Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Shunt\s+fed\s+vs\s+Inverted\s+L\s+and\s+Vee\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Shunt\s+fed\s+vs\s+Inverted\s+L\s+and\s+Vee\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TowerTalk] Shunt fed vs Inverted L and Vee (score: 1): Author: Dennis W0JX <w0jx@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 09:21:01 -0800 (PST); I have been using a shunt fed tower system on 160M since 1978. I first started out with a 60 feet Universal with a TH6 on top followed by 3 stacked mono-banders. The next iteration was growing the to; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-12/msg00047.html (8,118 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Shunt fed vs Inverted L and Vee (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 09:55:07 -0800; On 12/3/2013 9:21 AM, Dennis W0JX wrote: I cannot imagine a better single element antenna for 160 that fits on my lot without guying. Your 90 foot tower might benefit by more top loading. I would get; /archives//html/Towertalk/2013-12/msg00049.html (8,280 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]