Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Full\s+size\s+Rohn\s+25\s+vertical\s+vs\.\s+shunt\s+fed\s+tower\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Full\s+size\s+Rohn\s+25\s+vertical\s+vs\.\s+shunt\s+fed\s+tower\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Full size Rohn 25 vertical vs. shunt fed tower (score: 1): Author: n4uk@mindspring.com (Ken Ramirez); Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:15:26 -0000; I am soliciting comments on comparisons between shunt fed towers and full size 160m verticals. I presently have a 75 foot shunt fed tower with 24 elevated radials on 160m. I am pondering putting up 1; /archives//html/Topband/2001-02/msg00059.html (7,562 bytes)
2. Topband: Full size Rohn 25 vertical vs. shunt fed tower (score: 1): Author: k8do@email.msn.com (k8do); Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:53:50 -0500; For a single tower, unless there is some over riding reason for the elevated radials I would put them on the ground... I have used elevated radials extensively, including a 4 element parasitic array; /archives//html/Topband/2001-02/msg00063.html (7,396 bytes)
3. Topband: Full size Rohn 25 vertical vs. shunt fed tower (score: 1): Author: miltj@aepnet.com (Milt Jensen, ARS N5IA); Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:50:17 -0700; Ken, I first started using a gamma matched 80' tower with a Hornet TB-1000 on top back in 1973. It worked well and I had a lot of fun with it for a number of years. In 1991 got serious about 160 Mete; /archives//html/Topband/2001-02/msg00068.html (9,425 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]