Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:RadioIR@charter.net: 445 ]

Total 445 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Cadweld one shots - good price (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 21:05:26 -0500
I just ordered a bunch of Cadweld one shots for my new tower, $5.65 each, good price. See: http://www.nettechdi.com/index.html Ordered on Monday, received on Wednesday, wow! No, I have no connection
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-05/msg00299.html (7,308 bytes)

2. [TowerTalk] Good price on Cadweld one shots (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 20:43:52 -0500
I just ordered a bunch of Cadweld one shots for my new tower. $5.65 each, good price. See: http://www.nettechdi.com/index.html Ordered on Monday, received on Wednesday, wow! No, I have no connection
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-05/msg00300.html (7,341 bytes)

3. [TowerTalk] Antenna interaction tests (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 19:47:10 -0500
I am getting ready to mount a 4 element SteppIR at 55 ft, and an XM240 on the same mast only 5 feet above the SteppIR. I am concerned about degrading the SteppIR. I don't think there will be a proble
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-05/msg00381.html (7,980 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Antenna interaction tests (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 08:41:43 -0500
The consensus for placing a 4 element SteppIR and an XM240 five feet apart is that this is much too close. Although it is true that the SteppIR can be retuned to lower the SWR because of interaction,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-05/msg00398.html (8,688 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Stainless U-bolts for Cushcraft antennas (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:40:34 -0500
Jerry _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-05/msg00519.html (9,927 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] connecting a copper wire to a galvanized tower (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 21:31:57 -0500
In reference to the use of aluminum alloy lugs to connect copper ground wires to a tower: I am wrestling with the same problem right now. Especially since I just found out that you can't strap anythi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-05/msg00732.html (12,846 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower placement (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 22:00:59 -0500
Congratulations on having a QTH with good DX potential. You need HFTA, terrain analysis program! It was included on the CD ROM with the ARRL Antenna Book 20th edition. With this software you can mode
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-05/msg00775.html (12,874 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] End feeding a half-wave vetical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 08:48:01 -0500
In reference to an auto transformer matching network for a half wave vertical: In John Devoldere's book, Low-Band DXing, he describes a balun intended for this purpose. It was designed by W1FC, and i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00009.html (11,274 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] End feeding a half-wave vetical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:11:59 -0500
I agree with Tom's assessment of feeding a half wave antenna. After thinking about using a transformer, there is one parameter which is really difficult to overcome, stray capacitance between primary
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00022.html (11,897 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] End feeding a half-wave vetical (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 14:46:59 -0500
Jim was asking about feeding an unbalanced antenna (vertical), not a dipole, however your idea still applies. Actually, an air core transformer would work (almost). Taking this thought and evolving t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00027.html (16,209 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Bicep Cramping (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:03:29 -0500
I'm not an expert on the subject, but I can give you my own observations. Back in the days when I was a decent tennis player (in Florida), cramping was often a problem for players, especially when pl
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00166.html (10,031 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] elevated verticals....radial config. (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:19:03 -0500
Another reason to decouple the feedline is to keep noise generated inside your house from being coupled into your antenna. You may or may not notice a noise difference from decoupling, depending upon
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00354.html (10,087 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] modeling interaction (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:35:05 -0500
Actually, you have to do both. A real implementation will have an attached transmission line. This transmission line, at a particular frequency, may appear as an open, a short, or most anything in be
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00534.html (14,816 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] 135 foot dipole, 300 ohm twinlead (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:45:31 -0500
Let me take a stab at this. Due to the fact that your TVI is on all channels everywhere in your house, a lot of causes are rulled out. It probable doesn't have anything to do with the fact you change
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00660.html (13,395 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] 135 foot dipole, 300 ohm twinlead (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:32:07 -0500
"Outside it hangs from the antenna, drops to about a foot above the ground and comes into my window along with several pieces of coax. It goes under my desk about 6-8 feet and wraps back to the top t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-06/msg00664.html (15,051 bytes)

16. [TowerTalk] Water in my XM240 (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 15:07:48 -0500
For the past eight weeks, my XM240 has been sitting in my back yard on concrete blocks, awaiting the arrival of my 4 element SteppIR. Today I removed a couple of the elements and found a lot of water
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00228.html (8,056 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] Water in my XM240 (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 17:16:18 -0500
An additional note: I just found out that the loading coils on this antenna are not wound on solid rods like I had thought, they are wound on tubes. So a leak anywhere in the element can send water t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00230.html (10,734 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] Water in my XM240 (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:36:56 -0500
After some more investigation of my XM240 water problem, here are my findings: 1. Water is allowed into the elements around the screws used to attach the loading-hat. 2. I dissembled the elements and
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00250.html (9,974 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] dipole (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:15:32 -0500
That might be interesting. Assuming you are not using the hairpin match, you may be able to get some operation on other bands. The SWR at the antenna should be very high, but the SWR seen by the tune
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00253.html (8,694 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] dipole (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 10:15:49 -0500
Right you are. I was a bit careless with my wording. A tuner matches impedances, not SWRs. Jerry _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting To
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00257.html (7,900 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu