Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+80m\s+antenna\s+suggestion\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+80m\s+antenna\s+suggestion\s*$/: 35 ]

Total 35 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "Chris" <christopher_an@sympatico.ca>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 10:57:15 -0500; Hi all, As spring comes close, I'd like to have a plan to put up a new 80m antenna but don't know which one to go for. I am currently using a Fritzel FD-4 low power version (300W CW) just above my ro; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00267.html (7,592 bytes)
2. [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "Larry Greenberg N5BEA" <larrylg1@excite.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:38:21 -0500 (EST); I have built and operated several antennas on 80. Questions come to mind. What are you planing to do with it? (DX, contesting, rag chew, etc.) How much altitude can you achieve? How much space do you; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00268.html (7,561 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: ARDUJENSKI@aol.com; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:47:20 EST; Chris You did not indicate physical restrictions or limitations you may have (property size, etc.) or what operating parameters you are setting for your self (local or DX or both). Note by defining y; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00271.html (9,488 bytes)
4. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: N0KHQ@aol.com; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:55:17 EST; Please visit the web sites below. Based on the same principle as shown on the web site pages I will be manufacturing a fully rotatable 80/75m dipole with a turning radius of 16'. The weight of the an; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00272.html (7,594 bytes)
5. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: ac5e@comcast.net; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:30:23 +0000; Hi Chris: I'm sure you will get all sorts of suggestions for this or that "wonderwire" or "wonder beam" but the fact is that on 75/80 only a gain (directional) antenna will outperform a simple dipole; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00273.html (8,085 bytes)
6. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "jack" <jfriend31@comcast.net>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:25:18 -0700; check the one in April QST ...jack ak7o Hi all, As spring comes close, I'd like to have a plan to put up a new 80m antenna but don't know which one to go for. I am currently using a Fritzel FD-4 low; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00277.html (8,458 bytes)
7. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:41:22 -0600; Chris, I think that antenna is stainless steel conductor? You might homebrew a more efficient radiator of large gauge COPPER house wire, which is sold insulated but very reasonable at chain Home Cent; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00278.html (8,077 bytes)
8. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX <RMcGraw@Blomand.Net>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 18:35:17 -0600; Pete's comments are quite accurate. For all-purpose applications, I suggest and have found to be very successful a length of wire, preferabably #12 or #10 gauge solid copper. Make it as long as you h; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00279.html (10,331 bytes)
9. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "Chris" <christopher_an@sympatico.ca>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:27:47 -0500; Hi Larry, Thank you for the reply. I am looking for an antenna for all purpose but mostly on DXing. I have a 48ft tower in my backyard and my lot size is 65x120, a typical small city lot. Thanks. Chr; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00292.html (8,930 bytes)
10. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "Jim Miller WB5OXQ" <wb5oxq@grandecom.net>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:11:05 -0600; I have found that if you have the room for a 1/2 wave dipole that the bazooka made of coax works very well, is quieter than a vertical or a open wire dipole and more broadbanded than either. Search f; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00293.html (10,574 bytes)
11. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: aa4nu@ix.netcom.com; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:30:20 -0600 (GMT-06:00); Chris, purchase yourself a copy of ON4UN's LowBand DXing book. It has TONS of ideas for you to consider for your limited space. Also, check out the article by N4KG in the May 1994 QST who describes; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00294.html (8,445 bytes)
12. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:11:11 -1000; I was just reading REFLECTIONS and found that double bazooka antennas are broadband because they are lossy. For maximum generated field strength you will do better with a plain dipole, with higher SW; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00295.html (9,244 bytes)
13. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: ac5e@comcast.net; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:28:53 +0000; Chuckle - even back in prehistoric times we knew the only way to broadband a dipole is to make it lossy. However the reduction in field strength, while greater than a typical trap or loading inductor; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00298.html (9,538 bytes)
14. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "JAMES HANLON" <knjhanlon@msn.com>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:34:29 -0700; Chris, For 20 years when I lived in Columbus, Ohio, I used a 67 foot, center fed "hertz" with open-wire feed line and a tuner. The feed line was long enough to reach from the center of the antenna to; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00299.html (11,031 bytes)
15. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:36:32 -1000; Hi Pete, A fattened (cage) dipole is broader band than a skinny dipole, and I did not think they were lossy. Ken ac5e@comcast.net wrote: Chuckle - even back in prehistoric times we knew the only way; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00301.html (8,647 bytes)
16. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: Sinisa Hristov <shristov@ptt.yu>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:25:43 -0500; Of course it's not the only way, it's not even a good one. The recommended way is to lower the characteristic impedance of the line acting as antenna. That is, to lower the L/C ratio. For 80 m dipole; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00307.html (8,458 bytes)
17. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: ac5e@comcast.net; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:05:34 +0000; Well, I should have said the only way to broadband a single thin wire dipole is to make it lossy. A "fat" dipole, whether it's a cage, "double pennant," folded, the original "fan," or some other vari; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00317.html (9,334 bytes)
18. [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX <RMcGraw@Blomand.Net>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:31:08 -0600; I have tried the bazooka and double bazooka antennas in the past. I just had to find out what all the rave was about. Yes they are quieter than a wire dipole and yes they are broader than a wire dipo; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00332.html (9,285 bytes)
19. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:53:03 -0600; A great resource for multiple antenna ideas is the L. B. Cebik, W4RNL, antenna web site at www.cebik.com GL and 73, Stuart K5KVH _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list Te; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00339.html (8,589 bytes)
20. Re: [TenTec] 80m antenna suggestion (score: 1): Author: "Alfred Lorona" <w6wqc@dslextreme.com>; Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:06:32 -0800; Why physically complicate an antenna more than need be? Practically every antenna other than a simple dipole (or inverted V) involves construction and installation problems beyond those required to m; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-03/msg00340.html (9,040 bytes)

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