Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+HF\s+LOG\-PERIODIC\s+ANTENNAS\s+Comments\s+Please\s*$/: 42 ]

Total 42 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "RCARIELLO" <RCARIELLO@si.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:45:18 -0000
Hello to all, I am wondering if a stack of three Log-Periodic Antennas is the way to go. At best my single tower station will have three Tri-Banders on it. Possibly a Force12 C3S around 90-60-30 feet
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00440.html (7,793 bytes)

2. RE: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Keith Dutson" <kjdutson@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:16:52 -0500
Friend of mine has two LPAs on separate towers and he loves them. He is also a contester. One covers 20 through 10 and has a 40 meter 2 element (shortened) beam about 10 feet above. Not sure about co
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00441.html (10,174 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:07:28 -0400
antennas. The Tennadyne antennas are good, but for some reason I can't understand they instruct people to install the baluns at the incorrect location. The result is unbalance in the antenna and sig
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00443.html (8,516 bytes)

4. RE: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:54:47 -0400
At 11:16 AM 6/21/2004, Keith Dutson wrote: Stacking LPAs is rare to my knowledge. The problem is in planning how far to separate them. For best 20-15-10 performance the distance should be about 33 fe
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00444.html (9,361 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: Dino Darling <k6rix@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 12:16:52 -0700
I personally like LPDAs! There are advantages and disadvantages to everything! If you are an ARRL Member, you can read about one man's story. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/tis/info/pdf/0209031.pdf
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00445.html (10,603 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: David Greer <davidgreer73@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 05:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
I used a Tennadyne T6 for several years with excellent results. No traps -- and little to go wrong with the antenna. Very nice antenna. But then I switched to a 3 element SteppIR and find it produces
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00453.html (10,847 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "hasan Schiers" <schiers@netins.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:40:51 -0500
Would you share the proper location for the balun on the Tennadynes? I thought a balun/choke belonged at the feed point, and that is at the front of the array? ...hasan, N0AN (p.s...I've had two of t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00466.html (11,180 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "hasan Schiers" <schiers@netins.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:46:07 -0500
If you are talking about the T-10 or the smaller T-6, I would have to disagree with both of your comments. They are quite light and the wind loading is amazingly low. the T-10 on a 24' boom weighed 3
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00467.html (10,481 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "hasan Schiers" <schiers@netins.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:01:23 -0500
Comments interspersed in the text below: far get Stacking LP's is a problem because the spacing is only going to be optimal on one band. It can be done with decent results, but not like stacking a pa
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00468.html (13,715 bytes)

10. RE: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, K4IK" <k4ik@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:53:05 -0400
In fact, the SteppIR does not need a complicated and lossy matching network. A matching network, other than a combined un-un/balun is not needed since the proper tuning naturally matches the antenna
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00477.html (11,408 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "hasan Schiers" <schiers@netins.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:37:14 -0500
Great concept, the SteppIR...but cost about 4x as much as the T-6. I helped put one up about two weeks ago. It works rather nicely, but looks like an accident waiting to happen. (complexity). ...hasa
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00479.html (14,448 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Larry Phipps" <larry@telepostinc.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 21:58:08 -0400
When figuring the cost, you might want to consider that the T-6 is closer to the 2 element SteppIR than the three in terms of gain and F/B. One point needs to be made, especially for contesters. The
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00480.html (16,717 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: Joe <WD0M@centurytel.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:02:57 -0600
The first SteppIR has been up for 3 plus years, and has experienced no problems. I had to take my Mosley Pro57B down several times in that period to make adjustments within that same time frame. My S
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00481.html (11,326 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 22:29:28 -0400
Also, log periodics tend to be bigger (more elements on a given boom length) and heavier, so they require a huskier tower and rotator. A lot of them that many of us have seen actually user two towers
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00484.html (17,928 bytes)

15. RE: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Keith Dutson" <kjdutson@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 22:00:51 -0500
over the 3 element SteppIR. In return, you give up 1 - 2 dB on 20/15/10, 3 dB on 17/12 (as well as a proper match), operation on 6 meters ... as well as good F/R on 20-12. That's why I am building a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00486.html (12,990 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Rick Bullon" <kc5ajx@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 03:07:58 +0000
One point needs to be made, especially for contesters. The LPDA is a very low Q antenna with very wide bandwidth... the SteppIR is a high Q antenna with narrow bandwidth that is frequency agile. When
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00487.html (10,071 bytes)

17. RE: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, K4IK" <k4ik@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:17:55 -0400
If I do, I can get any part I need from an industrial supply store if Fluidmotion (SteppIR) doesn't overnight it to me ... and replace it with a screwdriver. I hope you don't need one of the odd siz
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00488.html (10,087 bytes)

18. RE: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, K4IK" <k4ik@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:28:42 -0400
I would not dismiss NT1Y's stack of three 4 element SteppIR's as "not a serious contest station." 73, ... Joe, K4IK _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00489.html (8,963 bytes)

19. RE: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Keith Dutson" <kjdutson@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:09:35 -0500
You obviously have never drilled out a rivet. You also do not seem to care about the need to climb your tower to do repairs on your antenna. And, finally, you must have little to no experience with c
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00490.html (11,474 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] HF LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNAS Comments Please (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:14:36 -0500
Hogwash! The receiver front end is of far greater consequence. Jim Brown K9YC _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless We
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-06/msg00491.html (9,368 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu