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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+carolina\s+windom\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TowerTalk] Carolina Windom (score: 1): Author: Jim Jarvis <jimjarvis@optonline.net>; Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:50:47 -0400; Guys...let me RESTATE my comments regarding the CW80, before we drag this thread through the fields of speculation: 1) To Reid's initial question: I am presently using a cw80 with an AT500. Works fin; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00220.html (7,852 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Carolina Windom (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 08:59:49 -0700; Here's an interesting question. Between a off center fed and a center fed dipole of the same length (e.g. something like the CW80s), and, assuming one has a reasonably low loss tuner to deal with the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00224.html (8,171 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Carolina Windom (score: 1): Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>; Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:13:57 -0700; Yes, I think that is exactly the case. I've both modeled and used (Field Day) center fed non-resonant dipoles as well as off-center fed dipoles, and the impedance effects represent the major differen; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00229.html (10,918 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] carolina windom (score: 1): Author: "Clara en Johan" <fam-j.hoekstra@zonnet.nl>; Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:30:43 +0100; http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/qsl-antenna3.htm _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http; /archives//html/Towertalk/2008-03/msg00545.html (6,860 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]