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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Breakall\s+short\s+vertical\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Breakall short vertical (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 07:49:26 -0400; I have been doing some modeling on Jim Breakall's shortened vertical for 160 meters. The antenna actually involves 4 45-foot verticals, spaced quite close together, with horizontal flattops making up; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00213.html (7,811 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Breakall short vertical (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 08:18:49 -0400; is 50 ohms, the short inverted L, L rather than the You are correct Pete. The ground losses are identical to a single antenna. What you essentially have with multiple drops is an impedance matching; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00215.html (8,731 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Breakall short vertical (score: 1): Author: "Jerry Keller" <k3bz@arrl.net>; Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:00:02 -0400; I may be one of those Pete calls "those with trees conveniently situated", and I am indeed "tempted" by this idea for a short vertical for 160M...:-)... hardly any of my trees are more than 60 feet h; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00228.html (10,553 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Breakall short vertical (score: 1): Author: Terry Conboy <n6ry@arrl.net>; Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:38:54 -0700; At 10:00 AM 2004-06-11, Jerry Keller wrote: I may be one of those Pete calls "those with trees conveniently situated", and I am indeed "tempted" by this idea for a short vertical for 160M...:-)... ha; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00232.html (8,792 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] Breakall short vertical (score: 1): Author: Terry Conboy <n6ry@arrl.net>; Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 12:12:36 -0700; Kintronic also has a link to a more theoretical IEEE article on this antenna: http://www.star-h.com/publications/ieee2002.pdf In the end, this is just a permutation of a short fat vertical with a lar; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00236.html (9,782 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] Breakall short vertical (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 12:28:50 -0700 (PDT); Note that the article talks about the Kintronic being 1/5 the height of a monopole, but in the actual tests, it was about 1/3 the height of the monopole. Basically, it's just a top hat loaded cage ve; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00237.html (11,032 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] Breakall short vertical (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:50:56 -0400; At 03:28 PM 6/11/2004, Rick Karlquist wrote: Note that the article talks about the Kintronic being 1/5 the height of a monopole, but in the actual tests, it was about 1/3 the height of the monopole.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00247.html (9,504 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]