Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+More\s+on\s+160\s+dipoles\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+More\s+on\s+160\s+dipoles\s*$/: 5 ]

Total 5 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: More on 160 dipoles (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 20:40:52 -0400; Typically I see large repeatable differences ONLY when comparing a low dipole (around 100 feet or less high) with a high dipole or vertical over a path several hundred miles long or longer. The aver; /archives//html/Topband/2002-05/msg00104.html (8,790 bytes)
2. Topband: More on 160 dipoles (score: 1): Author: k4iq@worldnet.att.net (John B. Mitchell); Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:46:37 -0400; Bill, et al, Interesting thread. My experience still tells me that fairly high dipoles or inverted vees are within a few db of single-element verticals over nearly all openings, all conditions. I've; /archives//html/Topband/2002-05/msg00097.html (12,623 bytes)
3. Topband: More on 160 dipoles (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 07:54:19 -0400; And thanks also to Bill for pulling it all together, for those of us who were hanging on to the topic by our fingernails. Is this effect entirely absent at 80m, or just very much reduced? 73, Pete N4; /archives//html/Topband/2002-05/msg00095.html (7,335 bytes)
4. Topband: More on 160 dipoles (score: 1): Author: btippett@alum.mit.edu (Bill Tippett); Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 02:39:42 +0100; Thanks to Bob for that great info. This may answer a question I've wondered about for a long time which is "Why do high dipoles work well on 80 but not on 160?" Here are some quick modeling results f; /archives//html/Topband/2002-05/msg00090.html (12,724 bytes)
5. Topband: More on 160 dipoles (score: 1): Author: bobnm7m@cnw.com (Robert Brown); Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 17:15:25 -0700 (PDT); Friends in Radio Land - Power coupling is greatest when the E-field from an antenna is parallel to the geomagnetic field and the least when the two are perpendicular to each other. For the parallel c; /archives//html/Topband/2002-05/msg00087.html (12,466 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 5
Page: [1]