- 1. Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: Lew Sayre <w7ew@arrl.net>
- Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:41:06 -0800
- TopBanders, While trying to attract SV3RF's attention last night on Top band it occurred to me that I need more efficiency in my Tx system. What I have is two fir trees, each about 110' tall and 189'
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00042.html (7,626 bytes)
- 2. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: DAVID CUTHBERT <telegrapher9@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 02:38:46 -0700
- Lew, I'm thinking that the close spacing between each tree and each vertical is absorbing a significant amount of signal. How much I don't know. If it is clear between the two trees I could see strin
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00043.html (8,749 bytes)
- 3. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 07:37:44 -0800
- Hi Lew, The only thing I would change is to use the trees to support a "Tee" vertical, with the vertical portion midway between the two trees. This should minimize loss from the trees. That's pretty
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00046.html (9,012 bytes)
- 4. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:45:48 -0500
- The amount of RF energy absorbed by a supporting or nearby tree is controversial. There is no accepted defining work on the RF loss effects of forest around a vertical, and some minor work was unable
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00048.html (10,216 bytes)
- 5. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:08:46 -0800
- Since I live in a dense redwood forest, I've done my best to learn as much as I can about this. While I agree with Guy as to the difficulty of learning anything solid, I don't think it's quite as ros
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00049.html (9,387 bytes)
- 6. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: Julius Fazekas <phriendly1@yahoo.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 04:58:26 -0800 (PST)
- There have been several articles, at least one in NCJ and one military related about absorption by trees. Deciduous seem to be the worse, and I would vouch for a noticeable difference when a tree is
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00050.html (11,928 bytes)
- 7. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:29:41 -0800
- If everything was nailed down so - we would only have Boring reports here on topband reflector. :-) Maybe not. Since Lew's comments come shortly after the CQ WW SSB, I am sure he was frustrated by he
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00052.html (9,118 bytes)
- 8. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: Ross Primrose <n4rp@aiko.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:49:11 +0000
- As one of those QRP ops, I've wondered how much I'm hurting myself by not having any RX antennas yet. Given that I'm only pushing 5W, how close am I to being able to hear every one who can hear me wi
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00054.html (8,335 bytes)
- 9. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: "Wayne Rogers" <n1wr@chesapeake.net>
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:34:37 -0500
- Jim and the list. This is a topic near and dear to me. I live in a house surrounded by forest - mostly oak, poplar and maple with a couple pines scattered about. I have a 90 foot tower, the top of wh
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00055.html (11,669 bytes)
- 10. Re: Topband: Improve efficiency? (score: 1)
- Author: "K9AY" <k9ay@k9ay.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:00:29 -0600
- K2AV As one of those QRP ops, I've wondered how much I'm hurting myself by not having any RX antennas yet. N4RP -- Every little improvement in RX capability (antennas, radio, gray matter) will help
- /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00057.html (8,746 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu