Mail Archive Search: <+from:k6se@juno.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:k6se@juno.com: 594 ]

Total 594 documents matching your query.

321. TopBand: EWEs (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 15:49:39 EST; Hi, Tom, "TOA is affected by ground a long distance out from a vertically polarized radiator. That has little to do with ground systems near and under the antenna." I didn't say otherwise, and I tota; /archives//html/Topband/1998-04/msg00006.html (12,298 bytes)
322. TopBand: EWEs (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 22:06:41 EST; Regarding the phasing in the vertical elements of the Ewe antenna: I asked Tom, W8JI if the vertical elements were 180 degrees out of phase because one element was inverted. He aptly explained how an; /archives//html/Topband/1998-04/msg00018.html (8,622 bytes)
323. TopBand: FW2EH (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Sat, 04 Apr 1998 14:04:32 EST; On Thu, 2 Apr 1998 05:55:05 -0500 (EST) jon zaimes <jon.zaimes@dol.net> writes: FW2EH (who was QRV a year or two ago from here on 160) showed up on 40m yesterday...anyone know how long he is there fo; /archives//html/Topband/1998-04/msg00033.html (7,385 bytes)
324. TopBand: High Input Intercept SMD Devices (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 14:00:43 EDT; Tom, I hope you meant 20 db gain. I'm not sure a preamp with a noise figure of 20 DB (at 1.8 mhz) is wise. What is the noise figure on 160 for the typical receiver? Probably less than that. Ambient n; /archives//html/Topband/1998-04/msg00116.html (8,048 bytes)
325. TopBand: Balloon suspended 1/2 wave vertical on 160 (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 23:01:05 EDT; On Fri, 10 Apr 1998 12:39:16 -0700 (PDT) David Feldman <dgf@netcom.com> writes: == Any elevated or ground-mounted vertical will require radials unless it is a half-wave center fed vertical. Of course; /archives//html/Topband/1998-04/msg00138.html (8,535 bytes)
326. TopBand: Umbrella Antenna (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 14:37:08 EDT; On Thu, 16 Apr 1998 22:04:22 -0700 Bill Hohnstein <k0ha@navix.net> writes: == To my knowledge, any claims that have been made about verticals that don't need radials have been proven wrong if it is t; /archives//html/Topband/1998-04/msg00189.html (7,769 bytes)
327. TopBand: Re: Beverage doubts. (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 13:24:04 EDT; "My two 580' beverages don't usually hear any better than my 4 sq on 80. However, they significantly out perform my quarter wave elevated vertical on 160." "Similar experience here in Iowa. I put up; /archives//html/Topband/1998-04/msg00222.html (8,007 bytes)
328. TopBand: Topband Receiver Survey Follow-up (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Mon, 02 Mar 1998 15:48:56 EST; Sherwood Engineering has tested 57 different amateur receivers and has published the test data at http://sherweng.com/se3specs.html. If you want to print this interesting table of data, configure you; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00014.html (8,560 bytes)
329. TopBand: Receiver Test Data (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Mon, 02 Mar 1998 23:13:42 EST; I e-mailed Rob Sherwood regarding his test data of various receivers. I thought his reply might interest you Topbanders. 73, de Earl, K6SE I ran across the table of receiver test data you posted on y; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00021.html (8,851 bytes)
330. TopBand: KZ5MM CQ-160 SSB Alligator Explanation! (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 21:44:57 EST; ON4UN wrote: On 160 a Beverage must be at least 100 ft (strict minimum) from a big transmit antenna. == It's possible that was the cause of the noise on KZ5MM Beverage, and no doubt John's spacing su; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00043.html (8,467 bytes)
331. TopBand: Re: Mobile Dx (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 22:02:43 EST; == I believe that was Carl, WB4ZNH, but I may be mistaken (as usual). Wonder whatever became of him? 73, de Earl, K6SE _____________________________________________________________________ You don't; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00045.html (7,310 bytes)
332. TopBand: Re: Mobile (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 14:06:10 EST; My response about WB4ZNH being the possible mobile in question certainly provoked a lot of response. Apparently Carl is alive and well in Virginia. I searched my archives and found that I remembered; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00059.html (7,080 bytes)
333. TopBand: KZ5MM Noisy Beverage (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 16:08:04 EST; Having read all messages which started with KZ5MM's noisy Beverage, it appears that the proximity (noise) problem (Beverage near Tx vertical) exists when the Tx vertical has elevated radials. Convers; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00074.html (8,320 bytes)
334. TopBand: KZ5MM Noisy Beverage (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 00:09:53 EST; Like most others, I hope to learn on this Reflector by reading of others experiences. My assumption, based on the messages up to that point, was that elevated radials are nasty to Beverages and non-e; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00090.html (8,602 bytes)
335. TopBand: Topbander Adage (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 18:50:47 EST; Years ago, Rush Drake (W7RM) commented regarding DXing on 160m CW, "You've got to love pain!" After briefly chasing DX on 160m SSB this past weekend, I think Rush should add "You've gotta love TORTUR; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00150.html (6,960 bytes)
336. TopBand: Elevated GP vs. Vertical Antennas (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 14:24:19 EST; "The correctly sized, sufficiently dense screen is superior to four resonant radials in close proximity to earth." Please define "correctly sized" and "close proximity to earth" as used in this conte; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00210.html (10,132 bytes)
337. TopBand: Elevated Radials (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 23:56:31 EST; Re the discussion about elevated radials: I've always considered "elevated radials" to be radials which are completely above ground and horizontal, and that the antenna feedpoint is also elevated to; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00259.html (9,473 bytes)
338. TopBand: NEC-4 info (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 02:57:46 EST; EZNEC (NEC2-based) was used to model a 160m elevated 1/4-wave vertical with 4 to 36 elevated 1/4-wave radials at heights from 10 to 60 feet above "good" (.004 S/m) ground. It was apparent from the mo; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00264.html (9,396 bytes)
339. TopBand: Elevated Radials (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 12:21:55 EST; up to date in understanding that the "elevated radials" being discussed can mean either "totally elevated" or "sloping upward from ground elevated". The latter is a new one for this old dog. Christm; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00274.html (10,380 bytes)
340. TopBand: Shunt-fed tower (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (Earl W Cunningham); Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 17:17:33 EST; Alex C.J. van Eijk <DXIS@wxs.nl> writes: "I am wondering how a half-sloper for 80m suspended from a 25m high tower effects the shunt-fed operation of that same tower for 160m, and vice-versa?" == Abo; /archives//html/Topband/1998-03/msg00312.html (9,185 bytes)

Current List: 321 - 340
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]