Hello, I borrowed a RigExpert analyzer and was able to take measurements that folks were asking for without AM station overload. I also built the K9YC 160m choke (18 turns of RG58 on a type 31 2.4" t
Hi Todd, Have a look at the calculator at https://chemandy.com/calculators/return-loss-and-mismatch-calculator.htm This calculator allows me to compute the SWR for your data points, as if the Z zero
Hello everyone. I also trying to improve things here on 160 and other bands. Going to make a few chokes. I have wound 8 turns thru 2.4 x2 31 mix but haven't seen any real improvement. Trying to get r
"Guy K2AV I'm guessing you don't like rg58 because of the center conductor moving outwards??" Nope. :>)) RG58 is not RG400. That's why I don't like RG58. RG400 is what should be used for winding coax
Thank You Guy for taking the time for all great the info. I have several pieces of RG400 none are long enough. I was an airfield electrician for CVG airport. Got some out of planes and some from the
Fred had to laugh. I fear my son (yeah a ham) will put all my stuff on the lawn with a small bucket for any money they feel it is worth. Use iT! de KG9H _________________ Searchable Archives: http://
Hello, Per many people's recommendations I added 800ft of radials today. That is 8 x 100ft each. It made a difference on the analyzer which I'll summarize below. It was dark when I finished but here
did you try transmitting with it, and see if any skimmers pick you up? just try sending test de urcall and check the RBN network, see how you are getting out.... Hello, Per many people's recommendati
Todd, get on the contest and rock and roll. I don't know of anyone on 160m who has not given their antennas an iterative workout over time. Bet you will do just fine. RX is the tougher nut anyway.
Man, that seems awfully broad! Somewhere, you have losses, my friend. You ARE measuring directly at the feedpoint, aren't you? And with the antenna analyzer FLOATING (not touching you, the earth, or
I would think adding radials would lower the Radiation resistance. Also, the SWR curve should narrow as ground losses are reduced; since the effect of ground loss resistance swamping the results less
You maybe confusing "Radiation Resistance" with "Feed point Resistance". It often will lower "Feed point Resistance", but raise "radiation Resistance". 73 Bruce At some point I suggest, as others, th
the SWR curve should narrow as ground losses are reduced; since the effect of ground loss resistance swamping the results lessens." The base resistance, not the radiation resistance is lowered by ad
Todd, The resistive component should be going down with more radials, not up. Maybe you are not measuring it the right way, or something in the radial system could be resonant (which may be a good th
I started this message a day or so ago. Others have commented since with some similar thoughts, nevertheless, here is my take. Todd you're going the wrong direction. The feed point resistance should
Have to pay attention to everything he is reporting. He added a feedpoint choke per K9YC at the same time. Which may, depending on the physical connections at his feedpoint, have removed the feedline
So, now we're (apparently) recommending he cut back his already minimal radial field..uhhh, really Wes? =-Mike VE9AA I started this message a day or so ago. Others have commented since with some simi
radial field..uhhh, really Wes? I agree with Wes' assessment -- as well as him questioning why Rr would increase with an increased number of radials. If Rr is changing significantly with the increas