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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+40m\s+beams\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: bjk@ihug.co.nz (Barry Kirkwood); Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 18:11:11 -0000; FWIW Some years back a writer in RSGB Radio Communication magazine gave listening reports of UK 40m signals as heard in Australia. Top ratings went to Cushcraft 40CD or four square arrays. Results ob; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00219.html (7,901 bytes)
2. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 14:35:16 -0400; I made this transition, and I think Barry has a valid point. Certainly, the jump to a rotary dipole made a big difference in my ability to put a signal where I wanted, and the front-to-back ratio of; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00221.html (8,621 bytes)
3. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: José de Sá" <ct1eeb@mail.telepac.pt (José de Sá); Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 18:49:11 +0100; I have got a KLM 3 el. Beam for 40m. for 8 years now, it looks bad but works very nicelly above 20m. high, it has been resisting all thru this Atlantic Gale winds, it never gave me problems. Thanks t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00223.html (7,792 bytes)
4. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 13:52:57 -0600; On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 14:35:16 -0400 Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com> writes: A 40M rotary dipole is a very effective antenna, especially when placed above 70 ft high. There is a lot of benefit to be d; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00228.html (9,240 bytes)
5. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: Jim White" <k4oj@tampabay.rr.com (Jim White); Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:37:56 -0400; Every so often this topic re-surfaces...so, I will take the turn this time... The 40-2CD works very very well... I really would love to see someone develope a 40-3CD or 40-4CD based upon it... It see; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00233.html (10,941 bytes)
6. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: w6ter@worldnet.att.net (Gerald Smith); Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 14:49:07 -0400; I have a new (never been assembled) DX Engineering 3 element 40. In case anyone is interested - $2,000. Pick up only near Albuquerque. I am in litigation with my county and I am restrained from putti; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00235.html (7,416 bytes)
7. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 17:23:33 -0400; But the Force 12 does not have a direct feed -- there is a 3-turn hairpin matching coil across the feedpoint.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00238.html (9,583 bytes)
8. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 18:05:29 -0600; A CC 3L40 seems appealing. On a 36 ft boom, 1 dB additional gain could be achieved with significantly higher F/B. On a 48 ft boom, 2 dB additional gain could be achieved with moderately higher F/B. G; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00240.html (12,466 bytes)
9. [Towertalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: W4EF@dellroy.com (Mike); Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 18:19:34 -0700; Seems like some enterprising person might go out a buy two XM-240's and put them together on a single boom long boom a la the KLM 40M4. Once the design parameters became a known quantity, and the dem; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-04/msg00241.html (14,127 bytes)
10. [TowerTalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: brian_smithson@vds.com (Brian Smithson); Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 15:33:33 -0400; Hi all! As the base for my 2nd Trylon cures, I'm contemplating the beams. I have 24' of 1/4" 4130 that will leave 16' sticking out the top. I plan on a 12/17 beam on top and I'd like a reasonable sig; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-10/msg00814.html (7,739 bytes)
11. [TowerTalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: jlangdon@outer.net (John Langdon); Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 14:55:21 -0500; 75' is a little low for optimum performance for 40M DX, but it will sure beat the heck out a sloper. I would look at the new force 12 40M elements that are 85% of full length. I do know if they have; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-10/msg00815.html (8,872 bytes)
12. [TowerTalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: k2av@contesting.com (Guy Olinger, K2AV); Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 21:02:47 GMT; The new F12 40's are designed to go over or under a tribander, rather than a WARC beam. Think the new "N" elements have a secondary resonance around 18 mHz, to keep it out of the hair of 15 meters in; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-10/msg00816.html (10,752 bytes)
13. [TowerTalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 20:45:40 -0600; Brian, You did not say which mode or modes you are interested in. If you want both CW and SSB, full size or nearly full size is the best way to go. 40M is a GREAT DX band with just about every countr; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-10/msg00825.html (8,161 bytes)
14. [TowerTalk] 40m beams (score: 1): Author: Roger Cooke <g3ldi@yahoo.co.uk>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:23:58 +0100 (BST); Hi. I had numerous replies to my email regarding the 402CD beam. Too many to reply to individually but all of them had very useful information which I have retained. I am very grateful to you all f; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-07/msg00160.html (6,980 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]