Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Elnec\s+model\s+of\s+Inv\s+L\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Elnec\s+model\s+of\s+Inv\s+L\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Elnec model of Inv L (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:43:34 -0500; Besides what John posted, there is another effect that we should keep in mind when modeling. Eznec "looks at" the antenna from an extremely large distance away. Looking at the antenna pattern from a; /archives//html/Topband/1999-12/msg00004.html (7,704 bytes)
2. Topband: Elnec model of Inv L (score: 1): Author: W2pm@aol.com (W2pm@aol.com); Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 13:19:52 EST; I am seeking comments on this Elnec modeling exercise: I entered a 3/8wave Inv L with a 1/4 wave counterpoise at 5' off ground and noticed fairly low gain of .492dbi at maximum takeoff angle. Then by; /archives//html/Topband/1999-11/msg00213.html (7,110 bytes)
3. Topband: Elnec model of Inv L (score: 1): Author: kaufmann@ll.mit.edu (John Kaufmann); Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:04:20 -0500; ELNEC (or any other MININEC derived modeling program) is not capable of accurately calculating gain of antennas with horizontal wires close to ground, including verticals with elevated radials (or co; /archives//html/Topband/1999-11/msg00216.html (7,400 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]