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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Ground\s+Radial\s+Fields\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: n7cl@mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson); Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 12:40:32 -0700; Hi Tom, I think we are in agreement here. But as I read your post exactly what you meant was unclear to me (and probably to others). I think you said (and meant) that compared to a sufficiently dense; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00061.html (9,180 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 16:33:54 -0500; That's what I meant. 73, Tom W8JI w8ji@contesting.com -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@conte; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00067.html (7,688 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: Clive Penna" <clive@gm3poi.prestel.co.uk (Clive Penna); Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 11:42:26 -0000; HI, Does anyone have any field strength data, re the lowering of radiation angle in a given direction if extra radials are concentrated in that direction. ie taken to the extreme 60 radials covering; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00501.html (7,811 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid); Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 06:35:19 -1000; in Hi, I believe the radial field "density" will not impact the take off angle. That is established several wavelengths on out from the antenna. The radial field is there to improve the efficiency o; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00503.html (7,852 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: n7cl@mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson); Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 11:11:15 -0700; Hi Clive, If this is your 40 meter antenna, it is already working pretty well. I'm assuming (since you didn't specify) that you are talking about the radial field surrounding the base of a full size; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00505.html (9,837 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 06:34:08 -0500; You might ask on rec.radio.amateur.antenna I think it is N6RK who actually measured this stuff, and his measurenents agree with theory. Theory tells us the radials do nothing at all for low wave ang; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00538.html (8,477 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: Clive Penna" <clive@gm3poi.prestel.co.uk (Clive Penna); Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:36:23 +0100; Hi Tom, Thanks for the I/P yes N6RK has interesting info on his web page about the work he did measuring radial field differences all very interesting stuff. It can be found at <http://www.karlquist.; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00552.html (9,532 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] Ground Radial Fields (score: 1): Author: k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV); Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 21:53:04 GMT; To: <towertalk@contesting.com> Is it possible that on N6RK's figures, that his comparisons were invalidated for a setup using equal radials over 360 degrees, simply because he did not run them in all; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00555.html (10,499 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]