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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+swr\s*$/: 44 ]

Total 44 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: John Molenda <cdistflatfoot@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:03:10 -0400; Hi All , I have a TT Orion II and when I use it on 160 with a palstar auto tuner , TT Titan III 417Amp and a new zero five vertical antenna The swr runs a muck. This only happens with 250 watts or mo; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00187.html (8,145 bytes)
2. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "N4PY2" <n4py2@earthlink.net>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:15:14 -0400; My best guess is a component in your Palstar overheats and changes its value or the Palstar goes into bypass mode from RF feedback. Carl Moreschi N4PY 121 Little Bell Dr Hays, NC 28635 www.n4py.com _; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00188.html (9,150 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "Nathan Moreschi" <n4ydu@yahoo.com>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:21:50 -0400; Which zero five antenna are you using? I imagine you have a severe mismatch with the zero-five on 160 and there is all kinds of losses taking place eventhough you are using a tuner. This could create; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00189.html (10,384 bytes)
4. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: John Molenda <cdistflatfoot@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:22:35 -0400; Carl that makes sense do you think a air wound choke at the antenna base would do the trick ? John _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lis; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00190.html (9,853 bytes)
5. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: John Molenda <cdistflatfoot@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:24:08 -0400; I am using there 43 foot 10-160 antenna . and I just got the tuner back from palstar for updating . John _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00191.html (11,060 bytes)
6. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:18:50 -0500; A series loading coil at the vertical base might do the job but only on 160m. You have 43 feet of vertical, and a quarter wave at 160 meters is about 120 feet, so you need a coil containing about 77; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00194.html (11,119 bytes)
7. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:53:38 -0400; Phil Salas has written several pieces on matching these big sticks on 160 and 80 meters. http://www.ad5x.com/articles.htm This one is especially helpful for 43 foot monopole owners. http://www.ad5x.c; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00197.html (8,883 bytes)
8. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:54:22 -0400; I also have a 43 foot monopole antenna (with 63 radials - but I agree 45 radials at 45 feet each is a good base.) I would suspect the balun / un-un you might be using. I know both ArraySolutions - Ze; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00198.html (11,265 bytes)
9. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: John Molenda <cdistflatfoot@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 22:01:17 -0400; Would you be so kind as to post the question to Don . I have difficulty getting on Yahoo groops. thanks John kb2huk _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesti; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00200.html (12,959 bytes)
10. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:02:56 -0500; That much coax, about a half wave with velocity factor included, moves the capacitive antenna to inductive and allows some sort of resonating with just a series capacitor at the tuner (away from the; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00201.html (11,761 bytes)
11. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@hawaiiantel.net>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 16:54:54 -1000; You are correct that a 43 foot radiator is way to short to be resonant on 160 meters, and either an added length of wire or an inductance can compensate for the capacitive reactance to make it a non; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00202.html (8,745 bytes)
12. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "Tom Macon" <tmacon@wi.rr.com>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:58:59 -0500; Lots of good suggestions, but don't overlook something simple. A while back I had similar symptoms on 75, and it turned out to be a loose PL259 on the lightning arrestor at the base of the tower. - T; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00203.html (9,595 bytes)
13. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 23:16:37 -0400; Agreed on all points, Jerry ! Definitely pushes the tuner to its limits. I never work top band with high power... I cannot imagine how little power is actually radiating outward when I work 160 on my; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00204.html (9,503 bytes)
14. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>; Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 01:17:00 -0500; Try it. Yes,its not perfect, but its as close as computing the C of the short antenna and computing the inductance required, and then the coil dimensions and the computation took much less time. If t; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00205.html (10,275 bytes)
15. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>; Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:01:18 -0500; You could always try a Hygain AV-6110 for $250 bucks. Grabbing my handy Lightning Calculator copyright 1932, I see my coil would be about 300 microhenries and the few on line references about such a; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00206.html (9,991 bytes)
16. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "N4PY2" <n4py2@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 08:08:02 -0400; For a 43 foot vertical antenna, to match it on 1.83 mhz, you need an 82 uH coil at the antenna base. If you use a 3 inch diameter coil form, and wind 20 turns per inch, you will need 33 turns of wire; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00207.html (11,373 bytes)
17. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: "Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>; Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:22:04 -0500; John, To answer your question, is it the O II, the Tuner, the amp and as everyone has suggested, the antenna, I suggest you look for the biggest coil you can find and insert it at the feedpoint. It d; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00208.html (10,764 bytes)
18. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 14:45:18 -0400; Interesting... I was not aware they had something like that. This may require a deeper look see. I like the honesty of the catalog description when they say: However, at 160/80M it is virtually impos; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00214.html (9,337 bytes)
19. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: george fritkin <georgefritkin@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:40:07 -0700 (PDT); The description is not properly written. Lock at at the antenna description. It should say "using high loss coax" not low loss. Point of fact the SWR loss using Times LM-400 or Belden RG-213 is un; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00219.html (10,516 bytes)
20. Re: [TenTec] swr (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:48:46 -0400; Not arguing... but how do we know that? So much of the literature claims that impedance is either way high or way low, and SWR is way wacky, and, therefore, there are HUGE losses in the coax... Your; /archives//html/TenTec/2010-08/msg00221.html (8,990 bytes)

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