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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Takeoff\s+angle\s*$/: 30 ]

Total 30 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: w5ec@digitalexp.com (Hawkins, Bill); Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 15:17:26 -0500; Hi all What happens to the takeoff angle of a vee beam or rhombic when it is constructed on the side of a hill. If it is pointed downhill, is the angle smaller (to horizontal) thereby making it a bet; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00343.html (7,200 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: lightfol@cadvision.com (lightfoots VE6PV); Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 20:34:33 -0700; If the antenna is pointed perpendicular to vertical, then yes, the radiation angle , depending on the actual slope angle, and distance will favor lower angles. The degree of improvement depends larg; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00345.html (8,861 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: k6ll@juno.com (David O. Hachadorian); Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 18:01:54 EDT; On Sat, 9 Aug 1997 15:17:26 -0500 w5ec@digitalexp.com (Hawkins, Bill) writes: The answer requires a computer program, because no hill is at a constant slope forever. At some point, the hill ends, and; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00351.html (7,775 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: donovanf@sgate.com (Frank Donovan); Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 23:13:01 -0400 (EDT); A goood rough approximation is that the take-off angle is reduced by the angle of slope of the Fresnel Zone. The equations for Fresnel Zone size are readily available in any good antenna handbook. To; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00357.html (8,131 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: w5ec@digitalexp.com (Hawkins, Bill); Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 15:30:49 -0500; Good. My future qth is on top of a gently sloping hill, maybe 10 degrees. I think I want a vee beam, but it will be pointing SE. It will be interesting to see how it works-maybe long path to Asia on; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00430.html (8,133 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: Jeff Draughn <n0ost99@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 16:38:48 +0000; I've been playing around with HFTA trying to figure out the best height/ configuration for my antennas and it dawned on me I wasn't sure what the best take off angles are. I know low is better than h; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00263.html (6,916 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 13:14:22 -0400; That is a great question! I wish that there was an answer however it varies which is why many of us have antennas at different heights. I believe that there was a study showing the probability of dif; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00267.html (7,592 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 17:12:37 +0000; Assuming you have picked the proper geographic area, the height of the bars at the bottom under the curves represent the percentage of the time signals from wherever you picked to your QTH come in at; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00268.html (8,360 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 14:24:10 -0400; Several additional points to keep in mind: 1) Where in the mid-West are you? Southern Ohio has very different propagation than Northern Wisconsin. Your location will affect what parts of the world to; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00269.html (10,875 bytes)
10. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "Dave Clemons" <dave@egh.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 14:35:03 -0400; A number of years ago Dean Straw gave some presentations on takeoff angles. His presentation included a big binder of information (I think called "All the Right Angles"). I don't remember who publish; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00271.html (8,244 bytes)
11. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "Ted Bryant" <w4nz@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 17:42:13 -0400; Jeff, <http://wwrof.org/webinar-archive/what-ive-learned-in-two-decades-of-terrain -assessment/> 73, Ted W4NZ I've been playing around with HFTA trying to figure out the best height/ configuration fo; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00274.html (8,213 bytes)
12. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 19:33:09 -0400; If you are using the HFTA from the ARRL AB then you have all that info there already! Its the Elevation File. They have one for every state for EU, AFR, AS etc etc ... for the most part the lower the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00277.html (10,003 bytes)
13. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 17:29:23 -0700; There's extensive data for that on the CD Rom that comes with the ARRL Antenna Book in the form of files that can be used with HFTA. The data files can be superimposed on the computed vertical patter; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00279.html (8,656 bytes)
14. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 20:59:36 -0400; Gary, The lower the better? Rare when higher is better? Seriously? Just for an example, I operated WPXSSB and WPXCW full-time (36 hours) with my 5/5/5 on 20, 5/5/5/5 on 15 and 5/5/5/5 on 10. At no ti; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00281.html (12,861 bytes)
15. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: Steve Maki <lists@oakcom.org>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 21:27:31 -0400; Err, we better keep straight whether we're speaking of heights above ground or takeoff angle. -Steve K8LX Gary, The lower the better? Rare when higher is better? Seriously? __________________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00282.html (8,002 bytes)
16. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 20:46:23 -0700; No kidding. -Steve K8LX Gary, The lower the better? Rare when higher is better? Seriously? _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk ma; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00284.html (8,976 bytes)
17. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 21:17:50 -0700; I consider use of the words "takeoff angle" to be VERY misleading, and cause a LOT of misconceptions. It is common to use the words "takeoff angle" to define the vertical angle at which field strengt; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00285.html (10,121 bytes)
18. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 08:31:22 -0400; It is clear my post was in response to Jims post (which was attached) where he specifies TOP (antenna) was rarely best and the lower the better. Bob KQ2M Err, we better keep straight whether we're sp; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00286.html (9,562 bytes)
19. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 08:35:21 -0400; Sorry I meant in response to Garys, (K9RX) post NOT Jim. Bob, KQ2M It is clear my post was in response to Jims post (which was attached) where he specifies TOP (antenna) was rarely best and the lower; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00287.html (10,106 bytes)
20. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1): Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 08:37:28 -0400; Bob, SERIOUSLY! I AM saying I am hearing this. This is not just the result of modeling, which shows indeed that the highest angle will be favored (less often of course)... this is a result of day to; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00288.html (15,691 bytes)

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