The AM Forum
May 14, 2024, 06:57:18 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is This Solar Minimum Better or Worse Than the Last One on 160m?  (Read 4065 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« on: September 15, 2009, 05:36:49 AM »

There is no doubt we're experiencing the deepest solar minimum period of our lifetimes. The previous five solar minima roughly lasted only two years, and here we are now halfway through year three of the solar minimum period between Cycle 23 and Cycle 24. This solar minimum period shouldn't be too much of a surprise, though, as our historical data suggested this is likely where we are headed.

http://mysite.verizon.net/k9la/Is_This_Solar_Minimum_Better_or_Worse.pdf
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
flintstone mop
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5047


« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2009, 11:51:02 AM »

Don ,
just think, we'll be world wide on the lower bands while ole Sol is resting. Your 160M sig should fly over the ponds a little more now. Praise the Lawd!!

Fred
Logged

Fred KC4MOP
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2009, 12:54:38 PM »

Don ,
just think, we'll be world wide on the lower bands while ole Sol is resting. Your 160M sig should fly over the ponds a little more now. Praise the Lawd!!

Why aren't the lower bands packed solid right now, whenever the band is quiet on a Friday or Saturday night?  20m usually goes dead pretty early in the evening, and forget about 17, 15, 12, or 10.  The only reliably usable HF bands we have during the hours of darkness are 160, 80 and 40.

In previous solar minima, 75 would be so crowded that it would take a while to find a clear spot to transmit on a weekend night, particularly if you were running AM.  I have even seen it that way on 160 back during the 80's and 90's, after LORAN was taken off and most of the amateur band restored.  Of course, 40m phone was practically unusable because of the broadcasters.

This time around, even on Friday and Saturday nights when there happens to be little QRN, there are plenty of blank spots to operate on 75, 160 is still very sparce, and I  don't hear that much on 40m after about 0200 GMT.  I noticed a big increase in 40m activity right after the broadcasters vacated 7.1-7.2, but even that has dwindled as the novelty has worn off (I am talking about SSB as well as AM).

Even during some of the most notoriously obnoxious slopbucket QuaRMtests, like Sweepstakes and the PenisSylvania QSO Party, the past few years there have been plenty of open spots in between QuaRMtesters to operate AM without too much hassle.

Of course, the expansion of the phone bands and lifting of 40m broadcasters has undoubtedly brought us some relief.  This should be an interesting upcoming radio season.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2009, 01:14:59 PM »

80/75 is definately less crowded. Let's fill it up with AM.
Logged
N4LTA
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1070


« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2009, 01:35:21 PM »

I say some of it is probably because it is harder for some to get a decent antenna up for the low bands and some of the younger hams have never worked the low bands.
Logged
K3ZS
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1036



« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2009, 02:09:18 PM »

One of Don's favorite web sites:

http://www.nittany-arc.net/paqso.html

.... .. .... ..

Now back to the subject.
Logged
flintstone mop
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5047


« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2009, 02:10:27 PM »

I say some of it is probably because it is harder for some to get a decent antenna up for the low bands and some of the younger hams have never worked the low bands.

This may be a good thing!!!

Fred
Logged

Fred KC4MOP
N4LTA
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1070


« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2009, 03:15:42 PM »

Now, Now  - That is not politically correct - Besides - I 'm a young ham - only 58.
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2009, 03:31:58 PM »

I say some of it is probably because it is harder for some to get a decent antenna up for the low bands and some of the younger hams have never worked the low bands.

This may be a good thing!!!

Maybe they are hanging out on EHamBone and QRZzzz.com, thinking they are on the air, or that it's the same thing.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone © 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.048 seconds with 19 queries.