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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+double\s+bazooka\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: tleaf@hotmail.com (Ted Leaf); Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 02:04:09 -1000; Hi guys, I am looking for a shorter wire antenna for 80M, other than a dipole. My two trees are not far enough apart, only 100 feet apart and I prefer not to let the ends hang down. I heard about the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00094.html (7,753 bytes)
2. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: wes@attawayinterests.com (Wes Attaway); Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 17:05:42 -0500; I think Tom and others will tell you that the double-bazooka is very lossy. It has had widespread use over the years, but if you read the literature on antenna efficiencies you will see that a random; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00108.html (9,485 bytes)
3. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: jreisert@jlc.net (Joe Reisert); Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 19:13:29 -0400; Hi Ted, Why not try the G5RV dipole. It's 102 feet long and can be shortened further by lengthening the 450 Ohm feedline. It will give good service on 80 and 40 with broadside pattern as well as 20 a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00110.html (9,235 bytes)
4. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: wa7fab@cdsnet.net (Van K7VS); Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 16:46:36 -0700; with a g5rv, keep your antenna tuner handy as you WILL need it for all bands. Certainly a compromise antenna but useful in some instances.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00111.html (7,735 bytes)
5. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: zigm1975@alloymail.com (S. Markowski Jr.); Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 05:02:45 +0000; You "CAN" work alot of DX with a G5RV and 100 watts. You will learn one new character trait..... "PATIENCE"! 73, Zig KM9M; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00116.html (8,077 bytes)
6. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 01:20:34 -0600; A *simple* solution to the 100 ft space limited antenna problem is to just install a 100 ft center fed dipole using Ladder Line feeders and an Antenna Tuner such as a Johnson Matchbox. I have 4 Ladde; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00117.html (9,600 bytes)
7. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: stevekz9g@speakeasy.net (Steve G.); Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 01:08:16 -0700; Yep... it's hard to beat these simplistic center-fed antennas that Tom has described. Just match or "tune" these low loss antenna systems (system = antenna and balanced feed line) with a capable tune; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00118.html (11,807 bytes)
8. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 05:29:21 -0400; Hi Ted, A few years ago someone from this reflector sent me an IAC Double Bazooka to test. Despite fantastic performance claims the Bazooka has about the same bandwidth as a regular wire dipole, is; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00119.html (8,250 bytes)
9. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: jreisert@jlc.net (Joe Reisert); Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 07:24:43 -0400; Steve, With the G5RV dipole, you get reasonable VSWR on the major bands. On 80 meters it may get to 3:1 or so at edge of band but all my rigs with built in tuners worked fine and never used an extern; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00121.html (14,064 bytes)
10. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: jreisert@jlc.net (Joe Reisert); Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 11:20:42 -0400; Hi Tom, Just to add a few words. In the early 1980's, Frank Witt, AI1H, was doing lots of work on broad banding 80-meter dipoles. He first explored the double bazooka and concluded it was slightly wi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00127.html (10,136 bytes)
11. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 08:08:24 -0600; I use the 450 ohm window ladderline mostly. Incidently, a COAX fed 80M dipole will also work well on the WARC bands since the center is a current maximum, or nearly so, on 30, 17, and 12M where a dip; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00128.html (11,890 bytes)
12. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 08:08:24 -0600; I use the 450 ohm window ladderline mostly. Incidently, a COAX fed 80M dipole will also work well on the WARC bands since the center is a current maximum, or nearly so, on 30, 17, and 12M where a dip; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00129.html (11,785 bytes)
13. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 08:08:24 -0600; I use the 450 ohm window ladderline mostly. Incidently, a COAX fed 80M dipole will also work well on the WARC bands since the center is a current maximum, or nearly so, on 30, 17, and 12M where a dip; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00130.html (11,681 bytes)
14. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: stevekz9g@speakeasy.net (Steve G.); Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 12:25:33 -0700; Hi Joe, Thanks for the additional info on the G5RV. It's nice to converse with you on the subject. As a matter of fact, I've never tried a G5RV after seeing one while pulling it up at a friend's hous; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00136.html (16,452 bytes)
15. [Towertalk] double bazooka (score: 1): Author: jreisert@jlc.net (Joe Reisert); Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 16:52:44 -0400; Hi Steve, My point about the G5RV is that as originally configured is that it yields a reasonable match to 50 Ohm on the major ham bands that most modern day radios can match WITHOUT AN ANTENNA TUNER; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00140.html (18,978 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]