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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+lightning\s+suppression\s+on\s+cable\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Re: lightning suppression on cable (score: 1): Author: jameswarren@swbell.net (James); Date: Fri Jul 11 23:43:04 2003; I've used commercial grade coax lightning arrestors for commercial two-way and cellular antennas. Very expensive, but the work and are almost invisible when you do a TDR line sweep, even at 1900 MHz; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-07/msg00177.html (7,719 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Re: lightning suppression on cable (score: 1): Author: RedHaines@centurytel.net (Red); Date: Sat Jul 12 09:49:54 2003; A high percentage of the energy in a lightning strike is in the spectrum under 1 MHz. I don't think tying knots in the line will impede it much. 73 de WO?W; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-07/msg00181.html (8,777 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Re: lightning suppression on cable (score: 1): Author: jim.wil@cox.net (Jim Wilcox); Date: Sat Jul 12 11:40:51 2003; Several years ago, I was quite fortunate to attend a seminar about lightning protection presented by one of GE's lightning experts. He had worked for their mobile radio group in Lynchburg, VA. Unfort; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-07/msg00182.html (9,806 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Re: lightning suppression on cable (score: 1): Author: RedHaines@centurytel.net (Red); Date: Sat Jul 12 12:53:39 2003; Hello, again; In days of old, before everything had electronic components, the threshold voltage above which appliances were damaged was quite high and the threshold for the power cords was, in some; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-07/msg00184.html (12,081 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]