Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+New\s+and\s+Improved\s+Terminology\s*$/: 23 ]

Total 23 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@hawaiiantel.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:25:57 -1000
When I was a Novice, my mentors called it "short haul skip." One of those was a former Air Force radio man, and if NVIS had been a common term used by the Air Force, I probably would have heard it f
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00559.html (9,102 bytes)

2. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 23:13:22 -0600
Searching the internet has proven useless. All the modern links say it was used by the German military during WW2, but it never says when it began to be called NVIS. I saw a couple references to Pat
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00560.html (10,130 bytes)

3. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 11:03:01 +0000
Jerry, I seem to recall reading somewhere that the term NVIS dates from the Vietnam war; I'll see if I can find a reference. 73, Steve G3TXQ _______________________________________________ TenTec mai
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00561.html (8,798 bytes)

4. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:52:58 -0600
Best I can tell from his index, the most recent previous discussion of the medium haul range antenna was in 1975 but was discussed several times earlier, just the term nvis wasn't used. One of those
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00562.html (11,656 bytes)

5. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "W8BVH" <w8bvh@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 11:14:21 -0500
I just saw an index on ARRL's site that indicates the QEX magazine index mentions the NVIS antenna two times; 1950 & 1955. Here is the web site for the index. I don't have access to QEX archives. htt
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00563.html (9,178 bytes)

6. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 11:23:04 -0600
I'll have to look at that. I don't remember QEX existing in the 50s. In my collection issue #38 is April 1985 in newsletter format and issue #86 is April 1989, four years later. 48 issues in four yea
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00568.html (10,086 bytes)

7. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "CSM\(r\) Gary Huber" <glhuber@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:08:16 -0600
During the mid 1970's, U.S. ARMY FIELD MANUAL 24-18, Appendix M and other pubs referenced the Near Vertical Incident System antenna and its development to meet a 0 to 500 mile skip-zone free communic
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00569.html (10,789 bytes)

8. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 13:19:02 -0500
I just changed my settings for German language and did a search for NVIS. Every time I found it, it quoted the US terminology and usually some US author. For the life of me, I cannot think of any Ger
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00570.html (11,157 bytes)

9. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:25:43 -0600
That index is the Jan/Feb 2007 issue QEX page 55. The other entry is May/June 2007 issue QEX page 50. Nearly 20 years after Pat Hawker's first mention and the article by Brian Collins and Phillips in
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00572.html (10,515 bytes)

10. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:34:14 -0600
The appendix I can down load about NVIS is not dated, but shows a HUMV, that's not 1970s. Late 80s. 73, Jerry, K0CQ _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesti
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00573.html (8,947 bytes)

11. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Stan Barr <g0clv@dsl.pipex.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 18:47:54 +0000
Some references here: http://www.vmars.org.uk/nvis.htm but not really helpful as to dates. -- Cheers and 73, Stan Barr G0CLV G-QRP 3369 g0clv@dsl.pipex.com "Never leave well enough alone." - Raymond
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00574.html (11,142 bytes)

12. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Bwana Bob <wb2vuf@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:28:18 -0500
We called it "short skip", during my misspent youth. From my Novice days in 1966 to the present, I don't think I've ever had an antenna higher than about 25 feet anyway. I work mostly 80 m traffic ne
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00580.html (12,146 bytes)

13. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:06:37 -0600
But did they call it NVIS or just short range skip? The concept has been known and used for most all of radio history, not always planned that way but used often when hams didn't know better and used
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00582.html (12,596 bytes)

14. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "CSM\(r\) Gary Huber" <glhuber@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:36:45 -0600
Jerry, I quoted from a recent revision of FM 24-18 (my hard copy is dated 13 December 1984) but I do recall a TC (training circular) released between December 76 and mid 1980 while I had unit trainin
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-12/msg00593.html (11,846 bytes)

15. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Stuart Rohre <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 18:03:01 -0600
I do agree, Gordo should have been more precise, but I see no conflict with Gordo's meaning, if he meant the shape of the power envelope (as I think he did), and Severn's second quote you have, "exce
/archives//html/TenTec/2011-01/msg00150.html (11,081 bytes)

16. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 20:40:11 -0500
I suppose we could spot Mr. West some slack given the context. He was saying all that as a very generalized statement relative to the exam question pool. I was just trying to apply what I was learnin
/archives//html/TenTec/2011-01/msg00153.html (10,758 bytes)

17. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 14:22:05 +0000
Folk who have been following the discussion may be interested in this chart: http://www.karinya.net/g3txq/temp/ground_zones_2.png It shows how the optimum take-off angle of an 80m quarter-wave vertic
/archives//html/TenTec/2011-01/msg00157.html (11,874 bytes)

18. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Walt Amos" <waltk8cv4612amos@att.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 12:10:40 -0500
Yogh, Steve: So, what is improved by the old adage 120 radials are needed? The EFFICIENCY ? Certainly not the radiation angle by your graph! Walt K8CV Royal Oak, MI. _________________________________
/archives//html/TenTec/2011-01/msg00158.html (13,330 bytes)

19. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 17:22:22 +0000
Walt, Exactly right! Of course, if those 120 radials extended several wavelengths from the antenna, well into into the Fresnel Zone, they might begin to have some effect on the elevation angle. But b
/archives//html/TenTec/2011-01/msg00159.html (11,406 bytes)

20. Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 13:32:12 -0500
Steve, I'm already on an island, and come to think of it, so are you! Walt, Exactly right! Of course, if those 120 radials extended several wavelengths from the antenna, well into into the Fresnel Zo
/archives//html/TenTec/2011-01/msg00164.html (12,023 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu