Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:jimjarvis@verizon.net: 26 ]

Total 26 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: slinky rx antenna? (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 19:58:36 -0500
Anyone with direct experience with 'slinky' coiled wire rx antennas, terminated like beverages? something like 100-150' long. I saw one once, at a chap's place in CT, but can't remember his call, and
/archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00051.html (6,472 bytes)

2. Re: Topband: Slinky beverage (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 08:33:56 -0500
Thanks, all, for the reference. I've read KM1H's discussion, and as soon as I can find DeVoldere's book in the boxes we've packed, I'll read what's there. n2ea jimjarvis@ieee.org jimjarvis@verizon.ne
/archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00054.html (6,328 bytes)

3. Topband: QSO coordination (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:01:13 -0500
Folks: If we were designing an experiment to test the ionosphere for shifting propagation, and trying to correlate it with something else...like sunspots or magnetic anomalies....we'd surely coordina
/archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00119.html (7,846 bytes)

4. Topband: qrss & such (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:33:37 -0500
As Bill Tippett observes, many of the digital modes won't cut it in the QSB/QRM/QRN/weak-signal/short-opening environment of 160. And there isn't enough time in life to accept QRSS, as Bill also obse
/archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00138.html (7,683 bytes)

5. Topband: technology qso's (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:42:40 -0500
I hate to prolong this thread, but it may have value. Jim, KR1S made the following points: VHF) far, another We set our own standards for what constitutes a valid QSO (within the rules and regs) and
/archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00164.html (8,594 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: psychoacoustics (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:25:35 -0500
I've found that small signal detection is actually BETTER in a wider bandwidth. i.e. ssb filters vs. cw filters for cw sigs. Why? It's a better sample of white noise, which the brain can average out.
/archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00309.html (8,321 bytes)

7. Topband: contest issues/ split operation/ window (score: 1)
Author: <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 16:50:36 -0600 (CST)
Fellow topbanders: I've been off and on on the band, going back to regular dx work with Stew, in the 60's. It was an nc300 and viking Navigator at the time, with our 40w limit. And I've worked dxcc,
/archives//html/Topband/2005-12/msg00159.html (8,202 bytes)

8. Topband: KR1S comments/N6RK additions (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 07:25:02 -0500
I would take exception to this notion: 6. Get a Titanex vertical, which can be tilted up at night and laid down before the neighbors see it in the morning. While I've only put up one, I did it twice.
/archives//html/Topband/2005-12/msg00298.html (6,574 bytes)

9. Topband: RM 11305/11306 (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:01:47 -0500
Both of these proposals require careful reading. The devil is undoubtedly in the details. The ARRL proposal would segregate signals by bandwidth, rather than mode. This encourages development and use
/archives//html/Topband/2006-01/msg00121.html (8,127 bytes)

10. Topband: skype remote rx 'beacons' (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:25:43 +0000
Three things would appear to be true: 1) They will either have utility or they won't. 2) Standing in the face of technology won't improve the state of amateur radio. 3) They all ought to be on ONE fr
/archives//html/Topband/2006-03/msg00054.html (7,629 bytes)

11. Topband: 4 sq k9ay loops for topband (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:27:37 +0000
Tom, Kaz, loops: http://sp3key.com/klub/k9ay_160_en/index.html Kaz, am I correct in my understanding? How did you feed the 4 pairs of loops? What were the phase relationships? How did you select dire
/archives//html/Topband/2006-03/msg00093.html (7,783 bytes)

12. Topband: FW: antenna (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:07:52 +0000
Eric, If the antenna is just off the E70, then I found it on Google Earth. 44deg 56m 59s North x 0 deg 11m 21s East sound about right? Interesting mystery. While I pour through international allocati
/archives//html/Topband/2006-06/msg00035.html (6,983 bytes)

13. [TowerTalk] MW antenna in Bordeaux (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 17:50:10 +0000
Eric....here's your answer, thanks to F8BPN Hi, I answered directly to Jim on his previous mail, before to read this one. This is France Info tower on 1.206 MHz. Eric, how long do you stay around Bor
/archives//html/Topband/2006-06/msg00036.html (8,136 bytes)

14. [TowerTalk] MW antenna in Bordeaux (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 17:45:45 +0000
Since the tower is series fed with open wire 'coax', and we can't see any feed to the sloping wire, I'm inclined to think that the sloper is a reflector, and is broadened in cross section by the cage
/archives//html/Topband/2006-06/msg00041.html (7,022 bytes)

15. Re: Topband: Grounded Tower (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 12:26:35 -0400
Quoth N9RF: "I would opt for a known performer -- the shunt-fed tower with in/on ground radials. Regardless of claims that 4 elevetaed radials outperforms many on/in ground radials, the opposite has
/archives//html/Topband/2006-08/msg00018.html (7,749 bytes)

16. Topband: elevated radials (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 09:25:43 -0400
Following N4HY's admonition regarding Gustafson's (N7CL) work with elevated radials, I Googled him...and wound up in the reflector thread on this topic, back in '98. Still reading the exchanges...and
/archives//html/Topband/2006-08/msg00027.html (7,679 bytes)

17. Topband: elevated radials (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 09:29:00 -0400
My last on this topic... from the 11 Oct 1996 archives, N7CL responding to an inquiry from WC7M.... Below, a small snippet from a lengthy, but pithy post. If you're seriously interested in the topic,
/archives//html/Topband/2006-08/msg00028.html (7,249 bytes)

18. Topband: a variant on elevated radials (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 12:16:07 -0400
TB: K3ANS uses an antenna which has several 1/4 wave 'radials' coming off his 120' tower at the 90' level. Coax snakes up the tower, with the 'radials' fed from the center conductor, and the shield c
/archives//html/Topband/2006-08/msg00033.html (6,711 bytes)

19. Topband: Resonant Radials Redux (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:06:25 -0400
VE3XZ observed that ON4UN says taking velocity factor into account, quarter wave resonant radials can be half the assumed physical length. On page 9-11, Devoldere says, (summarizing), that for a wire
/archives//html/Topband/2006-10/msg00097.html (7,352 bytes)

20. Topband: Battle Creek Special (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 13:10:31 -0400
Anybody using a Battle Creek Special as a regular home station antenna? It, or possibly a variant of it, might be a workable solution for my suburban qth. Appreciate any first-hand, experience based
/archives//html/Topband/2006-10/msg00107.html (6,345 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]
This search system is powered by Namazu