Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Was\s+\"43ft\s+Vertical\s+Feeding\s*$/: 32 ]

Total 32 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: "Samir Popaja" <7s7v@adamomail.se>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:59:26 +0100
This unit will done the job. http://www.hamware.de/hardware/tuner502/at502-e.htm Best Regards Samir, SM7VZX (7S7V) www.qsl.net/7s7v www.sk7mw.se _______________________________________________ ______
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00628.html (7,496 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 04:54:55 -0500
I think you meant to post the link to the 1500 w tuner, not the 200 w tuner.... and the big boy costs a mere $2100 with shipping extra. Maybe it would work, but it is rather expensive! == Richards -
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00630.html (7,442 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:05:22 -0500
What am I missing here. You need to cover 8 bands - surely a set of switched L networks, including several for band segments on 160, 80 and 40, could be built for much less than any automatic tuner c
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00633.html (8,014 bytes)

4. [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Dennis OConnor <ad4hk2004@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 05:26:32 -0800 (PST)
Pete - right on! I am dismayed by the lack of the old ham spirit that I see in todays operators...   Pete pointed it out quite clearly... 12 relays @ $3 a pop - $36 Roll of quarter inch dia. soft cop
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00636.html (8,521 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 06:27:01 -0800
It can probably tune a vertical as well as anything else. And, as previously noted, it too is in the couple of kilobuck class (plus, that control cable is going to be pricey.. ) But, this kind of thi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00637.html (8,978 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: "Greg" <ab7r@cablespeed.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 06:37:47 -0800
There's one just for verticals at hamware.de - I think its the 615 model and its high power. 73 Greg AB7R --Original Message-- From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contest
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00638.html (9,783 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 06:33:05 -0800
A couple years ago I ran through a design exercise on just this approach, and it turns out that it's about the same, either way. The typical L network autotuner has 7 or 8 L's (and their relays) and
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00640.html (9,256 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 06:45:08 -0800
back at the beginning, we discussed the difference between homebrew and getting an integrated unit. If you're willing to spend the considerable amount of free time needed to design and build a unit,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00641.html (10,747 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:08:05 -0500
My point wasn't to run an economic exercise here, but to suggest a DIY approach. Besides, the commercial tuners all involve enclosures, fancy control systems, and (gasp) profit. 73, Pete ____________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00643.html (9,409 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:37:42 -0800
There was a book by Vertical Antenna Book by Capt Paul Lee N6PL published by CQ Communications back in the 80's which featured numerous examples of homebrew matching networks with relays for multiban
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00644.html (10,087 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: "Alex Malyava" <alex.k2bb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:15:23 -0500
There was an article in QST, about a year ago, regarding homebrew remote antenna tuner with just a few controls. Something like L-network, both C and L are driven by the same motor, but there is a ge
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00645.html (10,954 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Dennis OConnor <ad4hk2004@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 09:30:35 -0800 (PST)
HI Jim, thanks for the comments... Yes, the relays will handle the voltage and current at 1.5kw... The ones I use are ~ $2.50... I buy typically 2 dozen at a time for the price break..  You have to r
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00651.html (10,830 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:04:43 -0500
Another advantage to switching L networks is that it's fast. In a contest you don't want to wait for an antenna to adjust. Array Solutions used to sell a unit similar to what N4ZR described for a 70'
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00675.html (9,838 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: "Dan Zimmerman N3OX" <n3ox@n3ox.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:19:47 -0600
"Another advantage to switching L networks is that it's fast. In a contest you don't want to wait for an antenna to adjust." Honestly, that's why I bothered with this: http://www.n3ox.net/projects/lo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00691.html (9,029 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 22:59:23 -0800
I really like the green trash can, Dan. That's real ham radio (don't need no stinkin' $$$NEMA box). 73, Mike W4EF......... _______________________________________________ ____________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00692.html (10,062 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: "Dan Zimmerman N3OX" <n3ox@n3ox.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:06:52 -0600
Yeah, until you go to fire up in a DX pileup on 40m, and you see your SWR way out of whack and climbing, and you go out and have to clean out RF-fried earwig from your capacitor ... There are pros a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00693.html (9,200 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:17:01 -0500
Eeeewwww.... yuk. But a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do... == K8JHR == go out and have to clean out RF-fried == _______________________________________________ __________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00694.html (9,014 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:20:24 -0500
Easy for you to say... Some of us have the spirit, but lack the know how. And yet we are trying to be good ham operators all the while. I am up to building dipoles, installing my new vertical, solder
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00695.html (10,660 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:54:09 -0800
Hmmm - fried earwig - that sounds like an episode of Iron Chef gone bad :-) _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list Towe
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00696.html (8,877 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] Was "43ft Vertical Feeding (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 04:27:31 -0500
I FOUND A REFERENCE TO A NEW HIGH POWER, BUT LESS EXPENSIVE SIMPLE REMOTE TUNER WITHOUT MEMORIES AT THIS SITE AND HAD SOME EMAIL CONVERSATION WITH THE PROPRIETOR THEREOF. HIS REPLIES, WITHOUT EDITING
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-11/msg00698.html (11,346 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu