Mail Archive Search: <+from:i4jmy at iol.it>

Results:

References: [ +from:i4jmy: 148 ] [ at (Too many documents hit. Ignored) ] [ iol.it: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Topband: Re: Weak signal receivers (score: 212): Author: i4jmy at iol.it (i4jmy); Date: Tue Jun 24 10:10:57 2003; Although linearity is inherent of the specific device and different amplifiers behave differently, the admissible output level of an amplifier to keep constatnt its charachteristics of linearity is a; /archives//html/Topband/2003-06/msg00049.html (6,866 bytes)
2. Topband: Multiple drops and vertical antennas (score: 212): Author: i4jmy at iol.it (Maurizio Panicara); Date: Fri May 2 14:20:08 2003; This is not surprising, but you have low loss elements. A 3/4 dB means that the overall efficiency of the antenna 1 in respect of the antenna 2 is between 40 and 50%. Considering that your element lo; /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00019.html (7,416 bytes)
3. Topband: Key clicks (score: 212): Author: i4jmy at iol.it (Maurizio Panicara); Date: Mon May 12 16:11:50 2003; about key clicks and having to perform post-production mods, far less feedback than that for us to say "hey, maybe we As a product manager (not in Ham radio) I suspect 50 letters about key clicks co; /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00096.html (9,676 bytes)
4. Topband: Slinky Beverage Vs. EWE (score: 212): Author: i4jmy at iol.it (Maurizio Panicara); Date: Tue May 27 22:14:57 2003; Two verticals at very short spacings can't develop any other than a cardioid pattern, the F/B is (may be) a sharp notch and the F/S is a mith. If your EWE can be long enough to have the verticals at; /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00150.html (7,580 bytes)
5. Topband: Slinky Beverage Vs. EWE (score: 212): Author: i4jmy at iol.it (Maurizio Panicara); Date: Wed May 28 18:15:29 2003; I got a private e-mail by Doug NX4D who pointed out the pattern of his antenna, a rotable end fire array of two resistively terminated non resonant loops. It occurred to me that I found a similar con; /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00154.html (7,288 bytes)
6. Topband: Antenna question (score: 212): Author: i4jmy at iol.it (Maurizio Panicara); Date: Tue Apr 29 17:25:47 2003; Did anyone tried anything like this but scaled on 160m ? http://www.star-h.com/publications/ieee2002.pdf Results? Thanks & 73, Mauri I4JMY; /archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00057.html (6,391 bytes)
7. Topband: Antenna question (score: 212): Author: i4jmy at iol.it (Maurizio Panicara); Date: Wed Apr 30 14:58:34 2003; . zero Hi John, first of all thanks for the reply. The intriguing points for me of the antenna in question, if compared to a classical low loss (top hat loaded) short monopole is the SWR flatness joi; /archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00070.html (7,536 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]