Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Coaxial\s+nverted\s+L\s+\-\s+160m\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Coaxial\s+nverted\s+L\s+\-\s+160m\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Coaxial nverted L - 160m (score: 1): Author: Chuck N7BV <ck2jones@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:55:44 -0700 (PDT); GD, For quite a few years I have been using a 160m coaxial inverted L antenna. CQ Magazine Aug 84. Have the vertical section about 60' up and the rest on the horizonal. There are 14 full size radials; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-04/msg00085.html (7,028 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Coaxial nverted L - 160m (score: 1): Author: "Gregg W6IZT" <gregg.w6izt1@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 09:59:53 -0400; I think the answer lies in another question. How well are you getting out compared to other stations in your immediate vicinity? 73 Gregg W6IZT GD, For quite a few years I have been using a 160m coax; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-04/msg00095.html (8,335 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Coaxial nverted L - 160m (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:12:55 -0500; A 60' inverted L works OK but certainly the more vertical element you have the better. In either case you need a good ground system. I am curious what the efficiency is of a coaxial inverted L? I bel; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-04/msg00096.html (8,041 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]