier from Newfoundland
than from the Carolinas - lower pest levels trumping longer path lengths? 
??

Sometime I may go on the Topband list and posit the same questions regarding
160-m ham activity from the western US / Canada to South America.

>>

--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx