Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:n4is@n4is.com: 46 ]

Total 46 documents matching your query.

21. Re: Topband: Bad Frequencies and Loop Pre-amps (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 08:57:08 -0500
The main issue with IMD is the passive IMD generated by oxidation between two metal structures or wires. The IMD's on 1810,1820, 30 40 50 etc, most of the time is irradiated on your own back yard fro
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00070.html (9,935 bytes)

22. Re: Topband: 40m array as RX antenna (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 16:00:17 -0500
Hi Jaime The only way to really improve signal to noise ratio is with directivity. Better directivity better signal to noise ratio. Everything else is just less deterioration or more deterioration. T
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00091.html (10,119 bytes)

23. Re: Topband: 40m array as RX antenna (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 19:41:00 -0500
Lee I agree with you, a vertical array in a quiet place works very well, I remember our friend Dale. The 8 circle array has almost 13 db RDF and can hear better than the WF with 11.5db RDF. The issue
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00094.html (13,269 bytes)

24. Re: Topband: 40m array as RX antenna (score: 1)
Author: "JC" <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 07:19:24 -0500
Hi Jim and Lee Before we agree that we disagree, let me elaborate on few basic concepts for a good design. Point by point and let me know which one you disagree. 1- RF runs outside the cable surface,
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00097.html (10,411 bytes)

25. Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 15:32:37 -0500
I never heard him on any band but he must be very active on EME ARRL DXCC - 2 Meters -151 OK1YQ http://www.arrl.org/system/dxcc/view/DXCC-2M-20181116-USLetter.pdf 73's JC N4IS ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00113.html (7,169 bytes)

26. Re: Topband: Vertical and horizontal polarized antennas in the same space (was Propagation improves from VK6 into Europe) (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2018 07:38:46 -0500
Hi Steve. You are 100 % right, the V works like a top hat for a vertical TX antenna. I it simple to detune any vertical TX antenna. Vertical TX antenna is the only way to work DX on topband! You may
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00134.html (8,111 bytes)

27. Re: Topband: Fwd: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters OK1YQ (OK1RD) Legitimacy???!!! (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2018 07:54:48 -0500
Hi Jeff We have a similar problem with several "PY" faking QSL, QSO and even LOTW confirmation by the DX operator. We've been reporting (we.. N4IS, PY2XB , PY2RO and PY5EG), documenting on paper, tal
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00135.html (12,729 bytes)

28. Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2018 08:28:42 -0500
Hi Joel I have the same impression as Bill mentioned. 160m paper QSL requires a card checker, however LOTW confirmation does not have the same process, no QSO or QSL check at all. We've seen 160m " Q
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00138.html (10,309 bytes)

29. Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:55:48 -0500
Hi Guys Here what I think is the problem. DXCC records and link accounts. This is a problem with CQ WAZ as well. Here some examples, Back in late 80's a PY1 send 40 cards to claim CQ WAZ 40 zones on
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00194.html (10,733 bytes)

30. Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:25:33 -0500
Guys Just for clarification I mentioned a QSO on 160 between PY3 and 4W SSB low power when there is no darkness near PY3 SR, only few minutes near SS. During winter I can hear Europe on 40 m all day
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00202.html (10,242 bytes)

31. Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX everywhere - the facts (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 13:39:24 -0500
Hi Frank I can comment on horizontal polarization. I am experiencing both polarization since 1980; with a vertical and a inverted V at 30m and 40m later; also with high DRF receiving antennas like th
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00229.html (12,043 bytes)

32. Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 11:05:43 -0500
Roger Every dipole or inverted V irradiate 50% of the power horizontal polarized broadside with the wire and 50% of the power vertical polarized along the wire. After the first refraction it does not
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00258.html (8,050 bytes)

33. Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 06:58:19 -0500
Sorry , but all antenna's on 160m are close to the ground and it is the case, you can check by yourself using EZENEC if you don't know how to calculate the fields. There is no misleading here. 73 JC
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00273.html (10,750 bytes)

34. Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 08:49:36 -0500
John The issue here is not math. It is the interaction of fields and matter. A good text book is Electromagnetic waves and radiating system by Edward C Jordan and Keith G. Balmain. Chapter 9. You can
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00277.html (13,990 bytes)

35. Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:01:32 -0500
Hi John On EZNEC for sure 3D. do not use total field, under description select horizontal and vertical field only and see the red line , vertical field and green line horizontal field, use real groun
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00279.html (16,960 bytes)

36. Re: Topband: Vertical antennas aren't always best for DX (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:52:10 -0500
John I think I understand where we disagree. Most low dipoles on 160m are 30 to 60 ft high, 1/4 wave high is not low for most stations. Very few can afford a dipole at 120 ft high. You right 50% is a
/archives//html/Topband/2018-11/msg00280.html (17,155 bytes)

37. Re: Topband: Rather use N-type (was Re: The answer to PL-259 soldering/reliability problems) (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 11:03:04 -0500
The issue with PL-259 is the leaking of common mode current into the internal RF current. On higher bands the leaking is very bad but difficult to see or understand. I went to over 50 WF installation
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00051.html (16,015 bytes)

38. Re: Topband: Waller Flag (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 15:04:57 -0500
Hi Stan There are two very important numbers to consider, first is horizontal or vertical, the horizontal signal is zero at ground level and maximum at 1.5 wave length height , vertical signal is max
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00147.html (9,477 bytes)

39. Re: Topband: Waller Flag (score: 1)
Author: <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 15:37:10 -0500
Stan Yes, for each one db improvement on RDF you can expect 2 or more dB on signal to noise ratio. One simple solution for you is to phase two or 4 delta flags, it will provide over 14 db RDF and onl
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00150.html (10,907 bytes)

40. Re: Topband: On FT8, noise bandwidths, filters, and signal vs noise. (score: 1)
Author: "JC" <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 19:26:05 -0500
Hi Tim You wrote < In VHF/UHF and EME weak-signal CW work, a lot of operators also liked listening with wider RX filters too, often preferring Gaussian filter shapes, and letting their ear pull the s
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00209.html (10,060 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu