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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Inverted\s+L\s+redux\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Inverted L redux (score: 1): Author: N4ZR <n4zr@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 15:08:16 -0400; More as an experiment and a thought-provoker than anything else, I've started adding 50-60-foot, on-the-ground radials to my 135-foot inverted L. In the latest incarnation I'm up to 4 radials. On m; /archives//html/Topband/2019-09/msg00023.html (8,187 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: Inverted L redux (score: 1): Author: <rgarrett5@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 15:33:12 -0400; Pete, Traditional wisdom is, if you have the choice of short or long radials, more shorter ones are preferred over a few long ones. However, 50 60 foot radials are not considered long for 160 meters.; /archives//html/Topband/2019-09/msg00024.html (8,899 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: Inverted L redux (score: 1): Author: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 12:37:07 -0700; The radiation resistance depends somewhat on the vertical vs horizontal components of the 135 feet which you didn't specify. It is easy to model on EZNEC what the drive impedance is over ideal ground; /archives//html/Topband/2019-09/msg00025.html (8,423 bytes)
4. Topband: Inverted L redux (score: 1): Author: "Clive GM3POI" <clive@gm3poi.com>; Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2019 15:40:14 -0500; The bandwidth of the SWR is a clue to how poor the ground system is. As you add radials the bandwidth will get narrower and the SWR is likely to change. At present it all looks like a big dummy load.; /archives//html/Topband/2019-09/msg00026.html (9,120 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: Inverted L redux (score: 1): Author: Wes <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>; Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 12:42:00 -0700; Four 50-60 footers. See: https://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/files/antenna_ground_system_experiment_4.pdf for my rational. Wes N7WS On 9/2/2019 12:08 PM, N4ZR wrote: More as an experiment and a thought-p; /archives//html/Topband/2019-09/msg00027.html (8,493 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: Inverted L redux (score: 1): Author: S57AD <mirko.s57ad@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 21:42:35 +0200; Add more short (50 - 60 foot) radials, IMHO. Some 45 years ago I worked as a wireless operator in fixed service on 60m band (my call has been 4NC24L) and we used L antennas. At my surprise, ground wa; /archives//html/Topband/2019-09/msg00028.html (9,333 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: Inverted L redux (score: 1): Author: donovanf@starpower.net; Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 16:23:55 -0400 (EDT); Hi Pete, Unless you're planning more than 30 radials eventually, there's no reason to install radials longer than the 50-60 feet you're already using. This is one of several classic references on the; /archives//html/Topband/2019-09/msg00029.html (8,846 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]