So, those dastardly electric appliances always freeze up on you Colorado guys
in the Winter....indeed, that is something we Floridians don't worry
about....but then again....doing antenna work in the Summer or Winter is
about the same here...other than a lil more humidity in the Summer! Now I
know why there are so many 160 types from CO, you must have mandatory
beverage stringing!
I admire your beverage setting effort, John....sure hope you felt it was
worth it, thats an awful lot of physical outlay....I dunno if I could muster
the energy to hit the F1 key over and over after that. I have been postponing
work on some new rxing antennas and gosh, if you can drive that many posts
before a contest in the harsh unforgiving Colorado Tundra I guess I will be
inspired to erect some beverages before the WPX.
A Kilt, surely one was not worn when you were driving those posts! W0UN had
better watch out at Dayton....a coupla years ago I know I saw a ham with a 4
element quad on his head and a mirror on the toe of his Nikes....as my two
year old grandkids say: "peeky"
zx
>From Jim Reid <jreid@aloha.net> Sun Apr 28 02:23:14 1996
From: Jim Reid <jreid@aloha.net> (Jim Reid)
Subject: Power, XMatch, and 72 ohm twn lead
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960428012314.00674590@aloha.net>
At 18:09 4/27/96 EDT, Paul D. Schrader wrote:
"Jim, Your message gives the impression that the XMatch(tm) antenna tuner
will not tune to 1:1 SWR at your band edges. That may be the case but
I wonder what the untuned SWR values are on 80 and 160??
Your 1.5:1 SWR that you can't tune below is very surprising to me.
How about some more info. Are we sure the measuring instrument is OK.
Does perhaps the outside balun need to be grounded to prevent
shield RF current from affecting the measuring instrument, etc.?
73 Paul N4XM"
Aloha Paul and Good News,
Perhaps I was not carful with my knob turning, as now DO get good
matches to the band edges!
Some numbers:
XMatch
Freq. Direct VSWR Tuned VSWR L C xm swtch
1.802 1.2 1.1 15.4 0 XM1
1.835 2.0 1.2 16.65 47 XM1
1.975 6.2 1.3 14.15 49 XM1
1.999 7.5 1.3 13.65 49 XM1
3.502 2.4 1.0 08.66 39 XM1
3.860 2.5 1.2 09.5 30 XM1
3.950 3.0 1.0 08.74 39 XM1
3.990 3.1 1.2 08.54 39 XM1
7.088 2.3 1.1 03.0 50 XM1
Hawaii Afternoon Net, used every day here.
And the Alpha 87A is happy at 1.5kW out at all the above frequencies and
settings of the XMatch tuner.
So Paul, all is well with your tuner after all. I just didn't tune
correctly before! Your "Classic Lowbander" is doing exactly as you
designed, Paul, even with my antennas not resonant at exactly the
frequencies for which I am shooting just yet. Been too hot here
the last few days to go out and trim the lengths again; they do
interact as they are all fed in parallel.
73, Jim, AH6NB, on Kauai. jreid@aloha.net
>From Jan Almedal <janalme@sn.no> Sun Apr 28 03:56:08 1996
From: Jan Almedal <janalme@sn.no> (Jan Almedal)
Subject: Which could be the correct contest No. of SPDX RTTY contest?
Message-ID: <199604280300.FAA28547@ekeberg.sn.no>
At 04:47 28.04.96 +0900, you wrote:
>Time period shown in www.sn.no/~janalme/rules is defferent from the time
>priod shown
>in www.canit.se/~txt/calender/rules.
>If you or anybody might know which period, begging from 12:00z on Saturday
>or 00:00z on
>Saturday, is correct.
It seems like they have new rules for this contest this year. Max. operating
time is 36 hours, but the contest period is from 00.00 on Saturday. Sorry
for me having old rules in my calendar - they where from 1994. Updated rules
are now displayed in the calendar!
I try to my best to display accurate information, but of course I have to
rely on information received from the contest sponsors. Probably this won't
work until we are all online, but I feel quite comfortable with the
information presented.
Hope you did well in the contest despite this confusion!
73 de
Jan / LA9HW
- - -
NRRL HF Contest Manager
Complete HF Contest Calendar: http://www.sn.no/~janalme/hammain.html
>From n4xm@iglou.com (Paul D. Schrader) Sun Apr 28 04:02:00 1996
From: n4xm@iglou.com (Paul D. Schrader) (Paul D. Schrader)
Subject: Power, XMatch, and 72 ohm twn lead
Message-ID: <m0uDMkx-00035SC@mail.iglou.com>
>At 18:09 4/27/96 EDT, Paul D. Schrader wrote:
>
>"Jim, Your message gives the impression that the XMatch(tm) antenna tuner
>will not tune to 1:1 SWR at your band edges. That may be the case but
>I wonder what the untuned SWR values are on 80 and 160??
> Your 1.5:1 SWR that you can't tune below is very surprising to me.
>How about some more info. Are we sure the measuring instrument is OK.
> Does perhaps the outside balun need to be grounded to prevent
>shield RF current from affecting the measuring instrument, etc.?
>
>73 Paul N4XM"
>
>Aloha Paul and Good News,
>
>Perhaps I was not carful with my knob turning, as now DO get good
>matches to the band edges!
>
>Some numbers:
> XMatch
> Freq. Direct VSWR Tuned VSWR L C xm swtch
>
> 1.802 1.2 1.1 15.4 0 XM1
>
> 1.835 2.0 1.2 16.65 47 XM1
>
> 1.975 6.2 1.3 14.15 49 XM1
>
> 1.999 7.5 1.3 13.65 49 XM1
>
> 3.502 2.4 1.0 08.66 39 XM1
>
> 3.860 2.5 1.2 09.5 30 XM1
>
> 3.950 3.0 1.0 08.74 39 XM1
>
> 3.990 3.1 1.2 08.54 39 XM1
>
> 7.088 2.3 1.1 03.0 50 XM1
> Hawaii Afternoon Net, used every day here.
>
>And the Alpha 87A is happy at 1.5kW out at all the above frequencies and
>settings of the XMatch tuner.
>
>So Paul, all is well with your tuner after all. I just didn't tune
>correctly before! Your "Classic Lowbander" is doing exactly as you
>designed, Paul, even with my antennas not resonant at exactly the
>frequencies for which I am shooting just yet. Been too hot here
>the last few days to go out and trim the lengths again; they do
>interact as they are all fed in parallel.
>
>73, Jim, AH6NB, on Kauai. jreid@aloha.net
>
>
Thanks for the further info Jim. You should be able to get to 1:1 SWR without
any problem at all unless you have more than one frequency going into the
XMatch(tm)
tuner. This may be the case as no rig or amplifier is perfectly clean and the
tuner can't match two frequencies at the same time. I believe I pointed
this out
in the instructions. Also be aware that the Bird slug you are probably
using is
probably rated down to only 2 Mhz although I personally believe it has minimal
error on 160 meters and not a major factor from a tuning standpoint. I have no
experience with your other instrument and cannot comment. 73 Paul N4XM
>From Greg Becker <na2n@ifam.com> Sun Apr 28 11:42:57 1996
From: Greg Becker <na2n@ifam.com> (Greg Becker)
Subject: CATV Hardline Fitting
Message-ID: <01BB34CE.188B24A0@ulster-port11.mhv.net>
All the antennas, switches etc, are always looking for a PL259 to =
mate with
them. Rather than reinvent the wheel, adapting the PL259 to the hardline =
has
seemed the way to go. The previous version of the W1CW connector was =
based on
a 1/2" compression compression union fitting - a double female.
The OD of the hardline's aluminum shield is half inch - so a good size =
match
was found there, and the OD of the back end of a PL259 is 1/2". By =
leaving a
long center conductor protruding from the end of your hard line you =
could
pass it through the double female connector and then into the PL259. =
Once the
tip was soldered in place you simply worked away from it compression =
fitting
wise. First you tighten one end of the dbl-f onto the PL259's tail end - =
the
part that has the inner threading which normally screws onto the
RG213/whatever. Then, tighten the other end of the dbl-f onto the =
aluminum
shield of the hardline. Done. The only drwaback of this generation of =
fitting
has been the bulkiness of this approach, and inherent lack of mechanical
strength since the point where the shield is grabbed is three or so =
inches
back from where you twist the PL259. This version has worked well for =
us, but
today I made something even slicker.
<snip>
The other solution, since you're cutting and soldering anyway, is to cut =
one of the double female 1/2" compression fittings in half, and use it =
in the way you describe. The butt of the PL-259 fits nicely when you cut =
right through the center wrench fitting, and you get two connectors for =
the price of one.
No drilling!
Greg na2n@ifam.com
|