Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+75\s+meter\s+antenna\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+75\s+meter\s+antenna\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: Joe Barnes <n4jbk@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:33:45 -0400; can anyone recomend an antenna for 75 meters that would be optimized for zero to about 400 miles? I am currently using an inverted vee with the apex at about 95 feet. I have 2 towers here , one is 10; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00183.html (6,634 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: Peter Larsen <ve6yc@shaw.ca>; Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 20:32:37 -0600; Why not build your self a 2 element beam pointed straight up? string it between your towers with the reflector at about 15 feet up and the driven element at about 65 to 75 feet up? All you would hav; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00184.html (8,026 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: "Chuck O'Neal" <cdoneal@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 22:52:12 -0400; Dipole at 65 ft. The inv V at 95 ft is probably a little high for the zero to 100 mi stuff., depending upon the apex angle and the resultant average height. I have found that for close in distances a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00185.html (9,180 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: "D. Scott MacKenzie" <kb0fhp@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 22:54:41 -0400; Personally - I would recommend a full size 75M loop. About 254 feet, with a 1/4 section of 75 ohm coax, plus a random length of 50 ohm - and you are ready to rock. Setting up as a triangle, with each; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00186.html (9,383 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: "Gene Smar" <ersmar@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 22:56:01 -0400; Joe: I suggest two alternatives: 1. Lower your existing inverted V to around 50 feet or so and make it a dipole. Allow the ends to droop a bit if you have to, but not too close to the ground. 2. Erec; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00187.html (9,603 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: Jim Jones <k0hy@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:42:28 -0600; I agree. NVIS will work super. Used a variety of NVIS antennas just for that reason during disasters. Find a copy of 'Near Vertical Incidence Skywave Communication' written be Fiedler and Farmer. Gre; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00188.html (11,103 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: "Jim Miller" <JimMiller@STL-Online.Net>; Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 08:57:14 -0500; QST June 2002 Page 28 has an article for NVIS for 40 and 80. Should be just what you are looking for. 73, de Jim KG0KP Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any quest; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00192.html (8,862 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: David Jordan <wa3gin@erols.com>; Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 10:14:38 -0400; Jim, I run a NVIS on 40m 2 full wave dipoles fed in phase just 15ft above the ground. Within the first 50-75 miles the signals are extremely intense. My station is an Internet remote so I actually op; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00193.html (11,441 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: "Al Williams" <alwilliams@olywa.net>; Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 09:02:05 -0700; EZNEC shows that this configuration is a barn burner for straight up propagation providing about 4 db gain over a single dipole and much attenuation at lower elevation angles. However EZNEC shows tha; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00196.html (14,072 bytes)
10. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: David Jordan <wa3gin@erols.com>; Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:44:21 -0400; Yes, I've not run the measurements myself...a friend provided theidb inputs...in my current configuration there are reflectors on the ground that are cut 5% long. I doubt they will add much but you m; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00197.html (9,139 bytes)
11. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:01:18 -0700; A lot of the details are going to depend on what the soil properties are, and I'd venture that most hams don't have a real good handle on exactly what they are for their particular site. When you ran; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00198.html (9,772 bytes)
12. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter antenna (score: 1): Author: "Al Williams" <alwilliams@olywa.net>; Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 12:19:21 -0700; Although I have ran hundreds of wire antennas with EZNEC, I am still a novice--usually variations of wire configurations rather than exploring the effects of various ground properties. I used the "re; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00199.html (9,181 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]