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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+sloper\s+puzzler\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: Dave NØRQ (lists) <n0rq-lists@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:59:04 -0600; I have a strange problem with 2 slopers. Apologies in advance for being a bit long with this... For the last year, the only topband xmit antenna I've had is a 1/4 wave sloper (actually a W9INN 40/80/; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00047.html (8,988 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 06:55:59 -0500; kinda at a loss... I just don't see how my old sloper would be melting its end insulator when I'm using the new Dave, The problem with 1/4 wl slopers is they are sloppy antennas. They should be calle; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00049.html (8,484 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: "Greg - ZL3IX" <zl3ix@inet.net.nz>; Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 07:14:53 +1300; I'd just put up an Inverted V dipole, and be done with it. Or do something else less risky. Being such an advocate of vertical polarisaton Tom, I'm really surprised to hear you say that. Apart from t; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00061.html (7,846 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:06:09 -0500; really surprised to Why Greg? A 1/4 wl slopper isn't much different than an inverted V. I can't think of a worse way to make a vertical! where you don't of getting RF for radiation. Actually the hei; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00062.html (9,808 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <rtym@ippt.gov.pl>; Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:02:56 -0000; Hello All, Since 14 years I was using Slopers /sloppers?/ on both 160 and 80m.Just 2 weeks ago I decided to try shunt feeding the tower.My tower is not too high,only 18m with TH6DXX and above it is 2; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00066.html (8,981 bytes)
6. Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 08:55:41 -0500; 18m with TH6DXX and above it is 2 meters tube with A3WS on the top. Be careful with conclusions. There are multiple issues at work simultaneously. 1. Nobody knows for sure the patterns for slopers...; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00071.html (9,400 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <rtym@ippt.gov.pl>; Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:32:31 -0000; Hello Bill,thanks for your comments. Of course I don't know but in the case of 160m I was comparing both antennas in different times for at least 2 weeks so in different propagation and I suppose I c; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00079.html (8,510 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: Earl W Cunningham <k6se@juno.com>; Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:28:37 -0800; A bit from my own on-the-air experience with slopers: When I returned to the air in 1996 after a long hiatus (I QRT'd in 1984 after achieving 160m DXCC), I needed an antenna for 80m to go after 5BDXC; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00082.html (9,283 bytes)
9. Re: Topband: sloper puzzler (score: 1): Author: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <rtym@ippt.gov.pl>; Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:46:26 +0100; Earl,thanks a lot again for your advices.. I have not EZNEC here but that A3WS is a little bit bigger as it has also traps for 30m ,so maybe the system is slightly longer..? When I used omega the shu; /archives//html/Topband/2004-12/msg00094.html (8,820 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]