Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:ab7echo@gmail.com: 205 ]

Total 205 documents matching your query.

181. Re: [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 14:52:50 -0700
If you have access to a 3D printer this might be an inexpensive alternative: https://youtu.be/qAgF9Mzr8XM or https://youtu.be/S6spyk1GRoo Personally, I'd go with the version that has a slight taper. 
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00005.html (7,819 bytes)

182. Re: [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 15:19:10 -0700
Yes ... that. Nickle has about 4 times worse electrical conductivity compared to copper, and the skin depth at 30 MHz is about 20 times thinner (about 12 microns for copper versus about 0.65 for nick
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00006.html (9,380 bytes)

183. Re: [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 14:08:47 -0700
I believe that is likely to be a more efficient approach than using an inductor.  It is possible to make air wound inductors with pretty high Q and not much loss, but the approach you used spreads th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00015.html (11,803 bytes)

184. Re: [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 16:06:18 -0700
Yeah, amplifier coils are a different animal than antenna loading coils.  Lots different circuit impedance and lots different current levels. Still, his point is valid if you use a tank coil for a co
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00016.html (9,786 bytes)

185. Re: [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 18:06:26 -0700
Jeff, you apparently didn't even bother to check out the guy's website.  Here is a direct quote from it: "These coils are suited for amateur and commercial applications, including but not limited to
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00018.html (12,512 bytes)

186. Re: [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2025 00:08:09 -0700
ChatGPT mostly agrees with you, except that it says that nickel with a high phosphorus content is almost impossible to solder to even when using an aggressive acid flux. Dave   AB7E I remember lookin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00020.html (11,396 bytes)

187. [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2025 11:33:34 -0700
The guy who makes the nickel plated QCoils has his email address on his website, so I just sent him an email asking him what the plating actually is.  Hopefully he answers. Dave  AB7E _______________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00026.html (7,903 bytes)

188. [TowerTalk] QCoils Answered (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2025 13:11:37 -0700
I guess that's why we call ourselves amateurs ... Dave  AB7E _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contestin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00028.html (7,608 bytes)

189. Re: [TowerTalk] QCoils Answered (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2025 13:51:27 -0700
Well, it wasn't a waste from my point of view and I appreciate your search.  I learned stuff I didn't know before. Take care, Dave  AB7E Thanks for straightening us out! 73, Mike W4EF...............
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00030.html (8,817 bytes)

190. Re: [TowerTalk] Loading Coils (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 10:50:25 -0700
I remember that as well.  Well over $100 for even a moderately sized coil.  That's why I came up with the do-it-yourself 3D printed concept that I posted here a few days ago.  I can make exactly the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00044.html (11,028 bytes)

191. Re: [TowerTalk] Circularly Polarized Receive Antenna (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 11:46:56 -0700
Before he retired, my oldest son used to write software for this sort of thing.  He told me that with eight synchronous antennas he could beam form in any direction ... up/down and left/right.  And o
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00088.html (13,423 bytes)

192. Re: [TowerTalk] Circularly Polarized Receive Antenna (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 14:17:50 -0700
I believe those are passive boxes, not DSP (somebody please correct me if I am wrong).  They work fine, but are pretty expensive. Dave   AB7E The DX Engineering NCC-1 and NCC-2 are excellent phasing
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00094.html (10,484 bytes)

193. Re: [TowerTalk] Circularly Polarized Receive Antenna (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 14:30:36 -0700
I don't own an RSPDuo and I have no commercial association with SDR Play ... although I do own an RSPdx and an RSP1B. The RSPDuo does have separate front ends, but the two receivers are fed from the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00095.html (18,488 bytes)

194. Re: [TowerTalk] Circularly Polarized Receive Antenna (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 19:05:26 -0700
Yes, that's definitely true.  In addition to a couple of NanoVNAs and an HF-CIA, I own an FA-VA5 designed by DG5MK that also works with the DG8SAQ software. By the way, it is possible to achieve the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-08/msg00100.html (11,602 bytes)

195. Re: [TowerTalk] Christman Phasing help! (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2025 14:27:15 -0700
And in turn, there is a lot of great information and advice your post, Rick.  I'm archiving it. Take care, Dave   AB7E On 9/7/2025 12:55 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote: Great article Gary.  It wa
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-09/msg00013.html (13,191 bytes)

196. Re: [TowerTalk] Feedline (choke) question (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 20:27:51 -0700
I can't claim all of the following perspective to be based upon much practical experience, but from a theoretical point of view I lean toward the following as an ideal case: 1.  A common mode choke a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-09/msg00058.html (10,814 bytes)

197. Re: [TowerTalk] Feedline (choke) question (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 09:11:35 -0700
Except that "ground" isn't actually some sort of sink for RF. Imagine a portable battery operated setup with a dipole antenna and nothing about the rig connected to ground.  A common mode choke will
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-09/msg00084.html (11,376 bytes)

198. Re: [TowerTalk] Feedline (choke) question (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 11:07:53 -0700
That's a fallacy.  It simply isn't. Dave   AB7E _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-09/msg00089.html (9,777 bytes)

199. Re: [TowerTalk] Feedline (choke) question (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 21:24:42 -0700
I already did with the example of a floating portable setup. Current requires an E-field to push it.  You could connect a grounded wire to a point on the coax shield and it wouldn't shunt any common
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-09/msg00096.html (12,747 bytes)

200. Re: [TowerTalk] Feedline (choke) question (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2025 00:26:23 -0700
RF is AC ... whatever current goes toward ground comes back every half cycle.  It doesn't just go into the ground and disappear.  You aren't bleeding off a static charge that happens to be referenced
/archives//html/Towertalk/2025-09/msg00100.html (10,518 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu