Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+HF\s+vertical\s+opinions\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+HF\s+vertical\s+opinions\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] HF vertical opinions (score: 1): Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 17:28:37 +0000; I don't think the no. of radials and their length affect the angle of maximum radiation in the vertical plain anywhere nearly as much as the length of the vertical radiator. the no. of radials and th; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-11/msg00684.html (7,406 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] HF vertical opinions (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 10:11:17 -0800; A few months ago, I did a modeling analysis comparing an approach where the length is always the same fraction of a wavelength vs a fixed length radiator and a tuning network at the base to match it.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-11/msg00688.html (9,162 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] HF vertical opinions (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 22:26:45 -0500; Jim, The only problem with a fixed length vertical and adjustable matching system is that the take off angle goes up in a hurry. Last I looked, the TO of a ground mounted 33 foot vertical on 21 MHz w; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-11/msg00728.html (10,874 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] HF vertical opinions (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 21:52:32 -0800; Yes, for longish radiators, this happens, a 1/4 wave on 40m is a full wave on 10, after all. But, consider something a bit shorter, say, 15-20 ft. The vertical pattern is pretty consistent until it s; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-11/msg00734.html (12,986 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] HF vertical opinions (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 01:53:44 -0500; I don't think on half wave is the real problem point ... you could go as much as 20 or 21 feet (5/8 wave on 10 meters). That's the point at which the higher angle lobe begins to predominate. At 21'; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-11/msg00736.html (15,886 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] HF vertical opinions (score: 1): Author: "Dan Zimmerman N3OX" <n3ox@n3ox.net>; Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:58 -0500; "I don't think on half wave is the real problem point" Agreed. I looked at patterns for my 40 foot base-matched vertical: http://www.n3ox.net/projects/lowbandvert I found the same thing, for a 40 foo; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-11/msg00741.html (9,267 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]