Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+75\s+meter\s+loop\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+75\s+meter\s+loop\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] 75 meter loop (score: 1): Author: Joe Barnes <n4jbk@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:24:05 -0400; can anyone tell me what kind of performance I can expect from a 75 meter loop positioned on its side with the top at 80 feet or so? I am still trying to find something to out perform my inverted v wi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-10/msg00511.html (6,417 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter loop (score: 1): Author: "D. Scott MacKenzie" <kb0fhp@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:27:53 -0400; I think it depends on what you want....From you description, I gather you are putting the loop up vertically - if so, it will be an excellent performer for DX (from ON4UN's book), when loaded to prov; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-10/msg00512.html (8,463 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] 75 meter loop (score: 1): Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>; Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:36:25 -0500; You could move the inverted vee to 125 ft and pick up 2 to 3 dB. A vertical loop with 102 ft horizontal wires and 42 ft vertical wires, with the top wire at 80 ft (resonates at 3.55 MHz), fed at the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-10/msg00517.html (8,550 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] 75 meter loop (score: 1): Author: Dennis OConnor <ad4hk2004@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 06:05:47 -0700 (PDT); You are already there... Your Vee at 95' is going to out run any other configuration at any lower elevation... The only improvement you could make was already suggested, raise the Vee.. denny ... k8d; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-10/msg00521.html (6,755 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]