Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:wa8jxm@gmail.com: 109 ]

Total 109 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Legs (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 19:57:55 -0500
Poor choice AFAIK. My understanding is that if the tower gets takes a heavy hit by lightning, the wire could vaporize and crack the concrete. Ken WA8JXM ______________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-12/msg00549.html (8,703 bytes)

22. Re: [TowerTalk] Elevated vertical (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:08:58 -0500
A low SWR does not indicate resonance. Resonance does not necessarily provide a low SWR. A true quarter wave resonant vertical over a perfect ground plane has a feed impedance of about 30 ohms and th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-12/msg00550.html (8,246 bytes)

23. Re: [TowerTalk] Elevated vertical (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:46:57 -0500
Gerald, I disagree. If a quarter wave vertical or ground plane is lengthened to about .28 wavelength, the radiation resistance raises to about 50 ohms and a 1:1 SWR. It is not resonant, but it has a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-12/msg00578.html (9,974 bytes)

24. Re: [TowerTalk] Elevated vertical (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 21:38:47 -0500
Okay, Gerald, I will agree that you and I are talking about different things. But most people talk about adjusting their antenna and saying it is resonant (or not) when they get a 1:1 SWR. As you hav
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-12/msg00585.html (9,422 bytes)

25. Re: [TowerTalk] Elevated vertical (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 11:15:43 -0500
Paul, I think you forgot to differentiate between the actual SWR and what a meter may read ;-) Just because a meter says the SWR is 5:1, doesn't necessarily mean it is so. A meter at different points
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-12/msg00599.html (11,564 bytes)

26. Re: [TowerTalk] FAA & Towers, continued (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 10:02:41 -0500
You can download topo maps online that will give you as good as 10 ft intervals depending on how flat your terrain is. See http://store.usgs.gov/b2c_usgs/b2c/start/%28xcm=r3standardpitrex_prd%29/.do
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-12/msg00801.html (8,071 bytes)

27. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:41:57 -0500
Actually this setup is covered in this month's QST "The Doctor Is In" column with a couple of references to older QST articles. A center fed dipole with open wire or ladder line is a very good multi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00279.html (10,327 bytes)

28. Re: [TowerTalk] My dipoles (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:46:40 -0500
Because it gives you the efficiency of a full half wave dipole on 80m. Ken WA8JXM _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing lis
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00280.html (7,203 bytes)

29. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:34:01 -0500
I see it differently. When going significantly below a half wave, you are eliminating a significant portion of the high current portion of the radiator. The highest radiation currents flow in the cen
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00329.html (9,624 bytes)

30. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:34:28 -0500
Steve, The issue is not about I^2R losses and feedline cannot compensate for missing antenna wire. It's the antenna wire that radiates, not a properly balanced feedline. How do you "increase the feed
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00333.html (10,008 bytes)

31. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:35:34 -0500
You are trying to tell me that if I had an excellent matching network, I could use a 2m dipole on 80m and it would be just as effective? Sorry, I think you are confusing feed and matching losses and
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00336.html (9,807 bytes)

32. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:23:28 -0500
The "cloudwarmer" function is more likely a result of the height rather than the length. There is nothing wrong with a "cloudwarmer" unless you are a DXer. A cloud warmer will probably outperform a d
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00351.html (9,730 bytes)

33. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:25:46 -0500
I have trouble accepting that. We will have to agree to disagree. Ken WA8JXM _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list Tow
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00352.html (10,414 bytes)

34. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:31:32 -0500
Paul, THERE I agree with you because the high current portion (e.g. center portion of a dipole, or the "effective" quarter wave portion of a vertical) is used as a radiator. End loading works well be
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00354.html (10,690 bytes)

35. Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole fed with balanced line? (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:36:31 -0500
What difference does it make, we don't put the matching network (lump) at the feed point (except people with remote tuners like the Icom AH-4). Most of us have a linear "matching network" of 30-100'
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00355.html (10,463 bytes)

36. Re: [TowerTalk] 40 m Dipole question. (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 10:47:44 -0500
Sure. Check, the SWR across the band. Is it higher at 7.3, or 7.0? Is there a lower SWR in the middle? If it looks like the lowest SWR is below the band, then shorten the antenna by 6" and remeasure.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00505.html (7,691 bytes)

37. Re: [TowerTalk] Making guy lines visible (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 08:31:09 -0500
Many good ideas here. If you are really worried, put up some fence panels with the orange SMV triangles on it. (On second thought, forget the fence panels, just put up a couple of fence posts with th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-01/msg00547.html (8,693 bytes)

38. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower lawsuit (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 10:23:20 -0500
SOMETIMES they break in the middle. Not always. I'll bet a guyed tower with a minimum base will fall intact if a guy wire fails. If you elect to live on a small lot, I can certainly understand regula
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-02/msg00083.html (8,989 bytes)

39. Re: [TowerTalk] ground plates (was DXE Patents) (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:23:33 -0500
I have often wondered about that. Is stainless exempt from dissimilar metal galvanic action? Why not just use copper (with brass machine screws, nuts and washers)? Are there any drawbacks to that? Ke
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-02/msg00217.html (8,937 bytes)

40. Re: [TowerTalk] ground plates (was DXE Patents) (score: 1)
Author: Ken <wa8jxm@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:16:31 -0500
You can take a couple of feet of 1/2" copper water pipe, flatten it with a hammer and drill all the holes you want through it for a lot less money than the DXE stainless steel plate. In my mind, copp
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-02/msg00221.html (9,871 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu