- 21. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 08:42:04 -0400
- Jim, Are you referring to the fact that at any given height over terrain for any antenna, there are multiple lobes, and that the angles of these lobes change as the height changes? The YO program tha
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00289.html (11,539 bytes)
- 22. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 08:58:23 -0400
- AH! There it is - sorry ... no that was my post, Gary .... sorry for the confusion ... no what I was saying is that the top antenna ALONE is never (almost) better than BIP (or all in phase). The diff
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00290.html (12,070 bytes)
- 23. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:06:25 -0400
- I'd agree if giving a presentation to potential neophytes, which I did to a local club on the use of HFTA, one should be careful to point that there ARE signals, lower in level, below (and above) the
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00291.html (11,512 bytes)
- 24. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:13:43 -0400
- On 7/24/2017 8:58 AM, StellarCAT wrote: Now that stated I'd say this really is for a 2 stack ... with a 3 stack you see more of a difference between 3IP and TOP... and with a 4 stack as well ... so a
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00292.html (9,841 bytes)
- 25. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "john@kk9a.com" <john@kk9a.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:07:53 -0400
- I have BOP on 40m and I found it to be completely useless, even for domestic contests. John KK9A - W4AAA Bob, SERIOUSLY! I AM saying I am hearing this. This is not just the result of modeling, which
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00293.html (10,712 bytes)
- 26. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:14:24 -0400
- ah - sorry indeed BOP recommendation would be for 20 and above. From what I understand stacking of 40's ... unless REALLY high and separated, doesnt provide much other than the ability to change dire
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00294.html (11,794 bytes)
- 27. [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 07:48:18 -0700
- <I have BOP on 40m and I found it to be completely useless, even for <domestic contests. <John KK9A W4AAA at 90 + 180 ft. The LC box is just a mess of 5 kv NPO caps at the 50 ohm input connector..to
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00296.html (9,702 bytes)
- 28. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "Roger (K8RI) on TT" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 16:53:15 -0400
- On the last low, 40 was open world wide around the clock with strong signals for several days. 20 was non existent. 73, Roger (K8RI) The lower the better? Rare when higher is better? Seriously? Just
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00309.html (14,449 bytes)
- 29. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: "Roger (K8RI) on TT" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:01:48 -0400
- As you "go up" in height (lower take off angle) those additional angles / lobes become important and can fill in the intermediate distances. 73, Roger (K8RI) On 7/24/2017 Monday 12:17 AM, Jim Brown w
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00310.html (12,224 bytes)
- 30. Re: [TowerTalk] Takeoff angle (score: 1)
- Author: <john@kk9a.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 21:13:29 -0400
- I think the advantage from a relatively low stack depends on the 40m beams. A two stack of 2el beams with 1/2 WL spacing works fantastic and it is a big improvement over a single yagi. When I modeled
- /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-07/msg00314.html (8,700 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu