Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Cover\s+antennas\s+\-\s+the\s+good\s+news\s+and\s+the\s+bad\s+news\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: k7lxc--- via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:30:33 +0000 (UTC)
Howdy, TowerTalkians -     Tnx for your identification of the aforementioned QST cover antennas. I was on the right track anyway - hi.     The good news? The F12 C31XR is a terrific antenna. The bad
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00309.html (7,525 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: AB2E Darrell <ab2e@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 22:03:19 +0000
Steve, Thanks for sharing the info on the test results book. I hadn't seen that and I will pick one up since I have a C31XR (will likely buy a 2nd when my tower project moves forward). Along the way
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00310.html (9,503 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: Richard Bell <richfbell@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:26:11 -0500
Im not trying to be the proverbial turd in the sandbox but Im wondering about a thing or two. I took a quick look at the publications on the championradio.com page and have a question. It seems the b
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00312.html (11,725 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: Mark - N5OT <r-emails@n5ot.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 18:49:09 -0500
You turd :-) I have a Classic 33 Tribander and I am still trying to figure out why anyone would put up something bigger.  It seems to work everything I call on it, and that makes me satisfied.  Maybe
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00314.html (12,446 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: John Simmons <jasimmons@pinewooddata.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 18:54:19 -0500
Why put up anything bigger? If it didn't blow down last year, it isn't big enough. -- 73, -de John NI0K https://www.qrz.com/db/NI0K Mark - N5OT wrote on 10/30/2020 6:49 PM: You turd :-) I have a Clas
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00315.html (13,723 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: K9MA <k9ma@sdellington.us>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 18:00:11 -0600
I can confirm that. I had a PRO-67B years ago. After putting it up twice due to defective traps, I took it down and returned it to Mosely. The only band on which it worked was 17. 73, Scott K9MA -- S
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00316.html (9,749 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: "Mike & Becca Krzystyniak" <k9mk@flash.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 19:07:46 -0500
Ditto Mark, I had a Pro-67C3 up for almost 20 years without issues, including several ice storms with 1" ice. Very robust and it stood up to most 3-4 element yagi's in the area. Computer modeling of
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00317.html (15,199 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: "Mike & Becca Krzystyniak" <k9mk@flash.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 19:08:02 -0500
Ditto Mark, I had a Pro-67C3 up for almost 20 years without issues, including several ice storms with 1" ice. Very robust and it stood up to most 3-4 element yagi's in the area. Computer modeling of
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00318.html (14,940 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: <chetmoore@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 20:35:02 -0700
Not a FLAME. But You would likely benefit from reading the k7lxc N0ax tribander report. After raeading it I ordered the C31XR. Force 12 is no more but some of their antennas are mechanically improved
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00319.html (15,383 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: Mark - N5OT <r-emails@n5ot.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 22:45:26 -0500
No worries.  Ward and I are beer drinking buddies and abuse each other regularly.  The joke is more like I have a different perspective and different priorities than many other people, and I enjoy sh
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00320.html (14,703 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 22:17:38 -0700
I would think that testing antennas today should be easier than it was when the K7LXC/N0AX report was done, and I don't see why an antenna range is even needed anymore.  A wideband noise source mount
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00321.html (11,104 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: Mark - N5OT <r-emails@n5ot.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 05:55:51 -0500
Great idea.  Do the exercise as well as you can multiple times, throw out the outliers and average the rest. Drones are changing the world.  Bagpipe players take note. 73 - Mark N5OT I would think th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00322.html (12,183 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 06:15:47 -0700
I would think that testing antennas today should be easier than it was when the K7LXC/N0AX report was done, and I don't see why an antenna range is even needed anymore.  A wideband noise source mount
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00323.html (20,310 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 11:44:33 -0700
Great tutorial, Jim! Two other important variables for earthbound antenna measurements are 1) terrain and 2) soil conductivity. You can't do this just anywhere. :) The N0AX/K7LXC test ranges were wel
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00324.html (11,816 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 14:19:01 -0700
It would interesting to take a known good antenna like a monoband Yagi (or perhaps a SteppIR) and do a set of measurements over the course of several days to evaluate the measurement repeatability. I
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00329.html (13,762 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:11:47 -0700
On 10/31/20 2:19 PM, Michael Tope wrote: It would interesting to take a known good antenna like a monoband Yagi (or perhaps a SteppIR) and do a set of measurements over the course of several days to
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00330.html (11,214 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] Cover antennas - the good news and the bad news (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 18:55:36 -0700
On 10/31/20 4:11 PM, jimlux wrote: On 10/31/20 2:19 PM, Michael Tope wrote: It would interesting to take a known good antenna like a monoband Yagi (or perhaps a SteppIR) and do a set of measurements
/archives//html/Towertalk/2020-10/msg00332.html (11,649 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu