Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Interaction\s+with\s+the\s+Optibeam\s+16\-3\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: Bill via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:47:50 -0400
Anyone out there using an Optibeam 16-3 tribander in close proximity to either an M2 40 4MLLDD or an Optibeam 40 meter Yagi? By close proximity I mean around 10 feet. Any interactions noticed, especi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-09/msg00311.html (7,027 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: "Chester Alderman" <aldermant@windstream.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 17:55:07 -0400
Yes, I have a OB16-3 at 70' and an OB40-2 on a 2" mast, 10 feet above the tribander. I had SWR data at about 20' above ground and noticed no degradation in the 40m yagi when the 16-el was put in plac
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-09/msg00312.html (8,278 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 23:50:30 -0700
I have an OB16-3 at 73 feet and an OB2-40 at 83 feet ... both have been up since 2008. Shortly after I installed them I ran pattern profiles of both antennas with the help of K9RX, who back then live
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-09/msg00313.html (8,739 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: "john@kk9a.com" <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 06:55:42 -0400
There is a big design difference between a linear loaded M2 and a High-Q coil loaded OptiBeam with detuning stubs, however I think neither antenna is resonant on 15m. I do not see any issued with the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-09/msg00314.html (7,860 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 07:55:33 -0600
There is a big design difference between a linear loaded M2 and a High-Q coil loaded OptiBeam with detuning stubs, however I think neither antenna is resonant on 15m. I do not see any issued with the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-09/msg00315.html (8,181 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: "StellarCAT" <rxdesign@ssvecnet.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:24:04 -0400
Steve, Interesting.... my plans are for a 40M4LLDD mounted ~31 above the top antenna of a 2x6el stack on 15... when I model something similar (I happen to, at the time, be looking at a moxon on 40) I
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-10/msg00000.html (8,380 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 17:26:36 -0600
Modeling guys for example the ARRL AB dimensions for safe lengths ... arent! They couple enough energy, Ive tried a good variance of lengths Funny you should mention this. The next issue of the Nati
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-10/msg00002.html (7,640 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: "Roger (K8RI) on TT" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 22:20:09 -0400
Depending on the band and height to determine the segment lengths, I started with relatively short lengths and made them progressively longer as I went down making sure to avoid resonant lengths and
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-10/msg00003.html (9,691 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Interaction with the Optibeam 16-3 (score: 1)
Author: Dan Maguire via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 19:21:01 -0700
Gary forgot to mention, or was too modest to mention, that in doing his tests he discovered a bug in EZNEC v6. He had his antenna-only model already open in EZNEC and he had his guy wires defined in
/archives//html/Towertalk/2015-10/msg00004.html (8,386 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu