Hi All,
Thanks for all info regarding my 1000 feet feeder.
Well
some people mentioned 2 dB loss is not so much. Personally i am agree on
what ON4UN says in his book. 0.5 here and another 0.5 ++++ and then you
are suddenly up to 2-4 dB total loss.
Not sure how much power 75 ohm CATV cable can handle, running her Acom 2000A
amplifier so plenty of horse power.
I
will check what is available of 75 ohm CATV cable, but i feel that using
parallel feeder is a good option for me if i need around 800-1000 feet of
feeder.
Thanks again for all help, hope this is up and running to the upcoming winter.
73 Rune LA7THA
> From: topband-request@contesting.com
> Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 136, Issue 21
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 12:00:08 -0400
>
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
> topband@contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> topband-request@contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> topband-owner@contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
> (Richard (Rick) Karlquist)
> 2. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line. (Carl)
> 3. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
> (Richard (Rick) Karlquist)
> 4. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line. (Carl)
> 5. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line. (Charlie)
> 6. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
> (Grant Saviers)
> 7. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
> (Mike Waters)
> 8. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
> (Jim Brown)
> 9. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
> (Mike Waters)
> 10. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line. (k1fz)
> 11. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
> (Jim Brown)
> 12. 1000 ft Hardline (Bill & Liz)
> 13. Re: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line. (Carl)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 09:10:33 -0700
> From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
> To: Rune ?ye <runeegil@hotmail.com>, "topband@contesting.com"
> <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <535BDA79.3050909@karlquist.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> I used to have a 1000 foot long open wire line using
> 4AWG stranded insulated aluminum wire with an impedance of
> 450 ohms. At the time, the wire cost $0.15 per foot.
> I think 4AWG was the smallest size available in aluminum.
> It is much easier to build a transformer
> for 450 ohms than 600 ohms, because 450/50 = 9 is
> a perfect square. The spacing is something like 12.5
> cm. It is supported every 15 meters with a support that
> spaces the wires apart by 12.5 cm. There are no intermediate
> spreaders. Originally, I had some intermediate spreaders but
> found them to be unnecessary. At each end there is a 50 ohm unbalanced
> to 50 ohm balanced transformer in cascade with a 50 ohm
> balanced to 450 ohm balanced transformer. The supports
> are PVC pipe slipped over "T-posts" (used for fences).
> I see that the web site you mentioned shows this same
> technique. Maybe they copied me, hi.
> It is easily deployed/redeployed. The end to end loss
> including the transformers is a few tenths of a dB on
> 160 meters.
>
> I moved the shack closer to the antenna and shortened the
> line to 600 feet. The line has served me well for over
> 10 years now. There are some photos of the line on my
> web site www.n6rk.com.
>
> Rick N6RK
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 12:17:18 -0400
> From: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
> To: "Richard \(Rick\) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>, Rune ?ye
> <runeegil@hotmail.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <8982E2306F6C464A8318E5D471EBF3A4@computer1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
>
> Shouldnt that line be rotated along its length to maintain balance as done
> with OWL Beverages?
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
> To: "Rune ?ye" <runeegil@hotmail.com>; <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 12:10 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
>
>
> >I used to have a 1000 foot long open wire line using
> > 4AWG stranded insulated aluminum wire with an impedance of
> > 450 ohms. At the time, the wire cost $0.15 per foot.
> > I think 4AWG was the smallest size available in aluminum.
> > It is much easier to build a transformer
> > for 450 ohms than 600 ohms, because 450/50 = 9 is
> > a perfect square. The spacing is something like 12.5
> > cm. It is supported every 15 meters with a support that
> > spaces the wires apart by 12.5 cm. There are no intermediate
> > spreaders. Originally, I had some intermediate spreaders but
> > found them to be unnecessary. At each end there is a 50 ohm unbalanced to
> > 50 ohm balanced transformer in cascade with a 50 ohm
> > balanced to 450 ohm balanced transformer. The supports
> > are PVC pipe slipped over "T-posts" (used for fences).
> > I see that the web site you mentioned shows this same
> > technique. Maybe they copied me, hi.
> > It is easily deployed/redeployed. The end to end loss
> > including the transformers is a few tenths of a dB on
> > 160 meters.
> >
> > I moved the shack closer to the antenna and shortened the
> > line to 600 feet. The line has served me well for over
> > 10 years now. There are some photos of the line on my
> > web site www.n6rk.com.
> >
> > Rick N6RK
> >
> > _________________
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> >
> >
> > -----
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3920/7399 - Release Date: 04/26/14
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 09:42:59 -0700
> From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
> To: Carl <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>, Rune ?ye <runeegil@hotmail.com>,
> topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <535BE213.8070403@karlquist.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 4/26/2014 9:17 AM, Carl wrote:
> > Shouldnt that line be rotated along its length to maintain balance as
> > done with OWL Beverages?
> >
> > Carl
> > KM1H
> >
>
> A big vertical is omni directional and has high signal levels.
> This is in contrast to the beverage which has low signal levels
> and tries to null out certain directions. If I disconnect the
> vertical from the line, the noise level drops many S units,
> indicating negligible ingress due to line leakage.
>
> Rick N6RK
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 13:23:17 -0400
> From: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
> To: "Richard \(Rick\) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>, Rune ?ye
> <runeegil@hotmail.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <3D29C153DC584503B193CA07B291F6E5@computer1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
>
>
>
> > On 4/26/2014 9:17 AM, Carl wrote:
> >> Shouldnt that line be rotated along its length to maintain balance as
> >> done with OWL Beverages?
> >>
> >> Carl
> >> KM1H
> >>
> >
> > A big vertical is omni directional and has high signal levels.
> > This is in contrast to the beverage which has low signal levels
> > and tries to null out certain directions. If I disconnect the
> > vertical from the line, the noise level drops many S units,
> > indicating negligible ingress due to line leakage.
> >
> > Rick N6RK
>
>
> What about a 4 square?
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 20:31:16 -0400
> From: "Charlie" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
> To: "'Richard \(Rick\) Karlquist'" <richard@karlquist.com>, "'Carl'"
> <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>, 'Rune ?ye' <runeegil@hotmail.com>,
> <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID:
>
> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAACWJM6zd2WdMhBqL3ccUIeMBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> ??
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Richard
> (Rick) Karlquist
> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 12:43 PM
> To: Carl; Rune ?ye; topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
>
> On 4/26/2014 9:17 AM, Carl wrote:
> > Shouldnt that line be rotated along its length to maintain balance as
> > done with OWL Beverages?
> >
> > Carl
> > KM1H
> >
>
> A big vertical is omni directional and has high signal levels.
> This is in contrast to the beverage which has low signal levels and tries to
> null out certain directions. If I disconnect the vertical from the line,
> the noise level drops many S units, indicating negligible ingress due to
> line leakage.
>
> Rick N6RK
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
> protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 17:36:42 -0700
> From: Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net>
> To: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>, Rune ?ye
> <runeegil@hotmail.com>, "topband@contesting.com"
> <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <535C511A.5030600@pacbell.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> I use 9 gauge Al electric fencing wire for elevated radials among my
> trees. It is pretty tough stuff, as 3" branches have fallen on it
> without anything but a little stretch. it doesn't stretch much with
> time either. Now 7.5 cents per foot on Amazon
> http://www.amazon.com/Field-Guardian-9-Guage-Aluminum-1000-Feet/dp/B00442G21G/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398558684&sr=8-1&keywords=aluminum+fence+wire+9
>
> This is the largest size I have found, but would make pretty good open
> wire feeder.
>
> Grant
>
> KZ1W
> On 4/26/2014 9:10 AM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
> > I used to have a 1000 foot long open wire line using
> > 4AWG stranded insulated aluminum wire with an impedance of
> > 450 ohms. At the time, the wire cost $0.15 per foot.
> > I think 4AWG was the smallest size available in aluminum.
> > It is much easier to build a transformer
> > for 450 ohms than 600 ohms, because 450/50 = 9 is
> > a perfect square. The spacing is something like 12.5
> > cm. It is supported every 15 meters with a support that
> > spaces the wires apart by 12.5 cm. There are no intermediate
> > spreaders. Originally, I had some intermediate spreaders but
> > found them to be unnecessary. At each end there is a 50 ohm
> > unbalanced to 50 ohm balanced transformer in cascade with a 50 ohm
> > balanced to 450 ohm balanced transformer. The supports
> > are PVC pipe slipped over "T-posts" (used for fences).
> > I see that the web site you mentioned shows this same
> > technique. Maybe they copied me, hi.
> > It is easily deployed/redeployed. The end to end loss
> > including the transformers is a few tenths of a dB on
> > 160 meters.
> >
> > I moved the shack closer to the antenna and shortened the
> > line to 600 feet. The line has served me well for over
> > 10 years now. There are some photos of the line on my
> > web site www.n6rk.com.
> >
> > Rick N6RK
> >
> > _________________
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 20:17:05 -0500
> From: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
> To: topband <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID:
> <CA+FxYXi=UTyy=DuQpTXAu4T1nWMr_MNobK79a4SMoyERsURjXw@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hardline for 160 meters?
>
> I've mostly used hardline where I really needed it, like back when I was
> doing weak signal work on the low end of 144 MHz.
>
> Is 75 ohm CATV-type RG-6 (F-6) coax available where you live? That's what I
> use on 160m to feed my inverted-L that is quite a distance from the
> operating position. I buy Commscope quad-shield flooded (buryable) F-6 with
> CCS conductor and a bonded inner shield in 1000' spools off eBay. I even
> use F connectors at 1500 watts (as do other hams). Neither the coax nor the
> F connectors get the least bit warm, even after several minutes of key-down
> at 1500 watts.
>
> The loss of RG-6 is about the same as RG-213. And it will handle over 3000
> watts all day long in the hot sun.
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 18:48:51 -0700
> From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <535C6203.1070202@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 4/26/2014 6:17 PM, Mike Waters wrote:
> > The loss of RG-6 is about the same as RG-213.
>
> Only in an advertising brochure for the RG-6. On 160M, loss is all due
> to copper, and there's LOT more copper in RG213 than in any RG6 cables
> I've seen. Remember -- the question was about 1,000 ft.
>
> As to the suggestion of 75 ohm CATV coax -- it should work fine if
> anything fairly large diameter is available at low cost. In the US, I've
> heard that partial spools are often thrown in the trash by CATV
> companies who don't want to deal with those shorter lengths. That may or
> may not be true in Norway, where LA7THA lives. And even if he could find
> this hard line, he would likely need to make several splices, and the
> connectors could be expensive.
>
> 1,000 ft of the best RG8 - RG213 cables I know of will burn a bit less
> than 2 dB on topband, which is a LOT more than I would like to throw
> away on 160M. N6RK's suggestion is about 1.7 dB better than that.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 22:21:07 -0500
> From: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
> To: topband <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID:
> <CA+FxYXhMW=VqPR+C3BVmFM47XmvsRbdZsyut9v925qnpOUCsTQ@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> You're right about the loss being all in the copper center conductor, Jim.
>
> I based that statement on a graph that Owen Duffy had on the old
> vk1od.netsite for solid center conductor. Perhaps I looked at it
> wrong, but I don't
> think so.
>
> There were two charts, one for loss and the other for power handling
> capability. Maybe I have them confused.
>
> However, I did look at Commscope's data sheet. I forget all the details,
> but their loss specs at MF looked really good.
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>wrote:
>
> > On 4/26/2014 6:17 PM, Mike Waters wrote:
> >
> >> The loss of RG-6 is about the same as RG-213.
> >>
> >
> > Only in an advertising brochure for the RG-6. On 160M, loss is all due to
> > copper, and there's LOT more copper in RG213 than in any RG6 cables I've
> > seen.
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 23:47:05 -0400
> From: "k1fz" <k1fz@myfairpoint.net>
> To: "Mike Waters" <mikewate@gmail.com>, "topband"
> <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <FBE65F66B48143B08EB182640ED2D9F7@k1fzPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
>
> A calibrated dummy load wattmeter at the far end of the cable can be a real
> eye opener. Power loss distributed 1000 feet would not result in much
> warming.
>
> 73
> Bruce-K1FZ
> www.qsl.net/k1fz/pennantnotes.html
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Waters" <mikewate@gmail.com>
> To: "topband" <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 11:21 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
>
>
> > You're right about the loss being all in the copper center conductor, Jim.
> >
> > I based that statement on a graph that Owen Duffy had on the old
> > vk1od.netsite for solid center conductor. Perhaps I looked at it
> > wrong, but I don't
> > think so.
> >
> > There were two charts, one for loss and the other for power handling
> > capability. Maybe I have them confused.
> >
> > However, I did look at Commscope's data sheet. I forget all the details,
> > but their loss specs at MF looked really good.
> >
> > 73, Mike
> > www.w0btu.com
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Jim Brown
> > <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/26/2014 6:17 PM, Mike Waters wrote:
> >>
> >>> The loss of RG-6 is about the same as RG-213.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Only in an advertising brochure for the RG-6. On 160M, loss is all due to
> >> copper, and there's LOT more copper in RG213 than in any RG6 cables I've
> >> seen.
> >>
> > _________________
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 00:00:23 -0700
> From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <535CAB07.2050900@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 4/26/2014 8:21 PM, Mike Waters wrote:
> > You're right about the loss being all in the copper center conductor, Jim.
>
> AND in the shield. One of the things that gives bigger coax lower loss
> is that skin effect has the greater diameter of the shield to work with.
>
> It's important to realize that "RG6" and "RG213" are no longer
> specifications for the cable that we buy. There are, for example,
> several dozen RG6s in the Belden catalog, many very different from each
> other. Ditto for RG8, RG11, RG58, RG59, RG213, etc. You've got to look
> at the mfr data sheets to find the real specs.
>
> Example -- go to the Belden website and compare 9212, 8213, 9913,
> 9913UF. Very different construction, very different loss
> characteristics. All "RG11" (although I've seen 9212 described as RG11
> in older catalogs and RG6 in at least one newer one). I've got a big
> spool of 9212, and it's slightly smaller than most RG11, but a lot
> bigger than any RG6 I've ever seen.
>
> I haven't seen Owen's charts, but there's a good chance they're out of
> date in that respect.
>
> For cables of approximately the same o.d. a pretty good determinant of
> loss is DCR of the shield and center combined, because resistance at RF
> is that DCR multiplied by skin effect. Cables with Cu clad Al, like
> LMR400, are an exception. By the time you hit 2 MHz, it's equivalent to
> solid copper. But NOT for Cu clad steel -- it doesn't get close to to
> solid Cu for another octave or two. (an octave is double the frequency).
>
> There's more detail about this in k9yc.com/Coax-Stubs.pdf
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 06:36:22 -0400
> From: "Bill & Liz" <magoo@isp.ca>
> To: <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: 1000 ft Hardline
> Message-ID: <E949F8D02FB44A25B9AB70098FC686B7@BILLMAINPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Cable TV companies up this way have not used 75 ohm hardline for many years
> and several have large inventories in storage awaiting disposal. I acquired
> two nearly full reels for free: one buryable 5/8? and the other non-buryable
> . Each reel had about 1500-2,000 ft on it and the cable is now used in
> feeding both my TX antennas and Beverages located from 250-600 ft away from
> the house.
>
> The cable is available and probably free for the asking in your area too.
>
> Bill VE3CSK
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 10:44:39 -0400
> From: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
> To: "Mike Waters" <mikewate@gmail.com>, "topband"
> <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder
> line.
> Message-ID: <F6B18B1EB7ED42A4A87AFC73474B8616@computer1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Hardline doesnt get chewed Mike; I run 750' of 1/2" CATV on the ground to
> the Beverage hub. That was after flooded RG-11 and RG-6 got destroyed during
> a few winter months when the critters were hungry.
>
> Not a nibble in the past 24 years.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Waters" <mikewate@gmail.com>
> To: "topband" <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 9:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: 1000 feet 5/8" hardline or 600ohm True Ladder line.
>
>
> > Hardline for 160 meters?
> >
> > I've mostly used hardline where I really needed it, like back when I was
> > doing weak signal work on the low end of 144 MHz.
> >
> > Is 75 ohm CATV-type RG-6 (F-6) coax available where you live? That's what
> > I
> > use on 160m to feed my inverted-L that is quite a distance from the
> > operating position. I buy Commscope quad-shield flooded (buryable) F-6
> > with
> > CCS conductor and a bonded inner shield in 1000' spools off eBay. I even
> > use F connectors at 1500 watts (as do other hams). Neither the coax nor
> > the
> > F connectors get the least bit warm, even after several minutes of
> > key-down
> > at 1500 watts.
> >
> > The loss of RG-6 is about the same as RG-213. And it will handle over 3000
> > watts all day long in the hot sun.
> >
> > 73, Mike
> > www.w0btu.com
> > _________________
> > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> >
> >
> > -----
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3920/7401 - Release Date: 04/26/14
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 136, Issue 21
> ****************************************
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|