Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Low\-angle\s+radiation\s+from\s+vertical\s+antennas\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Low\-angle\s+radiation\s+from\s+vertical\s+antennas\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Low-angle radiation from vertical antennas (score: 1): Author: Dan Maguire via Topband <topband@contesting.com>; Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 03:15:41 -0700; This is somewhat related to the "vertical on a beach" thread but I figured if I put that in the subject line I might get lynched. In the past there have been questions about the accuracy of NEC far f; /archives//html/Topband/2014-08/msg00217.html (8,602 bytes)
2. Topband: Low-angle radiation from vertical antennas (score: 1): Author: "Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net>; Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 13:36:11 -0500; Dan's AutoEZ charts remove all doubt about the issue of whether or not the ground wave contributes to monopole radiation reaching the ionosphere. Clearly, it doesn't. R. Fry _________________ Topband; /archives//html/Topband/2014-08/msg00228.html (7,413 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: Low-angle radiation from vertical antennas (score: 1): Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <k2av.guy@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:25:09 -0400; So now NEC is definitive? Even with all it's known defects around the edges? NEC is the process that indicates the unproven/undisproven notch. Measurements at aircraft altitudes and 25-50 km or hold; /archives//html/Topband/2014-08/msg00230.html (8,003 bytes)
4. Topband: Low-angle radiation from vertical antennas (score: 1): Author: "Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net>; Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 19:19:54 -0500; Based on the AutoEZ charts linked here by AC6LA, the existence of this "notch" is true only if NEC is misused and/or misunderstood. _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contestin; /archives//html/Topband/2014-08/msg00233.html (7,629 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]