Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Electrical conductivity of crankups for shunt feeding

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Electrical conductivity of crankups for shunt feeding
From: k3gt@pgh.net (Bob Thacker)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 09:10:19 -0400
Hi John. I have successfully fed a crank up at its lowest position for many
years. I chose to resonate it at its lowest position so I could operate when
the winds start howling at -20 F. None of the sections are mechanically
bonded other that the wire cable touching the pulleys. There has to be a
degree of resistance associated with this that will produce loss. Never
wanted to add anything additional that could get caught when it was raised
or lowered since everything is done remotely and completely out of sight. It
really depends on how particular you want to be and if you'll sacrifice
'some' performance for simplicity.  I can work anything and has been a real
performer.

73,
Bob, K3GT


>Having successfully used a shunt fed fixed mast for many years,
>I am contemplating a crankup.
>
>What is the best method of ensuring good electrical continuity
>of the adjoining sections.
>Thanks
>
>John - G3XRJ -
>
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
>Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
>Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
>


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm


From  jimi" <jimi@designet.com  Sat Sep  4 16:34:52 1999
From:  jimi" <jimi@designet.com ( jimi)
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat,  4 Sep 99 10:34:52 -0500
Subject: [TowerTalk] AEA CIA-HF
Message-ID: <199909041034.SM00137@mail.designet.com>


Let me explain.

The AEA is clearly a more advanced unit with better display capabilities - at 
least on paper. The company stands by its product with a money-back guarantee. 
If I don't like it, I'll send it back for a full refund. I have no intention of 
wasting my money.

I have used a 259 and 259B for some time, and find the need to constantly tune 
the sig gen to be an unfriendly feature of the unit. The fact that you can't 
store an antenna sweep on your pc for analysis later is also a big minus of the 
MFJ.

So, I'm hoping to get some comments from those of you who have had some 
experience with the AEA, just to see what you think.

Thanks,

Jim K1IR

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Dave Jordan <wa3gin@erols.com>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 10:12:07 -0400

>Perhaps you should have asked the question before you spent your money!



--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>