Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. TopBand: Bev and ts930s (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 08:38:17 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> Snip..... The problem is not that the DIN connector standard has been violated. It is that there are two different pin spacings for 8 pin connectors within the DIN stand
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00141.html (9,304 bytes)

2. TopBand: Bev and ts930s (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:48:43 -0700
OOs! aimed fr the 7 and hit the 8... Sorry -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html Submissions: topband@contesting.com Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com Sponsored
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00151.html (7,400 bytes)

3. TopBand: Elevated Radials (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 17:08:18 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> Snip... Jay, There seems to be a lot of confusion over the issue of elevated radials and vertical antenna ground system losses in general. To compound the problem, none o
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00155.html (17,614 bytes)

4. TopBand: Elevated Radials (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 08:51:12 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> The discussion applies equally well to inverted "L" types, etc. Yes, the loss categories are all still the same. To the extent that increased electrical length raises th
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00183.html (9,642 bytes)

5. TopBand: Elevated Radials (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 13:58:22 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> Yes, indeed, they do! Right down to the surface of it, actually. Yes, in the far field, a radiator is a radiator. Out there you can't tell if the radiation came from a s
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00191.html (12,827 bytes)

6. TopBand: Elevated Radials (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:32:23 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> Yes, they can be shielded fron electroSTATIC fields but not from electroMAGNETIC fields. Only in the case where the noise field is NOT a radiated field but is primarily
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00208.html (9,245 bytes)

7. TopBand: A NON-elevated radial question (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 07:15:45 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> By my calculations, at 40 radials 50 feet long on 80 meters, you are at almost exactly 0.03 wavelengths tip to tip distance. Going to 80 radials might get you a bit over
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00216.html (10,516 bytes)

8. TopBand: How many radials ? (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:45:33 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> Snip... Snip... This is another very interesting empirical determination. Peter's perception of diminishing returns based on feedpoint impedance measurements came at a r
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00287.html (11,160 bytes)

9. TopBand: How many radials ? (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 07:26:19 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> Right. Since I knew this to be a case using nonresonant radials, I forgot to warn against using that method when the radials are at a resonant length. 73, Eric -- FAQ on
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00298.html (7,994 bytes)

10. TopBand: Re: How many radials ? (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@sparx.mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:29:20 -0700
To: <topband@contesting.com> You are the second person to complain about bounced mail. I'll have to cattleprod the sysad guys to see whats different recently. I still get a _lot_ of externally origin
/archives//html/Topband/1996-10/msg00314.html (9,037 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu