Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Playing\s+with\s+my\s+new\s+VIA\s+Analyst\s+$long$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Playing\s+with\s+my\s+new\s+VIA\s+Analyst\s+$long$\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Playing with my new VIA Analyst (long) (score: 1): Author: "Robert Chudek" <k0rc@pclink.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 12:50:03 -0600; Merry Christmas to myself, early. I'm like a kid with a new toy using my new antenna analyzer! "You guys" pointed out I needed a 1/2 wavelength (electrical) run of coax to my 160m inverted vee to get; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-11/msg00349.html (9,804 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Playing with my new VIA Analyst (long) (score: 1): Author: Rob Frohne <frohro@wwc.edu>; Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:36:19 -0800; Hi Bob, I haven't been back to read the posts that directed you that you need 1/2 wavelength of coax to measure the correct VSWR, but it isn't true if you have any loss in your coax. The signal is at; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-11/msg00352.html (12,721 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Playing with my new VIA Analyst (long) (score: 1): Author: "Robert Chudek" <k0rc@pclink.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 16:20:12 -0600; Rob, Yes, I was more interested in repeating the complex impedance values of the feed point than the absolute VSWR. Some of the fellows have run my antenna through analysis and came up with different; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-11/msg00355.html (9,184 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Playing with my new VIA Analyst (long) (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 16:06:51 -0800; Excellent work! So what else did I learn? Well, I swept the feedline up to 54 MHz (the limit of this model). I saw additional resonances or minimum VSWR's all along the spectrum. I zoomed in to analy; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-11/msg00359.html (10,389 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]