Mail Archive Search: <+from:k5uj@hotmail.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:k5uj@hotmail.com: 481 ]

Total 481 documents matching your query.

321. [TenTec] ladder line (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:49:00 +0000; I have thought about rigid vertical dipoles before but didn't do anything because i was afraid ground effect would unbalance them (I didn't want to deal with insulating the bottom of the bottom half; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00324.html (8,368 bytes)
322. [TenTec] vertical dipoles (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:41:44 +0000; Anyone interested in more information about vertical dipoles should take a look at what Cebik has to say. As always, he has excellent information that is accurate and to the point: http://www.cebik.c; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00343.html (7,186 bytes)
323. [TenTec] vertical dipole (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:51:30 +0000; Thanks Rick, I wondered what the best length would be as I noticed that on 10 m. in RNL's article there is a high angle lobe that is pronounced. 73 rob/k5uj __________________________________________; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00360.html (6,845 bytes)
324. [TenTec] vertical dipoles (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 15:51:40 +0000; my hunch is that ground proximety on one side of a vert. dipole may do some unbalancing but it probably isn't significant unless the pipe making the bottom half is sticking down in salt water : ) oka; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00387.html (11,826 bytes)
325. [TenTec] MFJ dipole (was vertical dipole) (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:25:00 +0000; No offense Doug, but I have a feeling your beach location in connecticut has more to do with your performance into Europe than anything else. I have a hunch that if you took the MFJ antenna 1000 mile; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00456.html (7,049 bytes)
326. [TenTec] Ten Tec Net (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 22:35:43 +0000; I'll notify Riley. the net can expect to rx ur ONVs in the mail shortly. rob/k5uj ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Mike, We just had the TT net on 14.329 Kh. Starts at 4:30 PM Eas; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00469.html (7,492 bytes)
327. [TenTec] Tuner for Centurion to balanced antenna (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:06:35 +0000; First, forget about setting up something for your centurion. You want a system that can handle any amp up to at least 1.5 kw but preferably around 2 kw just for some margin for error, heating etc. If; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00508.html (10,703 bytes)
328. [TenTec] Tuner for Centurion balanced antenna (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 18:52:28 +0000; Rick is right in that there are a number of matching networks out that the manufacturers call balanced transmatches. i won't get into an engineering argument over the definition of a balanced transma; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00512.html (8,173 bytes)
329. [TenTec] Centurion Balananced tuner, matchboxes, etc. (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 11:49:04 +0000; One thing i forgot to mention is that a year or two ago QST had a review of new product balanced matching networks and they included a johnson matchbox for comparison. in the review you can see the m; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00526.html (7,856 bytes)
330. [TenTec] Orion debacle (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:56:29 +0000; Okay, I'll weigh in on this one time: Interesting how quickly the Ten Tec apologists can mobilize. A year or two ago, it was, "Never need to buy a new rig; the firmware updates will keep the Orion cu; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00651.html (11,293 bytes)
331. [TenTec] FCC says cw Dead? (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:23:40 +0000; Let's turn the burner down on this one: A. This is a rule proposal, not a report and order (actual rule change decision). B. It was a response to a bunch of petitions to get rid of cw testing among o; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00772.html (8,031 bytes)
332. [TenTec] cw testing / return policy (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 02:01:46 +0000; <<<It will make a difference for those who do operate CW, because there are no CW exclusive sub-bands. >>> Unless I missed something there are vast expanses of non-phone freqencies for hams on HF. bu; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00899.html (12,059 bytes)
333. [TenTec] cw testing / return policy correction (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 02:41:43 +0000; I'd like to correct the record; K7VO mistakenly wrote this: -- "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com> wrote: there are no CW exclusive sub-bands. 50.0-50.1 and 144.0-144.1 are, in fact, CW exclusive; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00975.html (8,187 bytes)
334. [TenTec] Terminology: Orion or Orion I (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:38:16 +0000; <<<I tend to agree that the release of the Orion II should produce some "spin off" advantages for the Orion. (Let me make my point clear, there is no such thing as the Orion I. There is the Orion and; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg01078.html (7,884 bytes)
335. [TenTec] Terminology p.s. (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:20:32 +0000; P.S. I'd like to apologize for the needlessly inflammatory tone of my previous comment on Orion numbering. I could have stated my point in a more restrained fashion and my message was instead, though; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg01081.html (6,913 bytes)
336. [TenTec] mac os X (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:33:54 +0000; have a look at these: http://www.machamradio.com/ http://www.dogparksoftware.com/Macintosh_Amateur_Radio_Pr.html in fact have a look at this page: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mac+ham&btnG=Go; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg01130.html (7,470 bytes)
337. [TenTec] mac os x (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 22:57:06 +0000; On the mac ham radio website there is mention that W6EET has written mac control software for the Jupiter. http://www.machamradio.com/ maybe he will be working on the same thing for the orion. linux; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg01161.html (7,884 bytes)
338. [TenTec] 30 day return policy (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 01:36:21 +0000; For the record, there were two eham posts to the Orion reviews column on Sunday July 24th, that gave accounts in which it was claimed that the authors were not sold merchandise because of past proble; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg01171.html (12,235 bytes)
339. [TenTec] good surge suppressor (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:58:40 +0000; The best surge protectors are not going to be found at some place like Best Buy. I recommend the following: Brickwall by Price Wheeler and the Industrial Communications Engineers protectors. The ICE; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-08/msg00420.html (8,304 bytes)
340. [TenTec] Orion II (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 13:42:32 +0000; It is more than strange, it's bizarre. Am i to understand there is a display ad in QST that either doesn't show the rig, or shows the Orion 1? These guys have to get their act together when it comes; /archives//html/TenTec/2005-09/msg00213.html (8,349 bytes)

Current List: 321 - 340
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]