Mail Archive Search: <+from:k3ky@erols.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:k3ky@erols.com: 66 ]

Total 66 documents matching your query.

21. Topband: Rx Antenna Reality Check? :o) (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 04:39:49 -0500; Hello topbandersTonight I managed to work PW0T for a new one on 160m. When I finally copied him well enough, (he came up to Q5 pretty fast around 0450Z) he sent my call clearly, and added: "OK es ur; /archives//html/Topband/2002-03/msg00001.html (9,140 bytes)
22. Topband: Rx Antenna Reality Check? :o) (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 17:14:59 -0500; I refuse to confirm to those kinds of operators BernieIf you read my post more carefully, you would realize that it was a 'good' QSO. I was hearing the DX most of the time. That is my threshold for d; /archives//html/Topband/2002-03/msg00018.html (8,322 bytes)
23. Topband: TEN-TEC IS LISTENING! (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 04:45:08 -0500; A very impressive list of features on the website. One thing I noticed immediately is that they are using both crystal and DSP IFfiltering in the main rx, but only IF DSP in the sub-rx. I think a sub; /archives//html/Topband/2002-03/msg00068.html (8,592 bytes)
24. Topband: TEN-TEC IS LISTENING! (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 06:12:39 -0500; Bingo! Although Yaesu saw great prospects in offering a high-end radio that does true diversity, it was a feature of the FT-1000D that apparently went largely unused. What we are left with in the MP; /archives//html/Topband/2002-03/msg00082.html (12,205 bytes)
25. Topband: Re: 160 Antenna? (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:05:14 -0500; Wow! Sorry I was away and missed that one. Must have been one of those 'horizontal' nights. :o) From all the recent threads on receiving antennas and 160 antennas in general, I have definitely adopte; /archives//html/Topband/2002-03/msg00178.html (7,523 bytes)
26. Topband: EZNec Fool (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 23:52:17 -0500; Sounds great- *but* how do you preserve the necessary phase information? Some sort of complicated digital encoding scheme, I imagine. 73, K3KY; /archives//html/Topband/2002-03/msg00182.html (6,991 bytes)
27. Topband: Re: MFJ power line noise receiver or alternatives? (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (by way of Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>); Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:30:22 +0000; Very good, BillGetting the police involved was a stroke of genius. You might have a promising career awaiting in politics. :o) That must have been a heck of an arc to wipe out VHF. Here in the MD sub; /archives//html/Topband/2002-03/msg00221.html (9,334 bytes)
28. Topband: Power line communication (PLC) - Trends in Holland (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 16:25:44 -0500; I fear that Ulli has it pretty much right. Sounds like PLC will be a disaster in city environments, and possibly even in some suburbs. Perhaps the HF SWL's of the world have essentially no political; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00030.html (13,503 bytes)
29. Topband: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 00:59:18 -0500; I have been using the K6STI horizontal loop design described here for several years now. I am very happy with mine, built switchable to cover 75, 80, and 160. STI comments that the output will be low; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00046.html (10,670 bytes)
30. Topband: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:51:58 -0500; Hi, George I make precisely that point in my text, and that comment has always been there. It takes a lot of carefull re-reading of the two articles to gain a full grasp of the antennas properties an; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00053.html (10,754 bytes)
31. Fw: Topband: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 12:30:54 -0500; Wow! Thanks a million, George. This is an example of what makes the Topband group such a joy. I will add those comments to my webpage writeup of the K6STI loop. Those who read the articles will end u; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00067.html (10,074 bytes)
32. Topband: Noise and reception (K6STI loop) (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:04:26 -0500; Hi, Donald (snip) According to the graph in my ancient ARRL handbook, about 430 ohm characteristic impedance. Probably close enough, but I recall K6STI said you want 450 ohms or better or it will not; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00071.html (12,169 bytes)
33. Topband: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 15:19:24 -0500; I believe the K6STI loop and even the Flag/Pennant family are getting unfairly slammed in the informal ham 'press' such as the Topband group. While the temptation to compare them is absolutely irresi; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00085.html (11,393 bytes)
34. Topband: Power line communication (PLC) - Trends in Holland (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 15:51:28 -0500; Hi, BradYou make some interesting points! Please see my comments below... (snip) (snip) There is nothing wrong with being paranoid when there actually is a crowd behind you with torches and pitchfork; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00097.html (10,506 bytes)
35. Topband: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 05:26:10 -0500; Hi, TomFrankly, I have zero emotional investment in whether the loop receives any horizontally polarized signal or not. The fact remains that I am seeing real, usable improvement in S/N over my 80 an; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00100.html (14,161 bytes)
36. Topband: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 06:08:51 -0500; Hi, TomIt does not bother me that the horizontally-polarized *ground wave* does not exist/ is not supported by the earth. I am trying to receive horizontally-polarized *skywave* signals, and to the m; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00101.html (11,897 bytes)
37. Topband: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 18:38:53 -0500; Hi, TomI think we may be reaching your frustration limit in this thread. A couple of general comments- I just want to be sure you know where I am coming from in this discussion... I don't think you h; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00106.html (12,118 bytes)
38. Topband: Re: Noise and reception (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (by way of Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>); Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 02:57:14 +0000; Hi, RickI need to dig my Sep 95 QST out of storage and reread the two articles about the K6STI horizontal loop- but I do remember the author saying that the antenna will work just about as well at 5; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00122.html (8,625 bytes)
39. Topband: 160 band plan (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 18:36:51 -0500; Some have worried that the combination of an SSB contest plus bandplan would be seen as very unfavorable by phone ops on 160. A few of them got together and sent in comments to FCC opposing RM-10352.; /archives//html/Topband/2002-02/msg00185.html (8,449 bytes)
40. Topband: ewe (score: 1): Author: k3ky@erols.com (k3ky@erols.com); Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:45:28 -0500; A lot of these low noise receiving antennas can be badly detuned if you set them up near a transmit vertical resonant on the band of interest. You might check if you have some F/B on other bands. Tha; /archives//html/Topband/2002-01/msg00198.html (7,758 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]