Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+High\s+SWR\,\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+High\s+SWR\,\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: Roger Parsons <ve3zi@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:13:39 -0700 (PDT); I know this has been said before, but just because your SWR meter says there is x Watts of power coming back down the line, it doesn't mean that it is being dissipated in your transmitter. All it mea; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00223.html (7,478 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 20:35:04 -0400; Roger, youre correct; its been said so many times you would think it would sink in. But with noobs from the CB/FM ranks old myths die hard. They cant be bothered buying a Handbook or Antenna Manual a; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00226.html (8,065 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:12:27 -0400; The power really is on the line, but as you say, it's not dissipated in the finals. The easiest way to explain, or rather the simplest analogy is to think of a lossless coax and a resistive mismatch.; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00229.html (9,215 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:28:26 -0400; Well, spouting off can be a good thing. That's what the reflector is for. So people can learn from one another. Plus it provides some entertainment for us old farts. 73 Gary K4FMX ___________________; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00230.html (10,320 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "KB0NLY" <kb0nly@mchsi.com>; Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:44:41 -0500; Stop the name calling Carl and just leave the people who want to have a meaningful conversation alone. I told you once and I will tell you again, I have both a Handbook and Antenna Book, but they are; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00232.html (10,276 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "KB0NLY" <kb0nly@mchsi.com>; Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:47:53 -0500; Why doesn't someone finally kick Carl off here for god's sake? I can't remember the last time he contributing something on topic or worth reading. I was on a different computer today when his comment; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00234.html (11,315 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 06:34:06 -0400; Carl occasionally goes too far, but he also has forgotten more about amps (from a practical and repair perspective, especially) than most of us will ever learn. He's a valuable resource, and it would; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00243.html (12,713 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: <d.cutter@ntlworld.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:40:52 +0100; Give every man thine ear, but few thy voice; take each man's censure but reserve thy judgement. - William Shakespeare (April 26, 1564 - April 23, 1616) David G3UNA ___________________________________; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00244.html (13,985 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:47:23 -0400; Whether I leave or not is inmaterial and it certainly wont be at the request of someone like Scott. Particularly since my post was rather generic and not singling out anyone. Guilty conscience maybe?; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00245.html (15,371 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "KB0NLY" <kb0nly@mchsi.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:24:40 -0500; By now Carl is probably making posts that attack me in person, most likely attacking my intelligence or some other mental ability, that's where he always takes it. So have fun reading his replies as; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00248.html (14,887 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "KB0NLY" <kb0nly@mchsi.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:47:14 -0500; Thin skinned no, but tired of people like Carl who pretend to be better than everyone. 73, Scott -- _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00250.html (19,003 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: Alek Petkovic <vk6apk@bigpond.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 21:48:08 +0800; Nobody is attacking you Scott. "Kurt N Sturba" has written on the the topic of this thread many times over in World Radio Magazine. Seek it out. It is good reading. Simple, to the point, easy to unde; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00252.html (17,019 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "KB0NLY" <kb0nly@mchsi.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:53:21 -0500; ""Whether I leave or not is immaterial and it certainly wont be at the request of someone like Scott. Particularly since my post was rather generic and not singling out anyone. Guilty conscience may; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00253.html (19,245 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "KB0NLY" <kb0nly@mchsi.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:57:19 -0500; Hope to catch you on the radio some day here as well! 73, Scott -- _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/a; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00254.html (23,871 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:03:24 -0400; Id just ignore him Alek, his rants speak for themslelf. He isnt worth my bothering with and you should read the foul mouthed infantile emails he is sending. When he tires of that I'll foreward them t; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00255.html (19,381 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: david sutton <sootydave@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:30:26 -0700 (PDT); Carl i for one enjoye your informative threads as well as the others on this group. not a moderator or head hontcho but i recone the SWR issue has burnt it's selfe out to the PL259. HI HI, dave kg4ux; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00257.html (25,511 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: Glen Zook <gzook@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:23:53 -0700 (PDT); Some people just cannot seem to grasp the phantom "reflected power" concept. Basically, "reflected power" is not real. To obtain the measurement of the true power being delivered to the load you have; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00258.html (9,787 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:00:52 -0400; I am curious as to why you would say that "reflected power is not real"? Just because reflected power upsets the readings of a wattmeter such as a bird or telewave, and you have to make a correction; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00262.html (11,651 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: donroden@hiwaay.net; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:08:15 -0500; I like Carl's perspective. Sometimes, all the theory in the world won't put a watt into an antenna. Don WA4NPL _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com ht; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00264.html (15,041 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] High SWR, (score: 1): Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:05:59 -0700; The author of this false statement would be far better off learning how transmission lines work by studying the ARRL Handbook and ARRL Antenna Book than the manual for someone's SWR bridge. The conc; /archives//html/Amps/2009-04/msg00270.html (9,236 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]