I do not know the answer to the puzzle, but the incident was the subject of
a Nova broadcast a few months ago. The theory put forth for the crash was
that the crew was not 'lost' but were in clouds and had to use 'dead
reckoning' to estimate their position enroute. Using air speed and time
enroute, they began their descent at the estimated time (after clearing the
Peruvian mountains, they thought). They crashed on a glacier, killing all
aboard, and the wreck was covered by snow and ice. The reason they were not
where they thought was the Lancaster was flying higher than other passenger
planes of the day and had run into what is now known as the 'jet stream'. It
slowed their ground speed to much less than they anticipated, leading to the
disaster. The wreckage was not found until recently when it appeared as the
glacier carrying it moved to a position that caused the ice to melt. The
curious CW message was a puzzling subplot to a larger mystery!
Bob, W5LT
-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of
towertalk-request@contesting.com
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 9:42 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 5, Issue 59
Send TowerTalk mailing list submissions to
towertalk@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
towertalk-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
towertalk-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TowerTalk digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: OR-2800 pigtail ..safety wire kit? (Bill NY9H)
2. re pigtails (Courtney Judd)
3.
Effect of not isolating shields at center switch of lazy vee, was
"feeding one antenna" (Guy Olinger, K2AV)
4. Re: OR-2800 pigtail connector (Joe Reisert)
5. OR-2300
6. Re: OR-2800 pigtail connector
7. Caplugs for UHF connectors (Mel)
8. Re: Feeding one antenna in a stack
9. Length of Mast (Jerry Keller)
10. Fw: [Elecraft] CW puzzle... From circa 1950 (Guy Olinger, K2AV)
11. Re: Length of Mast (Michael Tope)
12. Re: Length of Mast (Pete Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 11:04:04 -0500
From: Bill NY9H <ny9h@arrl.net>
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] OR-2800 pigtail ..safety wire kit?
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.2.20030531110047.02cd5c90@mail.attbi.com>
In-Reply-To: <50.1d78aaa5.2c0a2452@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: list
Message: 1
what is a safety wire kit???
I cut out that 8 conductor connector two years ago , after it filled with
water; and the corsstalk of the motor pulses confused the controller...
i must have re-setup that thing 20 times till i figured it out...
put a scope on the sense line.
bill
At 10:29 AM 5/31/03, KJ6Y@aol.com wrote:
>The new Orion Rotors do not have a connector on the end of the pigtail.
They
>now come with a weather proof electrical box with a terminal strip inside.
>I would also recommend when you order this rotor to order the safety wire
>kit. Eliminates the bolts coming loose.
>If you already have this rotor, cut off the connector, install your own
>weather proof box and termonal strip, and order the safety wire kit.
>
>
>
>Skip, KJ6Y
> <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/kj6y/skip.html";>Communications Service
> Co</A>
>_______________________________________________
>
>See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
>Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with
>any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
>_______________________________________________
>TowerTalk mailing list
>TowerTalk@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 11:08:27 -0500
From: "Courtney Judd" <k4wi@earthlink.net>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] re pigtails
Message-ID: <07d101c3278e$e19f5220$0f1e500a@k4jyo>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Courtney Judd <k4wi@earthlink.net>
Message: 2
Another good thing to do is move the starting capacitor up near the rotator.
Seal it in a pill bottle and run two leads to your pigtail and then you only
have six to deal with going to the shack.Place it on the line coming up to
the disconnect so if you have to take the rotator down the capacitor remains
behind and you still have a normal eight wire connect to the rotor. I use
trailer disconnects at the rotator and at the house entrance. GL 73's Cort
Courtney Judd K4WI / NA4W
2300 County Road 61
Uniontown, Alabama 36786
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 12:18:50 -0400
From: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>
To: "Pete Smith" <n4zr@contesting.com>, "TowerTalk"
<towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk]
Effect of not isolating shields at center switch of lazy vee, was
"feeding one antenna"
Message-ID: <001f01c32790$5296bc10$0200a8c0@swift>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030531074528.01bfd430@mail.adelphia.net>
<5.2.0.9.2.20030531104809.01bf5150@mail.adelphia.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message: 3
Faraday shield does not apply to insulated wires (including coax
shields) run for extents outside the cage (tower) as well. Models of
my entire tower (all the members) show current on the interior. So
does my sniffer. In every way I have been able to determine, tower as
faraday shield is an urban myth. (Regardless of what may be in print.)
Having an insulated conductor taped to a boom or tower modifies but
does not per se PREVENT current. This too with both model and sniffer.
The effect of the stub is just a capacitor on one side if the shield
is extended in any way.
And it IS in the field. Show me a model where it isn't?
Back to the original rules: All conductors are in play unless
overwhelmingly proved otherwise. When in doubt, it conducts. Not the
other way around.
The free space model is an abstraction only good for gathering
conceptual and isolated performance data. The real world is conductors
everywhere, all in the field and all conducting, just to degrees some
worth worrying about, some not.
The effect is that you have a spider web in the central field of the
antenna directly connected to half of all the elements. Put wires in
the model to show the outside of all the shields. Do NOT assume
faraday suppression. It's a myth.
Take a garden variety CB field strength meter and tape it to the
shield of a piece of coax running up inside the tower to an inverted
vee. Tape it so you can remove your hand and not be inducing current
from your body.
Do NOT use a balun. This will make the antenna want to put current on
the shield: a test setup to see if the tower stops current along the
shield induced at points outside the tower.
Key the transmitter.
Watch the meter jump.
The tower and the shield are acting like a piece of coax (tower is the
shield, and coax shield is the center conductor). Current from up top
can be found on shield of coax running away from the bottom of the
tower unless the coax shield is grounded at the bottom of the tower.
Even that merely reduces the current unless it's a really good *RF*
ground.
Guy.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Smith" <n4zr@contesting.com>
To: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>;
<towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Feeding one antenna in a stack
> At 09:48 AM 5/31/03 -0400, you wrote:
> >The shield has to be modeled as a wire in it's own right. It's in
the
> >other element's fields. If you break the shield connection at the
> >relays then it's short, nonresonant and of small effect. Otherwise
> >it's a wire connected to one of the same size (via the shield
> >connection) on the other side, connected to the feedline to the
shack,
> >possibly the tower, not short, and in play.
>
> In some instances being in the other elements' fields may not matter
much,
> particularly if the feedline is taped to the boom and mast, and then
goes
> to the bottom of the tower inside it. What I was wondering about is
the
> effect of having a conductor permanently linking one side of each
driven
> element (regardless of how the stack is switched) to all the others,
and
> secondarily whether a feedline thus connected but with center
conductor
> floated would still appear to its driven element like an open stub,
or
> something entirely different.
>
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> The World HF Contest Station Database was updated 9 May 03.
> Are you current? www.pvrc.org/wcsd/wcsdsearch.htm
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 15:56:06 -0400
From: Joe Reisert <W1JR@arrl.net>
To: K4BEV@aol.com, Towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] OR-2800 pigtail connector
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20030531154632.01e8c830@mailhost.jlc.net>
In-Reply-To: <196.1b160169.2c09fdd1@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: list
Message: 4
Jamie etal,
M Squared has been hinting for sometime about the reliability of the
connector. In fact, their tech service recommended to me over a year ago to
just cut off the connector and solder it directly to the rotator cable. I
didn't want to do that and it makes for a mess if you have to remove
rotator.
When I was at the Visalia DX Convention a few weeks ago, M Squared showed
me what they now recommend for the 2800 rotator. They have a cast box
(about 3 by 6 by 2") that can be mounted to the tower leg, preferably at
the base of the tower. You cut off the connectors, solder the wires to the
rotator cable and feed them down the tower to the box. Inside the box is a
terminal strip to connect the wires together. At least now the rotator can
be disconnected and, if needed, you can connect your control box at the
tower base for testing. The price is about $30-35. This would also allow
adding MOV etc. protection at the tower base for lightning.
73,
Joe, W1JR
At 08:45 AM 5/31/2003 -0400, K4BEV@aol.com wrote:
>K9RB@bellsouth.net writes:
><< I've found the most reliable rotator connector, by far, is the
>automotive flat rubber trailer connectors that come with pigtails.........
> >>
>
>Don't ya just love cheap, easy, elegant solutions that actually work?
>The above is one of 'em.
>
>I'd like to add -
>Put a bit of antioxidant stuff on each wire before you crimp it. It doesn't
>take much.
>Also, use the correct size butt splice and, as Rog points out, the correct
>tool.
>I usually spray the joint with a spray silicone before covering it, but
this
>may be overkill.
>
>Personally, I prefer the uninsulated connectors and heat-shrink tubing
method
>of installation. Some of the covers on the insulated ones are pretty
brittle
>and leave a lump, like a snake that just swallowed something. When you're
>done
>you have a bunch of wires and this big lump at the splice.
>The uninsulated type (or just remove the insulation if that's all you can
>find) makes a much neater job of it.
>
>73, Don - K4BEV
>_______________________________________________
>
>See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
>Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with
>any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
>_______________________________________________
>TowerTalk mailing list
>TowerTalk@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:26:02 EDT
From: F6BEE@aol.com
To: Towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] OR-2300
Message-ID: <65.122ec7f5.2c0a85fa@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message: 5
Hi T. Talkers
After some unsuccessful net search, TT reflector is my last chance to find a
copy of the old Orion 2300 rotor manual. At least some mechanical
characteristics woul help.
Please answer directly. My ISP being AOL, it's a bit complicated for me to
post on this reflector as I have to use an older version of mailer !
Thank you for the help
Jacques, F6BEE
f6bee@aol.com
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:47:48 EDT
From: K7LXC@aol.com
To: mcduffie@actcom.net, towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] OR-2800 pigtail connector
Message-ID: <132.1fecbe59.2c0a8b14@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message: 6
In a message dated 5/31/03 7:29:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
mcduffie@actcom.net writes:
> > A butt connector is a double female solderless crimp connector where you
> > poke a wire in each end, crimp, splicing the wire together.
>
> That's what I thought they were talking about. I don't see a need
> for them. You're just doubling the number of mechanical connections
> by adding them in series with the other connector. Or was the
> reference to using them alone, with no other connector? Too much
> room for cross wiring mistakes that way.
>
This is useful for splicing control cables, eliminating connectors, etc.
Or use wire nuts. It's a lot easier than trying to re-connectorize a cable
at
the top of the tower.
Cheers,
Steve K7LXC
TOWER TECH
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 19:40:59 -0400
From: "Mel" <mel.martin@axare.mail.net>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Caplugs for UHF connectors
Message-ID: <000001c327ce$177585b0$0100a8c0@STARGATE>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ve2dc@rac.ca
Message: 7
When I install my new relay box on the tower, I will have a couple of
unused UHF connectors...
Anyone know of a source for the plastic caplugs that fit over the
connectors. Plan would be to cover the unused (temporarily) connectors
with a caplug to keep the threads clean, then wrap with weatherproofing
tape...
Mel...
VE2DC
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 19:56:14 EDT
From: K3BU@aol.com
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Feeding one antenna in a stack
Message-ID: <1ca.ac66505.2c0a9b1e@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message: 8
In a message dated 5/31/03 8:03:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
n4zr@contesting.com writes:
> My 4-element lazy-vee array is also built this way, in a plastic box, with
> both the shields and the center conductors floated. I did it this way,
> even though it is a pain in the neck, because it's what K3LR said one
> should do, but don't understand the theory. I would have thought that an
> open stub with its shield grounded at the open end and connected to the
> shields of other similar stubs would still have functioned as an open
stub,
> but don't know. Can anyone explain?
>
I think that was the result of our verbal barrage at the time. One thing is
to claim certain performance (theoretical ?), another thing is to see the
results and measure it. Even using current baluns did not help.
Looks like we have a case with wires in the RF fields, lengths close to 1/4
or 1/2 wave acting as (anti) phasing lines and messing up the pattern. I
wanted
3 el. vertical array, it offers 6 directions and is better suited to serve
heavy ham population areas better than 4 square.
With cables and wires "hidden" inside the towers we have a situation more
looking as a leaky coax rather than Faraday shield. There is a different
(common)
current on the coax shield than on the tower. When tower is used as a
vertical on low bands, the situation is a bit better, but depending on cable
routing
and connections, the differences can happen, causing some arcing in "weak"
spots.
73 Yuri, K3BU
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 20:04:42 -0400
From: Jerry Keller <k3bz@arrl.net>
To: "(Reflector) TowerTalk" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Length of Mast
Message-ID: <000f01c327d1$6730b7c0$1902a8c0@MainDeskTop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Precedence: list
Message: 9
My 40' tower will have a 12 foot mast. I've heard it's a good idea to fasten
a sharp-pointed rod at the top of the mast... supposedly to reduce the risk
of a lightning strike....like the lightning rods I see on barns. If it's
true, does it really help a lot? (I don't notice a lot of other hams doing
it, so I'm wondering)
Jerry K3BZ
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 21:18:08 -0400
From: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>
To: "TowerTalk" <towertalk@contesting.com>, <pvrc@mailman.qth.net>,
<m3mph@hotmail.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Fw: [Elecraft] CW puzzle... From circa 1950
Message-ID: <006b01c327db$a90f0200$0200a8c0@swift>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message: 10
Interesting general Query...thought I'd forward it along. Please post
to other channels. Keep M3MPH on the reply list.
----- Original Message -----
From: "73 de M3MPH" <m3mph@hotmail.com>
To: <elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 8:59 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] CW puzzle... From circa 1950
> Greetings all
>
> This might be of interest to the CW ops, OM and aviation historians
out
> there who's experience and knowledge may shed some light on a
mystery
> that happened about 53 years ago....
>
> An aircraft, a civilian adaption of a Lancaster bomber, with a
British
> crew, got lost and flew into a mountain in cloud. The reason is
still
> unknown but the last message it sent in CW was copied as;
>
> S T E N D E C <message ended>
>
> Could this have been miscopied for another lesser known
abbreviation?
> Were there any competing or precursors to the
> "Q" codes that would have been known to probably ex military
pilots,
> crew, radio op?
>
> Any suggestions, ideas or theories...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> You must be a list member to post to the list.
> Postings must be plain text (no HTML or attachments).
> See: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Elecraft Web Page: http://www.elecraft.com
>
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:45:05 -0700
From: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>
To: "Jerry Keller" <k3bz@arrl.net>,
"\(Reflector\) TowerTalk" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Length of Mast
Message-ID: <066001c327df$6ce7d9b0$0100a8c0@1800XP>
References: <000f01c327d1$6730b7c0$1902a8c0@MainDeskTop>
Precedence: list
Message: 11
Jerry,
I believe lightning rods are placed on barns in order to give lightning
some place to go if a strike occurs (they are grounded thru a ground
lead). Although there seems to be varied opinion on this, I don't
think that the rod necessarily decreases the chance of strike. In fact,
if anything it may increase the odds of a strike. What it does do,
however, is lessen the odds that the strike will attach to an undesireable
part of the structure (like the wooden sides). It also provides a controlled
path to ground for the stroke energy if a strike occurs. Whatever the case,
I think the idea is to lessen the odds that all the hay, horses, and pigs
will go up in smoke. Since your tower is already a good ground rod (I
assume its made of metal and grounded properly at the base), I don't
see any benefit to adding a sharp point at the top.
Actually it brings up a good question for the lightning technology experts
on Towertalk. How come you only see lightning rods on barns and not
houses? Is that just because most barns are old, and people have stopped
using lightning rods, or is the their some other reason?
73 de Mike, W4EF.....................................
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Keller" <k3bz@arrl.net>
To: "(Reflector) TowerTalk" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 5:04 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] Length of Mast
> My 40' tower will have a 12 foot mast. I've heard it's a good idea to
fasten
> a sharp-pointed rod at the top of the mast... supposedly to reduce the
risk
> of a lightning strike....like the lightning rods I see on barns. If it's
> true, does it really help a lot? (I don't notice a lot of other hams
doing
> it, so I'm wondering)
> Jerry K3BZ
>
------------------------------
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 22:34:32 -0400
From: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
To: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>, "Jerry Keller" <k3bz@arrl.net>,
"\(Reflector\) TowerTalk" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Length of Mast
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20030531223145.01c07910@mail.adelphia.net>
In-Reply-To: <066001c327df$6ce7d9b0$0100a8c0@1800XP>
References: <000f01c327d1$6730b7c0$1902a8c0@MainDeskTop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: list
Message: 12
At 06:45 PM 5/31/03 -0700, Michael Tope wrote:
>Actually it brings up a good question for the lightning technology experts
>on Towertalk. How come you only see lightning rods on barns and not
>houses? Is that just because most barns are old, and people have stopped
>using lightning rods, or is the their some other reason?
My house -- a farmhouse -- came with an array of 6 lightning rods, complete
with woven aluminum down-conductors. Lightning rods are fairly common on
houses out here. I am very unclear on whether they offer any protection at
all, because the ground conductors seem to violate the low-inductance
requirement that we hear from Polyphaser. It's not clear to me why
lightning would "prefer" the rods to other ground conductors that might be
available in the neighborhood, or on nearby power poles.
73, Pete N4ZR
The World HF Contest Station Database was updated 9 May 03.
Are you current? www.pvrc.org/wcsd/wcsdsearch.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
End of TowerTalk Digest, Vol 5, Issue 59
****************************************
|