Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Force12\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Force12\s*$/: 62 ]

Total 62 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n3ue@arrl.net (Ed Wolf); Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 23:20:29 -0400; Force 12 recommends using a minimum of 100 feet of coax for their C4SXL feed lines. I just moved my shack to the second floor and now have over 30 feet each of both of the feed lines. Has anybody use; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00041.html (8,291 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 00:22:36 EDT; Really?!? I thought the swr would suffer. Cheers, Steve K7LXC Tower Tech List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems, Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also chec; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00045.html (8,756 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n3ue@arrl.net (Ed Wolf); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 00:28:24 -0400; I was Assuming that if I stated "BW" Everyone would know that I meant BW of 2:1 SWR. Apparently Most did, going by the few personal responses that I have received. Ed Wolf - ars:N3UE - NA40+TR.PA htt; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00047.html (9,573 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n6nz@n6nz.net (Dave N6NZ); Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 22:20:26 -0700; a) For all practical purposes, isn't that just saying the same thing in a different way? b) Let me rephrase the statement from F12 more honestly: A resistive pad will improve the SWR bandwidth of any; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00048.html (10,103 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: w2cs@ipass.net (Gary J. Ferdinand W2CS); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 05:58:24 -0400; I'm surprised Force 12 doesn't recommend you just replace their antenna with a dummy load. BW will be improved still further and cost will be kept to a minimum, although gain and F/B might suffer a t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00050.html (9,630 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 05:27:19 -0600; Shorter coax means less LOSS. Less loss means higher Q. Higher Q means less Bandwidth. No big deal. Use a tuner if your solid state radio doesn't like the SWR. Any Pi-Network in tube type amplifiers; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00052.html (10,477 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: Roger Borowski" <K9RB@arrl.net (Roger Borowski); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 07:50:44 -0400; If your feed lines go down the antenna support structure / tower to ground level, as they must to provide for adequate lightning protection, a move, assuming from the basement or first floor to the s; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00054.html (10,257 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 08:00:59 -0400; I think F12 is being treated a little unfairly on this issue. Their specs in general are the most honest, specific and verifiable of any antenna manufacturer. My hunch is that when F12 first develope; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00055.html (9,488 bytes)
9. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: k2av@contesting.com (Guy Olinger, K2AV); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 10:34:40 -0400; Ah, SWR. But then again, what else except SWR. Then there's SWR. How could anything else but SWR matter, after all, it's SWR. SWR trumps performance. SWR trumps efficiency SWR trumps price. ... How c; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00060.html (11,035 bytes)
10. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n3ue@arrl.net (Ed Wolf); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 11:15:57 -0400; You ARE missing something. When I installed the antenna, I followed the mfgr's recommendations, which worked ok for where the shack was. Now that I have moved the shack closer to the antenna, I asked; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00062.html (12,520 bytes)
11. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: nielsen@oz.net (Bob Nielsen); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 08:35:25 -0700; Stated somewhat differently, use as much tower as the length of the feedline will allow. -- Bob Nielsen, N7XY nielsen@oz.net Bainbridge Island, WA http://www.oz.net/~nielsen IOTA NA-065, USI WA-028S; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00063.html (9,337 bytes)
12. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: w5kp@swbell.net (J. Kincade); Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 11:12:25 -0500; I concur wholeheartedly. Add 30 feet to the tower! 73, Jerry W5KP List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems, Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out o; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00065.html (8,487 bytes)
13. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: K7GCO@aol.com (K7GCO@aol.com); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 17:08:50 EDT; In a message dated 10/3/01 2:54:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time, w2cs@ipass.net writes: << I'm surprised Force 12 doesn't recommend you just replace their antenna with a dummy load. BW will be improved s; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00079.html (10,139 bytes)
14. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: w2cs@ipass.net (Gary J. Ferdinand W2CS); Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 19:39:34 -0400; Hey Jim, This is great folklore! I'll add it to my file of misinformation on antenna theory, HI. I may not be a PhD in EE, but I can recognize marketing hyperbole from miles away. I'm surprised we do; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00087.html (9,332 bytes)
15. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: mel@interlink.net (Mel Martin); Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 08:53:57 -0400; I don't... they deserve to be thoroughly scolded for this kind "slight of hand" specification. Stick to the truth... we can handle it!!! was a little tight to enable them to stay under 2:1 across thi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00095.html (9,274 bytes)
16. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 08:30:01 -0600; So how much coax would you suggest they use to specify the SWR at the transmitter? Don't tell me ZERO. I don't know anyone who places their radio on top of their tower. Tom N4KG _____________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00099.html (10,390 bytes)
17. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: mel@interlink.net (Mel Martin); Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 10:12:08 -0400; Yes I would... if I were specifying bandwidth, since there is obviously no such thing as a "standard" length of cable. Why 100', why not 200', or 300' which I use, not to mention different transmissi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00101.html (11,133 bytes)
18. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: force12e@lightlink.com (force12e); Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 10:22:33 -0400; MEL, FYI. We have not specified our antenna VSWR at the end of 100' of coaxial cable for several years. Even though most antennas do have a feedline attached and few have the transmitter at the feed; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00102.html (11,010 bytes)
19. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: n2mg@contesting.com (Mike Gilmer - N2MG); Date: 4 Oct 2001 07:23:35 -0700; IMO, it's reasonable to specify the overall "system" SWR. And since the cable, after all, cannot be zero length, they have to pick something. A length of 100 feet seems completely realistic. Many fol; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00103.html (12,272 bytes)
20. [TowerTalk] Force12 (score: 1): Author: jon.ogden@cain-forlaw.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:46:03 -0500; The fact is, DON'T worry about it. 2:1 SWR is not a magical number. It's a typical industry standard but when a person gets over the fact that it's not a big deal then you can move on and enjoy the a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-10/msg00104.html (16,447 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]