Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+re\s+Radials\s*$/: 50 ]

Total 50 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 17:42:59 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: ** REPLY SEPARATOR ** Yes you did. Here is your original quote. Read it again: "They have to be at least 1/4 wave above ground before the radiation pattern is anything but straight
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00410.html (9,512 bytes)

42. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: bob finger <finger@goeaston.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 21:06:40 -0400
Sometimes the english language confounds us. In your anaylsis and defense you said "anything but straight up", "majority....straight up". It is either one or the other, can't be both. It is not the i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00411.html (11,227 bytes)

43. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: kd4e <kd4e@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 21:06:01 +0800
In respect for precision, doesn't "straight up" mean without ice? ;-) doc _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list Tower
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00412.html (9,969 bytes)

44. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 22:40:11 -0400
If you look at the whole pattern, the gain lobe is straight up. It looks like a snow cone. This description should be obvious to anyone who has done any modelling at all. If you want to receive signa
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00414.html (10,149 bytes)

45. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: "K8RI on Tower talk" <k8ri-tower@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 23:24:54 -0400
I thought it was like "Rum and Coke" without the Coke. Besides, who'd dilute good scotch with water? Yah gotta drink it quick before the ice melts and contaminates it. Roger Halstead (K8RI and ARRL 4
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00416.html (10,952 bytes)

46. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: N&Oslash;ATH <n0ath@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 22:50:20 -0500
Is there a Yahoo group or any location anybody knows of that would help a fellow with any of the antenna modeling programs? Dave / N&Oslash;ATH _______________________________________________ _______
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00417.html (13,252 bytes)

47. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 06:13:38 -0700
What's the question? You might ask it here. There's the NEC-List which sporadically has useful stuff. http://www.robomod.net/mailman/listinfo/nec-list If you're using 4nec2, Arie Voors(the author) an
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00427.html (15,082 bytes)

48. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: Red <RedHaines@centurytel.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:37:40 -0500
The ARRL Antenna modeling course was, a few years ago, among the best of the ARRL offerings. 73 de WO&Oslash;W _______________________________________________ ________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00429.html (10,036 bytes)

49. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 06:58:40 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: ** REPLY SEPARATOR ** W7EL, author of EZNEC, hangs out on the rec.radio.amateur.antenna group on Usenet and is quite active. Bill, W6WRT ____________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00430.html (9,863 bytes)

50. Re: [TowerTalk] re Radials (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:31:30 -0700
Indeed.. however, r.r.a.a has a high dreck/useful information ratio, and some long running interpersonal conflicts that result in a lot of posts which don't convey much information. You can post your
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-06/msg00434.html (10,960 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu