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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+NVIS\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "res04nyt" <res04nyt@gte.net>; Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 17:13:18 +0100; http://www.qsl.net/wb5ude/nvis/ NVIS = "cloudwarmer", and http://www.spacew.com/www/fof2.html _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Tower; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00078.html (7,123 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@comcast.net>; Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:46:30 -0400; Interesting thread. But a dipole @ 35' IS an NVIS antenna on 40. Well, not quite. If you want it to be a better NVIS, snuggle a reflector below it. Personal hot button: Guys with dipoles at 35' who c; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00572.html (7,233 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Bill Axelrod" <bill@axelrods.org>; Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 18:29:13 -0400; This is a very interesting thread. The technical discussion regarding what constitutes a NVIS antenna, what makes it efficient, how to best deploy and employ a NVIS antenna, etc. is wonderful and hel; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00577.html (10,000 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@verizon.net>; Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 19:53:04 -0700; Another personal hot button "Guys with dipoles at 35 feet on 80 meters "Oreiented east and west, so you are off the ends of my dipole." 73 Tom W7WHY _______________________________________________ Se; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00589.html (7,229 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "S. Markowski Jr." <km9m-zig@comcast.net>; Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 03:07:19 +0000; Well said Bill........ 73, Zig-KM9M a 32ft wire only guy _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00591.html (8,366 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Michael J. Castellano" <km1r@cshore.com>; Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 07:16:35 -0400; Way back in the ancient 1960's, we used these "NVIS" antennas in SE Asia. Our XO described them simply as: "just a very low antenna with a fancy name" keep smiling! See: http://www.mscomputer.com for; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00607.html (7,599 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "John Santillo" <u1004467@warwick.net>; Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 12:37:54 -0400; transmissions for beyond line-of-sight communications and for what's called the "Life Line". They are basically very inductive half-loop antennas mounted on the edge of a roof around 36" above the r; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00616.html (7,975 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: Wilson Lamb <infomet@embarqmail.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:08:00 -0400 (EDT); I'm claiming no expertise, but taking the nice figure with colored lines I make the following observations: 7' is BAD, for everything. 28' wins the vertical race, out to 60 deg. 28, 42, and 56 are eq; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00059.html (7,847 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Tim Duffy" <k3lr@k3lr.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:39:21 -0400; I have lots of experience with NVIS antennas and will share my observations. I am involved with Western Pennsylvania traffic nets on the high end of 80 meters (75 meters) every morning. I have an NVI; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00062.html (9,377 bytes)
10. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: Wilson Lamb <infomet@embarqmail.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:15:35 -0400 (EDT); Hi Tim, What's the orientation of the "radials"? Are they maybe parallel to the antenna? Cut to be reflectors? Have you compared that antenna to a higher dipole in about the same orientation? I'm sur; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00064.html (11,208 bytes)
11. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Tim Duffy" <k3lr@k3lr.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:27:00 -0400; Hello Wilson: Each radial (6) is 95 feet long. There are two that are directly under the two sides of the dipole the other four start out at the feedpoint of the dipole and the ends are 3 feet apart; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00065.html (12,410 bytes)
12. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: Steve Maki <lists@oakcom.org>; Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:10:47 -0400; Tim, You were obviously going for best high angle *RX* capability, which requires attenuation of all low angle (i.e. static) reception. Truly a specialized antenna. -Steve K8LX Each radial (6) is 95; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00068.html (9,184 bytes)
13. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Tim Duffy" <k3lr@k3lr.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:44:58 -0400; Hello Steve: Yes it is NVIS. This is not a DX antenna! It's only purpose is for the WPA section and PA statewide nets. It is good for daytime communications out several hundred miles and really good; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00069.html (9,967 bytes)
14. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: Steve Maki <lists@oakcom.org>; Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:51:07 -0400; Well part of the discussion has been why not 1/4 wave high since you gain some lower angle performance without losing any high angle. If one thinks about it in terms of low noise *receive* and doesn'; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00070.html (8,851 bytes)
15. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: <dj7ww@t-online.de>; Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 18:55:04 +0200; I had very good results in our local (within Germany) sprint contest on 40m with the Jamaica antenna where only high angle radition is necessary and supressed interference from Europe. http://on5au.b; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00071.html (9,982 bytes)
16. [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 06:02:48 -0500; Yeah, how about some frequencies to go with those height measurements? Rob K5UJ _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00077.html (7,729 bytes)
17. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 06:08:35 -0500; The problem with these antennas (one problem at least) is when they are used by hams who don't understand the lack of reciprocity between transmitting and receiving when using them. They hear great b; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00078.html (8,462 bytes)
18. Re: [TowerTalk] NVIS (score: 1): Author: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 11:28:47 -0700; A full size low dipole on 160m does great for me on receiving because it rejects ground wave noise more than it rejects sky wave signals. On TX, it might be down several S units. I noticed no differe; /archives//html/Towertalk/2020-06/msg00085.html (11,500 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 18
Page: [1]