Re: [TowerTalk] Tower and antenna decisions

["Patrick Greenlee" <patrick_g@windstream.net>]

Richard, It isn't an issue of what you can get away with and not be 
prosecuted.  The protest was based on civility and pedagogical 
considerations.  The original protest was based on the protester's 
perception of this forum being frequented by those whose ears were not 
accustomed to hearing such terminology. I don't know what monastery or 
nunnery you'd have to search to find persons to whom the term would be 
shocking but it sure isn't today's school children.  It may be an 
unfortunate state of affairs but nevertheless it is the current state of 
affairs.
Whether or not the user of the term was emulating his idol/mentor is left to 
your determination.  It is a fact in todays world that this sort of speech, 
used for emphasis, is not an infrequent event.  We have come a long way 
since Lenny Bruce.  Not necessarily in a totally desired direction but here 
we are.
And, oh by the way, I think the T shirt story was hilarious and wish I had 
thought of it first.
I recall an episode in my undergrad physics days where a friend of mine, a 
fellow ex USAF cum physics major, told someone to bleep themselves which got 
a quizzical but mildly hostile reply to which my friend replied, "bleep you, 
you mother bleeping mother bleeper, bleep off!
Note: I have made no substitution.  My friend used the word "bleep" but 
nevertheless conveyed his intent.
Had the poster written "BULL BLEEP" is there anyone who would not have made 
the correct translation?
Until or unless I see evidence to the contrary, I think the comment was 
acceptable in this forum for reasons stated above not because it wouldn't 
have gotten him prosecuted had it been said on the air.  I'm glad to see 
someone stick up for the laws of physics.  It is some of the last laws not 
bleeped with or bleeped up by the bleeping liberals.
Anyone care to advise me regarding issues relating to the coax run up the 
tower in the case of a crank-up tilt over with a rotating antenna atop it?
1.  How do you keep the coax tangle and jam free when the rotator rotates?
2.  What are the best choices for the part of the coax next to the rotator? 
Should all the moving coax be some kind of "ultra flexible cable."
3.  How do you keep the coax from getting "messed up? when raising and 
lowering the crank up? I have heard there is a way to keep the coax inside 
the tower tangle free. Is that so?
This is my first time so please treat me gently. I have never had a rotating 
ham antenna before.
Patrick


-----Original Message----- 
From: Richard Solomon
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 2:08 PM
To: Tower Talk
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower and antenna decisions

Jerry Letvin would agree with you, he used the same term in a
televised broadcast in the early 60's. The FCC did not react.

73, Dick, W1KSZ


On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Jim Brown 
<jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>wrote:
> On 10/27/2013 2:26 AM, Jim Thomson wrote:
>
> > #  Lemme rephrase that slightly.  IF the ground is relatively
> > flat....higher
> > is STILL better.   The 1st 45 feet doesn?t count.  You need that just to
> > clear junk +
> > clutter in the surrounding neighbourhood.
> I won't dispute that.
>
>  ## While 70 ft may seem high....on 40m + 80m, its not.   70 ft on 40m is
> > like 35 ft up
> > on 20m.
> Gee -- from your earlier post, to which I strongly objected, I got the
> distinct impression you were talking about tribanders. But that is is
> exactly my point -- in addition to clearing the clutter, the most 
> important
> contribution of height is forming the vertical radiation pattern of the
> antenna, and for that, height must be thought  on in ELECTRICAL DEGREES,
> not feet or meters. Up to a point, additional height boosts low angle
> radiation, but eventually a height will be reached where it produces nulls
> in the vertical pattern. At lower heights these nulls are at higher 
> angles,
> but when you go higher, they are at lower angles.
>
> I'm currently in the midst of a project to raise my 80/40 fan dipole from
> around 120 ft (155 degrees on 80M) to around 140 ft (182 degrees) to
> improve its low angle radiation on 80M, and to add a reflector to increase
> the gain to the east coast and EU. If it were flat land, NEC predicts 2 dB
> for the increased height and 3.5 - 4.5 dB for the reflector (the lower 
> gain
> number is because the available trees don't allow the reflector to be
> parallel to the driven.  We'll see.
>
>  Take one of these 89 ft crank ups....and run it from 26 ft nested..up to
> > 89 ft extended..and it?s a real eye opener.  I have a  slight uphill rise
> > from N-S...all facing east.   And slightly downhill.... from N-S..all
> > facing west.   I need all the height I can get when pointed at EU, AF, 
> > SA,
> > etc.
> Right, but you said flat land. I have similar topography here to the north
> and east, and on all bands, higher IS better in those directions, even on
> the higher HF bands.  But it is NOT better to anywhere in the Pacific,
> because I have five miles of down-slope in that direction.
>
> The beauty of N6BV's HFTA software is that it first models the
> contribution of terrain to the vertical pattern along any azimuth that you
> choose, then allows you to superimpose statistical modeled data for the
> vertical propagation to a range of destinations for the non-WARC bands.
> This allows the user to see when those vertical nulls are likely to get us
> in trouble, and when they don't matter. I have two towers, one holding a
> 3-el SteppIR (no trombones) at 120 ft,  another placing monobanders for 20
> and15  at about 45 and 35 ft respectively, and a third push-up holding a
> 10M Yagi at 20 ft. In all cases, HFTA accurately predicts the actual 
> on-air
> performance of these antennas.
>
> As to stacking Yagis -- I've heard W3LPL do an excellent presentation on
> this topic at part of K3LR's Contest University.  I don't know whether 
> this
> material is available on line, but it's well worth seeking out.
>
> Someone objected to my use of  "profanity" to make a point. The late Paul
> Klipsch, was one of the most highly respected of engineers working in pro
> audio as well as some other disciplines (explosives and firearms, as I
> recall), and founder of the loudspeaker company bearing his name. At 
> annual
> meetings of the Audio Engineering Society, Paul made a practice of sitting
> at the back of technical papers sessions wearing a plaid sport shirt (and 
> a
> bola tie, as I recall). When the technical content of a given paper 
> strayed
> from the laws of physics, Paul would stand in the aisle at the back of the
> room and open his shirt to reveal a tee-shirt containing the single 
> epithet
> "BULLSHIT" in large letters.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/towertalk<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk>
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

_______________________________________
No infections found in this incoming message
Scanned by iolo System Shield
http://www.iolo.com 

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk