Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+OCF\s+antennas\s+evolution\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+OCF\s+antennas\s+evolution\s*$/: 78 ]

Total 78 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Stuart Rohre <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:11:03 -0500; Many hams have used some form of OCF antenna. Not all are horizontal. For example, My Gap Titan vertical is technically an OCF antenna, since electrically it is longer on one side of the feedpoint th; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00194.html (13,163 bytes)
2. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Carl Moreschi <n4py3@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 16:31:30 -0400; I totally agree with you Stuart, the 135 foot dipole fed with open wire line and a balanced tuner is the best all band antenna I can think of. Carl Moreschi N4PY 121 Little Bell Dr. Hays, NC 28635 ww; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00198.html (13,218 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Robert Mcgraw" <rmcgraw@blomand.net>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:45:03 -0500 (CDT); I agree 100% with Carl and Stuart on this. One caveat, please use a balanced tuner an not a poor performing balun to get from unbalanced to balanced configuration. Also most likely a 1:1 current balu; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00199.html (15,279 bytes)
4. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Stuart Rohre <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 16:15:00 -0500; thanks, and I feel the same about the IDEZ, Inverted Double Extended Zepps we built for our club's Field Day use. 5/8 legs, cut at 80m. One for CW end of band one for phone end. We use them more on 2; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00200.html (10,215 bytes)
5. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 23:26:41 +0200; I disagree. I prefer a 270 foot lazy loop, fed with openwire. It is quieter, and has more gain. The 135' openwire fed dipole is #2 on my list. 73 Rick, DJ0IP I totally agree with you Stuart, the 135; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00202.html (14,396 bytes)
6. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Tony Lelieveld" <va3dwi@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:58:46 -0400; Stuart, What is an IDEZ? Is it just an EDZ configured as an Inverted V? BTW I use an EDZ up at 55 feet with somewhat unequal lengths fed with ladder line all the way to my Ten-Tec 238B tuner running; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00203.html (11,412 bytes)
7. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:07:55 +0200; Guys, Carl, Stuart, Bob, you are all correct, but not correct in every instance. Partially correct, mostly correct, but not totally correct. I agree with everything you all are saying, BUT, one canno; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00204.html (20,682 bytes)
8. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Rodney" <w3krq@dejazzd.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:47:44 -0400; I use a 80m double ext zip work 160 - 10m tune it with a Ten-Tec 238 tuner. 73 Rod the ant is up 70ft. Guys, Carl, Stuart, Bob, you are all correct, but not correct in every instance. Partially corre; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00205.html (20,699 bytes)
9. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Stuart Rohre <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:35:46 -0500; Rick, I am fine with loops also, even 270 foot or larger. Our club used up to 1024 foot horizontal loop for Field Days some years ago when we had a large sports field. Each year for several, we would; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00206.html (12,396 bytes)
10. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Stuart Rohre <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:44:59 -0500; Tony, You are correct, the IDEZ as I named it, is the Inverted Double Extended Zepp, (a Zepp as an inverted Vee). One year as I was playing with gain wires for Field Day, I came up with the IDEA for; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00207.html (10,532 bytes)
11. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Bob McGraw - K4TAX" <RMcGraw@Blomand.net>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:39:45 -0500; Just got an e-mail asking "so where is it best to use a 4:1 balun?" Remember when we learned that a folded dipole antenna exhibited a typical feedpoint impedance of some 300 ohms? Well the 4:1 balun; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00213.html (17,944 bytes)
12. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Michael Tortorella <w2iy@verizon.net>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:33:34 -0500 (CDT); I feel compelled to weigh in here....back in the late '70s I used an OCFD design from Ham Radio magazine which was pretty straightforward. It was 135' long, fed with 44' of 300-ohm open wire to a 4:1; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00217.html (18,616 bytes)
13. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: k6jek <k6jek@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:27:02 -0700; Gosh. In the midst of the OCF discussion one of the answers for where to use a 4:1 balun just has to be for an OCF dipole. Most people now feed them at the 200 ohm point with a 4:1 Balun. There is ev; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00219.html (20,706 bytes)
14. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:06:03 -0400; That is the one I have, along with a simple transmission line choke for good measure. Bob at Balun Designs was really courteous corresponding about the physical surroundings and the actual feed point; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00220.html (10,946 bytes)
15. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 08:34:27 +0200; In addition to what Bob has just said, another place where a 4:1 balun is good is in the Off-Center-Fed Dipole. Most people have learned that the OCFD (sometimes called Windom) has a feedpoint impeda; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00227.html (21,880 bytes)
16. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 08:46:58 +0200; Jon, in my opinion, THAT specific balun is one of the best (possibly the best) available commercially for use with OCFD. Look closely at the pictures. See how there are two sets of bifilar windings,; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00229.html (21,849 bytes)
17. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:54:12 -0400; -- Yikes! I see the price has gone up considerably since I got one... ! -- K8JHR -- _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.c; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00236.html (10,618 bytes)
18. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:29:27 -0400; I smile when I see everybody describing their favorite wire antenna, so let me jump in with my comments (asbestos suit on). <grin> Mike, not to deny your success nor picking on you or anyone else des; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00241.html (8,597 bytes)
19. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: Mike Bryce <prosolar@sssnet.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:06:36 -0400; Gang, I'll have to jump in here, too. I remember reading in one of the antenna books that some guy, to prove a point, worked DXCC using a light bulb as an antenna. But... Several years ago I homebrew; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00242.html (10,400 bytes)
20. Re: [TenTec] OCF antennas evolution (score: 1): Author: "Robert Mcgraw" <rmcgraw@blomand.net>; Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:28:02 -0500 (CDT); The 600 ohm or 400 ohm or 300 ohm line has nothing to do with the matching relating to the tuner. The tuner nor its internal balun, to my knowledge, is not designed for any specific impedance. A 4:1; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-07/msg00243.html (13,013 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]