Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Stacking\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] stacking (score: 1)
Author: dave@dpomeroy.com (Dave Pomeroy)
Date: Mon Feb 10 02:17:29 2003
How about a Steppir 3 element beam and a Force 12 EF-240/230. How high should they be for best work and how far apart? I haven't put up 2 beams before so I'm not sure what the best way to go is. Than
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-02/msg00181.html (6,475 bytes)

2. [TowerTalk] stacking (score: 1)
Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com)
Date: Mon Feb 10 09:25:04 2003
IMHO, 80 to 100 ft works very well on 20, 30, and 40M AFTER DARK. IMHO, 80 to 100 ft SUCKS on 10, 12, 15, 17, 20M when the SUN is UP. 110 to 120 ft places the second High Band lobe at useful (higher)
/archives//html/Towertalk/2003-02/msg00186.html (7,520 bytes)

3. [TowerTalk] Stacking (score: 1)
Author: kb1h@chowda.com (Dick Pechie)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 11:19:05 GMT
Not usually sending comments, I felt I would like to on this subject. Probably like many of you, I have been a Ham for going on 35 years. I have through all this time scavenged antennas of all types
/archives//html/Towertalk/1998-07/msg00914.html (8,690 bytes)

4. [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "Jose Castillo" <N4BAA@cox.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 19:54:31 -0400
Hello, I am planning on purchasing a SteppIR 4 element yagi. I also have a Force 12 240/230 (2 ele on 40 and 30 meters) How high above the SteppIR would be adequate? 73 Jose - N4BAA and YI9BAA ______
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00144.html (6,804 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 14:53:15 -0400
As I often do, quoting others more expert than myself, the main issue seems to be detuning of the 15M yagi by the 40M yagi. I asked W3LPL how far a 15 and a 40 should be apart. He thought 30' would b
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00150.html (9,483 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:55:05 -0400
One 15/40 combination that seems to work in proximity is when the 40 is made of Force 12 folded elements (the "N" series of F12 40m beams). The folding causes the secondary resonance of the 40 N elem
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00154.html (11,465 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:38:15 -0400
The 240 part of the F12 antenna is, I believe, the same as an EF-240S. At 6 foot spacing from my top tribander, I had to turn my EF-240S 90 degrees to prevent significantly affecting the SWR of my F1
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00156.html (11,479 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "Julio Peralta" <jperalta@tampabay.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 17:53:27 -0400
Our radio club just bought a F12 MAG 240N and we were told by Tom that it could be spaced only 7' above a C31, and that it would not interact at that distance. Since we haven't installed it as yet I
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00157.html (13,112 bytes)

9. RE: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "N2TK" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 18:19:48 -0400
Yes, you can put it that close to the C31 without a problem. I could not tell a difference in bandwidth, swr and comparative signals when I had it spaced between 7 and 14' apart. Seems the MAG240N do
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00158.html (14,793 bytes)

10. RE: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "N2TK" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 18:22:04 -0400
Pete, The MAG240N and EF240S seem to be two different type antennas. The "N" series has the linear loading moved out away from the boom. N2TK, Tony --Original Message-- From: towertalk-bounces@contes
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00159.html (13,234 bytes)

11. RE: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: Dan Bookwalter <n8dcj@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 15:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
Ya Know there is a very simple solution to this stacking stuff and big antenna problems.... move your station to the caribbean :-) all you need is a 70ft tower a good multiband yagi and a few wires..
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00161.html (15,634 bytes)

12. RE: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "N2TK" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 18:40:26 -0400
Well at least I get to live that dream twice a year in the Caribbean. But to be competitive there you need to apply the same rules as up in the frozen north of New York. N2TK, Tony Ya Know there is a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00162.html (15,979 bytes)

13. RE: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:07:08 -0400
Yes, exactly, but the 240/230 doesn't use the N elements, so far as I know. The N element antennas are much bigger and heavier. 73, Pete N4ZR At 06:22 PM 8/7/2004, N2TK wrote: Pete, The MAG240N and E
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00165.html (13,455 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: <kk9a@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 14:29:14 -0000
Why would moving the linear loading further out and having longer elements change anything? Wouldn't it still be the electrical equivalent of a 1 1/2 wl dipole on 21 MHz? Yes, exactly, but the 240/23
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00175.html (15,012 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] STACKING (score: 1)
Author: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 11:50:05 -0400
The linear loading allows the 7 MHz length to be SHORTER tip-to-tip. It is an easy exercise on EZNEC (or ...) to show the movement of secondary resonances when a 7 MHz element is folded. When you mod
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00178.html (17,934 bytes)

16. [TowerTalk] Stacking (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Harris" <mike.harris@horizon.co.fk>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 19:37:35 -0300
G'day, I'm sure there will be some useful opinions on the following: I currently run a 5 element 18-30MHz log. The elements are insulated from the single boom and fed with transposed aluminium strip
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-12/msg00055.html (7,912 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] Stacking (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:38:05 -0500
My guess is you probably want to separate them quite a large distance since they both cover 14 MHz, probably a distance similar to what you would stack two identical beams to use them as an array --
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-12/msg00060.html (10,543 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] Stacking (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:02:37 -0800
"Team (about at thought The beneficial effects from the high conductivity aren't so much from the good ground plane close to the antenna, but because a bit farther out, it supports a low angle reflec
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-12/msg00061.html (9,100 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] Stacking (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:46:03 -0800
Jim, When you do that calculation for a 1/4 ground mounted vertical, what do you use for the effective height when doing the ray trace for the distance to the reflection zone? I posed that question o
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-12/msg00062.html (11,028 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] Stacking (score: 1)
Author: "Frank Donovan" <donovanf@erols.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:05:46 -0500
Hi Mike, I'd expect the interaction between the 3 element 20M monobander and the log to be severe unless you can space the antennas at least 30 feet vertically. Both antennas would be severely degrad
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-12/msg00064.html (10,240 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu