Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:w8ji@w8ji.com: 971 ]

Total 971 documents matching your query.

221. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:09:17 -0400
Just to point out that we don't have measurements of arrival angles at the ionosphere proving the fields shown in a NEC far-field analysis, either. Yet people seem to accept a NEC far-field pattern a
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00297.html (10,256 bytes)

222. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:26:52 -0400
Hi Paul, I think the important "take away" in these discussions is that the far field pattern alone is not enough to show the real vertical profile from a vertical monopole. The significance of the i
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00299.html (9,735 bytes)

223. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:55:12 -0400
How has the vert/4-SQ vs Yagi performed? A dipole and a vertical are a better test, because a four square traditionally has more losses and different gain than a Yagi. It would be interesting to see
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00301.html (9,333 bytes)

224. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 17:44:20 -0400
Did you --or anyone else you are aware of-- ever A-B test a ~120' tower against a ~300' tower on 160? I A-B or A-B-C tested several antennas, including a low dipole, the high dipole, an element from
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00304.html (11,584 bytes)

225. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 18:18:27 -0400
I A-B or A-B-C tested several antennas, including a low dipole, the high dipole, an element from my four square, a ~318 foot insulated tower vertical, and I think my tall omni vertical was about 190
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00305.html (11,881 bytes)

226. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 20:12:05 -0400
If we knew those, then we could calculate the location and distance of the signal hops. That might give us some insight as to why some people have found a taller monopole to be worse than a shorter o
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00313.html (10,769 bytes)

227. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 20:13:47 -0400
What is your (or anybody's) definition/understanding of the term "takeoff angle?" Take off angle is the thing the fellow who wrote EZNEC wished no one used because he knew it would get abused and mis
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00314.html (9,377 bytes)

228. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 20:22:54 -0400
Herb's experience below echoes mine at my house here in GA and at BC stations in the Midwest. Others besides Herb have reported the same. I used or tried to use a 308 foot self supporting base insula
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00316.html (14,524 bytes)

229. Re: Topband: HFTA, Radio Arcala, general comments (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 21:54:59 -0400
Radio Arcala - I have always believed that a horizontal antenna on 160m at very high latitudes would generally be worse (note that I didn't say always) than a vertical due to the effect of the Earth'
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00320.html (8,057 bytes)

230. Re: Topband: Best angle of radiation ? (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:39:14 -0400
There were numerous technical write ups about stations who wanted the maximum theoretical ground wave signal and spent big bucks to put up 5/8 wave verticals. They were always disappointed in the une
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00340.html (8,256 bytes)

231. Re: Topband: Best angle of radiation ? (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:47:17 -0400
-- Original Message -- From: "Guy Olinger K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net> To: "Bruce" <k1fz@myfairpoint.net> Cc: <topband@contesting.com> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:56 AM Subject: Re: Topband:
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00341.html (11,923 bytes)

232. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:51:06 -0400
Qualitative or Quantitative...Let me get this straight. If I call CQ and the band is open to Europe on 160 and nobody replies after a couple of hours with my TX antenna #1 with no replies and after s
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00342.html (11,420 bytes)

233. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:02:18 -0400
Why we are talking about A B test knowing that the ionospheric signal is fading up and down at least 10dB!? This can be verified by anybody having a stable carrier as a receiving signal and monitor i
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00344.html (12,760 bytes)

234. Re: Topband: Monopole Elev Pattern w.r.t. Earth Conductivity (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 19:37:16 -0400
In order to estimate what is the real elevation angle (3dB or HPBW) of an antenna on far field, we should gather quantitative data. Tom, what you are after with your measurements/observation?>>> Only
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00355.html (14,466 bytes)

235. Re: Topband: dipole height (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:08:51 -0400
Hi it's an interesting discussion about the dipoles. I want to put up an inverted vee dipole for 160. I can put the apex at 15,30,45 or 60m and have magnetic equator. >>> I'm sure what works here is
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00370.html (9,185 bytes)

236. Re: Topband: dipole height (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 19:18:30 -0400
RDF is the key point to improve signal noise, not gain. Vertical or low dipole has very or none directivity, so low RDF or directivity does not improve signal noise. In general, this is the case, but
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00374.html (10,075 bytes)

237. Re: Topband: dipole height (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:12:12 -0400
That's very true. Consider the K9AY. The RDF is about 7.7. Compare that to a 1 wavelength Beverage which is about 7.9 dB. The K9AY has a deep null in the 180 degree direction at the right elevation a
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00390.html (9,445 bytes)

238. Re: Topband: Feeding a vertical (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:17:26 -0400
I have a hypoth--er hipoth--oh, alright, a theory, question for all. Take a grounded, 1/4 wave vertical (pick your band/freq of interest) made of tower sections. You're going to feed it with a gamma
/archives//html/Topband/2012-10/msg00399.html (8,925 bytes)

239. Re: Topband: 1820 spur (score: 1)
Author: "Tom" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 10:03:20 -0400
We can be sure it is not a harmonic of an IF. :-) 1820 is a particularly bad frequency because it involves 2nd harmonics of a popular channel (910) and also is a mixing product for many orders of mu
/archives//html/Topband/2012-11/msg00029.html (9,396 bytes)

240. Re: Topband: Antenna analysers in close proximity to BC station. (score: 1)
Author: "Tom" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 10:22:23 -0400
Tom, The problem with a low pass filter is it acts like a transmission line and matching network combination. Even if an analyzer allows calibrating out, results can be compromised. Results are usel
/archives//html/Topband/2012-11/msg00031.html (10,916 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu