Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Wet\s+ladderline\s+\-\-\s+Comments\s+on\s+QST\s+report\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Wet\s+ladderline\s+\-\-\s+Comments\s+on\s+QST\s+report\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TenTec] Wet ladderline -- Comments on QST report (score: 1): Author: Joel Hallas <jrhallas@optonline.net>; Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 08:55:00 -0400; Steve, Very nice report, indeed. For purposes of comparison to the 100 foot length Bob and I used, I would remind folks to multiply your attenuation by 1.7. The results seem quite close. One quibble; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-08/msg00139.html (10,541 bytes)
2. Re: [TenTec] Wet ladderline -- Comments on QST report (score: 1): Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>; Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 14:19:31 +0100; Joel, That'll teach me to read things more carefully - I'll modify the conclusions accordingly. I'm now waiting for some ice/snow conditions ...... but I don't think it'll be within the next few days; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-08/msg00140.html (10,673 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] Wet ladderline -- Comments on QST report (score: 1): Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>; Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 14:33:15 +0100; That's probably close enough for this sort of work! But it's maybe worth pointing out that an unmatched line does not have uniform losses along its length - the losses are higher at the standing wave; /archives//html/TenTec/2013-08/msg00141.html (9,790 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]