- 1. Topband: Re: 160 Meters Mobile Antennas (score: 1)
- Author: W9UCW at aol.com (W9UCW@aol.com)
- Date: Sun May 11 06:02:57 2003
- Hi Les & Others, As my name and call have been dragged thru this thread several times, I feel like I'm a part of it. I'd like to comment. The main topic seems to be effectiveness or loss especially r
- /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00079.html (11,244 bytes)
- 2. Topband: Re: 160 Meters Mobile Antennas (score: 1)
- Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
- Date: Sun May 11 17:40:37 2003
- rapidly true and I agree with most of what you say Barry, but I disagree with the above. Current in ANY *non-radiating* two-terminal device or component is exactly the same at each end, this include
- /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00082.html (7,856 bytes)
- 3. Topband: Re: 160 Meters Mobile Antennas (score: 1)
- Author: w7iuv at arrl.net (Larry Molitor)
- Date: Sun May 11 17:40:51 2003
- W9UCW's post brought back a lot of memories. I could write a book about topband mobile'ing around the south side of Chicago in the early 60's! Instead, I'll offer a few things I've learned in the las
- /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00088.html (10,302 bytes)
- 4. Topband: Re: 160 Meters Mobile Antennas (score: 1)
- Author: k3ky at erols.com (David Sinclair)
- Date: Wed May 14 06:28:25 2003
- (snip) (snip) This is most amusing, as the second coil being described sounds like it should be more lossy, and it sounds somewhat like one of those often-maligned Hustler resonators. The outer layer
- /archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00106.html (8,189 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu