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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+How\s+high\s+is\s+enough\s*$/: 30 ]

Total 30 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: "Jim in Waco wb5oxq" <wb5oxq_1@grandecom.net>; Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:46:28 -0500; When choosing a height for a beam is 1/4 wave above ground at the lowest frequency enough? 1/2 wave? I see Force 12 rating the gain on their beams at 74'1". Why that height? At 20 meters is 100' a lo; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00553.html (7,185 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 19:57:12 -0700; The best answers to your question are in the ARRL Antenna Book. It's a real bargain, especially because it includes a CD with a starter version of NEC, a nice program that computes loss in transmissi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00554.html (8,122 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: "K0DAN" <k0dan@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:59:08 -0500; No easy answers here...however the ARRL Handbook, and the ARRL Antenna Book have several excellent chapters on this topic. Interesting reading, which it runs from basic to complex, but the concepts a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00555.html (9,388 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: K8RI <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>; Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:26:10 -0400; On 7/30/2013 10:46 PM, Jim in Waco wb5oxq wrote: When choosing a height for a beam is 1/4 wave above ground at the lowest frequency enough? 1/2 wave? I see Force 12 rating the gain on their beams at; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00556.html (8,746 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: Richard Karlquist <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:19:40 -0700; On 2013-07-30 19:46, Jim in Waco wb5oxq wrote: When choosing a height for a beam is 1/4 wave above ground at the lowest frequency enough? 1/2 wave? I see Force 12 rating the gain on their beams at 74; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00557.html (9,215 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: K8RI <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:36:54 -0400; On 7/30/2013 10:57 PM, Jim Brown wrote: On 7/30/2013 7:46 PM, Jim in Waco wb5oxq wrote: When choosing a height for a beam is 1/4 wave above ground at the lowest frequency enough? 1/2 wave? I see Forc; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00558.html (8,987 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:41:31 +0100; Something similar here - it formed the basis of my QST article "What's the best height for my beam?" in the May 2009 edition. http://www.karinya.net/g3txq/hexbeam/height_2/ Look in particular at the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00559.html (8,912 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: "John Langdon" <jlangdon@outer.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:32:09 -0500; Rule of thumb, IMHO only, is that with an antenna below 1/4 wave you are coupling a lot of your signal to ground losses, not sending it off to be heard, and what you are sending out is at relatively; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00560.html (10,022 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] How High is enough (score: 1): Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:47:01 -0400; Great question and I concur with the suggestions of the ARRL Antenna Book with the software included. If you really want to get "the most for your buck" then you have to define what your primary inte; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00561.html (8,533 bytes)
10. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: David Robbins <k1ttt@verizon.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:25:46 -0500 (CDT); no one height is best for everything so put up a whole bunch of them at different heights! When choosing a height for a beam is 1/4 wave above ground at the lowest frequency enough? 1/2 wave? I see F; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00562.html (8,864 bytes)
11. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:06:12 -0400; The F12 height is coincidental - N6BT's crank-up went to that height. He was trying to make points about free-space gain versus the real world (including ground reflection gain), and to clarify the d; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00563.html (10,415 bytes)
12. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: john@kk9a.com; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:12:40 -0400; An antenna at 50' will work. Your subject "How high is enough" suggest that you are looking for some compromise between performance and tower height. Only you can make that decision. Certainly you co; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00564.html (9,398 bytes)
13. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: "chetmoore" <chetmoore@cox.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:03:25 -0400; I seem to remember somewhere, possibly in the early pvrc contest college video tape series) where W3LPL said for contesting, if you can only have ONE tower, make it a 100 footer. Your beam or beams w; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00566.html (11,078 bytes)
14. [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:12:40 -0700; When choosing a height for a beam is 1/4 wave above ground at the lowest frequency enough? 1/2 wave? I see Force 12 rating the gain on their beams at 74'1". Why that height? At 20 meters is 100' a lo; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00567.html (12,073 bytes)
15. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: john@kk9a.com; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:52:37 -0400; I recall reading in W2PV's Yagi Antenna book that the best height for a single yagi is 1.5 WL. John KK9A I seem to remember somewhere, possibly in the early pvrc contest college video tape series) wh; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00568.html (10,669 bytes)
16. Re: [TowerTalk] How High is enough (score: 1): Author: "Larry" <lknain@nc.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:01:03 -0400; Years ago I had the opportunity to work contests at place that had a 3 stack (bottom was 60 feet and the top was 120 feet I think). We would work Europe early in the morning starting with all 3 anten; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00569.html (12,229 bytes)
17. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:16:26 -0400 (EDT); video tape series) where W3LPL said for contesting, if you can only have ONE tower, make it a 100 footer. Your beam or beams will work well and the low band wire antennas you hang below it at 90 fee; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00571.html (8,812 bytes)
18. Re: [TowerTalk] How high is enough (score: 1): Author: "Mike Ryan" <mryan001@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:34:27 -0400; I agree with Steve...most contesters would too. My moto is to get as many elements as you can as high as you can. And as the 'Grid Pirates' used to say, "...if it stays up through more than one winte; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00572.html (9,434 bytes)
19. Re: [TowerTalk] How High is enough (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:17:44 -0400 (EDT); I've been sitting on the sidelines for this debate and want to throw my 2 cents in. As pointed out, all antennas work. What is your primary objective?...working USA? Working only DX? Working a 50/50; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00574.html (8,892 bytes)
20. Re: [TowerTalk] How High is enough (score: 1): Author: Bob K6UJ <k6uj@pacbell.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:51:55 -0700; I agree with Bill. My tribander is at 100 feet most of the time except when trying to work short haul DX on 10 and 15 like the caribbean for example. Then I lower it down to 50 feet and better signal; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-07/msg00575.html (9,764 bytes)

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