Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:btippett@alum.mit.edu: 175 ]

Total 175 documents matching your query.

121. [TowerTalk] question on coax (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 20:45:13 -0400
with LMR400. Recently a friend said he had some 75ohm hardline that I could use as well. Which would I be better using as far as lower loss is concerned? Its about a 250-300ft run btw. You didn't say
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-10/msg00229.html (7,692 bytes)

122. Re: [TowerTalk] "BigSticks" (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 07:14:12 -0400
the effort, especially if you really want to achieve the promise of the dual-driven elements. While you won't get a lot more gain, what you can get is more bandwidth, especially for the VSWR and the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-10/msg00685.html (8,177 bytes)

123. [TowerTalk] Radio Arkala by OH6KN and OH8NC (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:12:37 -0400
Was listening around on 10m to see what conditions might be like this weekend and was surprised to hear the OH9TEN/B (10W?) beacon on 28267.3 around 1730z. Tried a few CQ's with no takers. Posted mys
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-10/msg00836.html (7,593 bytes)

124. Re: [TowerTalk] CFA - It's real! ?? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 07:23:48 -0500
No it hasn't Mike. The long link was truncated. Enter item # 5824611055 in the eBay search window and you'll see it has 6+ days to run. 73, Bill W4ZV _______________________________________________ S
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-10/msg00861.html (7,360 bytes)

125. Re: [TowerTalk] Foam cables and velocity factor (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:06:50 -0500
K0RC: collected? Vf = actual length / 268.75' (for 1.83 MHz). 268.75' is the free space 1/2 wavelength at 1.83 MHz using the formula 983.56/f * 0.5 for 1/2 wl (983.56 from ARRL Antenna Book). What yo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-11/msg00362.html (8,347 bytes)

126. Re: [TowerTalk] Antenna Site...... (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 08:49:43 -0500
W5PR: It's still there Chuck...you just have to enter the full URL address which some mail programs truncate. The interesting thing is to check the history of this thing. The guy actually got a bid o
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-11/msg00383.html (7,479 bytes)

127. Re: [TowerTalk] HFTA (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 19:36:11 -0500
handbook, but not the 19th which I bought only this year :-( The predecessor of HFTA was N6BV's YT which is included in your 19th edition. See page 3-13 and the CD-ROM. I thought the comments about i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00582.html (8,163 bytes)

128. [TowerTalk] KLM Balun Phase Markings (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:14:10 -0500
K4XS wrote (with my parenthetical additions): with 5 dots burned into the PVC case), should be on the same side for all antennas. If not, he had a FB antenna for high angle radiation (BOP). I broke a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-03/msg00465.html (6,778 bytes)

129. [TowerTalk] insulated guys (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:34:50 -0500
K1UO: next one. Do you think these will be ok to use "as is" or should I change insulator spacings for use on 160M? I would put it up as is Larry. I have a 180' shunt-fed tower by itself on 160 and u
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-03/msg00592.html (6,977 bytes)

130. Re: [TowerTalk] Vertical Pattern of a yagi (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:18:10 -0400
N6KJ" This isn't the first time I've used EZNEC, but typically I start with something similar to what I want then just modify as necessary. I didn't find a 3 element yagi example in my batch of model
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-04/msg00419.html (7,913 bytes)

131. [TowerTalk] RF Exposure Calculator (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:56:46 -0400
OK I understand now. Here is what I would use if I were you: http://n5xu.ae.utexas.edu/rfsafety/ 73, Bill W4ZV _______________________________________________ ________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-04/msg00423.html (8,047 bytes)

132. Re: [TowerTalk] Was Radials... 160m High angle vs. low angle (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:18:46 -0400
N2EA: a 10m inverted vee with the apex at 4'. It's a cloud burner. A 160m dipole at 100' is a LOW antenna. But that's exactly what you need under certain conditions. In addition to being good for loc
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00383.html (9,314 bytes)

133. Re: [TowerTalk] Radials, verticals and horizontal antennas (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:20:29 -0400
W2CDO: radials and an antenna matching unit (e.g., "tuner") is a much more effective antenna than a dipole up 1/2 wavelength on paper. ;-) I hope the ;-) means you're kidding. A 1/2 wl DP has about 8
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00385.html (7,394 bytes)

134. Re: [TowerTalk] 160M Inverted Vee (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:37:11 -0400
N6RK: is more likely because the vertical is poor than because the dipole is good. Not necessarily. It simply means propagation is high-angle instead of low-angle: http://users.vnet.net/btippett/new_
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00462.html (9,246 bytes)

135. Re: [TowerTalk] 160 meter vertical (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 19:08:32 -0400
If you've worked VK on 160, chances are it was VK3ZL who uses a top-loaded vertical about 45' high. Bob will send you pictures and details if you email him: http://dayton.contesting.com/archives//htm
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00925.html (7,310 bytes)

136. Re: [TowerTalk] reflector for 75 meter inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 17:15:16 -0400
K4SAV: with very narrow lobes aren't very useful for ham purposes either. It depends on propagation. At sunrise, sunset and during high auroral activity, DX wave angles are often very high. I put up
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-10/msg00144.html (8,586 bytes)

137. [TowerTalk] reflector for 75 meter inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 19:49:49 -0400
K4SAV: signals entering a duct on 160 would enter that duct between 75 and 90 degrees elevation? Any speculation? What if you built an antenna with even more gain and even narrower beamwidth? Can you
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-10/msg00152.html (7,682 bytes)

138. Re: [TowerTalk] How best to keep the rebar cage centered in thehole? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 08:57:13 -0400
W7SW: pour the concrete? I always attach my first section of guyed tower to the base and then guy it with 3 wires to stakes 4-5' away from the base. It's important to always make sure the base sectio
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-10/msg00358.html (8,448 bytes)

139. Re: [TowerTalk] 160m Receive Antenna (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 10:30:39 -0500
VE3ZI: (1) A short Beverage - perhaps 300'; (2) A single K9AY; (3) A single flag; (4) A single EWE. Roger I would add a low dipole or inv-V to your list. It will work very well within 3-400 miles of
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-11/msg00000.html (6,304 bytes)

140. [TowerTalk] FORCE-12 MAG 2/2 (score: 1)
Author: Ryabov Vlad <ra4lw@mail.ru>(by way of Bill Tippett<btippett@alum.mit.edu>)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 13:45:46 -0500
Hi Bill! Has received as a gift disassembled aerial FORCE-12 MAG 2/2. Service-manual and the exact sizes is necessary. It is thankful in advance. Vlad/RA4LW P.S. CU in the ARRL CW 160m Contest ______
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-12/msg00034.html (6,508 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu