Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:RadioIR@charter.net: 445 ]

Total 445 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [TowerTalk] Remote control (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:44:01 -0500
That might work. The other idea about RF detection, used to trigger a latching relay has some merit if the relay is used at the right location. If you use the relay to disconnect the end segment of a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00537.html (9,370 bytes)

22. Re: [TowerTalk] dumbing down (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:45:00 -0500
Sic-em Tom! They deserve it! You are correct. I see this kind of stuff ocassionally appearing in QST and CQ. I'm sure it's in other magazines as well, but I only get those two. I also see it in the A
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00542.html (16,585 bytes)

23. Re: [TowerTalk] Remote control (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:11:34 -0500
I didn't see that reference. It is a good one. Exactly the information I was trying to convey, with more detail. When you have something as complicated as what N6RK was building, it may justify tryin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00548.html (11,293 bytes)

24. Re: [TowerTalk] Lube of a crank-up tower question (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 21:50:22 -0500
This is the second time I have seen this question posted. It received no reply either time. I also now own my first crankup, and was looking forward to the answer to this question. US Tower doesn't s
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00649.html (7,737 bytes)

25. Re: [TowerTalk] perfect braid... (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:40:54 -0500
As a bit of summary: Tom started this discussion off by saying: "That's why our transmitters can be shielded perfectly with copper shield or aluminum shields as long as the shield is several skin dep
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00707.html (9,791 bytes)

26. Re: [TowerTalk] Practical Ground Screens for NVIS antennas (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:24:31 -0500
Interesting question. I have never reasearched this one, even though I have thought about doing it, so I tried a few quick simulations. At first the suggestion of making the reflector 5% longer seem
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00723.html (13,680 bytes)

27. Re: [TowerTalk] Practical Ground Screens for NVIS antennas (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:28:04 -0500
Jim I also get 3.26MHz resonant frequency for the ground reflector. I don't know how I got the number I quoted, must have done something really funky. Jerry __________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00728.html (12,824 bytes)

28. Re: [TowerTalk] Sparky Pays a Visit (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 08:45:02 -0500
Denn Check Tom's message in this same thread to see what he does for lightning protection. He, and others, have found, it is possible to survive lightning hits if you do things right. Lots of other i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00020.html (9,925 bytes)

29. Re: [TowerTalk] Sparky Pays a Visit (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 09:06:26 -0500
It's pretty easy to get this if you have a long antenna attached (80 or 160 M). At first it may seem to do no damage, but each little arc will leave small metal particles across the area where the ar
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00022.html (9,111 bytes)

30. Re: [TowerTalk] End feeding a half-wave vetical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 10:45:10 -0500
<snip> Yep, a 3/4 wave antenna is not a low angle radiator. Anything longer than 5/8 wave and the maximum lobe starts to go up. That's the reason you see so many 5/8 wave mobile 2M antennas. You may
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00026.html (12,563 bytes)

31. Re: [TowerTalk] Raising fixture question (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:51:16 -0500
You should be OK. You can crank it from the side, but you won't be able to crank it from the front. If you have 3 feet between the house and the edge of the concrete pad, you should be able to crank
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00132.html (8,352 bytes)

32. Re: [TowerTalk] 160 antenna (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 18:59:29 -0500
I hope you mean: center fed zepp = dipole. It's impossible to exactly answer your question as stated, but here are some things to consider. If you are feeding that 80M dipole with coax, you are going
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00150.html (10,559 bytes)

33. Re: [TowerTalk] 160 antenna (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 22:12:52 -0500
Tom To answer your question a little more directly, I made a few simulations. I considered the configuration you mentioned, loading coils at the end of the 80M dipole, and 10 ft sections hanging down
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00154.html (13,124 bytes)

34. Re: [TowerTalk] 160 antenna (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 10:54:44 -0500
Good reference Tom, and I notice it is your write-up. Nicely done. I didn't want to recommend the approach of adding coils into the antenna, because the 80M dipole is just too short, and this approac
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00174.html (11,716 bytes)

35. Re: [TowerTalk] half square ground screens (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:02:39 -0500
I don't see anyone else answering this, so maybe I'll take a crack at it. Just to make sure, we are talking about the same thing, this half square is really half of a bob-tail-curtain, right? (1/4 wa
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00235.html (11,006 bytes)

36. Re: [TowerTalk] half square ground screens (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:05:40 -0500
K4SAV: I know I have seen antennas built and fed like this, but now that I am thinking about it, it doesn't seem right. If you feed the half square at the top corner, the phase of the currents in the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00256.html (11,189 bytes)

37. Re: [TowerTalk] half square ground screens (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:34:20 -0500
OOPS! Can I retract the last message. It is all incorrect. Half square works OK fed at the top. Brain took day off today. Jerry, K4SAV -- A closed mouth gathers no feet. -- __________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00257.html (12,717 bytes)

38. Re: [TowerTalk] 160 inverte L (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 20:58:27 -0500
The MFJ259 doesn't give you the resistive part of the impedance when the SWR is not equal to 1:1. From the tests I have done with it , I think it is giving you the total impedance. In the mnual, they
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00299.html (10,852 bytes)

39. Re: [TowerTalk] 160 invertde L (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 22:30:11 -0500
If there is no reactance, then yes this would be true. But it's not likely to be either one of those (16.6 or 150 ohms). Go back to the definitions of SWR. You most likely have some reactance in the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00302.html (11,255 bytes)

40. Re: [TowerTalk] 160 invertde L (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:33:11 -0500
Good point Tom. I overlooked the feedline. You are absolutely correct, the feedline combined with the 80M antenna could be resonant as a T on 160. As a test, the feedline length could be changed to s
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-08/msg00311.html (9,815 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu