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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Vertical\s+vs\s+Beam\s*$/: 43 ]

Total 43 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [TowerTalk] Vertical vs Beam (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:38:31 EDT; The only bands I have found where verticals are preferred are on 80 and 160 meters, which is good because of the impractical size of Yagis on those bands. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00190.html (9,349 bytes)
42. Re: [TowerTalk] Vertical vs Beam (score: 1): Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 21:02:07 -0700; Thanks for that clarification, Joe. My vague recollection was that W8JI had pointed this out in a Towertalk post a number of years ago, but I couldn't recall if it was WWV or WWVH that used radials u; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00193.html (10,751 bytes)
43. Re: [TowerTalk] Vertical vs Beam (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 00:37:11 -0400; This goes back more than 10 years and was probably on topband rather than Towertalk. About the same time as the information on the WWVH radials, N7CL provided data from some of his work for the DOD; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-04/msg00196.html (13,520 bytes)

Current List: 41 - 43
Page: [1] [2] [3]