Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+40M\s+Beam\s+Height\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+40M\s+Beam\s+Height\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] 40M Beam Height (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (T A RUSSELL); Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:48:30 -0600; "Question, why not put the 40 at 135 ft? At that height it would be 1 wavelength high and perform even better!! I have my upper 40M beam at 134 ft! Check out my web site: http://www.erols.com/n3rr "; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-09/msg00340.html (9,010 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] 40M Beam Height (score: 1): Author: n3rr@erols.com (Bill Hider, N3RR); Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 21:26:14 +0100; Tom, That's fine, but I was merely questioning why he wanted to put the 40 at 125 ft instead of his stated maximum tower/mast height of 135 ft. He's a DXer, not a contester, so I felt that he isn't i; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-09/msg00341.html (11,018 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]