Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Low\s+Dipole\s+for\s+RX\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Low\s+Dipole\s+for\s+RX\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: GALE STEWARD <k3nd@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 08:06:48 -0700 (PDT); Anyone using a low dipole on 160 for RX? By low, I mean 8-10ft. I could install one of these until some of the foliage dies off and I can install my two-wire beverage. Would this be useful or a waste; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00008.html (6,883 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: "Hardy Landskov" <n7rt@cox.net>; Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 08:46:36 -0700; I put one up here in AZ and it was a waste of time & energy. But Robin (he has a 6 call but I can't remember what it is) used one at XZ and said it worked fantastic. I guess you need to try and see.; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00010.html (8,408 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: "Mark Lunday" <mlunday@nc.rr.com>; Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:53:57 -0400; In his book "Low Band DXing" John, ON4UN, talks about how sometimes signals can arrive at higher angles. The more options the better. Mark Lunday WD4ELG Hillsborough, NC - FM06kb wd4elg@arrl.net http; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00014.html (8,401 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: GEORGE WALLNER <gwallner@the-beach.net>; Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:29:23 -0400; Steve, I have used a low dipole for some time (now it is down due to wind damage). Height was 15 feet and the total length was 24 feet. I used a 9:1 transformer at the center, not so much for matchin; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00017.html (8,075 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: "Milt, N5IA" <n5ia@zia-connection.com>; Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:25:57 -0700; -- I was with Robin (WA6CDR) at XZ1N in 1998 when I first suggested the low dipole. I installed it in the jungle and it worked to get some Qs that otherwise would not have been worked. So, when we we; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00020.html (10,904 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: Art <k6xt@arrl.net>; Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:36:39 -0600; I use exactly that, a full size 10 ft high 160 dipole. It is fed with 75 ohm coax and 100 beads at the feed point. Its effectiveness depends on the signal -- and I'm not about to take it down. (Other; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00024.html (8,488 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: "Robin" <wb6tza@socal.rr.com>; Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:41:48 -0700; Its based on the situation. In SE Asia, it appears that at Sunset it is often true that signals arrive at very high angles. At XZ0A it was responsible for something like 50% or more of our NA contact; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00026.html (9,694 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: Low Dipole for RX (score: 1): Author: Garry Shapiro <garry@ni6t.com>; Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:53:47 -0700; You never know. During an unusual Euro opening years ago (Christmas Week '97?) GI3OQR was huge on the West Coast. I recall Tree commenting that he was loudest on a low dipole in a drainage gully--act; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00092.html (10,194 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]