Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+vertical\s+160\/80m\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+vertical\s+160\/80m\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <rtym@ippt.gov.pl>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 07:36:29 +0100; Hello All, I asked already about this subject but still I'm not sure what to do specially after last e-mails regarding DL0AO verical. I'm going to build a vertical for both 80/160m but I'd like to ha; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00123.html (7,034 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 07:54:09 -0400; the mast? to know Rys, The performance difference between a base loaded 90 ft vertical and top loaded is unimportant if the ground system is good. Loading location is not so important. With noticeab; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00124.html (8,674 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <rtym@ippt.gov.pl>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 13:43:28 +0100; First of all THANKS for explanations Tom! I will have probably not the perfect radials system as I'm planning to have only about 40 radials /its an orchard and probably I'll have to remove radials du; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00126.html (7,954 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: "john battin" <jbattin@msn.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 08:39:17 -0500; I have used a 90 foot vertical with a tapped loading coil for 160 and a series C for 80. On 80 it is a bit better in side/by/side comparisons with a 1/4 wave vertical over an identical 100 radial fie; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00128.html (9,512 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: Roger D Johnson <n1rj@adelphia.net>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 11:52:07 -0500; I have used several versions of this antenna over the years. The last being the Titanex V-160s. It's approximately 3/8 wavelength on 80m so the base impedance isn't too high. I also discovered that t; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00129.html (7,974 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <rtym@ippt.gov.pl>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 16:41:55 +0100; Roger,thanks for e-mail. Well,I suspect you have used 90 ft vertical WITHOUT a hat /?/. I would like to use a hat to minimize losses on 160m and I want to have 100 ft high mast. There is another que; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00131.html (7,997 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 12:56:06 -0400; have only about Spring-Autumn Season/. 40 radials is a very good ground system. 60 is near perfect. Unless the radials are very short of course. for 80" means A skirt is two or more wires dropped ve; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00132.html (8,938 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: vertical 160/80m (score: 1): Author: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <rtym@ippt.gov.pl>; Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 17:41:17 +0100; [You would feed the skirt on 80 and the center on 160. You could probably just feed them in parallel.] OK Tom,now it is clear and it seems to be very interesting solution. I understand "few feet away; /archives//html/Topband/2004-04/msg00133.html (8,159 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]