Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Cage\s+dipole\s+revisited\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Cage\s+dipole\s+revisited\.\s*$/: 33 ]

Total 33 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>; Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:11:39 -0400; And where can I find the isotropic radiator to run a comparison against<:-)) 73 Roger (K8RI) _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00387.html (11,089 bytes)
22. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>; Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:56:15 +0000; I don't know about them, but for only $29.95 I'll sell you an infinitesimal dipole! Oops, wait a minute, I dropped it... darn, its around here somewhere... well anyway, and if you order in the next; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00390.html (9,940 bytes)
23. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: Mike <nf4l@nf4l.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:26:37 -0400; ROTFLMAO! 73, Mike NF4L _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mai; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00393.html (10,458 bytes)
24. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>; Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:52:57 -0400; The elusive infinitesimal dipole is really had to find now days. Just proves my point. Story of my life, a good deal comes along and I miss the deadline. Your message went out at 5:56 our time and it; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00394.html (11,377 bytes)
25. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: Dan Zimmerman N3OX <n3ox@n3ox.net>; Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:15:56 -0400; The only ones? What about dBq ... vs. quad loop? If dBd just means dBi + 2.1dB, it is completely trivial and should be never used again. I don't think it means that, or at least that is not how I wo; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00396.html (10,752 bytes)
26. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: Rick Stealey <rstealey@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 01:53:04 +0000; Today I did a little modeling with 4NEC2 on 80 meters. First a regular dipole showed a bandwidth of 200 KHz at the SWR=2:1 points. Then I decided to see how close to a real cage a pair of dipoles has; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00401.html (10,848 bytes)
27. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "Bill Aycock" <baycock@centurytel.net>; Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:54:31 -0500; RickWhy introduce this into this thread? The models you mention do not resemble the Cage dipole, so why? There is enough distortion of the claims and references (eg, vertical 1/4 wave) already. To re; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00407.html (12,552 bytes)
28. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: Rick Stealey <rstealey@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 13:09:28 +0000; Hi Bill, I don't agree. In fact I believe the models I built DO STRONGLY resemble a cage, give the same benefit, without the physical difficulties of building a traditional cage. What is a tradition; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00412.html (11,641 bytes)
29. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "Glen - W5IF" <W5IF@valornet.com>; Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:27:30 +0100; I thought this subject had been beaten to death. Lord please give these folks some sunspots. 73 W5IF resemble Hi Bill, I don't agree. In fact I believe the models I built DO STRONGLY resemble a cage,; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00413.html (12,413 bytes)
30. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: Dan Zimmerman N3OX <n3ox@n3ox.net>; Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 09:30:04 -0400; According to the website, that will not work: "Okay those with antenna modeling program will differ because their program will not allow all the parameters to be taken into account...So with actual; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00415.html (9,926 bytes)
31. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "Robert" <rgshauger@myyellowstone.net>; Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 10:52:28 -0700; Amen! And praise the Lord for the "delete" key... Bob W7KD _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00420.html (14,112 bytes)
32. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "Bill Aycock" <baycock@centurytel.net>; Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:32:38 -0500; Rick- I"m sorry I sounded so strident, but this subject has progressively wandered astray. The subject started about a particular cage being hyped as having 5db gain over a reference Dipole AS TESTED; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00426.html (13,822 bytes)
33. Re: [TowerTalk] Cage dipole revisited. (score: 1): Author: "Bill Aycock" <baycock@centurytel.net>; Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:48:09 -0500; DanAs far as I remember, every "fairy book" scheme antenna (CF, EH, etc) has made this claim. Whenever I see it, I assume it is related to an RF Ponzi scheme, and prepare to laugh. The kicker in this; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00428.html (11,303 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 33
Page: [1] [2]