[CQ-Contest] Second radio tri-band antenna options?
Brian Short
bshort at speedchoice.com
Wed Apr 7 21:29:00 EDT 1999
This has been addressed before by W2UP, see:
http://www.qex.net/k7on/contest/ant2.htm
--
Brian Short, K7ON 1994 E Laguna Dr Tempe, Az 85282
bshort at speedchoice.com >or< http://www.qex.net/k7on/
--
"I stayed up all night playing poker with tarot cards. I
got a full house and four people died." - Steven Wright
--
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
>From Jim Pratt <n6ig at netcom.com> Thu Apr 8 00:20:19 1999
From: Jim Pratt <n6ig at netcom.com> (Jim Pratt)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 16:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Second radio tri-band antenna options?
In-Reply-To: <a7af3375.243ce68d at aol.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9904071327.A10674-0100000 at netcom18>
I concur that any sort of multiple radio arrangements will result in
excessive RF coming into the second receiver and causing receiving
problems and/or receiver burnout. However, I don't agree with the
concept of switched filters.
At W6GO, we have one set of ICE filters - one filter for each contest
band. And we have a policy that one will not transmit on any radio
unless all radios (which are connected to antennas) also have a bandpass
filter in line. Thus it really isn't possible to blow up one radio with
another when you accidentally put both stations on 20 meters in the
middle of the night. With automatic switched filters, it becomes much
more likely to have a catastrophe.
My hat's off to those who avoid blowing things up with automatic systems,
I will stick to the manual method with quick-disconnect connectors for
quick band changes.
73, Jim N6IG
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list