Mail Archive Search: <bazooka>

Results:

References: [ bazooka: 195 ]

Total 195 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [TowerTalk] Bazooka 1/4 wave balun (score: 34): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 09:25:34 -0700; This discussion brings up a good question. What is the best what to make accurate inductor Q measurements? I understand that there are Boonton Electronics Q meters out there. How do those compare wit; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00138.html (10,497 bytes)
42. Re: [TowerTalk] Bazooka 1/4 wave balun (score: 34): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 06:07:58 -0700; I think one could get a "quick and dirty" feel using a typical antenna analyzer and measuring the SWR bandwidth of the coil and capacitor combination. As you point out, space wound coils have signfic; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00134.html (12,441 bytes)
43. Re: [TowerTalk] Bazooka 1/4 wave balun (score: 34): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 02:56:44 -0400; measure the loss MHz). Shove the the coil Space winding an inductor reduces turn-to-turn capacitance and increases inductor Q. Fill the area between turns in with a dielectric and Q decreases. That'; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00133.html (10,350 bytes)
44. Re: [TowerTalk] Bazooka 1/4 wave balun (score: 34): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 13:41:13 -0400; would a length of say, a 1.5" or 2" The problem with a sleeve or bazooka balun Jerry is the loss and surge impedance of the sleeve controls the choking ability of the sleeve. We need a large diamete; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-07/msg00128.html (9,146 bytes)
45. [TowerTalk] bazooka antennas (score: 34): Author: Craig Clark <jcclark@worldpath.net>; Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 11:45:54 -0400; The first bazooka article was in QST and repeated the antenna book years ago and was ptty much debunked in the 70's by DeMaw and crew. If I remember, the design came from the RADAR world but didn't t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00026.html (7,235 bytes)
46. Re: Re: [TowerTalk] 160 Meter Bazooka] (score: 34): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 13:35:55 -0400; satisfactory answer while needing same results of any truth to that? The coax is thicker, and the thickness gives a little bit more bandwidth than a thinner wire, but basically the THHN and coax wil; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00008.html (7,662 bytes)
47. [TowerTalk] 160 Meter Bazooka (score: 34): Author: Peter Larsen <ve6yc@shaw.ca>; Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 08:42:50 -0700; Hello All: I am thinking of building a double bazooka antenna for 160. I am wondering what effect if any using RG-59 rather than RG-58 would have. I am on a lot of major construction sites that use R; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00004.html (6,669 bytes)
48. [TowerTalk] Bazooka (Coaxial) Dipole information needed. Which design is best? (score: 34): Author: kg5ks@arrl.net (Kenny); Date: Thu Jun 26 23:50:09 2003; I thought maybe a Bazooka (Coaxial ) Dipole might fit the bill for 80m band. However after checking various links I noticed that there seems to be some disagreement on what design to use. I thought m; /archives//html/Towertalk/2003-06/msg00513.html (7,227 bytes)
49. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 34): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 08:08:24 -0600; I use the 450 ohm window ladderline mostly. Incidently, a COAX fed 80M dipole will also work well on the WARC bands since the center is a current maximum, or nearly so, on 30, 17, and 12M where a dip; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00128.html (11,890 bytes)
50. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 34): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 08:08:24 -0600; I use the 450 ohm window ladderline mostly. Incidently, a COAX fed 80M dipole will also work well on the WARC bands since the center is a current maximum, or nearly so, on 30, 17, and 12M where a dip; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00129.html (11,785 bytes)
51. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 34): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 08:08:24 -0600; I use the 450 ohm window ladderline mostly. Incidently, a COAX fed 80M dipole will also work well on the WARC bands since the center is a current maximum, or nearly so, on 30, 17, and 12M where a dip; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00130.html (11,681 bytes)
52. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 34): Author: jreisert@jlc.net (Joe Reisert); Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 19:13:29 -0400; Hi Ted, Why not try the G5RV dipole. It's 102 feet long and can be shortened further by lengthening the 450 Ohm feedline. It will give good service on 80 and 40 with broadside pattern as well as 20 a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00110.html (9,235 bytes)
53. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 34): Author: tleaf@hotmail.com (Ted Leaf); Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 02:04:09 -1000; Hi guys, I am looking for a shorter wire antenna for 80M, other than a dipole. My two trees are not far enough apart, only 100 feet apart and I prefer not to let the ends hang down. I heard about the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00094.html (7,753 bytes)
54. [Towertalk] Bazooka ant (score: 34): Author: n8de@thepoint.net (Don Havlicek); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:53:04 -0500; You can use 93 ohm or 100 ohm coax, if you wish ... in fact, the 75-ohm will probably work even better than the 50-ohm. [Assuming that you will put the antenna near a 1/2 high - this will give a feed; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00251.html (7,227 bytes)
55. [Towertalk] Bazooka ant (score: 34): Author: Darfug@aol.com (Darfug@aol.com); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:25:59 EST; Do bazooka antennas only use 50 ohm coax?Can it be 75 ohm coax considering VF of coax? -- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts -- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00250.html (6,503 bytes)
56. [TowerTalk] Bazooka antennas (score: 34): Author: dave@egh.com (dave@egh.com); Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1998 15:09:11 EDT; Hi Tom, OK, tell me this - do you have to use Scotch 33 where the coax connects to the Bazooka bubble gum or does the whole thing stay sealed up properly without it? :-) 73, Dave Clemons K1VUT -- FAQ; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-04/msg00998.html (7,101 bytes)
57. [TowerTalk] Bazooka (score: 34): Author: w5ec@digitalexp.com (Hawkins, Bill); Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 13:38:35 -0500; To you wire antenna gurus-a question. I read an article about the double bazooka 80m antenna and how two of them in a phased array will provide 4.5db gain in the inverted vee configuration. Won't a s; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-07/msg00859.html (7,139 bytes)
58. Re: [TowerTalk] Bazooka antenna (score: 33): Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>; Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:45:39 -0700; a. So publicly advocating against the use of fan dipoles is not a "crusade" of sorts? b. You think bad key clicks and SSB splatter 3 db down aren't at least as easy to detect as a harmonic 30 db down; /archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00173.html (9,597 bytes)
59. Re: [TowerTalk] Bazooka antenna (score: 33): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:44:19 -0800; You might want to study FCC Rules on the subject before making that statement. They are, in general, tied to the extent of harmonic suppression below the level of the fundamental, and to "good engine; /archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00172.html (9,469 bytes)
60. Re: [TowerTalk] Bazooka antenna (score: 33): Author: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:06:59 -0600; That's all wonderful but crusades with hams are usually counter productive. I submit that a detectable 2nd harmonic qualifies as a real problem especially if it is out of a ham band. 73 Rob K5UJ ___; /archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00170.html (8,918 bytes)

Current List: 41 - 60
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]