Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Height\s+for\s+horizontal\s+loops\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Height\s+for\s+horizontal\s+loops\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TowerTalk] Height for horizontal loops (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:07:02 -0700 (PDT); Why would a horizontal loop EVER be better than a dipole at the same height? Also, height is relative to wavelength. 25 or 30 feet is OK on 10 meters, but practically scraping the ground on 160 meter; /archives//html/Antennaware/2009-09/msg00040.html (7,522 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Height for horizontal loops (score: 1): Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:25:19 -0700; There are so many variables influencing the answer to your question that it seems to me your best bet is to download the demo version of EZNEC and learn how to use it. Your first surprise will be tha; /archives//html/Antennaware/2009-09/msg00046.html (8,595 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Height for horizontal loops (score: 1): Author: Tim Kass <timkass@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:59:06 -0400; I agree with Dave, but a brief would be to put it about a 1/4 wave up at the operating freq. however, lower versions are cloud burners and good for 100 - 500 miles...higher is generally accepted as b; /archives//html/Antennaware/2009-09/msg00047.html (10,871 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]