Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:ke3q@msn.com: 220 ]

Total 220 documents matching your query.

101. Re: [TowerTalk] concrete cost (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:38:36 -0400
This reminds me, a friend of mine did succeed in getting his concrete for free by calling concrete companies 'til he found one willing to listen to his pitch that he's a ham radio operator and was wi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00491.html (11,474 bytes)

102. Re: [TowerTalk] tower cost #2 (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:31:45 -0400
And you do see the occasional ones for TV antennas, now not being used, that are Rohn 45! _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers",
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00500.html (9,860 bytes)

103. [TowerTalk] Tower costs - permits for the foundation (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:48:41 -0400
Good point, on permits for "structural concrete." I think the argument could be made that a county's authority extends so far as the foundation, but not to the tower. As a for instance, my county sig
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00507.html (11,683 bytes)

104. Re: [TowerTalk]Being cheap vs. being frugal (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:19:33 -0400
As far as being "cheap," I think frugality, good common sense regarding one's resources, and "good stewardship" of one's resources, be they the dollars in your pocket, the "environment," etc. are vir
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00535.html (12,629 bytes)

105. [TowerTalk] non-hams on Towertalk (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:22:39 -0400
You may have noticed, as I have, that we seem to have a lot of non-hams who read Towertalk. That's okay, just interesting. Personally, whenever I see a message without a callsign, I assume it's a non
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00536.html (7,177 bytes)

106. Re: [TowerTalk] non-hams on Towertalk (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:59:43 -0400
No, I don't think that's the point, Gary. To me, to a ham, his callsign is the best identifier he has -- among hams it's generally more helpful than the name. Now, I can appreciate that a lot of peop
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00563.html (10,815 bytes)

107. [TowerTalk] be proud of your call (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 18:24:38 -0400
It's clear from all those brave enough to comment that there is no reason for anyone to be embarrassed about their callsign. I'm pleased we all agree! 73 - Rich, KE3Q ________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00585.html (7,070 bytes)

108. Re: [TowerTalk] non-hams on Towertalk (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 18:13:39 -0400
Absolutely. I agree. There are many, many who are fine with their callsign including extras who have opted to keep their original callsign. 73 - Rich, KE3Q ___________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00586.html (9,948 bytes)

109. [TowerTalk] Towertalk FAQ re callsign (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 18:54:28 -0400
Put your name, callsign and E-mail address on every message you send. We don't all know everyone by just a callsign, nickname or Internet address. Furthermore, not everyone's E-mail software lets yo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00591.html (7,003 bytes)

110. [TowerTalk] Need quad dimensions (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:12:14 -0400
Anyone have any really good 4-element quad element spacings and wire lengths for each element -- 20/15/10? 73 - Rich, KE3Q _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.c
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00614.html (6,752 bytes)

111. [TowerTalk] Quad dimensions? (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:06:16 -0400
Anyone have really good 4-element (20, 15 and 10) quad dimensions -- element spacings, wire lengths on each element, etc.? 73 - Rich, KE3Q _______________________________________________ See: http://
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00682.html (7,057 bytes)

112. [TowerTalk] Quads vs. SteppIR (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 21:07:33 -0400
One or more people have mentioned their "quad" was not as directive as their SteppIR. Since they did not mention how many elements their quad was, I assume it was a 2-element, in which case it's not
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00708.html (6,928 bytes)

113. [TowerTalk] verticals in woods vs. in a field (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 13:35:50 -0400
Anyone have experience, anecdotal or otherwise, on the performance of a vertical "in the woods" versus in an open field? I potentially have both options. Especially with lots of radials, "in the wood
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00284.html (7,449 bytes)

114. Re: [TowerTalk] A discussion on Dipoles.... (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:39:00 -0400
The typical cage dipole design I have seen brings the wires together at both the end and the middle -- twist and solder them together, and that's where the center of the coax connects -- and on the o
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00311.html (10,074 bytes)

115. [TowerTalk] followup question on verticals in trees (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:49:36 -0400
Thanks all for the responses on verticals in woods/trees. I haven't read or responded to them all yet, but plan to. Meantime, I have a followup question that's occurred to me, another practical, simp
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00312.html (8,049 bytes)

116. Re: [TowerTalk] antennas in trees (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 21:43:24 -0400
I for one have been satisfied with the excellent response to the question and generally do find I am satisfied with the non-scientific approach, to this question and to many other things in life I su
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00409.html (15,049 bytes)

117. Fw: [TowerTalk] antennas in trees (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 15:33:47 -0400
_______________________________________________ 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 quest
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00446.html (17,151 bytes)

118. Re: [TowerTalk] TB6EM Telrex antenna (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:32:32 -0400
If you can't otherwise find it, WB4NFO, Rana, is the one guy in our Maryland-DC-northern Virginia area that I know of who has a TB6EM. I think he almost certainly has a manual. Rana is active in our
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00469.html (8,987 bytes)

119. [TowerTalk] Telrex TB5EM hairpin (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 11:22:43 -0400
Let me ask you TB5EM guys a question. I have had one for years and use it every year for Field Day on our RTTY station. We pressed it into service when someone said, "Anyone have a tribander we can u
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00720.html (11,720 bytes)

120. [TowerTalk] Re: Telrex TB5EM hairpin (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 11:56:55 -0400
Okay. Yes, at the rig end of the feedline, 1:1. 73 - Rich, KE3Q _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-09/msg00723.html (13,911 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu