Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:jruing@ameritech.net: 412 ]

Total 412 documents matching your query.

321. Re: [TowerTalk] 43' Vertical - Feed Point Tuner or Shack Tuner? (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:17:31 -0500
The flap over the correct balun / unun / transformer sure soured my impression of Array Solutions and Zero-Five. Their handling of this situation reminds me of the way Intel handled the situation wit
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00123.html (9,847 bytes)

322. Re: [TowerTalk] Rotator specs? - Tnx! (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:50:44 -0500
Roger - we have slugs over here, also... my brother in law is a slug... Oh... shoot... sorry.... wrong forum... please disregard... ;-) == K8JHR == == _______________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00125.html (7,449 bytes)

323. Re: [TowerTalk] 43' Vertical - Feed Point Tuner or Shack Tuner? (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:41:43 -0500
My only "defense" (not that one is necessary) is that the big vertical IS all you say it is. Nevertheless, it has proven to be a fairly good performer, providing better results than my former dipoles
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00127.html (11,550 bytes)

324. Re: [TowerTalk] 43' Vertical - Feed Point Tuner or Shack Tuner? (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:34:00 -0500
Great news -- Phil. I like my 43 footer, also. I am pleased to hear you liked it tuner at the base of the antenna, and to learn about its limitations at 160 m. It is very helpful to learn of your exp
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00215.html (7,908 bytes)

325. Re: [TowerTalk] Titanex Verticals (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:41:44 -0500
Did you ask them in German? ;-) == JHR == _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00217.html (7,546 bytes)

326. Re: [TowerTalk] wind farms in west Texas and eastern New Mexico (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:39:14 -0500
My Canadian friends, where they have lots of them installed, indicate they rotate them in and out of the system, for various reasons, including routine maintenance and how much electricity is needed
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00233.html (7,842 bytes)

327. Re: [TowerTalk] how best to support a 27' x 3/8" (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:07:49 -0500
If it is not close to a building, you can use two guy ropes, one on each side - set perpendicular to the to the rope, cable, or whatever you are using to raise and lower it. Of course, that may be he
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00249.html (7,853 bytes)

328. Re: [TowerTalk] Antenna/tower Equipment Box (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:04:50 -0500
Yeah... Roger had bees or wasps or the like in one of his antenna baluns... a similar problem. I forget what he used to fill the box, and still keep the moisture and bugs out, while letting the thing
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00253.html (9,438 bytes)

329. Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 74, Issue 30 (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:06:07 -0500
How do we know they are broken, just because they are not turning? == Richards - K8JHR == == _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00254.html (7,896 bytes)

330. Re: [TowerTalk] 43' verticals (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 23:56:37 -0500
I am very pleased with my 43 foot vertical for regional and even close in contacts. I am making contacts I could not before. I agree, however, that having a horizontal wire antenna can be helpful for
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00422.html (7,963 bytes)

331. Re: [TowerTalk] F Now Mast Insertion Depth (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 00:08:22 -0500
My wife says a 60 foot tower anywhere in the yard is OK... and any other antennas are OK... but do not drill holes in her roof. I think I can live with that limitation. GOOD LUCK on your roof tower p
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00423.html (7,413 bytes)

332. Re: [TowerTalk] F Now Mast Insertion Depth (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:14:17 -0500
Yep - antennas always seem to involve compromises.... but in this case MY WIFE has issued an edict concerning holes in the roof. I am luckier than most hams - that is the ONLY stipulation she has eve
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00428.html (8,825 bytes)

333. Re: [TowerTalk] 43' verticals (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:26:48 -0500
I am thrilled with the 80 meter performance of MY 43 foot DX_Engineering vertical antenna. Even better on 40 M I am finally a big signal on many nets where before I was told they could barely hear me
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00429.html (8,658 bytes)

334. Re: [TowerTalk] 43' verticals (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:41:20 -0500
I am not sure what you mean by this... as the Cushcraft MA-160V is only 30 to 36 feet tall (adjustable stinger) and only has a 40 kHz bandwidth on 160 meters. The 43 footer is taller, and can be work
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00450.html (9,163 bytes)

335. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial material choice and effect (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:03:15 -0500
I second Jim's and Lee's answers totally. Scrounge up a couple thousand foot spool of 16 gauge or larger (I like 16 or bigger so avoid breakage after it works its way into the thatch of the lawn - es
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00476.html (8,008 bytes)

336. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Collapse - New Kensington, PA @ K3MJW (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:21:22 -0500
I think you need to consider the tremendous force placed on the subject guy wire when the tree hits it - even before the guy breaks, and then I would figure there would be some backlash after it brea
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00503.html (9,377 bytes)

337. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial material choice and effect (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:55:09 -0500
Don't worry about cutting to a particular exact length, Bill, as the lossy earth will detune them anyway. Maybe you wanna cut them for a bit longer than your target length, just to make sure you d no
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00518.html (8,426 bytes)

338. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial material choice and effect (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:34:03 -0500
Once again, Jim says it better than I did. I am clearly still a novice at this, but take HIS word for it ! == Richards -K8JHR == == _______________________________________________ ___________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00520.html (8,296 bytes)

339. Re: [TowerTalk] re radial wire source (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 01:07:08 -0500
I think it has to be strong enough to avoid breaking when your lawn mower goes over it - especially if it is a tractor type - so I use a bit heavier wire with THHN insulation for strength. Your milea
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00524.html (7,339 bytes)

340. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial wire sources? (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 03:22:08 -0500
I also used the radial kit, plus some more wire of my own... I get the same results you describe. How long are YOUR radials? How many did you end up with? == Richards - K8JHR == 5/8 wave on 20mtrs. T
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-02/msg00526.html (7,458 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu