Mail Archive Search: <+from:lightfol@cadvision.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:lightfol@cadvision.com: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots VE6PV); Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 20:34:33 -0700; If the antenna is pointed perpendicular to vertical, then yes, the radiation angle , depending on the actual slope angle, and distance will favor lower angles. The degree of improvement depends larg; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00345.html (8,861 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Re: [DX] [Fwd: Low yagi question] (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots VE6PV); Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 00:43:14 -0700; NO. Wrong way around Tom. Ground reflection coefficients do not depend solely on antenna height. In fact, the PERFORMANCE of an antenna at a PARTICULAR height depends upon reflection coefficients. R; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-07/msg00179.html (8,673 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] antenna gain (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots VE6PV); Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 18:40:58 -0700; This is a VERY good point you bring up. Something that I have thought about for some time. Makes a guy really wonder if the ARRL really dissallowed the antenna gain figures to be published for the be; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-07/msg00222.html (9,562 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Force 12 80M rotary dipole (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots VE6PV); Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 00:21:37 -0700; To: <towertalk@contesting.com> Hmmmmm....better read again...look for the number 72. VE6PV lightfol@cadvision.com Suggested Serving, Antennas not included. -- -- -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-07/msg00571.html (9,068 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] Guy wire anchors (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots); Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 23:04:59 -0700; Okay, here's an easy one; I'm looking for some good ideas for guy wire anchors for a 140' rohn 45 (maybe even 55) rotating tower. I'd like something simple, yet very strong and effective. Since this; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-06/msg00003.html (7,234 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Tower lighting (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots); Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 05:25:54 -0700; I think the bottom line with tower lighting is; If you are within the limits of an aerodrome that the FAA specifies, which will vary with location- they will specify exactly what you need to do- not; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-06/msg00424.html (9,085 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] ground screen for new lawn (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots); Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 01:19:01 -0700; It does, but for all intent and purposes, is useless in practicality. Here's why: The reflection from ground that we are interested in takes place many wavelengths away from the actual antenna. The l; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-05/msg00638.html (10,553 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] SB-220 affecting SWR curves (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots); Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 01:35:59 -0700; There could be several reasons for this. The number one reason is usually a poor directional coupler in the SWR meter. This is more common than you may think. Another reason may be that there are rea; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-05/msg00727.html (9,086 bytes)
9. [TowerTalk] Rain Static vs Feed System (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots); Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 18:00:56 -0600; You described exactly what I hear also. Starts with a slow put pu, builds up to a ferocious roar, and ends with putting, 3 minute delay, then all over again. I have two TH6'ss on the tower stacked,; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-05/msg00752.html (10,790 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]