Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+B\&W\s+folded\s+dipoles\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+B\&W\s+folded\s+dipoles\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 06:52:42 -0700; I'm looking for some details on the dimensions and design of the Barker and Williamson "folded dipoles", for the purposes of building an accurate NEC model. From some casual web searching (on TT, amo; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00080.html (7,455 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>; Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 09:27:14 -0500; Cebik thinks these things use an 800 to 900 ohm terminating resistors and a 16:1 transmission line transformer. http://www.cebik.com/wire/wbfd.html I too would like the specific data on the B&W. I ha; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00082.html (8,901 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 11:46:37 -0700; Cebik models that these get 6dB hit over a dipole. If they're that lossy, it's no wonder they get a good match: heck, any antenna with a 6dB pad in the feed line will get no worse than 1.66:1 VSWR. (; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00088.html (8,134 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>; Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 14:00:39 -0500; Now you have got it figured out. 6 dB agrees with my crude model. It also agrees with my "feeling" having used one of these once at a field day location. If you took a survey, I think you would get t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00090.html (9,444 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 16:32:41 -0400; they're that lossy, with a 6dB pad in (nothing says that "any Actually the loss varies quite a bit by band. On bands where feedpoint Z would be low, termination resistance is shunting a low impedanc; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00095.html (10,536 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 13:57:41 -0700; One would also look at the dissipation in the antenna wires themselves (especially in the stainless steel variety, that might be significant..) L.B.'s analysis shows the patterns are basically identi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00099.html (13,030 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: Bob Nielsen <nielsen@oz.net>; Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 14:37:16 -0700; The Maxcom was reviewed (debunked?) in QST, November 1984. The product review is available in the members-only section of the ARRL web site. There are X-ray photos as well as one of a unit with some; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00101.html (9,254 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: w3qx@qsl.net; Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 17:54:46 -0400; B&W filed patents. Search on the U S Patent and Trademark Office site skip to http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/search-bool.html For term one, enter "barker & williamson" that returns http://patft.uspt; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00102.html (8,642 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 16:30:26 -0700; Yep.. 4423423 is probably the one of interest to most readers... 600 ohm resistor, 4:1 transformer, etc. Issued in 1983 (so it expired in 2000, assuming they paid all their maintenance fees.. they ma; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00106.html (9,560 bytes)
10. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 20:40:49 -0400; readers... 600 ohm expired in 2000, not have bothered) Makes sense. It was around 1982 or 1983 when the transaction I recall occurred. _______________________________________________ See: http://www; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00113.html (9,447 bytes)
11. Re: [TowerTalk] B&W folded dipoles (score: 1): Author: "mofolk" <mofolk@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2005 05:52:03 +0600; Jim ... This antenna is B&W's take off on the T2FD which has been written up in CQ back in the 50's as I recall ... Countryman W3HH ??? It's in the same bag as the NVIS and other "beliefs" ... feet a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00120.html (13,746 bytes)
12. [TowerTalk] B&W Folded Dipoles (score: 1): Author: ABowenN4OO <abowen@nettally.com>; Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 09:27:44 -0400; The B&W antenna appears to be related to the T2FD (Tilted Folded Dipole) antenna. The T2FD antenna was first described in QST for June, 1949. It was also written about in CQ magazine sometime in the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-09/msg00123.html (9,432 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]