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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Combining\s+antennas\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 10:07:40 -0500; I have a spare Stackmatch box, repaired after a lightning hit, and I'm thinking about using it to let me simultaneously or alternatively feed my 40m yagi at 104 feet, a low 40m dipole running NE/SW a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00045.html (7,934 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 10:51:49 -0800; At 10:07 AM 2/3/2004 -0500, Pete Smith wrote: I have a spare Stackmatch box, repaired after a lightning hit, and I'm thinking about using it to let me simultaneously or alternatively feed my 40m yagi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00052.html (10,864 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 14:02:13 -0500; At 10:51 AM 2/3/04 -0800, Jim Lux wrote: ... So, the SNR will be 0.5Sa/.707(Na+Nb). If Na=Nb, this is .5/1.414 or about 4.5 dB worse than it was before. If the noise is correlated, then it will eithe; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00053.html (9,205 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:16:55 -0800; At 02:02 PM 2/3/2004 -0500, Pete Smith wrote: At 10:51 AM 2/3/04 -0800, Jim Lux wrote: ... So, the SNR will be 0.5Sa/.707(Na+Nb). If Na=Nb, this is .5/1.414 or about 4.5 dB worse than it was before.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00058.html (9,896 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 18:32:02 -0500; suggests they basically behave like separate antennas then. Pete, my experience has been fairly good with pointing my 10m 3-stack at mostly orthogonal angles, but sometimes you get some very strange; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00061.html (8,268 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 18:52:58 -0500; Bill (W4ZV) and others, my recollection of W3LPL's presentations on stacking, at the Dayton Antenna Forum and elsewhere, was that the stack was always equal or better than any individual antenna. I t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00062.html (9,976 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:21:30 EST; I have found that on my 200/90 stack on 40, the stack does NOT always play better than the individual antenna, either top or bottom. It depends on the angle of radiation which is favored. Bill K4XS _; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00063.html (7,888 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 20:15:56 -0500; stacking, at the Dayton Antenna Forum and elsewhere, was that the stack was always equal or better than any individual antenna. I think this was for two-stacks, like 50/100' on 20, 45/90' on 15 and 3; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00065.html (9,634 bytes)
9. Re:[TowerTalk] Combining antennas (score: 1): Author: "Doug Grant" <k1dg@ix.netcom.com>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 01:34:11 -0000; Yep. That antenna works so well when the band is really open that it earned itself a name. We call it the "Autobahn", since there's no speed limit when you're running DLs with it. 73, Doug K1DG _____; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-02/msg00067.html (8,524 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]