Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:w8ji: 2764 ] [ at (Too many documents hit. Ignored) ] [ contesting.com: 225 ]

Total 104 documents matching your query.

61. Topband: Re: 160 Loaded Vertical Antennas (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Thu May 15 09:26:54 2003
Hi Barry, Much of this is at: http://www.w8ji.com/radiation&fields.htm and at http://www.w8ji.com/radiation_resistance.htm With any monopole antenna radiation resistance carrying uniform current radi
/archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00111.html (11,169 bytes)

62. Topband: Re: where's the current in the coil? (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Mon May 19 06:41:56 2003
To do that we would have to have a coil that is either very large in terms of wavelength, has considerable distributed capacitance to "ground", or that violates basic laws of physics and electronic
/archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00125.html (8,984 bytes)

63. Topband: Re: 160 Loaded Vertical Antennas (Barry, W9UCW) (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Mon May 19 09:25:28 2003
about PVC Hi Larry and all, No matter hat the shape of the coil or what the mutual coupling from end-to-end, the only way current can taper is if current has a second path to ground other than the o
/archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00126.html (9,705 bytes)

64. Topband: Flattop "T" vs. Aluminum Vertical (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Mon May 19 09:25:32 2003
No one could accurately predict this Les, becuase there are far too many unknowns. Ground losses most likely dominante the system, since it sounds like you are forced to use a small ground system. T
/archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00127.html (8,486 bytes)

65. Topband: Current, current, here's the current?? (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Tue May 20 16:13:30 2003
Greg, That is a common perception but unfortunately it is not correct. We can NOT multiply voltage times current to obtain true or effective power in a system with reactance, unless we also know the
/archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00130.html (8,396 bytes)

66. Topband: Slinky Beverage Vs. EWE (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Tue May 27 22:14:59 2003
Hi Les, There is something on my web site about a Slinky Beverage. I even almost forgot it was buried in there! http://www.w8ji.com/slinky_and_loaded_beverages.htm There is a model you can download.
/archives//html/Topband/2003-05/msg00151.html (7,206 bytes)

67. Topband: AM BC spurious (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Fri Apr 4 21:43:41 2003
I've been copying a very wide and moderately strong spurious signal from the northwest (I'm near Macon) on 160 every morning. I can't quite identify the call sign but I'm very sure the station is fro
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00004.html (7,037 bytes)

68. Topband: Re: [160m] AM BC spurious (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Fri Apr 4 21:43:41 2003
Woops. I forgot the 160 frequency. The frequency on 160m is 1852kHz approx. with light splatter from 1820-1880kHz. The AM frequency and station I **think** I have a match on is WTJS in Jackson, Tn on
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00005.html (6,801 bytes)

69. Topband: BC Interference (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Fri Apr 11 10:40:33 2003
By catching a clear callsign and city name, I've positively identified the strong BC station buzzy broken carrier on 1853 that is splattering and spitting from 1810 to 1880. (The broken-up carrier on
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00017.html (7,141 bytes)

70. Topband: BC Interference (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Sun Apr 13 18:05:40 2003
The cause really didn't matter to me, but the end-effects and who was causing it sure did! That thing was wiping out JA's and other weaker signals to the NW of me even down on 1820kHz. The carrier o
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00025.html (8,063 bytes)

71. Topband: BCI cause (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Mon Apr 14 20:26:24 2003
As general information, I just learned the spurious signal was caused by an unknown problem in one of several power output modules in a brand new transmitter. The only indication there was a problem,
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00026.html (6,479 bytes)

72. Topband: Quarter wave Vs Eigth Wave (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Fri Apr 18 06:25:23 2003
W4RNL also points out how much poorer our soils generally are than we think they are. We also have to be careful because a lot of his data is unverified except through models which are also not verif
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00035.html (9,134 bytes)

73. Topband: Quarter wave Vs Eigth Wave (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Sun Apr 20 16:29:25 2003
Hi Rick, My point was we should be more careful in saying something is "accurate", or that some entirely unrelated trend "verifies" a entirely different measurement parameter. It certainly is not tha
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00040.html (9,759 bytes)

74. Topband: Quarter wave Vs Eigth Wave (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Sun Apr 20 20:48:42 2003
The important thing is we understand the limitations, especially that everything has some tolerance, and close calls (within a few dB) won't always rank things correctly. If we all lived by propagat
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00044.html (8,109 bytes)

75. Topband: Preamplifier measurements (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Mon Apr 21 06:27:19 2003
Since people seem to ask about amplifiers, I have added a new page to my web site with some preamplifier measurements. http://www.w8ji.com/pre-amplifers.htm Also a link to actual measurements of the
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00046.html (6,811 bytes)

76. Topband: Re: [160m] Preamplifier measurements (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Mon Apr 21 06:27:21 2003
Woops. I spelled "amplifiers" incorrectly.
/archives//html/Topband/2003-04/msg00047.html (6,503 bytes)

77. Topband: Apparent ground (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Thu Mar 6 06:54:26 2003
That is an overstatement of what actually occurs. Even a deep ground (say a foot or two deep) helps, it's just that closer to the surface is better. The skin depth on 160 is several feet to perhaps
/archives//html/Topband/2003-03/msg00017.html (7,584 bytes)

78. Topband: Preamp Shielding (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Tue Mar 25 06:13:29 2003
You are trying for an absolutely unobtainable system noise figure if the receiver has any sensitivity to speak of. For example, a 250Hz selectivity receiver at -150dBm sensitivity would require a 0d
/archives//html/Topband/2003-03/msg00057.html (7,769 bytes)

79. Fw: Topband: Inverted L for TX (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Sat Mar 29 16:23:54 2003
readings on useable If you have a problem with RFI, it is antenna size (system) related....it is not related at all to the dial setting of the analyzer. The problem centers around the fact virtually
/archives//html/Topband/2003-03/msg00074.html (7,679 bytes)

80. Topband: Inverted L question (score: 132)
Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Sat Feb 1 21:23:16 2003
The same voltage rating rule applies in a gamma match capacitor. http://www.w8ji.com/omega_and_gama_matching.htm Just read the gamma capacitor part. It works the same.
/archives//html/Topband/2003-02/msg00011.html (6,754 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu