Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

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

Total 44 documents matching your query.

21. Topband: Not sure why it was bouncing..... (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:56:56 -0700
Tree and all, I had to confirm my membership on the list because it said there were too many bounces. Any idea why that might be? Everything seems to be fine with the account and I did notice I wasn'
/archives//html/Topband/2012-11/msg00073.html (6,704 bytes)

22. Topband: A little assistance needed with an attempt at a T antenna (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 06:56:07 -0700
Hey guys and gals, I have a question: I have an OCFD that is about 130 feet long, end to end. It is Off Center Fed at a current node for 15 meters, which is the band it was designed for. Ends up that
/archives//html/Topband/2013-01/msg00021.html (9,029 bytes)

23. Re: Topband: gentlemen's band (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 11:19:29 -0700
Guys, I think the explanation for why 160 (and the dx crowd on 80, too... not necessarily the 75 meter "throw a wire in the air rag chew crowd) are more gentlemanly (and ladies, of course) is very si
/archives//html/Topband/2013-03/msg00079.html (11,705 bytes)

24. Re: Topband: 'Re: fine whiskey is a daylight beverage (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 09:46:27 -0700
Mike, sorry buddy..... It is reserved for us (now retired) military folk....... The "night is my friend." As is water and a few other things that make me harder to spot..... LOL LOL. Mike AB7ZU Kuhi
/archives//html/Topband/2013-05/msg00060.html (8,886 bytes)

25. Re: Topband: Height of antenna and takoff angle - Titan II site 571-5 (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:17:09 -0700
Rick and all, That is exactly right. It is a very wideband vertical. If you look at the vertical radiation pattern at various frequencies throughout its range, you will note that it is a low angle ra
/archives//html/Topband/2013-07/msg00129.html (10,099 bytes)

26. Re: Topband: Blame it on global warming (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:15:41 -0700
Let us hope they don't decide to use the 160 meter band proper for their experiments. This may be a good chance to speak to the researchers and remind them that our band space is occupado...... Unles
/archives//html/Topband/2013-08/msg00055.html (9,812 bytes)

27. Re: Topband: tree losses (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 19:40:41 -0700
Tom and all, After spending 25 years in the military (Navy specifically), I can say, with a fair amount of authority, that the antennas used by them are often used for much different purposes than wh
/archives//html/Topband/2013-08/msg00069.html (12,538 bytes)

28. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 06:03:18 -0700
Tom and all, If I am reading the question correctly, aren't we talking about something that is done at VHF/UHF with great regularity? Stacked vertical elements, stacked vertically polarized beams and
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00020.html (10,465 bytes)

29. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 08:16:46 -0700
Tom, Fully understood. I wasn't referring to the usual collinear antennas sold by "comet" or anything of that nature. I am referring to the stacking arrangements used for ops like moonbounce, etc. As
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00024.html (15,703 bytes)

30. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 10:19:40 -0700
Oh Tom, I FULLY agree that it would be VERY difficult and not very practical, especially considering we are talking 160...... In fact, the price/performance ratio simply wouldn't be worth it, in my o
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00026.html (13,307 bytes)

31. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 10:30:04 -0700
Oh, I didn't address one comment you made, Tom...... 5/8ths are dogs on 160? Really? That is odd in the extreme to me. I had incredible success with a ground mounted 5/8 on 20 meters while I was stat
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00027.html (14,151 bytes)

32. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 14:54:56 -0700
Guy, I was right across from the small marina you see. The difference I am talking about is the difference between a 5/8ths wave vertical and a quarter wave vertical in the same place. I am not talki
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00031.html (17,204 bytes)

33. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 16:35:48 -0700
Guy, you aren't reading my emails...... because that question is not appropriate to the conversation. I am NOT, I repeat NOT talking the difference between LOCATIONS, but the difference between ANTEN
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00032.html (17,381 bytes)

34. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 18:45:36 -0700
Mike, you are answering the wrong question. Guy didn't understand the question at all. I KNOW that sea water is a better ground than dirt...... The comparison I was ALWAYS talking about had NOTHING A
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00036.html (28,967 bytes)

35. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 19:41:41 -0700
Carl and Charlie, I am not sure it would even be close to practical or even doable, but I remember seeing an old book on verticals written by a prior Navy Captain, I believe. He had a very interestin
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00045.html (16,737 bytes)

36. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 20:21:22 -0700
Tony, Thanks...,. that is the one. As I recall a very good book "from my youth." It was one of the first antenna books that I remember reading in my early ham years...... I think its original publish
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00049.html (19,960 bytes)

37. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 20:24:59 -0700
Hey...... IF the tower is tall enough for that duty (3/4 wave tall), then you could put that "skirt" on the "middle" 1/4 wave, as it were, and you got 'er...... Could he be that lucky? I have to admi
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00050.html (19,713 bytes)

38. Re: Topband: Are stacked verticals feasible? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2013 05:28:04 -0700
Charlie, just to complete my thought..... Yes, I would use something along the lines of a gamma feed to a grounded tower. There are probably better matching techniques, but that would certainly be a
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00057.html (26,137 bytes)

39. Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorter versions?? (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 07:18:18 -0700
Tom (and James), I am well aware that my comments concerning the 5/8ths wave was based upon subjective/anecdotal evidence. I am in a science (Astrophysics) by profession..... I do know the difference
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00079.html (14,907 bytes)

40. Re: Topband: More anecdotal "stories" to cause one to stop and.... (score: 1)
Author: Mike Armstrong <armstrmj@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 11:23:47 -0700
Same here, guys. Please do reply here and if someone "already knows everything," they need not even read the thread, right? LOL. I have heard, but don't know if it is a common mode of propagation or
/archives//html/Topband/2013-09/msg00126.html (14,172 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu