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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+OCFD\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: "Wilson Lamb" <infomet@embarqmail.com>; Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:28:48 -0400; All your problems will go away if you build some open wire line and feed with a balanced tuner...HB or Matchbox. WL _______________________________________________ ___________________________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00339.html (7,213 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:55:44 -0700; Those who believe this seem not to realize that any imbalance in the antenna SYSTEM causes the feedline to carry common mode current both on RX and TX. That may be no big deal on TX, but on RX, the c; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00342.html (7,894 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: "Wilson Lamb" <infomet@embarqmail.com>; Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 20:08:06 -0400; Jim, I'm awed by your knowledge and willingness to share. But don't disparage things that have worked for decades. Of course the open wire fed OCFD is not optimum, but we were asked about an "OK" mul; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00344.html (9,061 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>; Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:46:50 -0700; Those who believe this seem not to realize that any imbalance in the antenna SYSTEM causes the feedline to carry common mode current both on RX and TX. That may be no big deal on TX, but on RX, the c; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00347.html (8,715 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 20:53:48 -0700; Why not, if conditions under which they are used have changed to make them work less well? The thing that has changed is NOISE. Of course the open wire fed OCFD is not optimum, but we were asked abou; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00354.html (8,036 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 08:46:27 -0400; Plus on higher frequencies the OCF Dipole has deep nulls. If these nulls are in your target area it is a poor choice for a TX antenna as well. You are much better off with a fan dipole which has a si; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00356.html (8,022 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: "Doug Ronald" <doug@dougronald.com>; Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 11:12:53 -0700; The tapered line concept is actually simple and logical. My LPDA antenna uses one which I pulled apart to inspect when I was constructing it. The outside diameter of the coax stays constant, in my ca; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00359.html (9,199 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] OCFD (score: 1): Author: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 19:57:52 -0500; Wilson forget it. These guys are going to take coax to their graves with them. A recent issue of QST could be regarded as the Coax Do or Die issue. There were two or three laughable articles describ; /archives//html/Towertalk/2017-03/msg00378.html (7,814 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]