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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Radial\s+question\s*$/: 37 ]

Total 37 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Phil Snyder <n9lah@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 08:51:09 -0500; If someone knows of a better reflector/avenue for this question please let me know. I am going to put up an HF9V this fall out back. I also plan to put up some type of inverted L for 160. I can find; /archives//html/Towertalk/2011-08/msg00249.html (6,862 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Vincent Weal <vincek4jc@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 10:49:30 -0500; I'm installing a 40/80 meter vertical (DX Engineering 8040VA-1) which calls for 65 foot radials. However, I recently saw a video of an antenna presentation by W3LPL in which Frank suggests 70 foot ra; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00314.html (7,599 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 16:40:23 +0000; I'm sure it will make a difference. The question is will it be perceptible?! With ground radials, it's a situation of diminishing returns (# and length). A rule of thumb is that the radials should be; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00315.html (10,027 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Kevin Stover <kevin.stover@mediacombb.net>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 10:50:44 -0600; The short answer is no, it won't make a hill of beans worth of difference. What does make a difference is the number. Turns out the denser the radial field near the antenna, the lower the losses. Gro; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00316.html (8,960 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: "Larry Banks" <larryb.w1dyj@verizon.net>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 11:52:14 -0500; Hi Vince, This is from the ARRL antenna book: -- Practical Suggestions For Vertical Ground Systems At least 16 radials should be used if at all possible. Experimental measurements and calculations sh; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00317.html (12,116 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Kevin Kidd <kkbroadcastengineering@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 10:56:01 -0600; He might be mowing a little high... Kevin C. Kidd, CSRE/AMD AM Ground Systems Company - WD4RAT kkidd@kkbc.com -- 866-22-RADIO -- 866-227-2346 www.amgroundsystems.com _________________________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00318.html (7,378 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 09:00:18 -0800; On Sat,2/27/2016 7:49 AM, Vincent Weal wrote: I'm installing a 40/80 meter vertical (DX Engineering 8040VA-1) which calls for 65 foot radials. However, I recently saw a video of an antenna presentati; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00319.html (9,525 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial Question (score: 1): Author: Dennis W0JX via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 17:32:44 +0000 (UTC); The effect of the earth on the radial generally is to detune it and make it longer electrically than it is. Perhaps Frank W3LPL can add something here as to why he recommends 70 feet. As for elevated; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00320.html (8,869 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Vincent Weal <vincek4jc@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 12:48:07 -0500; Thanks all for the good information. I know that many radials are necessary, I just was wondering if the difference between 65 and 70 foot lengths would make any appreciable difference. It looks like; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00321.html (9,128 bytes)
10. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial Question (score: 1): Author: Robert Harmon <k6uj@pacbell.net>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 11:43:45 -0800; I use four elevated radials for 80m. What I did was hook up my analyzer to each pair, 90 degrees from one another, without connecting anything else tune for resonance (just like a dipole, which it es; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00322.html (9,631 bytes)
11. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial Question (score: 1): Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 14:22:17 -0600; That's the way I do it, but use radials 180 degrees apart. (I only use two elevated radials and gamma feed the grounded tower. Chuck W5PR _______________________________________________ _____________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00324.html (10,918 bytes)
12. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial Question (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 16:33:42 -0800; You may be fairly close. The wild variable is the soil underneath them and their heights. N6LF recommends doubling the number of elevated radials to further equalize the currents. I have elevated rad; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00327.html (11,058 bytes)
13. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial Question (score: 1): Author: Robert Harmon <k6uj@pacbell.net>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 17:18:09 -0800; thanks Jim, I am going to measure the current in each of my 4 elevated radials and see where I stand. Bob K6UJ 73, Jim K9YC On Sat,2/27/2016 11:43 AM, Robert Harmon wrote: I use four elevated radials; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00328.html (11,490 bytes)
14. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: John N7ZN <kukl@idaho.net>; Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 09:10:53 -0800; When I installed my DX Engineering 80 meter vertical, I used 71 foot radials. Because: I could only get 500 foot spools of 14 THHN at Home Depot and one can get 7 71 foot lengths from each 500 foot s; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00330.html (9,749 bytes)
15. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: Donald Chester <k4kyv@hotmail.com>; Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:14:27 +0000; That's true - to shield the radiating antenna from the LOSSY earth. Some self-proclaimed experts have argued with me on that point, saying I was wrong and that the function of the radials is not to; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00337.html (9,086 bytes)
16. [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>; Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:06:59 -0800; Hi Vince, This is from the ARRL antenna book: -- Practical Suggestions For Vertical Ground Systems At least 16 radials should be used if at all possible. Experimental measurements and calculations sh; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00339.html (11,325 bytes)
17. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: "Doug Turnbull" <turnbull@net1.ie>; Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:58:58 -0500; Dear OMs and YLs, Yes all this is true but do not forget the actual radial length will be shorter than 0.4 Wavelength when on the ground. It may be electrically 0.4 wavelength but physically it is co; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00340.html (12,254 bytes)
18. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: "Larry Banks" <larryb.w1dyj@verizon.net>; Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 14:57:22 -0500; Interesting that the Antenna Book does not specify if this is physical or electrical length. Your guess is as good as mine. (Unless I missed the reference.) 73 -- Larry -- W1DYJ Dear OMs and YLs, Yes; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00341.html (13,490 bytes)
19. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 12:07:06 -0800; This is from the ARRL antenna book: -- Practical Suggestions For Vertical Ground Systems At least 16 radials should be used if at all possible. Experimental measurements and calculations show that w; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00342.html (9,532 bytes)
20. Re: [TowerTalk] Radial question (score: 1): Author: "Doug Turnbull" <turnbull@net1.ie>; Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 15:26:49 -0500; Larry,OMs and YLs, Your point is correct some of the antenna books are very vague on this point but I have seen it reinforced on the Top Band Reflector. Generally Qty 120 one hundred ten foot radials; /archives//html/Towertalk/2016-02/msg00343.html (14,867 bytes)

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