Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

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

Total 445 documents matching your query.

281. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank-Up Tower Base Question (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 22:41:12 -0600
I had the septic tank guy dig the hole for my tower when the house was built, and it came out perfect size and plumb sides. I guess digging septic tank holes is pretty close to the same thing. Jerry,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2007-12/msg00078.html (10,137 bytes)

282. Re: [TowerTalk] Portable Mast Guy Rings? (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:17:36 -0600
I looked thru my Tractor Supply catalog and the only thing I found that looked like it might work is the "3 and 4 Bolt Steel Flanges". If you can get the right hole diameter this might work. Page 202
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-01/msg00167.html (9,163 bytes)

283. Re: [TowerTalk] tower leg ground (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:51:28 -0600
-- I have asked this question on a couple of other reflectors and got no answer, so I will try this one also. Can anyone explain how putting a stainless steel shim between a copper wire and a zinc p
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-01/msg00282.html (9,232 bytes)

284. Re: [TowerTalk] Front-to-back / Front-to-rear (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 20:35:25 -0600
Those are some good questions. Others have addressed this with some limited success. W8JI uses a RDF technique for a figure of merit. This is convenient because EZNEC can give you all the data to cal
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-01/msg00430.html (10,112 bytes)

285. Re: [TowerTalk] Front-to-back / Front-to-rear (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 09:42:10 -0600
Good point. I never considered that he might be building a transmit antenna. I thought it was for receiving only. Jerry, K4SAV _______________________________________________ ________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-01/msg00436.html (7,317 bytes)

286. Re: [TowerTalk] 80 meter antenna comparison (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:49:47 -0600
The model included with EZNEC contains no wire losses, no transmission line losses, and no near field ground losses, and assumes average flat ground. Jerry, K4SAV ____________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-01/msg00579.html (9,740 bytes)

287. Re: [TowerTalk] New Antennas (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:05:49 -0600
Something like an XM240 at 65 feet will easily beat a four square or a 3 element vertical. The take-off angle of the XM240 will be slightly higher than the 4 square, but the XM240 will have more gain
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00259.html (8,739 bytes)

288. Re: [TowerTalk] Lightnig Arrestors at tower base or house entrance? (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:58:23 -0600
...."Is it because of some overvoltage issue on the shield? Maybe letting the coax be the sacrificial fuse (i.e. let it arc through the jacket) might be a good approach?"..... That is exactly what yo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00358.html (12,861 bytes)

289. Re: [TowerTalk] Lightnig Arrestors at tower base or house entrance? (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:51:25 -0600
Well you are thinking like a Californian. Direct strikes maybe rare in California, but in other places they are very common. I now live in a much lower lightning probability area than my Florida loca
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00360.html (15,129 bytes)

290. Re: [TowerTalk] Lightnig Arrestors at tower base or house entrance? (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:30:49 -0600
My tower is only 55 feet, and 71 feet to the top of the mast, but it is also located on a hill and is the highest thing around for a long distance except for a very few trees about 700 feet away. NE
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00363.html (9,276 bytes)

291. Re: [TowerTalk] Topband: VP6DX Very Loud (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:48:09 -0600
If you want to know why they are so loud, take a look at their website for a list of the equipment they are using. Also look at the site map. There is info on that map which they have not talked abou
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00364.html (7,286 bytes)

292. Re: [TowerTalk] Grounding Coax at Tower (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:00:12 -0600
Having the cables exit the tower above ground is a really bad idea. Voltage drop down the tower is very high during a strike. Anything exiting the tower above ground will see a very large voltage imp
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00374.html (9,381 bytes)

293. Re: [TowerTalk] Grounding Coax at Tower (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:39:36 -0600
If you just use di/dt for calculating voltage drops on lightning conductors you can get some very misleading answers. Sure if you have a known rise time and inductance you can calculate a voltage, bu
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00378.html (16,658 bytes)

294. Re: [TowerTalk] Grounding Coax at Tower (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:45:55 -0600
W6RMK wrote: Hmmm.. are we talking direct hits? The lightning literature is fairly full of the electrical properties of lightning strokes, and the current pulse typical stroke is substantially less t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00391.html (20,189 bytes)

295. Re: [TowerTalk] Q on guyed rotating towers (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:13:28 -0600
I guess I didn't follow the explaination. Why would there not be a difference in torsional loading between a tower constrained only at the bottom versus one constrained at both the top and bottom? Je
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00397.html (9,462 bytes)

296. Re: [TowerTalk] Looking for a Gotham Antenna Ad (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 12:13:46 -0600
http://www.w8ji.com/gotham.htm _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-03/msg00043.html (7,808 bytes)

297. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial length (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:43:18 -0500
It is interesting to compare Cebik's calculations for gain versus number of radials with that which W8JI measured. Cebik calculated that the gain difference between 4 radials and 64 radials was 1.2 d
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-03/msg00254.html (13,966 bytes)

298. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial length (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:38:52 -0500
-- Poor ground does make the difference larger, but to account for a gain difference of 5.5 dB in NEC, the ground quality at W8JI would have to be poorer that that in downtown New York City in the mi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-03/msg00259.html (9,318 bytes)

299. Re: [TowerTalk] Planning New Tower (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:44:24 -0500
I think you are a bit overloaded with that tower. The tower is rated for 16 sq ft at 70 mph and the MonstIR has a load of 23.9 sq ft. I'm not sure how the rating goes up as you lower the tower, but I
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-03/msg00281.html (9,118 bytes)

300. Re: [TowerTalk] Does a M2 Orion 2800 fit in a LM354HD top section? (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:03:13 -0500
Are you sure you didn't get a metric number mixed in with the English numbers? Using Yaesu's method of figuring the K factor, I get 3264 ft-lbs for the antennas you have. The G-2800DXA is rated for 6
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-03/msg00373.html (8,865 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu