Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+TH7\s+Traps\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+TH7\s+Traps\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: Dan Levin <djl@andlev.com>; Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 14:39:30 -0400 (EST); Flame Suit On You could just get rid of the TH7 and get an antenna with no traps - like a C-31XR... Said with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Best 73, **dan, K6IF See you all in the California QSO P; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00257.html (6,953 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Barry " <w2up@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:40:29 -0000; I knew someone would make such a comment... Despite tongue in cheek, I do have a good reason for not replacing the TH7s with C31XRs. I did look into doing such a thing about 3-4 years ago. After mode; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00259.html (8,038 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: TexasRF@aol.com; Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 16:21:27 EDT; Further to Dan's (K6IF) comment about the C31XR: and they are available for immediate shipment (while one more lasts) from Texas Towers stock! Might as well get a MAG240N while you are at it (also in; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00261.html (7,358 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "n3drk" <n3drk@triad.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 16:37:32 -0400; And you could put some screen netting like a dxer did who made DXCC#1. Yes that is what he did and there is nothing wrong with your antenna. Dont get rid of the TH7 it is one of the best antennas out; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00262.html (9,424 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Blake M. Meinecke" <n4gi@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 19:06:27 -0400; non product Personally, I wouldn't put any potential water blocker in the trap holes unless I lived out in the arid west. Every time it rains, I have to "boil" the water out of my low TH3 by turning; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00268.html (8,368 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Barry " <w2up@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 23:40:41 -0000; Blake, You probably have the same problem I did. After a rain, the crap in the traps gets wet and detunes the antenna. Around here, even in summer, it takes several days to dry out. It's not standing; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00271.html (9,238 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "n3drk" <n3drk@triad.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 19:52:28 -0400; Blake, it is not a water blocker. It is a fine netting which allows condensation to escape but keeps out the bugs and whatever thingys will collect in the traps. john "boil" working Weather Stations"; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00273.html (9,492 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 20:10:05 EDT; I had a problem with several of the A-3 antennas I use for 'spray antennas' in contests. I had to boil the water off. In the A-3 antennas, the water will collect if the elements are not parallel with; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00275.html (8,069 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Jim White, K4OJ" <k4oj@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:33:46 -0400; NOPE Having read the tribander report and seen the presentation on how it was done I would have to say that when n3drk wrote: "Don't get rid of the TH7 it is one of the best antennas out there even w; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00276.html (12,238 bytes)
10. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "n3drk" <n3drk@triad.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 21:02:20 -0400; I am not damning a very well done effort. Yes the effort was there but it is not scientific. Read your handbook. Seeing as one of the guys who performed these tests was a former Well he may very wel; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00279.html (14,352 bytes)
11. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: VR2BrettGraham <vr2bg@harts.org.hk>; Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 02:07:09 +0000; N3DRK replied to K4OJ about K7LXC's & N0AX's tribander comparison tests: I am not damning a very well done effort. Yes the effort was there but it is not scientific. Read your handbook. One of the ne; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00282.html (8,794 bytes)
12. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Jim White, K4OJ" <k4oj@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 22:12:48 -0400; Excuse my ignorance but what "Handbook" do you insist I read? Antennas mounted in same place on the same\ tower at same height compared... sounds like the kind of comparison I want to see! K4OJ n3drk; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00284.html (17,688 bytes)
13. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: gdaught6@stanford.edu; Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:59:53 -0700; Well, I think the report IS scientific! It isn't complete (and the authors admit that) in that it doesn't compare a large number of paths, with a large number of ionosperic conditions. It does indeed; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00285.html (9,346 bytes)
14. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "W1GOR" <W1GOR@maine.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:24:16 -0400; Brett, One might ask N3DRK, "Upon what do you bias your opinion..?" 73, Larry - W2GOR is sir. Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman,; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00288.html (9,394 bytes)
15. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Tod - MN" <tod@k0to.us>; Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 08:13:18 -0500; Interesting variety in the set of comments. Brings to mind an interesting quote, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts" Tod, KOTO N3DRK replied to K; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00291.html (9,641 bytes)
16. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: Bill Aycock <baycock@direcway.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:04:03 -0500; is How can the effort be "well done" if the results are "unscientific"? I am puzzled by these comments (repeated later), with no apparent basis or understanding. Which handbook, and where in the hand; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00293.html (9,201 bytes)
17. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Rex Lint" <rex@lint.mv.com>; Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 10:37:43 -0400; john, I don't follow you. "One cannot dispute mathematics. Gain is a product of Boom Length." The boom length of a TH7 is 24 feet. The boom length of a C-31XR is 31 feet. Therefore, the C-31XR is the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00342.html (11,709 bytes)
18. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:10:40 -0700; At 10:37 AM 9/12/2003 -0400, Rex Lint wrote: john, I don't follow you. "One cannot dispute mathematics. Gain is a product of Boom Length." The boom length of a TH7 is 24 feet. The boom length of a C-; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00345.html (10,298 bytes)
19. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Paul Playford" <w8aef@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:36:53 -0000; You have provided a quick answer, but the REAL question is what is the boom length on each band? The TH7 and C-31XR are good antennas but on 10 meters the boom length is not 24 feet or 31 feet. de Pa; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00346.html (9,731 bytes)
20. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps (score: 1): Author: "Rex Lint" <rex@lint.mv.com>; Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:04:18 -0400; I guess the REAL question is, "Is there any band where the effective boom length of the TH7 exceeds the effective boom length of the C-31XR?" Rex K1HI You have provided a quick answer, but the REAL q; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-09/msg00348.html (10,327 bytes)

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