Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Looking\s+for\s+160m\s+narrow\s+beam\s+RX\s+advice\s+\-\s+an\s+interesting\s+combination\s+of\s+ideas\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: Lloyd Berg N9LB <lloydberg@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 13:14:26 -0500 (EST)
I have received many suggestions and ideas on this subject. Finding a single RX antenna system that nulls the neighbor noise sources at 90 and 270 degrees is proving to be a challenge. Greg has offer
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00022.html (9,733 bytes)

2. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 18:57:58 -0500
Finding a single RX antenna system that nulls the neighbor noise sources at 90 and 270 degrees is proving to be a challenge. If the noise sources are really at 90 and 270, and you have 30 feet or mor
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00023.html (12,095 bytes)

3. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Schoenbohm <herbert.schoenbohm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 20:33:19 -0400
I have a strong source of 160 meter IX from another ham about a mile away at a bearing 330 degrees. The key clix and pumping of the noise floor make weak signal reception a real challenge at times. B
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00024.html (12,927 bytes)

4. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Schoenbohm <herbs@vitelcom.net>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 06:03:16 -0400
On 1/6/2015 7:57 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: "but it would be much more simple to build a directive antenna with deep nulls to the sides" This is what I would like to try....but what are the best antennas fo
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00025.html (7,923 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "Lloyd Berg - N9LB" <lloydberg@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 07:11:52 -0600
Thanks for the input. Yes, utilities are underground, located by the road - north side of property. This is adjacent to the proposed RX receiving area. I can detect no noise coming from these undergr
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00026.html (11,547 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 10:11:51 -0500
The issue with just combining noise antennas is, to phase antennas, there have to be at least two phase shift and at least two amplitude-sensitive paths involved. At least one path through air, and a
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00027.html (14,792 bytes)

7. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:42:21 -0600
A couple of thoughts here, good or bad: 1. I can see the case for an array of loops. However, wouldn't it be less time-consuming --not to mention less expensive-- to just get an additional MFJ-1026 t
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00028.html (9,152 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 22:09:12 -0500
1. I can see the case for an array of loops. However, wouldn't it be less time-consuming --not to mention less expensive-- to just get an additional MFJ-1026 to effectively null the second noise sour
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00029.html (10,635 bytes)

9. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "JC" <n4is@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 08:36:41 -0500
"An array of loops is two loops for two directions. Hi guys The simple solution that is working very well since 2009 is the HWF. Why not two horizontal loaded loops end-fire. Two identical horizontal
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00031.html (10,969 bytes)

10. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "JC" <n4is@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 12:02:36 -0500
Hi Guys I uploaded the video on YouTube on this link, DropBox is not working. http://youtu.be/dNBekvzlxgM Hi guys The simple solution that is working very well since 2009 is the HWF. Why not two hori
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00035.html (11,482 bytes)

11. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 11:36:09 -0800
"An array of loops is two loops for two directions. Hi guys The simple solution that is working very well since 2009 is the HWF. Why not two horizontal loaded loops end-fire. Two identical horizontal
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00037.html (11,000 bytes)

12. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "JC" <n4is@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 15:12:11 -0500
Hi Rick It is not recommended to tilt and elevate the loop. There is two reasons it improve the signal to noise ratio, First is the attenuation of the vertical component at the same direction you ar
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00038.html (14,208 bytes)

13. Re: Topband: Looking for 160m narrow beam RX advice - an interesting combination of ideas (score: 1)
Author: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 12:22:46 -0800
Hi Rick It is not recommended to tilt and elevate the loop. There is two reasons it Clarification: 70 degrees refers to the AZIMUTH that the loop will be aimed for. It will still be in a horizontal p
/archives//html/Topband/2015-01/msg00039.html (10,141 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu