My apologies to Seymour - he'd chastise me for that :>) I think I was thinking of Bill ... ZS6CCY ... Seymour is W6CCP ... CHARLIE CHARLIE PAPPA! Gary K(RX Seymour, W6CCY does this ... or at least di
definitely at a 90. The 40 could and probably will interact, potentially a significant amount, with the 15 and contrary to some beliefs and statements "it doesn't interact because my SWR is fine" it
are you sure you're not confusing winds with storms? My understanding was that it should be retracted if there is any chance of lightning greatly reducing the exposed area. g. --Original Message-- Fr
Had one at 90' in AZ - worked 200+ countries on each of the WARC bands in 3 years. Great antenna. Gary K9RX I have a D3-W (with the 10 Mhz driven element extension) up at 50 feet with a 6 meter beam
If I understand you correctly why not go to a 2:1 pulley system instead of a 4:1. Or compromise and use a 3:1! The 2:1 only requires a pulley at the attachment point - the top return goes to the rais
yes - I have them on my 55 installation - they tower is to be 147' - the highest guy point 122' and the guy anchors are out 140'... the top guy is 5/16" and 11200# philly. Drop me a note if you need
I'm signed in at Tessco - I can't find this specific part number and the lowest price I'm seeing is $3.11 for the 50JAA7 (list of $4.75). Gary K9RX http://www.rfsworld.com/websearchecat/datasheets/?q
I was logged in and seeing a discounted price - $3.11! I couldn't even find the cable you had specified. If indeed you can get 7/8" brand new for under $2 ... that is one heck of a buy. Do you have a
the issue is more than likely not going to be 'what is the interaction of the 160 on the 40 ... rather it is going to be what is the interaction of the 40 on the 160 ... and my guess (after having pl
John, Charlie, My apologies! I had done quite a bit of modeling for my own situation and found that what seemed like ANY piece of metal of most any length coupled current in (and it does) and screwed
Forgive me - I've replied to Gerald's email but this is directed to the thread in general: WHY all the concern for sealed connectors and connector types? I've been using UHF for 49 years and the only
and more than likely ANYTHING you had done to waterproof the connectors including water proof connectors would have failed with a direct hit. Just because a connector might be water proof doesn't mak
I bought 2 hinges from Lowes ... they're for a fence - they JUST fit my R55 tower ... I was going to use 2 of them spaced about 6" apart with a solid 1/2" stainless rod going between them through the
why not the SARK?! No BC issues here ... Gary K9RX Quick question. Is the MFJ series of SWR analyzer's the only ones susceptible to BC interference? Any issues with the Comet or RigExpert series? I k
Hey Bill! Been a while - glad things are progressing back out in KH land ... First I'd say what K3LR says is good advice - I can't contest it - just he's had many years of experience and experimentat
TREAD lightly as well... (Bill) as for 'how close' someone had asked.... when I model a HiZ 4 element RX array I can move one of my towers as much as 500' away and it STILL has a noticeable impact on
Wayne, Can you add more detail as to how it changed please - in the last scenario you have listed? I have no idea what this means: "DX reports = antenna #1 (NE) being the only one detectable ???? " ?
one suggestion: use 12 ga Romex or similar to the base - and then a cable with #14 stranded instead of 12 up the tower. That might be easier to find. The sense wires dont' have to be anything larger
I think more is being made of this then what it is - the reason why it was defined as "supplied to the antenna" is that is indeed simple - and doesn't necessitate any math/measurements beyond that si
Im' sure someone else will respond to this - and I'm sure Steve you'll say 'duh' as I know you know this: increasing the CM resistance seen REDUCES the CM currents - thus reduces the losses in the pr