Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Shortened\s+80m\s+dipole\/inverted\s+vee\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: ww5l@gte.net (Tom Anderson)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:10:10 -0500
After taking a lightnming hit I'm redoing the antenna configuration on my crank up tower. One question is does anyone know how efficient a shortened 80 meter dipole/inverted vee (80 ft) is versus the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00411.html (7,936 bytes)

2. [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: k9mi@home.com (Michael Brown)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:43:29 -0500
Tom, maybe that was a typo? I see 100x150 feet in your message. 150 feet is of course plenty of room for a full sized 80m dipole/inverted vee. My experience is, yes there is a big difference in perfo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00412.html (9,470 bytes)

3. [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: alwilliams@olywa.net (Al Williams)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 22:17:35 -0700
My EZNEC modeling of various 80m horiz wire dipoles at low heights (say 50') shows that the ends can be snaked around just about anywhere without hardly effecting the patterns. Apex at 50' puts the a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00414.html (9,771 bytes)

4. [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 01:49:10 -0600
For domenstic use, an 80M dipole at 50 ft will do well. For DX, a vertical will do MUCH better. Unfortunately, a 50 ft tower with a Yagi on top will act as a parasitic REFLECTOR to a separate 80M ver
/archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00416.html (9,696 bytes)

5. [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: franknorton@home.com (Frank Norton KB8XU)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 10:23:02 -0400
Hi Tom, U've received many excellent suggestions for "shortened" 80 meter antennas but here is one I haven't seen mentioned. At several locations over the years I have used a combination antenna by A
/archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00418.html (11,188 bytes)

6. [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: FireBrick" <w9ol@billnjudy.com (FireBrick)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 10:05:57 -0500
I had little success getting it to tune on 160. It was just marginal. But... I was able to work VK0H on 80 cw with it with my peanut whistle so I can't complain. It quality prior concerned...ur patte
/archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00420.html (13,021 bytes)

7. [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee (score: 1)
Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 14:08:09 -0400
Hi Tom, You've received many good answers, but keep this in mind: You are generally better off to use lumped loading rather than feedline loading, of you are worried about getting every last watt out
/archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00428.html (8,434 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu