Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+shortened\s+\&\s+low\s+dipole\s+for\s+160M\-\-transmit\/receiveissues\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: shortened & low dipole for 160M--transmit/receiveissues (score: 1)
Author: k8do@msn.com (k8do)
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 15:00:41 +0100
Frank, For any hope at all of working DX you need a vertical transmit.... A top loaded <whatever you can stand up> will work better than any dipole, by magnitudes... I predict that if you try to do t
/archives//html/Topband/2001-09/msg00051.html (7,445 bytes)

2. Topband: shortened & low dipole for 160M--transmit/receiveissues (score: 1)
Author: 9a3a@spidernet.com.cy (Ivo PEZER, 5B4ADA)
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 10:27:32 +0100
vertical that I have much better experience with TX/RX low 160m antenna and would like to encourage people to get on the air with whatever available means. Having no other choice for 160 (unable to
/archives//html/Topband/2001-09/msg00065.html (8,235 bytes)

3. Topband: shortened & low dipole for 160M--transmit/receiveissues (score: 1)
Author: sire@iinet.net.au (Steve Ireland)
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 02:03:03 +0100
Hi Frank, I worked 150 countries on 1.8MHz using a bent dipole at 45' high - made out of a 3.5MHz flat-top dipole, with 66' of wire soldered onto each end and sloped/drooped semi-vertically down to t
/archives//html/Topband/2001-09/msg00078.html (7,476 bytes)

4. Topband: shortened & low dipole for 160M--transmit/receiveissues (score: 1)
Author: jreisert@jlc.net (Joe Reisert)
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:35:37 +0100
Denny, Gee Whiz. I guess my over 260 DXCC on 160 meters with only a dipole with the apex never above 90 feet doesn't work for DX. I guess I'll quit now while I'm ahead! Or, maybe I better get up a ve
/archives//html/Topband/2001-09/msg00119.html (7,305 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu