On Becoming a Big Gun

Over the years I've operated from all kinds of stations: big and small; QRP and QRO; portable or mobile; wire antennas or stacked yagis; noisy urban environment or quiet rural. But until recently I've never really built and operated a so-called "big gun" station. I've operated the big stations of others in the past, mostly in contests, but never before could I wake up in the morning, turn on the rig and be able to put out a big signal. It's convenient and it has become routine.

I don't have the biggest station. It's big but there are many that are bigger. That said, there's little doubt that I'm now a member of the 1% (on HF). Many hams love to visit or look at pictures of big towers and antennas even though they'd never try to do it themselves. It takes a lot of commitment and is wildly incompatible with the lives of all but a few. You have to be in a position to do it and you must really really want it. 

Even then it's a big decision. You not only have to build the station, you must also maintain it. There are also improvements to be made to retain your big gun status, if that's your objective. It's a long term commitment. Most are content to get a vicarious thrill from the efforts of others while enjoying the stations within their means and that don't interfere with their lives.

Now that I've built this station it is interesting to see how it affects me and my operating style. There are differences and similarities; some things change while others do not. Consider this a newly minted big gun's perspective on what it's like being one.

Overwhelming force

This is perhaps what first comes to mind when thinking about big gun stations. There are pile up and contest techniques that I need less. Very often I can jump into a pile up on a rare DX station or contest multiplier, send my call once and log them. That certainly requires favourable propagation and that the called station infrequently changes their listening frequency. It doesn't matter how powerful your signal might be when they're listening elsewhere. You must still find the sweet spot to make your call.

In a major contest it can be difficult to find a clear frequency to run. When you find one there will be others trying to "muscle in" from time to time. In rare cases it's a deliberate attempt to steal the frequency. More often another big guns clicks on a temporarily blank spot on the spectrum map (while I'm listening, not transmitting) or doesn't hear me because we're in each other's skip zone.

In the past I would find it difficult to defend the frequency. Now I can. To use a hockey analogy, when you get in a tight spot you put up your elbows to keep others out of your way. Instead of having to QSY it is usually sufficient to keep CQing. They will soon disappear. Although I don't use my muscle to intentionally steal another's run frequency, unintended conflict can occur anyway. For example, when I get no reply to a "QRL?" I wait a few seconds and launch a CQ.

This next point is you might not expect. I sometimes feel shame when I jump into a pile up and push through with my big signal to quickly make the QSO. Yes, I still do it but outside of contests I feel a little uncomfortable jumping to the front of the queue ahead of many others who have invested more time and effort into making that contact. It doesn't seem fair.

Attracting pile ups

Many hams are attracted to the strongest signals on the band. The weak signals are passed over because they're more difficult to copy and there is less prospect for a conversation. Yet those weak ones may be rare DX or contest multipliers.

When I call CQ on any band open to a populated area -- most often Europe -- I will quickly attract many callers. That happens on any day, not just in contests. There are many big guns who love the attention and thrive on it. I do not. Pulling call signs out of a pile up can be hard work and there's pressure to work them all. Of course I can't because I don't spend all my time operating. Without exercising discipline, you will find yourself constantly running. That's necessary in a contest, so I do it despite not liking it that much.

For ordinary non-contest operation I tend to call others rather than CQ. I find it more relaxing because there's less of a time commitment. Even then I will often sign off from the QSO with a quick note that I am QSYing. When I don't there is a good chance that several stations will call me. They don't know it isn't my frequency.

When I choose to run, the pile ups can be immense. VE3 may be one of the most common prefixes on the planet, yet they still call. Since I don't do it often outside of contests, non-contesters, especially on SSB, are occasionally surprised to discover that we've never worked before. It is unusual to hear a ham with a big signal that they've never met before. We tend to stand out. 

Most hams just want to talk and a big signal is very conducive to that. Those with simple antennas and low power have learned from experience that it is easier to contact a big station than a small one. I try to accommodate them because I know what it's like. I've been there. I honestly enjoy pulling their weak signals out of the noise and making the contact. When they're QRP it's even more fun.

Satisfaction

A surprising number of North American hams are wealthy or have ample funds to fund their hobbies. That is not too surprising since the majority are boomers and they (we) are the wealthiest generation in human history. I am not wealthy but I am free to spend what I have on what I want. For me that means a big gun station.

When you have the money it is a simple matter to contract out the work to build the towers. You pay someone else to do the hard physical ground work and then buy antennas, shack equipment and all the peripherals. That is, if you have a family or professional situation that allows or indeed supports your big gun aspirations. Many will spend less than their means to do the best they can with their retirement property and leave the bulk of their money for other things and to support their families.

When you hire others to build your dream station, does that lead to satisfaction? For many, the answer is yes. The business of aluminum, steel, concrete and silicon is a chore that must be overcome before the fun of operating begins. There is nothing wrong with that, but that approach would not satisfy me. I feel satisfaction when I've done the work: planting and building big towers; designing, building and raising large antennas; and designing and building control systems. 

Many big guns must feel the same way. They stay involved in building their stations to the extent of their abilities and resources. It is rare that no professional help is hired for part of the build. For example, excavation and cranes. On the Bell curve of personal involvement I'm at the tail end where my involvement is maximized. That puts me in the minority of big guns. It's a fat tail so the minority is quite large. There are many station builders that labour behind the scenes because only those closest to them know what they've done. Others garner the recognition by winning contests from their stations.

Guest operators

Which bring me to guest operators. Builders gain satisfaction from building -- I understand that well. They may also enjoy the achievements from operating the station. It just doesn't have to be them doing all the operating.

I am a middling contester and DXer. Despite my enthusiasm, I am not especially talented and I rarely strive to win. I practice the skills needed to excel and fully exploit my station's capabilities. However, I'll never be a great contester, nor do I particularly care. As I said in an earlier article:

"It is not enough to put up big towers and antennas to do well in a contest. You not only have to know how to use them to best effect, you must also be skilled at running, SO2R, hunting stations and have a keen eye on DX openings that can be marginal at best with small antennas at a lower height. I have much to learn and relearn."

I track the countries that I've worked and confirmed but I've never applied for DXCC. For anyone who has been reading this blog for a while it should be obvious that I get most of my satisfaction from building the station. A further satisfaction is inviting others to operate, whether it be for a contest or just for fun. 

It came as a surprise that many of my friends who have helped me the most with building this station decline the invitation. They prefer their own stations, even if they're small ones in a crowded and noisy urban or suburban setting. I have come to understand that: there is more satisfaction from operating from one's own station, no matter the circumstances.

Many big gun stations outside of the US and Canada are club stations. The clubs may be associated with institutions, a property owner and a group of supporters/operators, or a club of peers. Here the big gun stations are almost always privately owned, like mine. Guest operators may come and go but station building and maintenance is solely the responsibility of the owner. 

There are also big gun stations that can be rented for on-site or remote operating. Many partake of that opportunity. As long as you don't overdo it, it is less expensive than building your own. You pay to operate from a station someone else built and you avoid major commitments. It's a business transaction.

A private station rarely has a padlocked gate. Guests operators are regularly welcomed to join a team for contests or for single-op contests and events.

I recently held my first multi-op contest and there will be more. They get to enjoy operating the station and I get the satisfaction of building a team and seeing them enjoy themselves. I get a lot of satisfaction from it.

Propagation

Every ham operates at the whim of propagation. No amount of steel and aluminum is enough if  nature doesn't cooperate. A 10 db edge over other stations can't compete against 100 db or greater swings in signal strength due to the vagaries of propagation. Big guns and little pistols share the same fate.

As I've discovered many times, lesser stations that are not far away will often have a large propagation advantage over a variety of paths throughout the day. That, too, can render a big gun station impotent. I am far enough north that even stations near Toronto (300 km to the southwest) regularly beat me in the pile ups. The difference is greater just a little to the south in the northeastern US. 

I really can't complain too much. When I started in this hobby half a century ago I was a VE4, and that was a dreadful location from which to DX and contest. The propagation to Europe and most of Asia had to pass the gauntlet of the auroral zone. 

Not long after moving to VE3 over 40 years ago I often considered moving back to VE4 for reasons of friends, family and culture. Had I done so there would have been little incentive to build a big gun station. You can't fight propagation. Since DX propagation is far better here the incentive exists.

Retro operating

With a large antenna system I often don't need or use an amplifier. The amplifier is turned only in certain circumstances: difficult DX pile ups; some contests; for contest practice; and challenging propagation on 6, 80 and 160 meters. I typically leave the amp on after its intended use in case I decide to make further use of it even when it isn't strictly necessary.

Not only do I leave the amplifier off, I will often increase the challenge by operating QRP in contests. It's good ongoing practice to ensure that I don't lose my DXing skills. Besides, I still love low power operating. It always puts a smile on my face when I make a difficult DX contact or I do well in a contest with QRP. Of course the antennas have something to do with that! Nevertheless, it is a lot of fun to work DX while putting 5 watts into a big antenna.

That's what I mean by "retro" operating. When being a big gun becomes too routine or easy, I deliberately challenge myself. Other than QRP, I may use one of my smaller antennas or an antenna pointed in the wrong direction to increase the challenge in a pile up. Although I no longer want to be limited by low wire antennas and QRP -- since I'd have to operate that way all the time -- I like variety and challenges. 

Having it easy all the time diminishes one's skills and interest. To be blunt: being a big gun can be boring if you don't watch yourself. I'm a big gun now but don't be surprised if the next time you hear me on the air that you can barely copy my signal.

CQ WW SSB: M/2

At long last I've fulfilled my plan to host a multi-op. The occasion was CQ WW SSB, which is arguably the most popular contest of all. I was not keen to do it single op since phone contests are not my favourite, and I was so close to being ready to host a multi-op. I recruited a few friends living nearby -- Dave VE3KG, Vlad VE3TM, Greg VE3PJ -- and circled the weekend on my calendar. The deadline spurred me to deal with several critical items on my to-do list:

• 
  New rig
• New computers
• Updates to the station automation software
• Upgrade the 160 meter antenna
• Move and raise yagis to improve effectiveness on the high bands
  
• Arrange the operating desk to accommodate two operating positions
• Clean the house and stock the fridge and freezer with food
  

My main objective for the contest was for all of us to have a good time. From my friends' feedback it seems that I exceeded that objective. Incrementally building this stations over a 7 year span I had lost sight of what it's like for those with average stations to discover that they've become a big gun and can have endless runs of DX. As one of them told me after the contest: "I had a blast!" 

Although we had just 4 operators for a 48-hour contest in the M/2 category, there was never an empty seat. It was difficult to pry an operator out of the chair to give one of the others a chance. Log statistics show that I had the lowest number of contacts: 1100 out of 7000. It was my plan to be available to guide the others to familiarize them with the station and to use the antennas effectively. I can't do that while I'm operating.

Our placement among the M/2 raw scores is quite good. We'll see how we did after log checking is complete and the results announced next year. I'm hoping we didn't make too many logging errors. Typos and more are a worry when the focus is on serving the pile up and keeping the rate high.

Not all of the experience was positive. On the way to running up a pretty good score we encountered a variety of difficulties. However, none dampened our enthusiasm and the impact on our score was modest. I should be thankful that so little went awry.

Photo credit: VA3UMM

The good

I suppose the most notable good thing is that nothing went terribly wrong. There was a lot that could have gone wrong that didn't. That's a success. Here's a sampling of what didn't go wrong:

• No power outages
• No equipment failures
• No empty seats due to operator fatigue, disinterest or other issues
• Propagation was excellent on the high bands and average on 80 and 160 
• Very little inter-station interference
  

That's quite good since so much is out of our control during a contest. I have some spare equipment but there is no backup electrical generator to run two high power stations and associated devices. The utility (Hydro One) seems to have been getting better at keeping the power on in this rural area. They also respond well to reports of noise due to faulty equipment. We can hear a pin drop on the other side of the world, and that's great for pulling out the many small signals responding to our big signal.

Multi-ops require one computer per station. Since I use N1MM+ those computers are Windows PCs. Inexpensive refurbished Win10 PCs are widely available and I now have 3 of them. Since they use SSD for non-volatile storage they boot quickly and perform well. All PCs have Wi-Fi, built-in or with a USB dongle. 

For the PC running the antenna selector UI (user interface), I plugged in an ancient display and mouse from a defunct XP machine. This is a workaround until I have a touchscreen for each operator. I tried it with two mice (one per operator) so shorten the reach but the PC didn't like that for some reason. You can see the full multi-op desktop in an earlier article.

Networking was a breeze. I worried about it unnecessarily before setting it up. A friend told me how easy it was with N1MM+ and so it was. It was so easy I thought I'd done something wrong. Within minutes I had the station PCs communicating with each other and synchronizing logs. 

A third PC hosted my home brew antenna selector UI (user interface). I placed the (ancient) display and mouse for it between the operating positions, along with the controllers for the 5 rotators. I connected two mice to shorten the reach for the operators but the PC didn't like that. The mouse is a workaround until I have a touchscreen for each operator. I was not surprised to discover a few bugs in my software when I turned on N1MM+ networking for the first time. They were quickly resolved.

The bad (where there's room for improvement)

I can summarize the problems in a very short list:

• Antennas
• Amplifiers
• Control
• Multipliers
  

The biggest problem with the antennas is that there are so many. I am used to them but the others were not. There are 3 antennas on the high bands, and really 4 when you split the stacks. Some are fixed and some are rotatable. Further, the two tri-band yagis must be shared and each may be unavailable when the other operator is using it. The problem was worst during times of day when we could not run Europe or the US and it was necessary to try various propagation paths in the hunt for stations and multipliers.

Surprisingly it was the fixed direction high band yagis that caused the most confusion. It was very common for an operator to turn a rotatable yagi where it was wanted rather than click to select a fixed yagi pointed to the desired direction. I didn't anticipate that. From their feedback I learned that it was easy to "forget" about an antenna when there was no associated rotator. Similarly, splitting the stacks to maximum effect or using them to "spray" in different directions was a difficult concept to quickly master.

Antenna selection was easier on 40 meters since there are only two yagis. On 80 meters we usually kept to the vertical in preference to the inverted vee since we were primarily hunting DX. I say vertical rather than vertical yagi because the yagi modes are only functional up to 3650 kHz. The array is optimized for CW. For most of the phone segment the array is only usable as a simple vertical. Yagi operation up to 3800 kHz has long been on my project list. Maybe next year.

Mastering the Beverage receive antennas on 160 took practice. It was easy to understand but not necessarily easy to remember when and how to change direction. Since the Beverages can only be used by one radio at a time, despite having a choice of 6 directions. I have begun construction of a second receive antenna and I hope to have it ready by the end of the year. 

For the contest I placed a manual antenna switch on the operating desk to connect the Beverage system to one radio or the other. I programmed the Icom 7610 to always use the receive antenna port on 160 meters. On 80 meters it had to be manually selected in the Antennas menu. The FTdx5000 has a front panel switch.

The next big problem was the amplifiers. Mine are manual tune tube amps: an Acom 1500 and a vintage Drake L7. At their own stations, the other operators either use no-tune solid state amps or do not currently have amps. They all know how to operate them, in general, but none had done so recently. That became a problem.

My attempt to be helpful wasn't as helpful as I'd hoped. Before the contest I made a tuning chart for the A1500 by tuning and documenting the Tune & Load settings across the SSB segments for every antenna. It got ridiculously complicated due to the many antennas.

Although precise tuning isn't necessary it does help to keep the amps running smoothly and it also maximizes tube life. Errors were made. No, many errors were made. When you haven't used an amp for a while it can be intimidating. It is also very inconvenient when changing antennas or clicking to work a multiplier 200 kHz away, and the tuning is very wrong. 

Either the power output would be painfully low or the protection circuits would place the A1500 offline. Often the operator didn't notice until I pointed it out. Setting the drive level too low or too high was another common error. I jumped in to do a quick tune whenever necessary.

Another confusion was the pair of foot switches for the FTdx5000: one for PTT and one to generate a carrier for tuning. Guess what happened more times than I care to think about!

The L7 is more forgiving since it uses 3-500Z triodes rather the tetrode in the Acom. For that reason I didn't bother with a tuning chart. However, it must still be tuned. Too often it wasn't and the power output was little better than running barefoot. Without a foot switch, the only way to generate a carrier was to use the CTRL-T function of N1MM+. 

This is why many contest stations now use broadband solid state amps and broadband antennas such as OWA yagis and 4-squares. There are tube and solid state amps with built in ATUs, but those are expensive. One reason I like my amps is that they're cleaner than almost every solid state amp with regard to IMD and harmonics. I don't use BPF or stubs on the amps so that is important. We'll have to live with the hassle since I am unwilling to spend $20,000 for two new amplifiers with built in ATUs.

Which brings us to antenna control. For reading ease I've copied the original UI (user interface) from an earlier article. It's almost unchanged. You can read that article for detail on how it works. 

Despite my misgivings, I didn't think it would fail as badly as it did. It was barely comprehensible to the others. I have a plan to make it much better, but I've had no time to work on it.

I was frequently guiding the operators on its use. Part of that was due to the poor design and part was their lack of familiarity with the antenna and rotation options (see above). The contest raised the redesign priority and I will get down to work this winter. In my defense, the first priority was getting the automation system working and the UI was rushed. It was never intended to be a final design.

The system itself glitched several times which it has never done before. It was always at night when we were active on the low bands, so it is likely due to RFI. Intermittent faults are difficult to track down so all I can do is add more RFI protection like toroids and bypass capacitors for every wire touching the Arduino controller and the cables to the PC. Transitioning from USB to Wi-Fi will help.

On the bright side, recovery was quick and easy. When it locks up the status bar turns yellow or red. The UI is shut down, the Arduino power cycled and the UI restarted. One time the PC required a restart to clear a COM port fault. It takes 30 seconds to restore service, or twice that when the PC must be restarted. SSD storage makes for very fast Windows restarts.

Call: VE3VN
Operator(s): VE3KG VE3PJ VE3TM VE3VN
Station: VE3VN

Class: M/2 HP
QTH: 
Operating Time (hrs): 48

Summary:
 Band  QSOs  Zones  Countries
------------------------------
  160:  116    10       14
   80:  470    15       58
   40: 1451    26       99
   20: 1586    36      119
   15: 1863    35      116
   10: 1462    32      130
------------------------------
Total: 6948   154      536  Total Score = 12,442,770

With regard to operating strategy, I believe our greatest shortcoming was multipliers. The runs were so good and the operator enthusiasm so high that it was difficult to interrupt and suggest spending more time hunting multipliers. Not all of us were experienced or comfortable with clicking those spots or using the N1MM+ AMQ window. 

It takes practice and a sharp eye to click on a spot, call the station and resume running. Both radios have dual receive so it is possible to listen on two frequencies concurrently. I try do it when one or two CQs go unanswered. Timing is key. Multi-single teams have it easier since only one station can run; the other (or others) can only work multipliers on other bands. In M/2 we must carefully weigh the options.

That is not to say our multiplier count was dreadful; we did pretty well (see above). Improvement will come with time. We could afford to lose a few multipliers since they were partly compensated by the high QSO points. I was more concerned with 80 and 160 meters since the runs were relatively weak and more time could have been spent hunting multipliers overnight. The rules allow us 8 band changes per hour, yet we never came close to the limit. I suspect that part of the problem was operator avoidance of frequent amplifier tuning (see above).

The future

We'll do this again, with the same team or with others depending on availability and contest mode (SSB vs CW). I made a list of station improvements that I'll work on over the coming months. My objectives are to rise higher in the standings and increase operator enjoyment and engagement. I have an incentive to stick with a core team who will become familiar with the antennas, equipment and station features.

I may gather a team for CQ WW CW at the end of November. If that occurs it will involve few if any improvements to the station. There have been other priorities in the waning weeks of fall while the weather is not yet very cold. The next likely opportunities are the ARRL DX contests early next year.

For the present, the operating desk has been reconfigured for SO2R, which I used for a casual effort in Sweepstakes CW. I will also need to spend time exchanging the IC7610 and FTdx5000MP so that the former becomes the primary operating rig for everyday operating.

Accommodating guests in my small house is a challenge. There is a guest bedroom and an adjoining bathroom and shower, but that's it apart from my own space and a couple of sofas. Old people tend to be finicky about these things but that didn't seem to apply to this fine group of contesters. We made do with few problems or complaints. That might not be the case with a larger team. It is something to think about for future contests.

The past

I am not a fan of nostalgia. Tube rigs and paper and pencil logging are history and they have no place in my shack. The fondness I feel about the past involves people. So bear with me as I finish this article with an old scanned photograph and a story.

The picture was likely taken in 1982, which is 41 years ago. It would have been at the end of one of the CQ WW or CQ WPX contests. Our multi-op call sign was VE3PCA. The station was owned by Doug VE3KKB (top centre) and located at his parents' rural home near the town of Perth. Those were good times. I was a lot younger then (left), new to VE3 and without a station of my own. I had yet to trim my 1970s hair. The others are Dave VE3KG (top right), Brian VE3CRG (lower right) and John ex-VE3EL (bottom, SK).

I have always enjoyed the energy level of multi-op contesting. I hate being alone in a room for 48 hours for single op contests and I hated it more when I was young. Joining a team at the moderately large station that Doug built was a great joy. Conditions were good, the camaraderie infectious and we sumptuously hosted by Doug's parents Mary and Jim (ex-VE3KJG). Both have long since passed.

By 1984 VE3PCA was no more. I had few opportunities to do a multi-op contest since. Later that year I bought a house and built my own modest station. In 1992 I exited the hobby entirely. When I returned to amateur radio 10 years ago, it wasn't long before I resumed contesting. First casually and then with enthusiasm. With my contesting interest rekindled I developed a long term plan to build a station that could do well in contests and host a multi-op. Mission accomplished. 

The 4 surviving VE3PCA members in that picture remain friends. Brian VE3CRG continues to be very active on HF though not in contests. Doug VE3KKB has downsized his station and no longer has HF capability. Dave VE3KG, like me, continues to be very active. He was on our team for CQ WW SSB (see the pic near the beginning of the article). It is almost exactly 44 years since we did our first multi-op together. 

Amateur radio, and contesting in particular, breeds long lasting friendships. We may not stay in frequent contact but when we do the good times return. My longest and firmest friendships are with fellow contesters. On the air you may hear little more than "59 4" but behind that brevity lies a rich culture, full of friends, pizza and smiles. Contesting, in my experience, is an extraordinarily social endeavour.

Rapid Tower Decommissioning

Hams with towers are growing old. Many young hams are content with simpler HF antennas that don't require a tower or a long term commitment. Lifestyles have changed over the decades. When a tower comes on the used market there is often little interest. Many are free for the taking, if you take them down. Few are willing.

What do you do when the ham passes away? Small towers can usually be taken down, and I've done that. They are then given away or sold by the estate. Home buyers prefer not to see a tower when shopping. Bigger towers are a greater challenge. The estate incurs the expense of professional removal, and that may be the only option. The cost can only be recovered if there's is a buyer once it is on the ground.

A friend (Dave VE3KG) has been helping the widow of a silent key (Ajmal Rahman ex-VA3ZQ, and formerly VE2ZQ and AP2ZQ) to dispose of his station. He had a dilemma: a 110' guyed tower that no one wanted. Without a buyer, it wasn't worth the trouble and expense to dismantle it. Due to the illness of the owner preceding his death, it was in a state of disrepair. 

I previously showed a picture of the tower on this blog, along with the antenna parts that had broken and fallen to the ground. At right is a full height picture taken this past summer.

I knew Ajmal a long time ago. When I dropped out of the hobby I did not stay in touch with many ham friends. The last time we spoke was at least 30 years ago. I visited his country home when his family was young and he was eager to build an effective HF station. The tower was raised soon after.

Following my inspection, I decided that the tower was safe to climb despite several issues. But to what purpose? There was little of value to salvage. A lightning strike several years previous had disabled the rotator and likely destroyed some or all of the cables. With fatigued elements having fallen to the ground, the antennas were little better than scrap. The house was being sold and the tower had to go. We decided it would have to be cut down.

That is easier said than done. There are many things that can go wrong in that seemingly simple operation. Risk of injuries to people and property should not burden the family. Despite the large size of the property there were several complications due to the property layout and guying. 

We considered options while waiting for a neighbour to drive over with his bush hog to clear the field around the tower. There was lots of time on our hands since he didn't show up until two months later. Luckily the house hadn't been sold in the interim.

The tower and property are annotated on this Google satellite view. The yellow dots are the approximate location of the guy anchors, the orange letters are hazards and the red arrows are the directions the tower is most likely to fall when the opposite anchor is severed. The gray circle is the approximate 120' fall radius (tower height plus mast and yagi measured on the ground from the pier pin base).

There are a few general concerns about felling a tower in this manner:

1. The fall radius is the minimum distance where debris will land. Tall towers can bounce. Their forward momentum can take them beyond the marked circle. Although that isn't likely for a tower of this size it must be taken into account.
2. Debris from the tower top can be dispersed well beyond the fall radius. Impact velocity and momentum are very high. Mast, antennas and other attachments can break off and take flight to damage property and injure unprotected people in the vicinity. Spectators must keep their distance.
   
3. Towers are most likely to fall in the direction opposite of the cut guy anchor. However they can fall in any direction in which the remaining guys are slack. That covers a lot of ground. Steps must be taken to ensure the tower falls where you want unless there are no hazards in the path of the tower or the two intact sets of guys.
   

We are now in a position to discuss the three fall directions and their hazards. 

The south anchor is inside the edge of the bush. Only a little vegetation had to be fought to access it. By dropping the tower to the north it would likely fall across the eastern edge of the lawn. That's undesirable but in this case was permitted. 

The problem is the northwest anchor and hazard C. I won't draw a diagram so you'll have to visualize  the scenario. C is a mature hardwood about 30' to 40' tall. When the tower topples forward the guys attached to the northwest anchor would wrap around the tree. That would severely injure or kill the tree. Worse, the tangling would cause the tower to veer left into the lawn and towards hazard E, the house. 

The first is very unwelcome and the second is unacceptable due to the risk of flying debris and lawn damage. I've seen the effects of a yagi striking a house when a 120' tower unexpectedly collapsed. It wasn't pretty.

The northwest anchor we just discussed has bushes growing all around but they were easily removed to reach the anchor. By cutting that anchor the tower would fall to the southeast. No matter how it falls there would be no risk of damage to anything of value. That sounds wonderful but for two things.

First, a tower falling into a forest typically will not reach the ground. A tower hanging overhead amid a tangle of broken tree limbs is not easily or safely removed. Neither is it easy to reach since the bush in front of the trees is dense and more than head height. I tried to get in there for a look and quickly decided it wasn't worth the trouble, both for the aforementioned problem and because of hazard D. That's the property line. We were told that it wasn't acceptable to fell the tower into the neighbour's patch of forest.

The northeast anchor was easily accessed once the bush hog levelled the field. The open field seemed an ideal landing area and the guys from the other anchors would easily cut through the light bushes on their west sides. Which brings us to hazards A and B.

Hazard A is utility pole supporting a transformer and hazard B is the distribution line and includes the telephone service cable. The fall radius comes almost exactly to the pole's guy anchor that stretches a short distance to the east (barely visible in the satellite photo). The distribution line at southwest corner of the property is 200' from the tower and well outside the fall radius. Potential debris set flying from the impact is at risk of hitting the anchor, pole or distribution line.

The red X marks the desired fall target.

"A ham's got to know his limitations"

It was at that point I recommended calling in the professionals. I was not comfortable taking on the job using a crew of hams who understood even less about the procedure than I did. I received good advice and an offer of tools from someone of my acquaintance in the commercial business in case I decided to take it on. 

He agreed with me that the best option was to cut the northeast anchor. When the anchor was cut, a rope tied to near the top of the tower has to be pulled hard within 2 seconds of separation to direct the tower to fall where we wanted. That's a precision operation. I considered the options and the procedure details and I decided it was outside of my comfort zone. Although I believed the chance of success would be very high, the cost of failure, low risk that it was, was too high to bear.

The firm I called on, Ontower, is very familiar to me and they are located a 30 minute drive from the site. The owner stopped by the site and agreed with the level of risk. A simple "cut and run" felling was out of the question. The recommended options were a crane to lay it down or bring a full crew to manage a precision fall to the target in the southwest area of the property. Cranes are expensive so we got the widow's approval to do the latter. Since the firm is fully insured, the risk of failure was covered.

Felling a tower

The appointed day was the Tuesday morning following the CQ WW SSB contest. It was a hectic weekend in which our team of 4 did pretty well. I'll have more to say about the contest in a future article. 

One of the multi-op team members, Dave VE3KG, was there with me. He knew Ajmal far better than I did and took the lead helping his widow dispose of the station. All the pictures and video in this article were taken by him. I was going to do it but after the first picture my phone battery went dead. I forgot to charge it.

The first job was to expose the guy anchors. All were galvanized angle stock, with two being ⅜" and the northeast anchor was about 3/16". One extended above grade, one was at grade and one was below grade. Use of angles is unconventional but perfectly fine if sized appropriately. What was very unusual was the use of shackles to tie the turnbuckles directly to the angle, spread onto the two faces of the steel. That's awkward. A header is preferred.

The picture gives you an idea of the anchor style since I don't have a picture of the northeast anchor that was cut. They dug deeper than I did during my inspection to expose over a foot of it. The gas powered cut off saw needed space to work. The safeties had to be cut since, for reasons unknown, they appeared to be tied into the (presumably) concrete anchor further down. 

All guys are often loosened before cutting the anchor. In this case they decided against it, using the tension of the other guys to start it falling in the approximately correct direction. The cut anchor and its guys recoil violently towards the tower when it is done this way. 

Click to view on YouTube

A rigger tied a rope about 80' up the tower. The other end extended to the southwest corner of the property. One of the two most experienced crew cut through the northeast anchor while the other maintained tension on the rope. The fall happens very quickly. 

Once the tower starts moving, the forward momentum becomes too high to direct the tower. There would have been less than 2 seconds to pull the tower while it was near vertical. That's why the person on the rope maintained tension throughout the cutting -- there was no time to communicate over the almost 100 meter distance at the moment the anchor was severed. The person on the rope can feel when the cut guys go slack and do what's necessary.

I'm sure many of you are expecting a video. We have one! Dave pulled out his phone and recorded the cutting and the fall. It's short and 95% of it is the cutting. The tower falls fast. We were of course told to stand well back. The falling tower hit the bullseye. It was a neat job. Professionals make it look easy. It isn't.

Salvage

With the tower on ground, our thoughts turned to salvage. The disposition of everything was not yet decided as I write this article. The crew separated all the sections while we inspected and disconnected the rotator and mast. The foreman brought the saw over to speed the work by cutting both steel and aluminum jammed into the ground. 

He then inspected every tower section and cut through one leg of the sections that were damaged. This is a smart way to discourage hams from the temptation to reuse them. An hour later they were done. They were on site for little more than 2 hours.

There are aluminum bars that can be reused, but the the guys are scrap other than, perhaps, the porcelain insulators. The short fibreglass rods that electrically decouple the tower from the EHS guys are old, likely damaged from the fall and partially delaminated. While tempting, they must not be reused.

The only prize I left with was a Tailtwister rotator. Although damaged by the fall it might be reparable. I can use it for parts if not. I'll open it up for inspection later this fall and if it looks interesting I'll write it up for the blog.

New Rig: Icom 7610

For several years I've had a new transceiver in my annual plan. This year was no different. What is different this year is that I finally did it. The spur was the upcoming CQ WW SSB contest. Since this will be the first multi-op contest from my station, I was uncomfortable asking others to put up with the relatively ancient Yaesu FT950. It was only marginally acceptable when it was just me using it, and then only during contests when I operated SO2R.

The FT950 is not that bad of a rig, for its time. It is unsuitable for a modern contest station where I want ultimate performance. I've had it for years and it did what I asked of it, and it is now set aside. For the time being it will be a backup rig. It will eventually be sold. Due to the march of technology, perfectly good rigs of an earlier generation fetch increasingly lower resale prices. It is almost not worth selling.

The IC7610 is a complex rig and there is much to learn. I have to learn quickly because the contest is almost here. I moved slowly while setting it up and integrating it into the station to avoid mistakes. For now it is a drop in substite for the second operating position. When the contest is behind me it will be become the rig for the main station. The Yaesu FTdx5000MP will be demoted to the second operating position. It has been my primary rig for more than 6 years, but it's time for it to be set aside.

As I said, it's an expensive item and I did not spend the money without due consideration. Is it worth the money? Many hams would never spend that much on a transceiver; I know that I am reluctant to do so. Needs and means are different for each of us, and for me this was the right choice.

Here's how it looks in the shack, as it has been rearranged for two-position multi-op in CQ WW.

It's small and light, and hardly looks as if it is worth the price. The FTdx5000MP is nearly 3× its weight. When the contest is behind me, I will get deeper into its features and capability. For the next few days I am solely focussed on the features needed during the contest. I am likely to have more to say about the 7610 in the future.

The following is a quick take based on my first impressions. Bear in mind that first impressions can be wrong. Do not interpret this article as a review because it isn't.

Buttons

The FTdx5000 has almost every operator feature on the front panel. The panel is large, the buttons many, and the buttons are small. It has to be this way because the features are many and the text-based menu system is slow and difficult to navigate. This high end rig predates the adoption of touch screens. It is one of the last of the "big iron" transceivers. 

Buttons have their good and bad points. The majority of the features are not used or rarely used. That's a waste of panel real estate. They are small and hard to read, especially in dim lighting. You remember the buttons you regularly use and mostly ignore the others. Another point that is rarely considered is that cleaning the multitude of tiny buttons and knobs with their textured rubbery surfaces is difficult. But it must be done. A years long buildup of dirt, grime and skin oil is a subject best avoided in polite company.

The OLED displays age poorly and, as you can see, the ones on the lower right are in dire need of replacement. This is a well known flaw of the '5000. Their replacement will be a winter project. 

Another problem with many closely space buttons and knobs is that it's easy to grab the wrong one while you're operating. Often you will accidentally bump the ones nearby with unpredictable results. If it's a feature you rarely use it can take some time to figure out what happened and to correct it.

There are few buttons on the IC7610 front panel. A large fraction of the space is taken by a touchscreen where many features can be directly accessed or accessed via the menus. Whether the physical buttons are assigned to the right features is debatable. Operators will have different opinions depending on their individual needs and interests. It's too soon to have developed a solid opinion of my own.

Menu maze

The number of transceiver features increases with every generation of technology. Buttons and knobs for all of them is impractical. Of course there are many rigs that are designed to have a small feature set and don't need more than a few buttons and knobs. But those are usually smaller or special purpose products that take a minimalist approach for specific purposes such as portable operation. High end rigs are feature rich and need menus.

Although they many be necessary, menus are not always better than buttons. For a sophisticated rig like the IC7610 the menu system is a deep tree with many branches. It can be difficult to reach many features or even to know where to look in the menu system. 

The names of novel features can be so unfamiliar that you can easily pass by the one you want. Reading manuals is tedious, and there are two of them for the IC7610, the basic and the advanced. Both are large and from my reading the descriptions are occasionally puzzling or incomplete.

That said, the menu system for the IC7610 isn't that bad considering its extensive feature set. Pressing the Multi key (upper right) displays a context sensitive list of only a few features. For example, transmitter power and mic gain. There are several context sensitive features on the left side of the touchscreen that can be directly accessed by a short or long press.

It took me several days to become reasonably comfortable with the menu system. Every modern rig has a learning curve and each manufacturer has their own ideas for menu design. There are many critics of the FTdx101's menu system. I tried it for myself in Dayton last year. That is one reason I favoured Icom for this purchase.

Menus are a necessary modern evil, so I live with it. I escape a lot of the tedium of operating feature use, like with RIT and XIT, using the keyboard commands of N1MM+. I preferentially do that whether or not I'm in a contest. There's less to learn because the N1MM+ keyboard shortcuts for common features are the same for most every rig.

Connector standards

The simplest things can cause a lot of grief. The most basic interconnection needs are the microphone, headphones, keyer and PTT (in and out). At least headphone and keyer jacks are almost always ¼" or 3.5 mm. I'd prefer they all were 3.5 mm but I can deal with it using the adaptors I've accumulated over the years.

But...microphones? Dynamic vs. electret, 3.5 mm vs 8-pin Foster, and different pin outs for the same physical connector. This must be quite the revenue generator going by the extortionate prices they charge for their branded lines of microphones, complete with their unique mic connectors and features. One of my first jobs was to make an adaptor for the 8-pin Foster connector to allow connection of a 3.5 mm electret mic almost universally used for PC headsets. A USB headset connector would be even better. The connectors are right there on the 7610 just above the mic connector.

PTT was easier in one respect. Unlike so many transceivers, the PTT line (that they call Send for some reason or other -- see my thoughts further below) is a simple phono connector. I have loads of phono-to-phono cables. However, there is nothing simple about connecting a foot switch and keyer for PTT control (that they confusingly also call Send). There's an 8-pin DIN (ACC1) where that resides. 

The rig does not include the DIN connector. In fact, the only connector they include with a multi-thousand dollar piece of equipment is a ¼" stereo plug. Typical of most transceivers, the interconnecting cables are included with the other equipment that they sell. In most cases it's their amplifiers.

By some miracle I found one of these connectors lying at the bottom of a box full of orphan connectors and cables that I've accumulated over the decades. I soldered on a phone jack and plugged a splitter into that. I could finally connect the foot switch and keyer.

USB

The USB connection to the PC removes clutter from the back of the rig. One cable replaces several. Since it provides both CAT and a sound card, there are no separate audio cables. 

There is a prescribed installation process to properly install the driver so that Windows doesn't substitute its preferred driver with which the interface will not work. I appear to have done it correctly since everything works as it should.

One way in which Icom is deficient in comparison to other manufacturers is that not every function on the rig is accessible or completely controllable by the PC. I knew this in advance. There are a few peculiarities when using N1MM+ despite the development team's best effort to overcome those deficiencies. I can live with it.

One day soon I hope we can eliminate the cables entirely when the PC connection evolves to wireless and TCP/IP. Some rigs have already done so and I expect the rest to eventually follow. But for now this style of PC interface is good enough.

It's different

Equipment manufacturers have most of the same features as all the others in the same price class. Of course they also have unique features, and those can be very useful. Competition is good! What annoys me is that for the common features they too often use unique terminology and methods to manipulate those features. This has proved to be an obstacle since I've never owned an Icom HF rig before. I had to figure out their names for the features that I am familiar with.

For example, what most hams call RIT and XIT is called the Clarifier by Yaesu. Icom uses the more common terms so this was easy and welcome. The Twin PBT feature of the 7610 is very nice, but only once I figured out the relationship between the high/low cutoffs, filter selection and width controls and their relationship to the CW pitch control. Okay, maybe that isn't too difficult a difference.

There is a prominent button above the VFO knob labelled Change. Change what? So I pressed it and discovered it's what most other rigs call the A⟺B feature to swap the contents of the two VFOs. I'm still trying to figure out what the XFC button symbolizes but I did finally figure out what it's used for. The bizarre name does not make it intuitive. I'm still puzzling out split and dual watch which we need for 40 meters in the contest.

I was surprised to find that the AF Gain also controls the volume of the CW side tone monitor. That's very odd. It was disconcerting when I first encountered it when, after turning down the gain, I had difficulty hearing what I was sending when I next transmitted.  

Speaking of CW, why can't there be a common usage for normal and reverse CW reception? CW (normal) on this rig is the opposite of what I expect (USB reception), and was pretty well the standard decades ago when tubes ruled the airwaves. At least I could reverse the default behavior of CW and CW-R deep within the menu maze.

One thing I really liked was the speed of the ATU. Compared to previous rigs I've owned or used it's wonderful. Not only that, the tuner setting hold over 100 kHz. This is far better than the 10 kHz typical of so many other rigs. Unless you use a small magnetic loop antenna there is no need to tune every few kilohertz.

Well, there's lots more I won't bore readers with. You get the idea. Like connectors, I wish rig manufacturers would standardize more of their terminology for common features. They have no particular incentive to do so since their customers don't base their purchasing decisions on it.

Contest priority

I am trying to understand this rig in time for CQ WW SSB this weekend. When the team arrives I have to be able to explain to them how the rig works. I'm getting closer so we'll have to see how it goes.

After the contest I'll have a better understanding. Expect to hear more about the rig and other contest matters after the weekend is in the rear view mirror. When there's a long enough break between contests and DXpeditions I'll swap the IC7610 and FTdx5000MP to make the former my main rig.

Belated 6 Meter Season Report

Each year I report on my 6 meter experiences after the end of the sporadic E season. It usually comes out in mid-August. This year I'm 2 months late; it is not because I've been putting it off. The season was not the greatest and with the increasing solar flux and the approach of the fall equinox I hoped that I would have more of interest to say by waiting. 

I regret to say that I was disappointed with both sporadic E and equinox north-south propagation (TEP). That makes the year interesting in some respects and less so with regard to my (and others') achievements this year. 

Despite the disappointments, let's go ahead and recap the year. We can learn from mediocre results, often more than with spectacular results. Many may therefore find this article uninteresting. Since I find it educational, I'll press on regardless. Read on if you will.

Perspectives on propagation

Reports of the sporadic E season have varied. In this part of the world the experience seems to have been mostly poor. Others had greater success. Propagation is not the same for everyone. If you're an ARRL member, please read the VHF column in the October QST which contrasted the differences among locations. A lucky few had great propagation this year.

Antennas matter. The more marginal the propagation the more the antennas matter. It is common for those stations to have openings that others nearby do not. I frequently notice this since my 6 meter antenna is higher and bigger than many of my friends. There are many bigger stations and in better locations who do far better than I ever will.

TEP to the southern hemisphere has been productive though not as good as I had hoped. The fall equinox season had one good opening and many "teasers" in which little could be worked. However the spring equinox season was good. It delivered numerous openings to South America which netted two new countries (more on that below).

Europe, the usual stalwart, delivered only a handful of good openings during the sporadic E season. When it was in it was pretty good, covering every corner of the continent. There is a lot of activity in Europe so that when there is a path we know it on this side of the Atlantic. Unfortunately I failed to work any new European countries. That said, there are only a few European countries that I have yet to work!

F2 paths that rely on a sustained high solar flux have been absent in 2023. Our geomagnetic latitude is higher than the geographic latitude due to the position of the geomagnetic pole. The average flux is rising at a steady and slow pace so there is hope for better next year. I say next year because as daylight fades with the approach of winter so do our prospects for F2 openings over the next several months.

Perhaps my disappointment is due to having experienced several good years of sporadic E propagation. Although 2023 has been poor, it was not worse than the worst I've seen since I returned to 6 meters in 2017. Propagation has its ups and downs, sporadic E is sporadic and sunspots come and go. 6 meters is the magic band and magic is fickle. The long anticipation of yet-to-arrived DX openings requiring a sustained solar flux of 200 tries our patience.

As I often say, if it was easy what would be the point? A challenge is what motivates station and skills improvement. It's us against nature and the laws of physics. Technical advances have made predicting and finding DX openings easier, but technology cannot manufacture openings. We learn, improve and measure our progress by our successes and our failures.

There was one very good aurora session this year. That netted contacts stretching across the northern US as far as Idaho. Although not DX, it was exciting to do well on aurora. That's one of the rare times I shut down WSJT-X and put the paddles to work. FTx modes are not compatible with aurora Doppler. We can expect more aurora propagation as the solar cycle peaks and then slides down the other side.

My log tells me that I made about 350 contacts on 6 meters this year. Most was via sporadic E. The total could have been much higher but I am not very interested in non-DX. I monitor most openings, scan the DX spotting networks and I will occasionally CQ into a seemingly dead band. Catching those brief and weak DX openings takes effort. Many times I am out of the shack when the band opens and I miss out.

New countries

My count of DXCC countries increased from 120 to 131. That's worked, not confirmed. On LoTW (the only way I confirm contacts) I have 120 confirmed. While I do operate CW and SSB when conditions warrant, all of my new countries are on FT8.

11 countries isn't much. A higher annual increment is unlikely until the solar flux increases enough to sustain F2 openings at this high geomagnetic latitude. As I said at the end of the 2022 season, I've reached the point on diminishing returns: each new one takes more effort than those that came before.

The most noteworthy new country I worked this year was New Zealand. I've heard ZL before but previous openings were too fleeting to make a QSO. Back in June, ZL1RS was not only workable, I was able to copy him pretty well for more than 20 minutes. I briefly heard but could not work two other ZL stations that evening. 

The other new one in the Pacific direction was FK8. They were in fairly consistently for several days in the spring. Then they were gone and they haven't been heard since. The solar flux hasn't risen too high for several months. On one of the days FK8 was heard, several strong Hawaii stations were rolling in but none that I haven't work before.

Another interesting new country was Angola. D2UY has been heard here and elsewhere in eastern NA quite regularly early in the year. On one day, and one day only, his signal was in for long enough to allow a QSO. There is not a lot of activity in Africa so every new country from there is an accomplishment. I heard and was heard in V5 and ZS but, again, there wasn't enough sustained propagation for a contact. Southern Africa was a common opening during the 1989-1990 solar maximum so there is reason to hope for better next year.

The rest of the new countries were in many respects uninteresting yet challenging in their own way. There was J8, V2, V4, FJ, OA and other Caribbean, South America and Central America countries that found their way in my log this summer. It should be an easy shot from here but, like for many parts of the world, there is limited activity on 6 meters from many of those countries and few have big antennas or pay close attention to the band.

For TEP-enhanced equinox propagation to the south, the new ones this year were OA and VP8 in March. The latter was a difficult contact since he had difficulty copying stations. Perhaps the local noise was high. I am running out of unworked countries in South America other than the rare islands. Galapagos Island (HC8) was worked by many locals. My attention was elsewhere and I missed it.

The final notable country was CY0S. That one was done on MSK144 meteor scatter. These were random meteors so it was very tough for everyone. A lucky few got through. We had no good sporadic E openings on this short path during the DXpedition.

Other stations heard and worked

Although not a new country, I was pleased to work OX3LX on a grid-pedition to northern Greenland. We don't often hear arctic stations on 6 meters. Although I don't enthusiastically chase grids and islands, working these unusual locations is always a pleasure.

There were numerous brief openings on long DX paths. Few delivered results but it was nice to hear them. These included:

• Japan: only two stations worked. This year was similar to the first time I briefly heard Japan but didn't work them. This time I was watching but this was all I could accomplish. There were other evenings with a few signals form JA netted no QSOs. Nothing else was heard from east Asia.
• Central Asia: We had one fleeting opening to UN. That's typical for us. Last year's bounty of UN stations was very unusual. Two stations called me but signals faded before we could complete the contacts. PSK Reporter told me that I was heard in another country in the region but I didn't hear them if they called me.
  
• Indian Ocean: Early in the year I heard 3B8, 3B9 and FR, and had a partial QSO with FR4OO. I was being heard, as seen on PSK Reporter, but I wasn't always hearing them. It is likely due to a power difference.
  
• A scattering of other DX: 9K, Z6, TR, among others. The only one of these worked was 9K.
  
• W6: We had many openings to California this year. That's unusual. W6 isn't DX but a long path nonetheless. I worked some though most were stations I'd worked before. I pay close attention when I hear the southwest US and northern XE because they can herald openings to the Pacific, which are on the same western bearing.

How can I do better? 

We are all at the mercy of propagation. We can monitor, let others know what we hear or toss a CQ into the aether. Bigger antennas and higher power can help. However, the several decibels you can glean that way pales in comparison to the far greater range of propagated signal levels. On the HF bands you can see results every day with a superior station because the propagation is more consistent.

That does not mean station improvements are pointless. I already run the legal limit on 6 meters so all I can do is improve the antenna. I can replace the optimized A50-6 with a bigger (longer boom) yagi or put another antenna higher up on one of my two big towers, and I may do so, even though that'll get me 1 or perhaps 2 db. 

To go further I'd need a stack, both for gain and for a variety of elevation angles. That would require a new tower since I'm out of room on the ones I have. My priority is HF contests so VHF and other antennas must be placed wherever I can find room left for them. A new tower is unlikely since I'm not getting any younger and station maintenance will eventually become a burden.

I continue to consider the possibilities despite the obstacles. Since I'll soon sate my HF station objectives there will be time to devote to other projects. A long boom yagi in 2024 is a possibility. That's about all I can say at this point while I ponder the alternatives.

Closing note

I think this will be the last of my annual 6 meter reports. I've had a lot to report on for the past 6 years, and many seem to have enjoyed those articles. The rise of FT8 and FT4 was partly responsible due to its novelty and how it drew many hams to the magic band.

The diminishing returns I spoke about in the 2022 report about DXCC countries can now also be applied to these articles. There will continue to be individual articles on select topics about 6 meters, including notable propagation, new technology and station improvement, but not annual reports.

Update Oct.20, 2023:

My gloomy report about DX for the remainder of the year proves that my belated report ought to have been belated a little longer. I got an email alert on October 19 from the newest member of our local 6 meter buddy group (VE3KG) that stations from the Indian Ocean were rolling in.

Frantic activity followed, with most of us working 3B8FA, 3B8CW and 3B9FR. A few hours later I worked 7Q7EMH. But that wasn't all! That evening saw an excellent TEP opening to South American. I worked a number of Brazilian stations while my friends chased ZP9HTL, who I worked last year. Then today, October 20, VP8LP was worked by many stations in this corner of North America. 

I guess the magic band still has a few surprises in store for us this year! It is remarkable considering that the solar flux index is hovering around 130. The key factor appears to be a rare October sporadic E opening bridging to TEP. Both days saw strong signals from VO1 and VY2, and later from W4.

It's a good thing someone in our group was checking 6 meters or I'd have missed all of it. The buddy system works.

3B8, 3B9 and 7Q are new DXCC countries for me, bringing my total to 134. My 2023 increment is now 14 countries. TO8FH (Mayotte) was heard by others nearby but not by me. That would have been a fine catch. I am no longer quite so gloomy about 6 meter prospects in the coming days and weeks.

Inspecting a Bencher Skyhawk

This is not a typical product review. Indeed, it is really not a review at all. But as I inspected, cleaned, reassembled and installed the Bencher Skyhawk tri-band yagi I recently purchased secondhand I thought that it might be instructive to look at how an antenna ages and how it is designed. Nothing lasts forever, and problems crop up in the best antennas. They are totally exposed high up on a tower and endure everything nature can throw at them. 

Mine is an approximately 12-year old Bencher Skyhawk, a product which has since been transferred to DX Engineering. The new owners have made only a few small changes so that the antenna you can buy today is substantially the same as the original. My observations are mostly applicable to both. 

The electrical and mechanical design of this no-trap tri-bander is very good and reviews are almost all very positive. This is a fine antenna. That's why I bought it. But a 12-year old antenna is not a new antenna and time has taken its toll. That's one good reason you don't pay new prices for old merchandise. The resale prices of many products fall precipitously because they age poorly.

The Skyhawk is now on the air at VE3VN. Raising of the antenna was described in a previous article.

This article contains my notes and observations. As already said, this is not a review but a collection of my impressions from inspecting, assembling and raising the antenna. It was an interesting study.

Electrical design

A multi-band yagi is very difficult to design and optimize. This is true with or without traps. All the elements interact, so that even non-resonant elements, and even the tips beyond the traps, have induced current and their fields add to those of the resonant elements. There are no analytical solutions except in the most trivial of cases. 

An iterative numerical process is needed to solve the design problem. Before computer modelling, trap yagis had to be refined with great time and expense on a test range. Many manufacturers didn't even bother trying. I've done manual iterations using EZNEC to optimize small yagis but large ones like the Skyhawk require automated algorithms. For my own antennas, I most often take an already optimized design, whether one band or more, which I may tweak to meet my personal performance objectives.

Measurement notes: The SWR plots were made with a RigExpert AA54 in the shack, through about 40 meters of low-loss coax (except 2.5 m of RG213) and a 2×8 antenna switch. I checked the SWR at the feed point after it was raised but the measured impedance is affected by body proximity. The effect increases with frequency: little change on 20 but noticable on 10 meters.

The Skyhawk is optimized and it is a good design. Although I have not developed a computer model of the antenna, nor have I read an engineering review of it, it appears from its behaviour that some gain may have been sacrificed in favour of an excellent match across all three bands.

There's nothing wrong with that and it may be better for the majority. I tend to favour a little more gain. But that's a nitpick.

12 years of wear

Nothing lasts forever, and that includes antennas. Exposure to the elements takes its toll no matter how good the antenna's mechanical design. An inspection found problems, both small and large. These were corrected before it was reassembled and raised.

• Rivets
  
• Driven element spacer
• Grease
  

I laid out the pieces of the antenna on the deck to do the inspection and element assembly. Rivets had to be removed from several elements to break into sections that would fit on the truck. 

It was an excellent opportunity to inspect how rivets perform over time. I was interested because I've never owned a yagi that used rivets and I didn't use them on my many home brew antennas.

Rivets

Rivets have always struck me as inadequate for joining the sections of tapered element since they are quite small. I wondered if they were strong enough to last and whether the longitudinal stress on the element would accelerate failure of the softer aluminum alloy tubes. Disassembly of the antenna for transport gave me an opportunity to inspect their long term behaviour.

On the left is an improperly seated rivet head. I drilled out several of these to inspect the holes and insert new rivets. There was no obvious damage to the tubes or rivets in most cases so the protruding heads were likely due to mishandling of the rivet tool. The heads of all the rivets protrude around most of their circumference since it's flat and the tube is cylindrical. That isn't ideal but it seems to work.

On the upper right is a damaged hole where rivets were drilled out to disassemble the element. The sides of the hole are clean so it is possible that it was due to careless application of the drill. I left it as is and inserted a new rivet. The resulting bond was good since the rivet head is larger than the hole in the outer tube and the inner tube wasn't damaged.

Close inspection of the inner tube of one telescoping joint was enlightening. The hole is longitudinally elongated and the inside hole rim is roughly bevelled. The elongation is slight, probably no more than 0.020", and it is sometimes less (my calipers didn't fit very well for accuracy). This is what I expected since mechanical stress on the element is primarily longitudinal. 

The ⅛" diameter of the stainless rivets is a small, hard surface that can amplify the stress and push the softer aluminum aside. However, it isn't enough to be of concern so I inserted new rivets and continued.

The outer diameter (OD) of the smaller telescoping tube is less than the larger tube's inner diameter (ID). In both cases the wall thickness is 0.058", which is the most common US made aerospace alloy tubes used for telescoping yagi elements in ⅛" steps. For a press fit the wall would have to be 0.0625". That leaves a maximum gap of 0.009" when the tubes touch on one side. The tubes thus slide together very easily. Please note that the gap is less than it appears in the pic due to shadowing.

The antenna obviously works well despite the gap, although it bothers me a little. A press fit a poor choice for antennas since if you could insert the smaller tube it'll probably never come out again! Oxidation, stress and galling take their toll. For full circumference contact the outer tube must be slit and a gear clamp used to squeeze them together. That introduces two points of failure: the slit and the clamp. High quality stainless clamps are essential for reliability.

There are other ways of bonding telescoping tubes. A few of those which are applicable to element tubes were described in the blog when I was building my many yagis. Each method has its pros and cons, including rivets. Perhaps rivets aren't so bad after all.

There are many online resources that explain rivets and how they work, and how to use them. High tensile strength stainless rivets are inexpensive and widely available. It's well worth wasting a few to practice using the rivet tool. I drilled a few ⅛" holes in scrap aluminum and practiced until I was sure of what I was doing. The rivet tool came with the antenna.

It takes a lot of force to seat the rivet and break the narrow neck. I found it easiest to place the element and tool on a solid surface and press the upper handle with one hand while using my other hand to align the tool head with the tubes and to ensure contact between the rivet head and the tool tip. Inset is a closeup of properly seated rivets that were drilled out. You can see how the rivet bulb expands the shank upward to squeeze the tubes together against the rivet head.

All conductive joints in a yagi should be coated to prevent oxidation, prevent binding of telescoped tubes and assure conduction. Many hams skip this step and they should not. I've taken apart many "dry" antennas that required restoration. Some use dielectric grease, and it can work well if it doesn't dry out. A better choice is a conductive grease, which is essentially dielectric grease with a suspension of microscopic metal particles.

The manual states that the Bencher product was shipped with a product called Butter-It's-Not. The name is familiar but I've never seen it and I had difficulty searching for it online -- searches favour links to margarine sites! In any case there are many products. Whatever was used on my Skyhawk, all the grease had dried, leaving a residue of the suspended metal and whatever else. From the residue at least two different products were used.

I lightly sanded the exposed joints to renew them and greased them. Rivetted joints were left as is. The product I use is Noalox. I've had good success with it. The joints remain slippery after many years. I know there are better products that I have less experience with so don't take this as a firm recommendation. My squeeze bottle is so old that the plastic is cracked and repaired with clear packing tape. I've greases joints in countless antennas over the years. A small amount goes a long way. It's cheap insurance so don't skimp.

Driven element spacer

Feeding multiple elements directly from a common feed point puts them in close proximity. Without one or more spacers along their lengths the driven elements would strike one another when the wind is more than a light breeze. That would be catastrophic since the transmitter would fault due to SWR when they make contact.

The Skyhawk uses one spacer on each side of the boom to hold the three driven elements. Only the 15 and 20 meter elements are at risk of touching, and that's very unlikely unless the tubes are severely stressed. If wind or ice of such severity were to occur, you'd likely have bigger worries!

A common complaint in many online review of the antenna is that over time the bundle of driven elements develops an S curve. The reason is that the spacer gradually slides sideways on the 10 and 15 meter driven elements while waving in the wind. When it slides it tends to stay in its new position because the tube fit is tight. Only on the 20 meter element is the spacer trapped so that it can't move.

The plastic spacer is very tough but not indestructible. Apart from the unsightliness of twisted elements, the spacer and tubes are placed under increased stress. You can see where one of the spacers cracked, not surprisingly on the 20 meter element where the hole in the spacer is largest. I'm surprised that this product flaw has not been resolved.

My solution was to fix the spacer position on the 10 and 15 meter elements. A combination of small hose clamps and UV-resistant cable ties are lightweight and get the job done. It takes very little resistance to prevent the spacer from creeping.

I ventured to repair the cracked spacer rather than order a replacement. I drilled a hole and threaded a heavy duty cable tie through it. The tie braces against the element to bind the sides of the crack. 

When kept in the correct position, the radial stress ought to be low. The plastic itself is quite tough (it survived the crack). Time will tell whether my repair is effective.

Element-to-Boom clamps

The element-to-boom clamps have no way to fix the element centre to coincide with the boom. All the elements are insulated from the boom with bonded plastic sleeves and you simply judge by eye (or a ruler) as you tighten the clamp bolts. Perfect centering is irrelevant to performance but I do it anyway.

The driven element clamp alignment is more critical (picture is from the DXE manual). These three elements are split for feeding. Rather than one long plastic sleeve, there's a short one on each side of centre. The straps for feeding the elements in parallel are wide and carelessness can cause a short between the strap and the element clamp (which contacts the boom). I made sure the clamps were properly tightened to prevent the elements from creeping due to wind stress. 

I wish the design of the feed and clamps were better. However, I haven't heard any complaints on various fora of shorts developing over time. It must happen but perhaps it's rare. A raised lip or rim on the inner side of the sleeve would reduce the risk.

Another peculiarity (or benefit) of the clamp design is that there is no way to position or align the elements along the boom. There is a bolt that run through the upper half of the clamp and the boom. In a few cases the bolt does double duty to bond the boom sections and the boom compensator.

Alignment was excellent except for the driven elements. They are less than 2° askew. It isn't noticable except when you sight along the boom. The PVC element compensator doesn't age well so it is no longer straight. That isn't the fault of the clamp, and it doesn't matter.

Boom attachments

The antenna has no boom truss despite its 24' length and with the longest (heaviest) 20 meter elements mounted at each end. Despite that lack the boom is pretty hefty and sags very little. You can get an idea from the view along the boom towards the reflector end.

You really don't notice it from the ground. Aside from aesthetics there is a question of how much severe weather load the boom and mast clamp can tolerate without the truss. The antenna is engineered for high winds and some ice so I am not especially concerned. But I do wonder how it'll fare in our harsh winters and occasional severe ice storms. On the other hand, elimination of the truss keeps the mast free of obstructions.

When I removed the antenna from its previous owner's tower I was unfamiliar with the design of the mast clamp. I automatically loosened the saddle clamps and sent the antenna into the hands of the ground crew below. The u-bolts don't pierce the saddles so it isn't difficult to drop the loose saddles.

I later came to understand the two-part design. The mast side of the assembly can be left on the mast for both raising and lowering. The upper nuts on the boom side of the clamp fit into the keyholes of the mast plate and drop into the slots below. When that's done the antenna is secure. The lower nuts can be threaded on and all 4 bolts tightened. The reverse procedure is performed for removal of the yagi.

Keyhole mounts are found on all types of hardware, but this is the first time I've seen it on a yagi. I like it. 

When we raised the antenna onto my tower, the mast clamp was already installed and all I had to do was direct the nuts into the slots and have the crew lower the antenna an inch. There was no fussing with multiple saddle clamps (often with short u-bolt legs that require near perfect alignment) to secure the load. 

Balun and coax

The balun supplied by Bencher is more compact than the one included by DX Engineering. It appears to have weathered well. I can't say how well the PVC electrical box for DX Engineering's common mode choke will survive other than to note my poor experience with the same enclosure used by Balun Designs.

The balun fits snugly under the boom using special brackets to keep it centred and with adequate space for fitting and weather proofing the coax. I tested it with a dummy load on the workbench and it tested fine, with inductive reactance gradually increasing with frequency due to the pigtails. I do not have a fixture for testing common mode rejection. The quantity and type of ferrite beads determine its performance.

The location of the feed point is not convenient for attaching the coax and rotation loop. The Skyhawk includes a boom bracket to support the coax and thus reduce stress on the connector and balun. Unfortunately, that puts the coax even further out. It isn't very far but you must be comfortable leaning out from the tower to do the work.

Since the feed system is below the boom the coax is routed above the boom. The rotation loop is located on the opposite side of the mast and paired with coax dropping down from the 6 meter yagi at the top of the mast. It is possible to put the rotation loop on the same side of the mast by routing it down on the outside of the driven elements, except that the coax has to be kept rigid as it passes the balun to avoid jostling during rotation. A few more feet of coax makes a cleaner rotation loop on the far side of the mast, so that's what I did.

Tube caps

The antenna comes equipped with plastic caps for the boom and element tips. Only a few of the elements had caps on my Skyhawk. I prefer no element caps so that water can freely flow out should any get in. 

I have the boom caps and I put them on. Insects are a greater risk in booms since they are large. It's a trade off. Depending on local conditions it maybe sensible to cap all of the tube ends, or none of them.

So far...

I'm happy with the Skyhawk. The first contact was with VK9LAA and I have made many other DX contacts since, including several of the current DXpeditions. It's easier and quicker to turn this antenna than the prop pitch driven big yagis. Although it is not my best antenna on the high bands, it is usually sufficient to make the contact. The agility it brings to my contesting is very welcom. 

For most hams it would be a fine antenna on its own. Just make sure the tower and rotator are up to the job. There are many elements and that adds up to a high wind and ice load. 

Another consideration is the price. There are few antennas I would buy new and this one is no exception. Material prices have skyrocketed over the past few years and that makes up a substantial portion of the manufacturing cost. The Skyhawk is not out of line with the prices of similar antennas. I don't see many available on the used market. I buy my antennas used or I build my own, with infrequent exceptions.

Direct comparison with the TH6 hasn't yet been done since their gains will be close and the confounding factors many. 1 to 2 db of difference is difficult to reliably discern by ear or S-meter on receive. On transmit it's a different matter: the extra gain of a no-trap design will be noticed. This is often also true when comparing my stacks to smaller yagis. The contest pile ups are deeper and they last longer.

Most hams are fortunate to have one yagi for the HF bands, and two is uncommon. Easy comparisons are impossible. Hence the reliance by some hams on myth and lore, unreliable opinions and advertising. We do have a tendency to convince ourselves that whatever choice we make is the best choice because it is our choice. Physics begs to disagree.