- 1. [TowerTalk] Re: Log periodics - Tennadyne (score: 1)
- Author: davidc@bit-net.com (DavidC)
- Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 13:49:08 -0400
- Mike: I found a couple of sites and a couple of discussion list commentaries that seemed particularly helpful. I'd love to find a good comparison between the log periodics, one might then compare th
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-06/msg00492.html (11,333 bytes)
- 2. [TowerTalk] Re: Log periodics - Tennadyne (score: 1)
- Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com)
- Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:09:58 EDT
- What was that distance? Interesting comments one and all. Perhaps someone will take our HF antenna test protocol and do some more testing. We'd all like to see those results too. Cheers, Steve K7LXC
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-06/msg00493.html (7,674 bytes)
- 3. [TowerTalk] Re: Log periodics - Tennadyne (score: 1)
- Author: k4sb@mindspring.com (K4SB)
- Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 19:09:56 -0700
- Think a little clarification is needed...Are you speaking of the boom length of the entire antenna, or just that of the log cell? And, would like source the first statement. Plus, what distance did y
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-06/msg00499.html (7,751 bytes)
- 4. [TowerTalk] Re: Log periodics - Tennadyne (score: 1)
- Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith)
- Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:08:16
- Of course, the fact that the SWR went down tells you absolutely nothing about the resulting pattern/gain. Assuming Murphy's Law remains applicable, you could have lovely SWRs and lousy patterns on *b
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-06/msg00524.html (7,854 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu