It was told by Len, KH0AC that Bart Thompson KG6SL passed away
Sunday morning because of heart attack.
More detail will be informed soon.
de
73
Jun
Junichi Tanaka Ph.D. JH4RHF
e-mail: jh4rhf@ppp.bekkoame.or.jp
P.O.Box 61 Toyonaka, Osaka 560 JAPAN
ph: +81-6-846-5927
fax: +81-6-846-0073
>From w7ni@teleport.com (Stan Griffiths) Mon Aug 26 01:44:13 1996
From: w7ni@teleport.com (Stan Griffiths) (Stan Griffiths)
Subject: CW & HF Licensing
Message-ID: <199608260044.RAA25048@desiree.teleport.com>
>Realize that as soon as the no-coders win, the CW sub-bands are history!
>(That's when I'll look for a new hobby.)
>73, Bob (aa0cy@robertwanderer.gardnerville.nv.us)
Do you really believe you can't win a frequency contest on CW against a
sidebander? Believe me, he will have a much harder time copying through
your loud CW than you will through his SSB! Besides, it does not
necessarily follow that we will lose our CW subbands simply because the CW
requirements for licensing may be relaxed. We have "gentlemen's agreements"
in effect today regarding subbands and they seem to work pretty well. I
can't think of a reason why we couldn't have "gentlemen's agreement" CW
subbands in the future whether or not they are dictated by FCC rules.
Personally, I hope the FCC relaxes the CW proficiency rules for those who
want to operate in the full phone segments of the HF bands, but keep them in
place for those who want to operate on the low ends of the various HF bands
on CW, and at the same time, continue to keep the CW subbands in the rules.
Stan w7ni@teleport.com
>From w7zrc@micron.net (Rod Greene) Mon Aug 26 02:25:00 1996
From: w7zrc@micron.net (Rod Greene) (Rod Greene)
Subject: 40/80 Phased verticals
Message-ID: <2.2.16.19960825183016.27471894@micron.net>
Tom,
Could you give me a little more information about the choke arrangement,
value, etc. that you mention in your message below. Or if there is a
reference, please let me know and I'll look it up.
Thanks for your help, 73 Rod
At 08:20 PM 8/23/96 -0400, W8JITom@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 96-08-23 14:23:59 EDT, you write:
>
>>
>>Your 180 degree delay line on 40 becomes about 90 degrees on 80...
>>Your 3/4 wave spacing on 40 becomes 3/8 wave spacing on 80...
>
>If you invert the phase of one element via a phase reversing choke a delay
***********************
>line becomes the correct length for all frequencies below 1/4 wl spacing. The
************************* I don't understand this either ***************
>null will remain in the same direction without a delay line change. The line
>should electrically equal (or be slightly shorter if you want to maximize
>gain and offset the rear null) than the element spacing.
>
>The only problem that remains is keeping the phasing line flat and the
>elements
>correctly matched for proper distribution of current. This system increases
>BW of any phasing system.
>
>73 Tom
>
>
----- Rod Greene, w7zrc@micron.net, <>< -----
|