Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:armstrmj@aol.com: 44 ]

Total 44 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Topband: Threading radials (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 07:10:39 -0700
ZR and HAROLD, I have been having issues with the tie wraps breaking in the AZ sun. I suspect the UV is getting to them badly. The metal ones don't break, but I can't use those for shunt feeding, of
/archives//html/Topband/2012-08/msg00250.html (9,956 bytes)

2. Re: Topband: Threading radials (score: 1)
Author: Michael Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 08:41:45 -0700
ZR, Bruce and Bob, thanks for your info. There's the problem..... I was using the white ones and didn't know the black ones are UV resistant. I'll check those out. ZR, I need to use tie wraps in my c
/archives//html/Topband/2012-08/msg00253.html (12,367 bytes)

3. Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20 (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:07:02 -0700
Tom, "on point" ....... I am, almost exclusively, a CW and Digi op in that order. I will say, anecdotally, that I have not experienced any interference caused by one or the other to the other on 160.
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00110.html (11,787 bytes)

4. Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 117, Issue 20 (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 16:28:51 -0700
Tom, I never said putting digimodes in the middle of the weak signal area was a good idea, but I also know that the weak signal area is violated constantly by local station using it. By that I mean U
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00116.html (16,586 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: Digimodes (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:52:34 -0700
Tom, actually I DID say with varying signal strengths. The difference being IF the agc is badly pumped by a strong station and the weak station is wiped out by the action. I can easily decode a weak
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00121.html (14,212 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: The use of digital modes on 160 metres (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 19:05:27 -0700
Mike, that is QUITE true indeed. Actually, you must watch the waterfall due to the fact that most ears would be unable, by hearing alone, to detect a frequency shift that would cause the signal to be
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00122.html (12,811 bytes)

7. Re: Topband: TB digital (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 20:44:07 -0700
Jim, this topic IS about 160, no doubt about it. I don't think anyone here has insulted or abused anyone. We are discussing a very valid subject and it has nothing to do with who is bigger than who.
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00124.html (10,730 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: The use of digital modes on 160 metres (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:37:26 -0700
Differentiating operating awards? If you are talking DXCC it has been differentiated for years. SSB award, CW award, DIGITAL/RTTY award and MIXED. I know this because I have them all hanging on my wa
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00162.html (16,614 bytes)

9. Re: Topband: The use of digital modes on 160 metres (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:43:07 -0700
Jan, I am not absolutely certain, but I believe JT65HF, which is what is being talked about here, doesn't do a deep search or nobody uses it if it does. Again, not absolutely certain about it, since
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00163.html (14,181 bytes)

10. Re: Topband: Vertical dipoles in the real world (score: 1)
Author: Michael Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:38:07 +0000
Jim, yes considerable! A ringo ranger is a vertical half wave using "end feed" and they work great. I prefer end feeding, using hte method of the ringo (which is easy to scale to other bands). I purc
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00210.html (12,074 bytes)

11. Re: Topband: Vertical dipoles in the real world (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 06:07:40 -0700
Well Tom, all I can say is that it works...... Here is more data.... The mast was a wood pole about 12 feet long and the feedline was buried, so there wouldn't be much radiation from them. There coul
/archives//html/Topband/2012-09/msg00217.html (12,151 bytes)

12. Re: Topband: Fishing beacons redux (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 06:27:43 -0700
Not to mention "sharing" out callsign pool????? Last time I looked NM7E was/is a ham callsign. That should DEFINITELY be illegal, especially when those things are in a ham band. I am pretty sure we D
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00003.html (8,336 bytes)

13. Re: Topband: Maritime gear programmable on ham bands? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 17:39:19 -0700
I don't think anyone has mentioned the ONE VALID use for an "open" radio and that is MARS system service. It still exists and with the advent of radios that can transmit almost anywhere without modif
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00022.html (9,809 bytes)

14. Re: Topband: Maritime gear programmable on ham bands? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 19:35:26 -0700
Tom, I was talking about ham radio, not marine radios. Someone talked about "open" radios and that is what I was speaking to. Marine radios are another subject altogether. The concern is that the mar
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00026.html (10,216 bytes)

15. Re: Topband: Fishing beacons redux (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 07:23:51 -0700
Guys, there is alot more circuitry in that buoy than a simple dumb transmitter. Maybe some of the devices are dumb transmitters, but I'd bet most of them are more like this unit. Those fishing nets a
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00042.html (10,569 bytes)

16. Re: Topband: Fishing beacons redux (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 11:49:21 -0700
Tom and all, I searched for the company name on those photos and it is a Japanese company that makes those models and many others. The one in the pix that were put up are fairly sophisticated and the
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00066.html (10,439 bytes)

17. Re: Topband: 1810 (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 05:34:42 -0700
Paul, You took the words right out of my mouth. While I am not in a position to help with this one, if I was I would be "all over it," in the same manner as you guys are doing it now. THANKS to all t
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00129.html (9,214 bytes)

18. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:58:44 -0700
Guys, I am probably completely off the wall here. But given all the talk about a 300 foot vertical not working well on 160 and a very high dipole not working well on 160 leads me to a very unscientif
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00323.html (12,971 bytes)

19. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 20:08:19 -0700
Dang Tom..... I just sent out a more wordy version of what you just said. This is getting strange. Not sure why it hasn't been disseminated yet (my email), but I swear I sent it just moments before y
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00325.html (11,830 bytes)

20. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 06:48:20 -0700
Rik, I think your suggestion is part of the point of this discussion. Modeling things at higher frequencies, like 40 meters, wouldn't apply to how 160 works...... IF what we are saying is true or has
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00331.html (11,976 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu