Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+One\s+more\s+ground\s+radial\s+question\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: "Jerry Connelly" <jerryc@clinchrivercorp.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:17:49 -0500
Hello I do not want to flog the proverbial dead horse but I am trying to understand something here. My inverted L for 160m seems to work fairly well but the tuning is far from o.k. Right now I have 5
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00478.html (8,616 bytes)

2. RE: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: "R. Earle Sanders" <nt7y@xmission.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:40:11 -0700
I have to admit that I am in aan enviable position...whatever the number of radials I need that is what I install. The more the Merrier. in my major radial field below the vertical I had 120 radials
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00479.html (9,754 bytes)

3. RE: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: kb9cry@comcast.net
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 16:49:41 +0000
I would agree 5 radials just won't cut it and your theory of impedance changing during rain is probably right on. Also your planned number of radials of 12 - 24 is also low. The best bet is 60 1/4 wa
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00481.html (10,905 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: Don Havlicek <n8de@thepoint.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:12:39 -0500
I believe the word "optimum" should be replaced with "sufficient". My experience with verticals tells me that 100 radials works much better than 60, especially when concentrated in certain directions
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00482.html (8,992 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: <va3pl@cuic.ca>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:59:56 -0500
Concentrated in what direction? Direction of interest? Andy - VA3PL _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stat
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00485.html (8,761 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: Don Havlicek <n8de@thepoint.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 13:07:05 -0500
Yes! In my case ... 60 radials spaced 6 degrees apart .. then concentrations of ten radials at 1 degree each for Europe, Japan, South America, and VK/ZL ... works like gangbusters .. all I need now i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00486.html (10,086 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: Dinsterdog@aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 13:47:14 EST
Jerry, What you need to realize is that using an Inverted L, the more radials you add, the less ground loss you incur which in-turn, shows the true impedance mismatch you have going on between the an
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00488.html (10,028 bytes)

8. [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:40:45 +0000
You have all these guys telling you to add more radials which is true--you do need more. Also, more shorter is better than a few long. But before you go crazy or start messing around with ununs and s
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00495.html (10,126 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: Dinsterdog@aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:07:36 -0500
Gee wiz Rob, Have you ever tried an UNUN? I just love getting blasted by those who teachI've actually used what I suggested and guess what, it worked- There is so much "in your face" talk any more on
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00496.html (8,672 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:43:04 -0800
At 10:40 PM 12/17/2003 +0000, Rob Atkinson, K5UJ wrote: Y Fresh water (rain) does not have anywhere near the conductivity of salt water. It alone on your radial field should not make a drastic differ
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00498.html (11,102 bytes)

11. [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 00:05:39 +0000
Dear Paul: I apologize if I inadvertently denigrated your suggestion regarding ununs. However, I advise you to dial down your sensitivity level. I do not believe I ever wrote anything that cast asper
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00499.html (10,132 bytes)

12. [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: kb9cry@comcast.net
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 16:31:29 +0000
I wish to apologize to the group for stirring this debate up. I think it's good discussion but let's not rehash old information that is already in the archives. I think I started this by responding t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00516.html (9,334 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] One more ground radial question (score: 1)
Author: Jan Erik Holm <sm2ekm@telia.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 07:17:55 +0100
If you have 60 radials, take a rest and be done with it, you are so close to "minimum" loss, ofcourse if you need the excersise and have nothing else to do you can go to work puting out more but it?s
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-12/msg00550.html (10,928 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu