Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Nested\s+4\-Squares\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Nested\s+4\-Squares\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Nested 4-Squares (score: 1): Author: N5KM - Kris <n5kilomike@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:24:24 -0500; Is nesting 4-Square arrays a good idea? By that I mean, for instance, an 80m 4-square inside a 160m 4-square. I was about to model this but it occurs to me that someone has probably already done this; /archives//html/Towertalk/2018-04/msg00215.html (6,702 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Nested 4-Squares (score: 1): Author: "David Robbins" <k1ttt@verizon.net>; Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 16:59:27 -0500; My experience with 40m inside 80m says it is a bad idea. David Robbins K1TTT e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net web: http://wiki.k1ttt.net AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://k1ttt.net:7373 Is nesting; /archives//html/Towertalk/2018-04/msg00217.html (7,930 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Nested 4-Squares (score: 1): Author: n8de@thepoint.net; Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 18:13:51 -0400; That's exactly what W3LPL has on 80/160. You might email Frank and ask about it. 73 Don N8DE My experience with 40m inside 80m says it is a bad idea. David Robbins K1TTT e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net; /archives//html/Towertalk/2018-04/msg00220.html (8,303 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Nested 4-Squares (score: 1): Author: "Mike Smith VE9AA" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>; Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 20:14:31 -0300; I have 2 partially nested 4 squares and also a 2el array, all in a patch of uneven woods roughly 65' x 135' 2el 160m runs along West side of the rectangle. The 80m array is roughly in the center of t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2018-04/msg00221.html (8,524 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] Nested 4-Squares (score: 1): Author: Charles Morrison <junkcmp@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 19:33:12 -0400; I understand that W2FU has concentric 80/160 also and is satisfied. I will be added an 80M 4-square next to my 160. Each is supported by a separate tower. The towers are 160ft apart. Should know more; /archives//html/Towertalk/2018-04/msg00222.html (9,797 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] Nested 4-Squares (score: 1): Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 17:07:02 -0700; bad on 40 or bad on 80? Given the harmonic relationships, there's potential for issues, but it might be easily solvable with a relay at the base of each element that opens or shorts as needed. Is nes; /archives//html/Towertalk/2018-04/msg00223.html (8,140 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] Nested 4-Squares (score: 1): Author: "john@kk9a.com" <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 06:28:25 -0400; This is all very easy to model, my guess is that it will work fine. If the 160m verticals are shortened they may not even be resonant on 80m. The only other option to eliminate interaction would be i; /archives//html/Towertalk/2018-04/msg00224.html (7,848 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]