In reply to DF2GN:
Klaus, it was conditions or gear problems, I knew it was you on 7160 by the tone and rhythm of your voice but I could not copy you so I did not call, sorry about that, I should have tried!
A thought about the dipole, would it work to cut it to resonate at the CW end of the band but fold back several cm of the end when qsy to phone?
73
Brian G8ADD
In reply to DF2GN:
I was listening 7160 also, but a big zero here.
Next time Steve 73
In reply to G8ADD:
hi Brian,
that folding back of the dipole works, but its a problem , because if you use
a linked dipole for qro and the 40m part is between 30 and 20m.
i plan to use a open wire feeder with z-match in my next qro activations,
to feed the antenna.so i can use all bands and have no problem when qsy
from 14058 to 14315.in moment i work on that 100watt z-match .
the example above is also about bad conds. before i made a few qso´s
on cw. ssb and qrp in bad conds is no fun. thats the extra boost from cw over
ssb with abt. 12-15db. the old example that a 5w cw-signal have the same
punch as a 100w ssb-sig.
after the z-match i will build the kpa-100 pa for my k2. i can´t use
the ft-857,i sold it , because i used it never again after
the new trx.never again problems with a crowded band and strong sigs
around 7032.the other plus from the k2 is , that the amp only works
if i go over 10watt output. so i can use a smaller slab for the qro.
the 857 needed abt. 7Ah ! to produce abt. 20watt.
stay at 10watt in cw and do qro in ssb. that are my plans this year.
that takes a bit time in that we have hard work in ssb with my 10watt.
hope on good conds on sporadic E for my ssb from the summits next time.
had have nice qso´s on 20 and 17m in ssb the last times.
vy 73 Klaus
In reply to G8ADD:
In reply to DF2GN:
Klaus, it was conditions or gear problems, I knew it was you on 7160
by the tone and rhythm of your voice but I could not copy you so I did
not call, sorry about that, I should have tried!
73Brian G8ADD
Not the case with Klaus’s sigs on CW where many worked him, myself included, sort of proves the point why to opt for CW over SSB.
Another fine example of this is that sometimes, when 60m conditions are poor and I can’t get a report from Jack GM4COX, he will automatically switch to CW where we will exchange reports with absolute ease.
Having said that, Rogers original question was Has SSB died? He didn’t mention anything about CW.
73
Mike GW0DSP
I could possibly improve my set-up by “folding back”. My 80m dipole is centred on 3.550MHz. It still works on 3.660MHz, but not with so good SWR. Interestingly, the SWR is no better even down at 3.600MHz, so it does seem fairly critical!
I have just done a quick calculation and have come up with 63cm as the amount I should fold back at the end of each dipole leg when QSYing from 3.557MHz to 3.660MHz. Is that right, will that work, or have I made a mistake?
I could probably find some kind of little plastic clips I can leave in situ on the dipole legs at the positions I would fold back from and clip onto. Thoughts?
Has SSB died? No. Jimmy always makes plenty of contacts on 80 SSB. Also, there seems to be plenty of 80 and 40 SSB activations for us to chase from the shack at weekends.
SSB hasn’t died. It just might look that way on SOTAwatch with the ever increasing amount of CW activations. The rapid growth of CW in SOTA does not mean that SSB has diminished. That’s why although Roger didn’t mention anything about CW in his original prompt, CW naturally came into the discussion. It is creating an ‘optical illusion’ that SSB is diminishing - when it isn’t!
Tom M1EYP
In reply to GW0DSP and others:
Hi all,
I tried SSB on 40m from 5 of my 6 DM/NS summits last week but with 5W on 40m could not generate more than one reply (from OK2OP). I can’t believe I had worked the band out on CW. I was unable to self spot my move to SSB but did announce on 7032 each time. Another problem is that there is no obvious equivalent to 7032 as the SSB part of 40m seems to be so full during day time. I tried 7090 ish, 7105 and 7115 at various times without success.
I did have a number (7 from memory) of 2m SSB QSOs which was very satisfying indeed.
I think I have to resort to a more QRO station for SSB on HF. I have long promised myself an FT897 or similar but the thought of carrying lots of battery is not too encouraging.
I did not have access to 60m whilst in DL but feel sure the 5W would have been OK there as I could hear UK activators quite well.
I suppose the answer is that activiating with QRP on HF, CW gives better results than SSB. However I will keep trying. It was a shame I could not have got on SSB on 40m as I really wanted to hook up with Graham G4JZF.
73 to all
I will remember to try SSB more seriously in future!
Mike G4DDL
In reply to G4DDL:
Hi Mike
You did a great job over there and many thanks for the activations.
SSB set frequencies seem to be an ongoing problem due to QRM - perhaps a range of frequencies could be agreed instead - (say 7115 - 7125?) - at least that narrows the search a little!
73 es tnx again
Cris
GM4FAM
In reply to M1EYP:
“I could possibly improve my set-up by “folding back”. My 80m dipole is centred on 3.550MHz. It still works on 3.660MHz, but not with so good SWR. Interestingly, the SWR is no better even down at 3.600MHz, so it does seem fairly critical!”
A lot of people miss out on this one, Tom: the bandwidth of an 80m dipole between the SWR 2:1 points is only 80 kHz! The bandwidth for a folded dipole is just under 350 kHz but of course you need open wire or ribbon feeder and the windage and weight makes it impractical for SOTA, so that Klaus’ idea of a Z match becomes more practical, especially as it reduces the number of knobs to twiddle.
Klaus, have you seen the Z-match designs on:
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/ldbutler/SingleCoilZMatch.htm
This works well but needs shrinking a bit for portable!
73
Brian G8ADD
In reply to G8ADD:
hi Brian,
thanks nice link ! some interesting stuff for me !
vy 73 Klaus
I always try SSB on my (few) activations Roger as my CW is not very good yet.
But I must admit with 10 watts it is easier to get contacts in CW than in SSB. It is always a struggle. Still, I keep persevering.
Next time I will announce my activation and if we work there’s 9 WAB books in it for you.
73, don’t give up!
Peter
In reply to G0TRB:
Hi Roger,
SSB is a difficult mode for SOTA activations. I would need a CQ machine to call with a second radio same time that I am working on 7031/10116 kHz the regular chasers. I guess I could listen the band noise and QRM with the other ear same time that I try to copy the CW. Maybe that could be done with a MP3 player or small Palm PC. Same problem is in activations on 6 m, 2 m and 70 cm for both CW and SSB. One way out is to start to use modern digital CW, which is RTTY, PSK, MFSK, HELL etc, but then you need a computer.
73, Jaakko OH7BF/F5VGL
In reply to all: On behalf of G(W)6DTN, my hf alter ego, who shares the feeling that there is less activity on hf ssb than there use to be, despite the statistical ‘proof’ offered to the contrary. However, he’s been out quite a lot recently now his ticker has been sorted, and despite the difficult conditions on 80 and 40, has activated the following with is barefoot FT817 and stepped dipole:
28th Feb - G/WB-005. 9 on 80 and 9 on 40
27th March - G/WB-003. 10 on 80 and 1 on 40
25th April - G/SC-003. 4 on 80 and 1 on 40
2nd May - GW/MW-013. 11 on 80, 3 on 40 and 1 on 20 (E73AD). The first 20M qso from this summit.
5th May - GW/NW-042. 16 on 80, 3 on 40 and 2 on 20 (2E0PXW and SM5MEK). The first 20M QSOs from this summit
9th May - GW/NW-039. 14 on 80, 5 on 40 and 5 on 20.
16th May - GW/NW-032. 6 on 80, 2 on 40 and 4 on 20
22nd May - GW/SW-001. 6 on 80, 5 on 40 and 10 on 20. The first 20M QSOs from this summit.
23rd May - GW/SW-003. 6 on 80, 10 on 40 and 4 on 20
30th May - GW/NW-018. 7 on 80 (inc ON4CAP) 5 on 40 and 3 on 20. The first 20M QSOs from this summit.
1st June - G/WB-006. 9 on 80, 2 on 40 and 3 on 20.
6th June - GW/NW-011. 11 on 80 (inc ON4CAP), 3 on 40 and 1 on 20 (OH1GFW) The first 20M QSO from this summit.
13th June - 9 on 80 (inc ON4CAP), 1 on 40 and 1 on 20 (LX2MG). The first 20M QSO from this summit.
80 and 40 can be hard work for the chasers, and 20 can turn up some surprises.
CW: Neither of us can read CW - we have to write it down at a miserable 10wpm, and can only send with a straight key at about the same speed. G6DTN has tried a couple of chases, but by the time he’s sent his call, the chaser is half-way through a QSO with a faster operator. We don’t blame them - why change down a gear to work a QRS chaser when you can work 2 or 3 at your regular speed.
Regards, Dave, G6DTN/M0DFA
Hi to you both,
why change down a gear to work a QRS chaser when you can work 2 or 3 at your regular speed…?
Because it is good manners and in the correct ham spirit to do so. Some ops will do QRS towards the end of their activations, while others will QRS at any time according to the caller. If you found you have been ignored because you were at 10wpm, then you’ve been unlucky. The vast majority of CW activators will slow down immediately for slower speed callers.
FB on all your successful activations so far this year Dave(s).
73, Tom M1EYP
In reply to M1EYP:
Because it is good manners and in the correct ham spirit to do so.
I 100% agree with you Tom.
the best chaser is a good SWL with short transmissions,
indepent of the speed. (read G4SSH´s CW-rprt to learn).
Vy73 es cu in QRS,QRQ and SSB (if condx allows).
Fritz HB9CSA,DL4FDM
Chasing here is done at slow speed and I must say I have never been ignored because of that speed.
Most activators even reduce their speed so that it is understandable for me. But I always have my notebook at hand to write down if necessary.
Peter
In reply to M0DFA:
Hi Dave,
The exams in OH used to be 8 wpm for novice class with QRP access to HF and 12 wpm for general class license. The 20 - 24 wpm that you hear often works only for short contest type QSOs, where only the call signs and simple exchange are send. The exception are the high speed club members, who can actually talk to each other at these speeds. For the normal hams QRS is needed if more info has to be passed.
73, Jaakko OH7BF/F5VGL
In reply to F5VGL:
Hi All
Jaakko is right. I find that my CW speed ability varies with what I’m doing and amount of information exchanged. (although it’s still improving as the years go by)
These seem to be my limits:
18-20 wpm for rag chewing with all manner of information being passed
22 wpm for me activating SOTA - any faster and it seems to go awry… too much adrenaline? 
25 wpm for chasing SOTA - limited exchanges, somewhat predictable
30 wpm for copying just calls and serial numbers in a contest - very predictable… and this one has to be sent by computer not my paddle!
In any case I will ALWAYS slow down… what concerns me sometimes is the instance where I am activating at the usual 22 wpm (or less) but a chaser “machine guns” me at 27-30 wpm. I can copy it but it is usually more efficient to slow to the activators speed to avoid repeats.
So Dave… hpe cusn on cw.
73 Marc G0AZS
HAS SSB Died? In reply to G0TRB, 24-06-08:
Hi Roger,
A very interesting list of comments here. You certainly stirred up some reaction! I do agree with you that SSB should not die and that both SOTA activating and chasing should aim to have something for everybody.
It is difficult to be ‘all things to everyone’ and it constantly bothers me that for an activator, it’s just not possible. However looking back, I can’t find any summits that I’ve done CW only. All the issues about time, WX, signal efficiencies have been dealt with very well here (and elsewhere) but this did prompt me to analyze the past two years of my SOTA activator log (30-June to 30-June) to see if I could at least identify any personal trends. Here are the results…
Total 2006-07: 1798 QSOs; breakdown as follows:
Modes 2006-07:
CW: 58%
FM: 9%
SSB: 33%
Bands 2006-07:
160m: 5%
80m: 55%
60m: 2%
40m: 29%
2m: 9%
(4m-30m-20m-70cm: 10 QSO’s)
QRP/QRO 2006-07: 41% / 59%
…………………………………….
Total 2007-08: 2159 QSOs; breakdown as follows:
Modes 2007-08:
CW: 57%
FM: 10%
SSB: 33%
Bands 2007-08:
160m: 9%
80m: 56%
60m: 2%
40m: 19%
30m: 4%
2m: 10%
(70cm: 1 QSO)
QRP/QRO 2007-08: 59% / 41%
…………………………………….
Observations from the above:
A significant move towards QRP but apparently not at the expense of QSO’s (SSB or otherwise).
The SSB share is unchanged and FM much the same (I for one, have no plans to abandon SSB).
Minimal difference in chaser targeting.
A sad neglect of some very interesting bands, probably because of (bread & butter) chaser targeting.
Wider observations:
As far as the SSB argument is concerned, I think what Tom M1EYP stated is correct. CW use is burgeoning; SSB use is roughly the same. This trend is likely to continue or accelerate as more countries join in and targets get further away. It appears that activators independently discover (or already know) that CW is very well suited to SOTA ops. If that is accepted it becomes a hard truth that each subsequent change of band or mode impacts on the activator to a greater or lesser degree, dependent on external factors.
Perhaps CW wasn’t merely useful for access to HF after all! I would encourage anybody in SOTA to learn the code and use it to great advantage but I do mourn the dismantling of the UK infrastructure, which better enabled it.
73, John G4YSS. (SSEG G?0OOO/P)
In reply to ALL:
Another point to consider is that there has (seemingly) been a big shift from VHF to HF activations. This is inevitable with the increasing number of associations that are now part of SOTA.
Back in the days of yore, there were regular postings about poor skip length for 40m for inter-G working, which was one reason why 60m was adopted quite heartily by some. Now that inter-G is not a priority, then 40m comes back into the fray.
Now most sota activators run qrp setups so on what is a noisy and crowded band, CW will give the best returns.
If we now look at VHF, the advantages of CW over SSB are not so great, hence the reason why if you give a cq on 144.050cw you have a slim chance of being replied to (unless prearranged) whilst an ssb call on 144.300 will generally recieve answers. The band isn’t as noisy, and even in contests you can usually find room.
If CW becomes more and more prevalent though, and SSB/FM becomes more of a fringe activity (whilst the stats say that the levels of SSB/FM are level, from the viewpoint of the reflector says otherwise) then getting new ops to take part will become increasingly difficult.
Since the requirement for code was dropped from the license then there will be fewer people learning it. There will be some, but not as many as were “forced” to, who will still learn CW. This will give a smaller pool of people from which to draw new participants.
But who is to say that things wont change. If the USA get on board in a big way, they might dictate the future direction by their own operating habbits. It may well be CW or it could be exsclusively PSK31. Who knows what the future holds.
Just a final point, some of my observations and conclusions are drawn from traffic on the reflector. I havent looked at any activating/chasing stats, but just the overall viewpoint as seen by someone looking at the reflector. This view is dominated by CW, which is why the original “Has SSB died?” question was originally asked.
Ian
G7ADF
In reply to G7ADF:
“Back in the days of yore, there were regular postings about poor skip length for 40m for inter-G working, which was one reason why 60m was adopted quite heartily by some. Now that inter-G is not a priority, then 40m comes back into the fray.”
Also, the skip on 60 m is nowhere near as reliable as it used to be, which on its own is interesting and a sufficient justification for extending the 60 m experiment! However, I disagree that inter-G is not a priority, rather it is often just plain unavailable - long skip on 40 and 60, D-layer absorption on 80, and for long periods you can’t contact your old regulars at all!
The requirement for code was dropped (not before it was time INHO, there was no test for any other mode, was there?) but the Foundation License candidates do get exposed to code and at least some of them go on to use code once licensed. I think that SOTA is a powerful force for the preservation of code, which may not have been foreseen by the founders but I’ll bet it pleases them. Personally I hope to overcome my problem and become active on CW (but I’ll be darned if I’ll attempt to overcome the problem with a morse reader program!) but right now I really, really wish that some of those lovely continental uniques were available on phone!:-((
73
Brian G8ADD