Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Indirect\s+Coupling\s+to\s+tower\s+helps\s+vert\.\s+polarization\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Indirect\s+Coupling\s+to\s+tower\s+helps\s+vert\.\s+polarization\?\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Indirect Coupling to tower helps vert. polarization? (score: 1): Author: RLVZ@aol.com; Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 15:01:12 EST; Hi guys, Got a question I'd love to run by you: At another QTH I had a 160-m. inverted vee with apex at 60' on a Rohn 25 tower. Had a Tribander mounted 3' up above it. Not much of an antenna on 160 b; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00014.html (8,022 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Indirect Coupling to tower helps vert. polarization? (score: 1): Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>; Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 19:25:22 -0600; You are correct that a 160 meter inverted vee at 60 ft is not a DX antenna. Compared to a full size vertical with a good radial system, at 10 degrees elevation it should be down 7 to 10 dB, and if yo; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00019.html (11,786 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]