Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:K3BU@aol.com: 231 ]

Total 231 documents matching your query.

201. Re: [TowerTalk] Problems on a 2el vertical Array (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 21:25:29 EST
You do if you want the triangular array perform the way it is supposed to work with WX0B stackmatch. It can work as two driven elements fed in phase with third as reflector (frequency shifted by open
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-01/msg00236.html (8,935 bytes)

202. Re: Fw: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas - My experiences - LONG (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 17:03:18 EST
based on the difference is height and other weird propagation effects sure make a 4 stack a really fun antenna to play with. Unfortunately MOST of the fun and games can be seen only at the top of the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00086.html (8,923 bytes)

203. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Placement (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 21:16:32 EST
recommend guying it. Self supporting towers are actually designed that way with no need for guys. Guying a self supporter will prevent it from twisting like it wants to by design and could actually
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00155.html (8,094 bytes)

204. Re: [TowerTalk] One Man Tower (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:09:53 EST
On the VK4VKD site: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~aeitower/ we read... *_WARNING * *_I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT SOMEONE IN THE USA IS ADVERTISING THAT THEY ARE BUILDING THE "ONE MAN TOWER" UNDER LICEN
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00311.html (8,233 bytes)

205. Re: [TowerTalk] One Man Tower (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:15:35 EST
*_WARNING * *_I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT SOMEONE IN THE USA IS ADVERTISING THAT THEY ARE BUILDING THE "ONE MAN TOWER" UNDER LICENCE - THIS IS NOT CORRECT - NO AGREEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE WITH ANY INDIVI
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00312.html (8,189 bytes)

206. Re: [TowerTalk] SteppIR VS Force 12 (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:03:32 EST
be a deal killer to have a motor die in the middle. << They use stepping motors. They are the best engines around, no brushes, they are precise for positioning, can be used as a brakes and very relia
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00341.html (7,311 bytes)

207. Re: [TowerTalk] Steppir tuning noise (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:23:31 EST
sure. Two seconds of low level hash and then 1:1 VSWR, boy am I glad that I dumped my old fashioned, fixed tuned, beam.<< I wonder where is hash coming from. Stepping motors do not have brushes, they
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00405.html (8,022 bytes)

208. Re: [TowerTalk] Steppir tuning noise (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:53:10 EST
I am surprised that they would live with noise generated by the drive system. There should be no capacitive coupling between windings and elements. Windings are completely enclosed. By using shielded
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00411.html (8,396 bytes)

209. Re: [TowerTalk] Steppir tuning noise (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 09:35:56 EST
run of the mill steppers (with decent temperature ranges, etc.) are probably around $50, brand new, in big quantities. Shielded steppers with the fancy connectors are more like $500 or $1000. Fluidmo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00419.html (9,625 bytes)

210. Re: [TowerTalk] Steppir tuning noise (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:53:27 EST
the time researching filter designs, trying various approaches, tuning the stubs, etc.. Figure your time at a cheap $50/hr, take the parts cost, using components purchased new from catalogs, and doub
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00466.html (8,497 bytes)

211. Re: [TowerTalk] Quickly releasable knot (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 18:49:46 EST
Way back there was a discussion about knots and some marine or knot web sites were mentioned. I tried to avoid using tag lines while lifting antennas. I was blessed to have Bertha, no guy wires and h
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00495.html (9,301 bytes)

212. Re: [TowerTalk] Why did adding a radial make the input Z of myinverted L go ... (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:47:43 EST
73 de Jim Smith VE7FO<< Rather than analyzing your particular situation (more info needed), here are some general observations: 1. If you have strong local BC or other signals, some antenna analyzer
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00279.html (10,150 bytes)

213. Re: [TowerTalk] Why did adding a radial make the input Z of myinverted L go ... (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:58:13 EST
variable C in series so I could resonate the antenna anywhere in the band. Maybe even motorize it. From what you say, maybe the MkV tuner will be good enough.<< That is good way to get more out of lo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00324.html (8,356 bytes)

214. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:42:09 EST
states that these devices do not work as the manufacturers claim.<< Welcome to the lawyers world! If you had the threat of law suit and you are "expert" and there was a doubt as how exactly "thing" w
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00384.html (10,675 bytes)

215. Re: [TowerTalk] Lightning protection (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:32:42 EST
Do you have data contrary to that? Is there anybody who experienced more lightning strikes after putting up bigger antenna installations? Just because "professionals" did not exprience it (didn't hav
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00388.html (7,743 bytes)

216. Re: [TowerTalk] Lightning protection (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:10:32 EST
towers didn't get hit then why do power companies spend money trying to prevent damage from strokes to power lines. HV power lines are larger than any ham structures, within the same range of heights
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00390.html (8,760 bytes)

217. Re: [TowerTalk] Static, Lightening, and protection (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:02:29 EST
installation that had just been hit, I decided to never have anything above the yagi except maybe 5' of mast for the truss. In 13 years, I have never had a hit. << Another vote for "Yuri's theory" of
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00424.html (8,582 bytes)

218. Re: [TowerTalk] Lightning resuscitation (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:12:54 EST
Inquirer - The journal of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP).<< Looks like we have quite a few graduates of W8JI "guru" "knowitall" academy If you guy
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00492.html (9,185 bytes)

219. Re: [TowerTalk] Static, Lightening, and protection (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:30:03 EST
tribander help or hurt this "capacitor plate" theory?<< The "rules" seem to be like this: If you want to create "umbrella lightning repellent" protection situation, the tower should be as high as pos
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00493.html (10,160 bytes)

220. Re: [TowerTalk] Static, Lightning, and protection (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:00:20 EST
have all observed a storm cell moving towards us that was generating lots of strikes. As the cell neared our towers the lightning stopped and the guy wires started crackling and popping. As the cell
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-03/msg00497.html (9,724 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu