- 1. Re: Topband: TRANSCEIVER WITH SEPERATE RECEIVER? (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:12:26 -0700
- I always thought the major benefit of using two receivers was to feed each from a different antenna, preferably one being vertically polarized and the other horizontal. I can't find the reports just
- /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00070.html (10,801 bytes)
- 2. Re: Topband: 160m Ant on 80m? (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 08:48:51 -0700
- Tom, I believe your antenna should simply look like a vertical halfwave dipole, except electrically off-balanced by the coil at the top end. In theory, any simple vertical one half wavelength or less
- /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00115.html (9,649 bytes)
- 3. Re: Topband: 160m Ant on 80m? (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:34:01 -0700
- Tom, I definitely agree. I played around with different loading coils in the simple EZNEC model I created and the base impedance swings all over the place, both real and imaginary components. I distr
- /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00122.html (9,959 bytes)
- 4. Topband: Hillside Beverage Antenna (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 00:09:15 -0700
- I'm a relative newbie to 160m and I'd like to know whether a beverage antenna running up a steep slope would have better or worse performance compared to one on flat ground. The slope in question is
- /archives//html/Topband/2004-05/msg00032.html (7,365 bytes)
- 5. Re: Topband: Hillside Beverage Antenna (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 10:11:36 -0700
- Thanks, Bill, to you and all the others for such quick replies. I guess my description wasn't very clear, though, because the 40 degree gradient I described slopes downward toward the northeast, not
- /archives//html/Topband/2004-05/msg00034.html (9,642 bytes)
- 6. Re: Topband: New style 1.8MHz antenna (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:28:31 -0700
- Tom, as you say, anyone can apply for a patent no matter how silly or extravagant the claims, and I would certainly classify the entire EET article as silly and extravagant. The gushing prose and rep
- /archives//html/Topband/2004-06/msg00056.html (9,795 bytes)
- 7. Re: Topband: Inverted L Matching Question (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:15:10 -0700
- There shouldn't be a problem with coax stub matching unless the stub developed an arc path due to high voltages. If so, you might try making a stub from 450 ohm ladderline. I've seen doorknobs going
- /archives//html/Topband/2004-11/msg00019.html (8,879 bytes)
- 8. Re: Topband: Forbidden Frequency Part 2 (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 23:22:18 -0700
- I mean, sure, a unique combination of mixer products, beat notes, harmonics, etc. could conspire to make 1830khz a particularly "bad" frequency at MY QTH, but why then is it also such a bad frequency
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-01/msg00049.html (7,719 bytes)
- 9. Re: Topband: May 2005 EET article about the DLM (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 09:08:48 -0700
- What you say is true, but I agree fully with Tom's comments on the slovenly work coming out of the U of RI. The early claims were simply ridiculous and unsubstantiated by mathematical analysis. In th
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-08/msg00039.html (8,432 bytes)
- 10. Topband: Random Wire Report (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 22:16:34 -0700
- I'm just getting settled in our new hillside QTH in southern Arizona and don't have a decent antenna up yet, but I recently ran a random length of wire (maybe 50 meters long) from the house across th
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-10/msg00203.html (7,478 bytes)
- 11. Re: Topband: WB4ENE Antenna (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:49:26 -0700
- I have to admit that WB4ENE put an impressive amount of aluminum into that ambitious antenna, but no matter how well he reduced the losses in the materials it is still basically a very short vertical
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00212.html (7,606 bytes)
- 12. Re: Topband: WB4ENE - MRA (minimal reactance antenna) (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:11:42 -0700
- Hi, Ken. Just to clarify ... I didn't say that the antenna needed a good ground to work. I said that it's radiating efficiency was dependent upon whether the ground was lossy or not, the same as any
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00241.html (7,837 bytes)
- 13. Re: Topband: Antenna Impedance vs efficiency (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 10:29:55 -0700
- Is there any intrinsic loss attributable to coupling a relatively low impedance system to the high impedance of free space? E.g. is there any benefit to using a higher impedance system? == Hi, Ford.
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00286.html (9,200 bytes)
- 14. Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:17:47 -0700
- It is commonly known that the human brain is a good processor for picking signals out of the noise. I found the following excerpt (slightly edited) on psychoacoustics at http://www.ka7oei.com/qrss1.h
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00288.html (8,153 bytes)
- 15. Re: Topband: Antenna Impedance vs efficiency (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:09:20 -0700
- Upon further reflection (no pun intended), I think my speculation is off base. The field radiated from an antenna is a function only of the current through it, so it probably has no relationship to t
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00290.html (8,237 bytes)
- 16. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:32:12 -0700
- Maybe I should have been more specific. I have the DSP filters in my 756Pro set to "100 Hz", 200 Hz, and 400 Hz. The "100 Hz" setting is actually 600 Hz narrowed down by the PBT controls to give a mo
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00293.html (7,868 bytes)
- 17. Re: Topband: psychoacoustics (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 15:00:36 -0700
- Yes, a drifting signal gives the same effect as when I slowly tune through a signal to help pick it out of the noise. One of the hams who responded offline to my original message said he sometimes wi
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00315.html (10,720 bytes)
- 18. Re: Topband: FW: ERROR IN ARRL 160M CONTEST RULES ? (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 16:08:48 -0700
- Interesting idea, but "QRL?" for many stations means "is there anyone here with a signal that I can't ignore". An elephant standing still kills fewer ants ... Dave AB7E ______________________________
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-12/msg00047.html (8,044 bytes)
- 19. Re: Topband: Dirty Harry and the DX window (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 12:42:15 -0700
- I tend to agree with Eric, and here are a few thoughts why. I'm fairly new to 160m but I've been DXing for over 30 years. It seems that everyone monitors the DX window during a contest and pileups bu
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-12/msg00152.html (9,716 bytes)
- 20. Topband: Condx to UK (score: 1)
- Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 01:30:27 -0700
- This evening was an encouraging sign for the Stew Perry contest this weekend. Several UK stations were especially strong into Arizona. I had to give G3JMJ a 599 at 0737z and his signal was worth ever
- /archives//html/Topband/2005-12/msg00201.html (6,707 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu