Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

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

Total 445 documents matching your query.

241. Re: [TowerTalk] Cadwelding and grounding nightmare (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:14:47 -0500
..."I've never heard of electrician's putty. Is it something that the brain-fried clerks in HD could point me to? "... Nope, tried that, but a good clerk will know about it. I think the stuff your ar
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00555.html (11,409 bytes)

242. Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem-update from the front lines (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:32:52 -0500
I don't think I would take the antenna down unless you are at the point of shipping the whole thing back to FM for a refund. I can't think of any possible problem with the antenna that could cause th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00590.html (21,675 bytes)

243. Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem-update from the front lines (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:00:21 -0500
Darn, I can't believe I forgot to Google. The part number for my supply is PSU66C-8 http://www.powerbox.se/pdf/catalogues/external.pdf This document has a PSU66C-8 listed but the C designator (or A o
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00606.html (13,345 bytes)

244. Re: [TowerTalk] EMI concerns;Detectors/Radiation Allergies (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:03:57 -0500
I'm sure that has been done, but the results of that doesn't make a good news story. _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00607.html (8,241 bytes)

245. Re: [TowerTalk] Trapped Tribanders Turned Vertical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:25:50 -0500
If the trees are so close that it turns vertically but not horizontally, that will only last about 3 months, then he won't be able to turn it mounted vertically. Besides if the antenna is very low, m
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00641.html (10,550 bytes)

246. Re: [TowerTalk] Trapped Tribanders Turned Vertical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 10:01:27 -0500
-- Well, my original statement is not 100% true for all heights, and neither is yours. Here are some EZNEC numbers for a three element Yagi turned either vertically of horizontally. Height ___ Horz A
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00651.html (10,752 bytes)

247. Re: [TowerTalk] Trapped Tribanders Turned Vertical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:06:39 -0500
Ground losses for both antennas were included to the extent that EZNEC Sommerfield-Norton ground is accurate. At the heights used in these examples, that should be a good estimate. What is "real worl
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00656.html (13,905 bytes)

248. Re: [TowerTalk] Trapped Tribanders Turned Vertical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:57:49 -0500
You are correct, Ward. That info is only part of the whole story. Clearly as can be seen in my previous chart, the vertical has a lower take-off angle, but it is not clear how the gains compare at so
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00658.html (11,974 bytes)

249. Re: [TowerTalk] vertical ground experiment (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:00:05 -0500
Could be really interesting for the swimmers. _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://li
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00659.html (8,000 bytes)

250. Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR problem-update from the front lines (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 23:49:40 -0500
Glad to hear you now have a working antenna Bill. From your new information, I would conclude that my speculation was correct, a power supply problem. It is possible that there may also be a motor pr
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00834.html (13,271 bytes)

251. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower design question (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:14:34 -0500
I thought this was an interesting question, but no one tackled it except for one guy who said that's the way it's done. So is that really the reason? _______________________________________________ _
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-06/msg00931.html (8,675 bytes)

252. Re: [TowerTalk] US TowerHDX-555 (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:13:33 -0500
From your "loose cable on the reel" comment I'm assuming you don't have the positive pull-down configuration. After you crank the tower "up" 4 ft, while the tower is horizontal, it won't crank by dow
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-07/msg00614.html (9,735 bytes)

253. Re: [TowerTalk] Coax loop (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 23:00:27 -0500
Taping the coax to the mast is almost a necessity with a crank-up, especially when there is an antenna is mounted just above the top of the tower. The tower tie point would have to be at the top of t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-07/msg00821.html (11,414 bytes)

254. Re: [TowerTalk] Sweet spot locations: (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:24:56 -0500
"They purposely built a 5/8 wavelength radiator design in order to suppress higher lobe radiation causing selective fading at a particular radius from the antenna. " Actually WSM started out with som
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-07/msg01102.html (10,366 bytes)

255. Re: [TowerTalk] Parallel Dipoles. (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:28:37 -0500
Here is a trick you can do to make a 40 meter dipole be resonant on 15 meters at the frequency you want it to be. First build a 40 meter dipole, about 68 ft. Then at 7 ft either side of the center, a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00306.html (8,743 bytes)

256. Re: [TowerTalk] Ground System (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 11:31:12 -0500
K8RI's assessment of the grounding problem is right on. I would like to add a few comments. Current waveforms for lightning simulation is not always the same. Different waveforms are used for differe
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00358.html (17,076 bytes)

257. Re: [TowerTalk] Ground System (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 00:50:23 -0500
True, and you are not going to melt this. And your numbers look close. If it is 1/64 thick, then each of these lines would have just slightly less copper than a #00 wire, and lower skin resistance. D
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00382.html (10,701 bytes)

258. Re: [TowerTalk] Topband: INV L Directionality (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 09:28:56 -0500
I has a little more gain in the direction directly opposite the direction the top wire is running away from the vertical wire (maybe 2 dB or so). The angle created by bending a wire causes some field
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00827.html (7,033 bytes)

259. [TowerTalk] Standing up 90 ft of 25G (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 20:26:55 -0500
Is this a wise thing to do? Standing up 90 feet of Rohn 25G with a raising fixture. Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgtNNvIU-Kg&mode part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWLo-n4qAuA&mode _____
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00072.html (6,915 bytes)

260. Re: [TowerTalk] putting a reflector below a 75 meter inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2007 01:40:53 -0500
A wire on the ground gets tuned to a lower frequency by being on the ground, so to act like a reflector (and tuned to a lower frequency) it has to be shorter than a half wave dipole. You only get a b
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00279.html (8,783 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu