I have built the LPDA as described in the ARRL Antenna Handbook and I
can't get the SWR to go below 1.9:1. I have tried everything except
rebuilding it with a bigger gap between the central feeder run. The
antenna, without the balun, seems to have an impedence around 105
ohms which would tie in with this theory.
A friend built one for last year's CQ WW and had similar problems,
eventually abandoning the project. Has anyone ever tried to build one
and got it working at 1:1 (52 ohms) on 80m? If not, I strongly
suspect that the details of measurements in the Ant Handbook are wrong
in spite of the antenna appearing through many editions.
Cheers
Stewart
GM4AFF with GM4DMZ / GM6V
>From dale.long@internetmci.com (Dale Long) Mon Oct 14 19:41:14 1996
From: dale.long@internetmci.com (Dale Long) (Dale Long)
Subject: stacking Telrex beams
Message-ID: <01IAMN43CIZW8YDNRY@MAIL-CLUSTER.PCY.MCI.NET>
-- [ From: Dale Long * EMC.Ver #2.3 ] --
A friend of mine is putting his 10M636 antennas back up...Yes, he is crazy,
but he doesn't have much time left, and he is my Elmer. I have two
questions:
1. How can one reproduce the phasing lines originally supplied by Telrex?
(If we could buy them, we would) What would be the normal lengths and
impedance of these lines? Does the unique Telrex match make any difference
in the phasing harness requirements?
2. My friend wants to stack them 32 feet apart. Is this the optimum
distance? What other separation would be good?
Tks es 73,
Dale - N3BNA (dale.long@internetmci.com)
>From Fatchett.Mike@tci.com (Fatchett, Mike) Tue Oct 15 15:27:14 1996
From: Fatchett.Mike@tci.com (Fatchett, Mike) (Fatchett, Mike)
Subject: Please Don't Use Expired Calls
Message-ID:
<01CCB32639F42055*/c=us/admd=attmail/prmd=tci/o=mailhub/ou=msmaildos/s=Fatchett/g=Mike/@MHS>
I am curious, If this is fact then why is the name and call of the
individual not published? I think this would be a big deterrent for
cheating. Maybe it is time for the contest organizers to be more public
with disqualifications.
Mike
NI0E (Yes this call is going away!)
----------
From: (Norton, Richard)[SMTP:nortonr@mrd.srl.dsto.defence.gov.au]
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 1996 12:43 AM
To: (CQ-Contest)
Subject: Please Don't Use Expired Calls
It seems pedantic to have to say the following but -
Some people think it is cool to give friends extra contacts by working
them with their old, or even future-expected call. This has, in the past,
included people who should know better. There even was a case of this
detected during the WRTC.
Some people think it is cool to give friends extra contacts by working
them with their wife's call, or multi-op station's operator's call, or
call of a foreigner licensed to their location. This has, in the past,
also included people who should know better. There are discussions taking
place between some of the judges of one big contest about to do with one
guy who received 35 private contacts in one recent event. One of his
friends gave him a "contact" with a guy who died about five years ago,
and he actually logged it. He is the only "serious" competitor doing this
kind of thing. The sad thing is that the guy actually has enough talent
to win his class someday, with skill, if things went right for him.
Presently he has a reputation that I wouldn't want, and he can thank his
helping friends for part of it.
There are likely to be a number of new calls on the air in the upcoming
contests. It sure would be nice if there were no contacts made with the
calls that were given up. Log checkers would thank you if you made their
work of looking at computer generated notations of "Bad-calls" easier, by
using only your call currently assigned by the FCC.
It would be much cooler to let your friends win using their skill.
73,
Dick Norton, N6AA/VK5
|