Hi Wayne,
Just a quick comment:
>...ie: attach the quy wire to a 3 to 4 inch pipe cemented next to the
>fence line that is tall enough to maintain the guy angle.
I did just that once, and it solved my problems of guying a 80 ft
tower on a small city lot. I could even walk under the guywires! My
pipe was some 5 inch I think. You need some calculations here.
>Since the tower will only be 40 to 50 feet tall, would I be better
>served with a 2 el 3 band quad than with a triband yagi? I seem to
>remember reading that quads have a lower takeoff angle at lower
>heights than do yagi's at a comparable height, have less wind load
>and have more gain than a yagi with an equal number of elements.
That is the general thinking of most amateurs, who look at a quad as a
closed spaced stack. IMHO the radiation angle is only dependent on the
height of the center of the antenna. Stacked beams does not pull down
the radiation angle, but transfers power from higher loops to the
lowest one. The lower loop from a stack is longer (bigger/fatter) than
from the upper antenna alone, but its angle is higher than the lower
loop from the upper antenna alone. The lower half of the lowest loop
is almost unchanged stack or no stack. If your tower is not high
enough, stacking or using a quad will not put more power out at low
radiation angles. You may check with Terrain Analyzer 1.0 program from
K6STI (advertised in QST July 95). One other point: quads are seldom
mechanical stable.
If you want low angle of radiation you need a higher tower (say 90
ft), unless your QTH is on a hill top.
BTW, who says you need low angle of radiation? That depends on which
contest you are in. Actually it would be nice to be able to
control/steer the radiation angle. That is possible with stacked
beams.
For serious contesting you might as well move out of town right away
due to TVI, noise level and room for rotating pole(s) and beverages.
Easier said than done. =:-(
73, Palle, OZ1RH (OZ9EDR-OZ5W contest team) Internet: pph@dc.dk
>From Frits.Jensen@mch.sni.de (Frits Jensen) Wed Oct 4 12:26:10 1995
From: Frits.Jensen@mch.sni.de (Frits Jensen) (Frits Jensen)
Subject: CT. file wanted
Message-ID: <jensen.48.00702D68@horus.mch.sni.de>
Can anyone send me a mail and attach the CQWW.CTY file for CT in a updated
version? - (with all the russian stuff in order)?
Thanks in advance
vy 73 de DL4MHU, Frits
>From km9p@is.net (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) Wed Oct 4
>13:37:53 1995
From: km9p@is.net (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) (Bill Fisher,
KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.)
Subject: SS SSB Station Available
Message-ID: <199510041237.IAA08818@mail1.is.net>
My station in the mountains will be available for someone interested in
operating LP SS SSB. If you have interest in operating FD Style (generator)
and rustic living conditions, drop me a note. I'll furnish the computer(s),
radios, antennas, and switch boxes (audio & the ones that keep you from
txing on 2 bands at once). 4 wheel drive vehicle is almost a must.
---
On a personal note... Starting another business has me pretty much swamped.
I think I'll concentrate on getting the new business and the station QRV,
and bypass operating SS CW this year.
73
Bill
---
Bill Fisher, KM9P - Concentric Systems, Inc.
>From Mixalis Dimitrakakis <mdim@intranet.gr> Wed Oct 4 16:34:36 1995
From: Mixalis Dimitrakakis <mdim@intranet.gr> (Mixalis Dimitrakakis)
Subject: HF Vertical Antenna Help...
Message-ID: <199510041338.PAA22105@helios.intranet.GR>
Dear DXers
I am trying to decide which of the two verticals I should buy for my
new QTH. (the challenger by GAP or the R7 by cushcraft).
The new QTH is an apartment on the last floor of a four story building
with flat concrete roof.I plan using the guard rails arount the roof for
radials.
I would appreciate any help or suggestions of Any owners of the above antennas
Which of the two antennas is a better performer?
Please send Email directly to me at: mdim@intranet.gr
>From John Dorr K1AR" <p00259@psilink.com Wed Oct 4 16:41:53 1995
From: John Dorr K1AR" <p00259@psilink.com (John Dorr K1AR)
Subject: CQ Contest Mag - Add'l Info
Message-ID: <3021903169.5.p00259@psilink.com>
Wow, what a pileup! Many of you asked for subscription info. Rather than
replying to everyone individually, here's the poop:
CQ Contest magazine
10 issues/yr.
Charter Rates:
$30/year US - delivered 1st Class
$37/year Canada/Mexico - delivered airmail
$40/year Foreign - delivered airmail
Subs can be ordered now. The first issue is scheduled to be mailed
December 14.
Orders can be placed as follows:
Mail order
Via FAX: 516-681-2926
via Phone: 516-681-2922 or 800-853-9797
All of the usual credit cards are accepted.
Sorry for the commercialism here, guys. There just were so many
inquiries that I wanted to efficiently fill in the blanks for those asking.
73 John, K1AR
>From mraz@rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com (Kris I. Mraz) Wed Oct 4 17:24:10 1995
From: mraz@rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com (Kris I. Mraz) (Kris I. Mraz)
Subject: Vanity Callsigns: The Latest
Message-ID: <9510041624.AA22157@maverick.aud.alcatel.com>
Here's a summary of an FCC Memorandum Opinion and Order adopted 21
September, 1995. This addresses the various Petitions for Reconsideration
filed by the ARRL and others on the Vanity callsign program.
1. Callsigns for Puerto Rico, Alaska, Hawaii and other US possessions
can only be requested if applicant has a mailing address at said location
(except for persons requesting callsigns of a deceased relative).
2. Persons requesting the callsign of a deceased relative must hold a
license class as high or higher than the callsign requested.
3. A new gate has been added, gate 1A, to allow clubs that existed prior
to 24 March, 1995 to request the callsign of a deceased member. Clubs
formed after 24 March, 1995 must wait until gate 4 to request the
callsign of a deceased member.
4. A licensee who requests a vanity callsign will have continued operating
authority until final disposition of the application.
Hope this helps.
73
Kris AA5UO
mraz@aud.alcatel.com
>From mihry@ns1.koyote.com (michael ihry) Wed Oct 4 18:35:27 1995
From: mihry@ns1.koyote.com (michael ihry) (michael ihry)
Subject: new contester needs help
Message-ID: <199510041735.MAA02206@ns1.koyote.com>
need suggestions for better scores. have 90 ft tower with 10,15,20=
tribander
dipoles for 40,80
tnx
mike, AC5CT =20
>From Cain, Jim, K1TN" <jcain@arrl.org Wed Oct 4 18:57:00 1995
From: Cain, Jim, K1TN" <jcain@arrl.org (Cain, Jim, K1TN)
Subject: new contester needs help
Message-ID: <3072CAC6@arrl.org>
Move station to Caribbean island.
----------
From: michael ihry
To: cq-contest
Subject: new contester needs help
Return-Path: <mihry@ns1.koyote.com>
X-ListName: Amateur Radio Contester's discussion list <CQ-Contest@tgv.com>
Warnings-To: <>
Errors-To: owner-cq-contest@tgv.com
Sender: owner-cq-contest@tgv.com
Message-ID: <199510041735.MAA02206@ns1.koyote.com>
X-Sender: mihry@ns1.koyote.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: cq-contest@tgv.com
From: michael ihry <mihry@ns1.koyote.com>
Reply-To: michael ihry <mihry@ns1.koyote.com>
Subject: new contester needs help
X-Mailer: <PC Eudora Version 1.4b17>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
need suggestions for better scores. have 90 ft tower with 10,15,20=
tribander
dipoles for 40,80
tnx
mike, AC5CT =20
>From mraz@rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com (Kris I. Mraz) Wed Oct 4 19:21:19 1995
From: mraz@rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com (Kris I. Mraz) (Kris I. Mraz)
Subject: Vanity Callsigns: The Latest
Message-ID: <9510041821.AA22307@maverick.aud.alcatel.com>
> ->2. Persons requesting the callsign of a deceased relative must hold a
> -> license class as high or higher than the callsign requested.
>
>
> Not quite the way I read it... from the ARRL bulletin text...
>
> -- The FCC concurred with suggestions that an amateur seeking the call
> -- sign of a deceased, close relative, should hold an equal or higher
> -- class amateur license than that held by the deceased relative. The
> -- FCC said that the two-year .... deleted..
OK. To avoid paraphrasing here's the exact text from the Opinion and Order:
>From Paragraph 9.
"Upon reconsideration, we are persuaded that this latter provision
could result in unfair assignments. For example, a Novice Class
operator could obtain a group A call sign simply because a now-deceased
relative once passed the rigorous examination for an Amateur Extra
Class operator license".
>From Paragraph 14.
"We also amend our rules to require that, in the case of a close relative
applying for the former call sign of a deceased licensee, the applicant
must hold the requisite class of operator license".
Make your own interpretation.
73
Kris AA5UO
mraz@aud.alcatel.com
|