Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+40\s+meter\s+boom\,\s+80\s+meter\s+dipole\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+40\s+meter\s+boom\,\s+80\s+meter\s+dipole\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] 40 meter boom, 80 meter dipole? (score: 1): Author: k1xm@underwater.org (Paul Young); Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 12:51:24 -0400; I have a three element 40 meter beam. I'm thinking about matching the boom as an 80 meter short dipole. The boom length is 48'. The driven element is insulated but the parasitic elements are connecte; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-05/msg00575.html (7,524 bytes)
2. [Towertalk] 40 meter boom, 80 meter dipole? (score: 1): Author: k4oj@tampabay.rr.com (Jim White); Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 13:15:40 -0400; would it be easier to use the truss as a loaded dipole - you can mechanicaly isolate it easily???? K4OJ; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-05/msg00576.html (8,469 bytes)
3. [Towertalk] 40 meter boom, 80 meter dipole? (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:21:52 -0600; Sounds like an ideal design for 80 / 40 Paul. The majority of the boom loading comes from the end elements. The best way to support the matching arm is under the boom. You can feed at any point below; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-05/msg00778.html (9,087 bytes)
4. [Towertalk] 40 meter boom, 80 meter dipole? (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:21:52 -0600; Sounds like an ideal design for 80 / 40 Paul. The majority of the boom loading comes from the end elements. The best way to support the matching arm is under the boom. You can feed at any point below; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-05/msg00779.html (9,051 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]