Article: 216968 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Message-ID: <306uh1d2qjepk6eqt17mts5scoirb0e7sv@4ax.com> References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:41:00 -0400 On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 09:39:28 -0700, Dan Richardson <> wrote: >On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 11:41:33 -0400, Walter Maxwell >wrote: > >>Sorry to disagree, Reg, but it appears you're overlooking an important >>point--the difference between the efficiency of the radiating system >>itself, versus the efficiency of the ground area external to the >>radiating system. > >Walter, my friend, you're beating a dead horse. It would appear that >Reg's mind is made up and no amount factual proof is going to change >it. > >Had BL&E been Englishmen I sure things would be different. > >73, >Danny, K6MHE > Good point, Danny, how true. Walt Article: 216969 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Dummy Load experience? References: <1126098596.599662.122930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> From: dougmc@frenzy.com (Doug McLaren) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:56:07 GMT In article <1126098596.599662.122930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, CD wrote: | My friend tried using a dummy load on a 300W transmitter. He was only | running it for a few mins at the VHF range, but he was picking up a | signal 100 ft away. Is that typical? Probably | I don't know much about dummy loads, but I think that 100ft is just a | tad bit too far, no? There is the guy who got a Worked all Continents using only a light bulb as his antenna. (And basically it's just a dummy load, though the resistance varies and so it doesn't make a very good dummy load, though it shouldn't make a better antenna than a good dummy load. Was that sentence long enough?) The leakage of your rig and the feed lines is signifigant. And of course, the dummy load itself will radiate a little bit too. You may have a hard time getting a WAC, but certainly the signal is there and can be picked up by those close. It's also why it's a good idea to ID yourself and such even when transmitting into a dummy load. -- Doug McLaren, dougmc@frenzy.com, AD5RH In the valley of the blind, the Venetian is king. Article: 216970 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ron Murray" References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Message-ID: <%_ETe.5719$rj.4059@lakeread07> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 12:58:25 -0400 | Sorry to disagree, Reg, but it appears you're overlooking an important | point--the difference between the efficiency of the radiating system | itself, versus the efficiency of the ground area external to the | radiating system. | | BL&E shows that when 90 - 120 (actually 113) radials of 0,4 w/l form | the ground system for a 1/4 wl radiator, the efficiency is 98.7% | efficient, REGARDLESS OF THE SOIL RESISTIVITY UNDER THE RADIALS. This | is shown by obtaining the field strength of 192 mv/meter at 1 mile for | 1000 watts delivered to the antenna under the conditions described | above, compared to 194.5 mv/meter with a perfect ground having an | efficiency of 100% | | It is only the soil resistivity of the ground external to the radial | system that determines the field stength external to the radial | system. Consequently, the soil resistivity (or conductivity, if you | like) is significant only in the areas external to the radial system. | | Walt, W2DU Walt, What if the ground outside the radial system was comprised of 30-1000 feet of sand and rock overlying any conductive soil below? Would we then be able to measure 192 mv/meter at one mile with our 113 radials of 0.4 w/l? Ron, WA4IWN Article: 216971 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Advice on building a 6 meter vertical antenna Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:26:34 -0500 Message-ID: <11hu8mj63a5e11c@corp.supernews.com> References: <1126100684.670634.172990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> pinpassion wrote: > Hi Gang, > > I'm building my first 6 meter vertical antenna > for repeater use. I already have a 6 meter beam > for SSB DX use. (Cushcraft 5 element) > > I'm using the plans from G3JVL for a 5/8 wave > aluminum antenna. I have the tubing from Texas > Towers (extruded aluminum) designed to fit in > to each other, so this should make a perfect > antenna when I get it cut to size. For those > not familiar with the G3JVL antenna, here is > a link: > > http://www.hamuniverse.com/6metervertical.html > > The advice I need is how should I protect the > antenna prior to putting it on the roof? Is there > a spray I should use to resist rust, or something > I should use when I connect the sections to help > maintain a good connection and prevent oxidation? > I suppose this might have the added benefit of making > the antenna easier to disassemble. > > I was planning on using stainless hardware to assemble > the sections. I was initially thinking of using a > stainless hose clamp, but I was advised to drill a hole > through the sections and use a bolt and nut as that is > more reliable. > > This is my fist shot at a homebrew, so any advice is > appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Mike N2QAC > Mike; The first advice to protect your new antenna prior to mounting it is to insure that nothing is allowed to fall on or against it while it is in your shop. This is very detrimental to the final look of the antenna. ;^). Seriously though being made of aluminum it will not rust. It will lightly oxidize but this is a natural action as aluminum is very reactive with oxygen. If you are in a salty environment you might lightly spay paint the aluminum with either a color paint or a clear finish otherwise you really do not have to worry about the metal. Just be sure that your paint does not have any metal in it. One thing you might want to consider is coating the joints between two pieces of metal with a conductive grease. You should be able to find that at a Radio Shack or other electrical supply house. Using a nut and bolt to hold sections of tubing together is a very good idea, just be careful when tightening the nut not to crush the tubing. Good luck; Dave WD9BDZ Article: 216972 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Dummy Load experience? Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:36:17 -0500 Message-ID: <11hu98m3q79vr61@corp.supernews.com> References: <1126098596.599662.122930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Doug McLaren wrote: > In article <1126098596.599662.122930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, > CD wrote: > > | My friend tried using a dummy load on a 300W transmitter. He was only > | running it for a few mins at the VHF range, but he was picking up a > | signal 100 ft away. Is that typical? > > Probably > > | I don't know much about dummy loads, but I think that 100ft is just a > | tad bit too far, no? > > There is the guy who got a Worked all Continents using only a light > bulb as his antenna. (And basically it's just a dummy load, though > the resistance varies and so it doesn't make a very good dummy load, > though it shouldn't make a better antenna than a good dummy load. Was > that sentence long enough?) > > The leakage of your rig and the feed lines is signifigant. And of > course, the dummy load itself will radiate a little bit too. You may > have a hard time getting a WAC, but certainly the signal is there and > can be picked up by those close. It's also why it's a good idea to ID > yourself and such even when transmitting into a dummy load. > If I might insert my comments. I whole heartedly agree with the other responses. A dummy load will radiate and using light bulbs as a dummy load will work. However, they will radiate emf as well as light. One of my mother's cousins, Arnold W2OVP SK, received his first ham license on something like 8DEC1941, if you are a student of history you know what happened next. Radio Silence until after August 1945. Anyway one night he was practicing his CW into a bank of light bulbs at his home in Buffalo, NY. He received a phone call from one of his friends on the other side of town that his code sounded good. Suffice it to say that he shutdown and did not do that again. So yes a dummy load will radiate, just not very efficiently. Dave WD9BDZ Article: 216973 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:13:44 -0700 Message-ID: <11huevcqtndtr30@corp.supernews.com> References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <431E4F4A.2050804@comcast.net> dansawyeror wrote: > All, > > A fundamental basic question, which is the primary purpose of radials: > > 1. is it to create a ground, that is a as close as possible to zero ohm > virtual reference for the 'real' vertical half of the dipole? There is no such thing as "creating a ground". As for a "virtual reference", you can declare any point on any conductor a "reference" and for that matter "ground" that you wish. > 2. Or are they to create a real resonant half of a dipole? There's no need to try to make a dipole. If the radials are on or very near the ground, their sole purpose is to reduce the amount of loss due to current returning to the base of the antenna. The current entering the antenna at the base equals the current flowing into the source through the ground. This ground current results in I^2 * R loss; radials reduce the R and therefore the loss. In the case of a "ground plane" antenna with highly elevated radials, the radials provide a path for the base current to flow (again, current out of the source -- into the antenna -- has to equal the current into it -- from the radials). Because of the physical configuration, it's sometimes more convenient to build an antenna this way instead of making a dipole. The radials radiate very little, and the vertical section radiates twice as much per unit length as a dipole, resulting in the same overall gain and pattern. > If it is the first then what does the 'efficiency' curve look like for a > shortened, loaded, vertical? That is if the vertical element is loaded > to resonate at 1/5 of a half wave length what does the ground resistance > profile look like for 120 radials at various lengths of 1/20 wave, 1/10 > wave and 1/5 wave? The answer to this depends on the ground conductivity and frequency. But the radiation resistance of the shortened antenna will be less than that of a full-height one. Therefore, if the ground resistance is fixed and determined by the ground system (not completely true -- it does depend some on the antenna height -- but close enough for discussion), the efficiency of the short antenna will be less than for a full-height one. I recommend finding and reading "The W2FMI Ground-Mounted Short Vertical", by Jerry Sevick, W2FMI in March 1973 QST. He built several antennas very much like you describe and made extensive measurements. > > The question I am really driving at is if mesh is layed down at 100% > coverage about what fraction of a wave length needs to be covered to > create a 2.5, 5, and 10 ohm equivalent ground for the vertical above? Sorry, I don't know the answer to that one right off the bat. It could be determined with NEC-4 modeling, but I don't have time to do that. I suggest that you locate a copy of Brown, Lewis, and Epstein's paper "Ground Systems as a Factor in Antenna Efficiency", now posted on the web. You should be able to get a fairly good idea from their measurements of 113-radial systems. > > In the paragraph above is the mesh simulating a ground or is it fact > operating as a ground. I really don't know what "simulating a ground" and "operating as a ground" means. But the radial field doesn't act like either real Earth or a perfect infinite plane, if that's what you mean. If sufficiently fine, a mesh will act like a solid conductor the size of the mesh. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216974 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Allodoxaphobia Subject: Re: Dummy Load experience? Date: 7 Sep 2005 19:44:29 GMT Message-ID: References: <1126098596.599662.122930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 07:12:12 -0700, Tim Wescott wrote: > CD wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm curious about dummy loads. I read that ideally dummy loads convert >> RF energy into heat, but I'm sure in the real world, there will still >> be a small amount RF energy transmitted. >> >> My friend tried using a dummy load on a 300W transmitter. He was only >> running it for a few mins at the VHF range, but he was picking up a >> signal 100 ft away. Is that typical? >> >> What's your experience on dummy loads? Were you able to pick up a >> signal, as well, with this type of distance? >> >> I don't know much about dummy loads, but I think that 100ft is just a >> tad bit too far, no? >> > Even with a perfect dummy load you'd still get some leakage from your > transmitter and cabling -- I generally expect that if I run into a dummy > load I'm going to peg the S meter of any receivers that are on-frequency > and in the room. > > So picking up the signal 100ft away doesn't surprise me. A friend of mine and I used to do 'code practice' on 40M with our rigs cranked down to approx 20 watts each -- using Heathkit Cantennas at both ends. S-9 sigs both ways. We were 5 blocks apart. As well, once a week we used to (attempt to) check into a distant (180 miles) 2M SSB. While waiting for net control (and the rest of the net) to point in our compass direction (220 degrees - approx 35 past the hour), we'd chat back and forth - again switched into the Cantennas. And, again, S-9+ sigs both ways. It's more a testament to the quality of good receivers now-a-days -- than the leakiness of a dummy load. Look over what the QRP and QRPp folks are doing - with their "Millions of Miles Per Watt" records, and you'll realize (if you haven't already) than you can happily 'do' amateur radio with Not Much Watts. 73 Jonesy -- Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux Pueblo, Colorado | @ | Jonesy | OS/2 __ 38.24N 104.55W | config.com | DM78rf | SK Article: 216975 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Richard Fry" References: <1126098596.599662.122930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Dummy Load experience? Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:52:55 -0500 Message-ID: <431f453f_1@newsfeed.slurp.net> "CD" wrote > My friend tried using a dummy load on a 300W transmitter. He was only > running it for a few mins at the VHF range, but he was picking up a > signal 100 ft away. Is that typical? ______________ If that 300 W was all radiated from a matched 1/2-wave dipole, it would generate a free-space, maximum field of about 4 volts per meter at a distance of 100 feet. If the sum of cabinet, cable and dummy load radiation was 80 dB below that, the maximum free-space field at 100 feet would be about 400 microvolts per meter -- a very healthy signal. RF Article: 216976 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 20:08:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> "Walter Maxwell" wrote in message news:qn1uh1dln013betj933p8fv9irsccpb3sb@4ax.com... > On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:07:39 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" > wrote: > > >MK, > > > >How satisfying it is to read your message, written in plain, easy to > >understand, well-punctuated English, without any undeciferable coded > >abbreviations. > > > >I agree with what you say although I am unfamiliar with exactly how > >the FCC fits into the scheme of things. > > > >Amateurs and commercial broadcasters have a common fundamental > >requirement. There is a service area to be covered with a given field > >strength. Depending on frequency, requirements then diverge. But the > >design methods used to satisfy requirements are all confined (or > >should be) to the principles of engineering economics. Inevitably, the > >Dollar, Pound, Frank, Mark, Rouble and the Yen rule the roost. > > > >Both commercial broadcasters and amateurs do a cost-befit analysis. > >The broadcaster takes into account the revenue acruing from selling > >the service. The amateur, whether he likes it or not, has to ask > >himself what the satisfaction of using the station is worth. > > > >Amateurs' bank accounts are not unlimited. > > > >Field strength at the limits of the service area depends on the power > >efficiency of the radiating system. If engineering economics dictate > >use of a set of buried ground radials then the peformance of the > >ground radials must be included. Considering the system as a whole, > >it may be economical NOT to achieve the maximum possible radiating > >efficiency. Indeed, the maximum is seldom the target. > > > >If there is an economical choice in the matter, once the location of > >the station is decided, everybody agrees that efficiency depends on > >soil resistivity at the site. To estimate efficiency it is necessary, > >at the very least, to make a guess at soil resistivity. Perhaps just > >by looking at the type of weeds growing in it. Or it can be measured. > > > >Depending on how far it enters into station economics, it is possible > >to numerically estimate efficiency from the number and length of > >radials AND FROM SOIL RESISTIVITY. > > > >B.L & E and the FCC don't enter into it. > >---- > >Reg. > > Sorry to disagree, Reg, but it appears you're overlooking an important > point--the difference between the efficiency of the radiating system > itself, versus the efficiency of the ground area external to the > radiating system. > > BL&E shows that when 90 - 120 (actually 113) radials of 0,4 w/l form > the ground system for a 1/4 wl radiator, the efficiency is 98.7% > efficient, REGARDLESS OF THE SOIL RESISTIVITY UNDER THE RADIALS. This > is shown by obtaining the field strength of 192 mv/meter at 1 mile for > 1000 watts delivered to the antenna under the conditions described > above, compared to 194.5 mv/meter with a perfect ground having an > efficiency of 100% > > It is only the soil resistivity of the ground external to the radial > system that determines the field stength external to the radial > system. Consequently, the soil resistivity (or conductivity, if you > like) is significant only in the areas external to the radial system. > > Walt, W2DU > ======================================= Walt, just what is it you cannot agree with? You appear to be making an argument where none exists. It is obvious there must be a distant point beyond which a large number of radials will approach 100% efficiency regardless of ground resistivity. B.L & E and the FCC arbitraliry decided on 1/2-wavelength and 120. Both nice round figures. I'm sorrry to say you appear unable to agree that for the remaining 99.9% of all possible cases, ie., for cases less than 1/2-wavelength and fewer than 120 radials, that GROUND RESISTIVITY in the immediate vicinity of the antenna DOES HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON EFFICIENCY and it cannot be disregarded. My only criticism of B.L & E is that they forgot to measure soil resistivity before leaving the site. And apparently, nobody has ever bothered to go back and do it for them. The only mention of their work occurs on this newsgroup. When laying radials, 99% of amateurs forget B.L & E (if they have ever heard of them) and the magic number of 120. Hasan Schiers has recently given a blow-by-blow account of a sensible way to lay a set of radials with the reasoning behind it. ---- Reg. Article: 216977 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 15:17:13 -0500 Message-ID: <3649-431F4AC9-92@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net> References: Reg, G4FGQ wrote: "The broadcaster takes into account the revenue accruing from selling the service." Yes, and he takes into account the ease of compliance with FCC Riles in the USA. Although 90 radials is a minimum requirement for the U.S. AM broadcaster, here is the rule quoted by John Edward Cunningham in his 1977 "The Complete Broadcast Antenna Handbook", from page 311: "The current FCC Rules specify that the radials should be at least 1/4 wavelength long and that there should be as many as practicable, but in no case less than 90. The Rules add that a system of 120 radials spaced every 3-degrees and extending 0.35-0.4 wavelength from the tower is considered an excellent ground system. In addition, a square ground screen 24 or 48 on a side is often provided at the base of the tower, particularly when the tower height is such as to cause a high voltage. Whenever a less than optimum ground system is used, the FCC requires a complete field-intensity survey to establish that the effective field at one mile meets minimum requirements." Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 216978 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 14:08:25 -0700 Message-ID: <11hulmh3t2s1t5b@corp.supernews.com> References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Reg Edwards wrote: > . . . > My only criticism of B.L & E is that they forgot to measure soil > resistivity before leaving the site. And apparently, nobody has ever > bothered to go back and do it for them. What would you suggest as a method of measuring the RF ground resistivity to a depth of 17 - 100 feet (3 skin depths at 3 MHz for the range of likely resistivities)? Assuming it's very likely that the resistivity would be quite different at different depths within that range, how should they have used that information? How would you use that information if someone "bothered to go back and do it for them"? Reg, all signs point to your being seriously in need of a holiday. How about a little trip to New Jersey to show us Yanks how it should have been done? For less than the price of a couple of bottles of decent wine, you can buy everything you'll need -- bucket, pocket DVM, trowel -- right there, so you won't even have to carry any equipment with you. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216979 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 22:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11hulmh3t2s1t5b@corp.supernews.com> Dear Roy, I'm sorry to say your worthless comments constitute an abject admission of defeat in an argument which exists only in your imagination. By the way, are you still using your S-meter as the North American Standard of signal strength? ---- Reg. Article: 216980 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "God" References: <1116948846.845758.269720@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1116950811.722761.163430@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1116956452.889209.81740@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4293acf2$0$298$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> <4293be22$1_2@spool9-west.superfeed.net> <1117690429.916477.190610@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <429f04f7$1_2@spool9-west.superfeed.net> <43148C75.606@library.berkeley.edu> <9_1Te.71845$2Q3.57303@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com> Subject: Re: I wonder... Message-ID: Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 23:03:45 GMT "Daniel J. Stern" wrote in message news:Pine.GSO.4.58.0509052317440.6886@alumni.engin.umich.edu... > On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Wayne P. Muckleroy wrote: > > > Well, me, I'm reading this from RAMC, and so I wonder if God and Allah and > Jesus and that lot use K&N or Fram filters. Yes, I do use Fram filters. Article: 216981 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: References: <1126100684.670634.172990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Advice on building a 6 meter vertical antenna Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 22:02:12 -0500 Message-ID: <431fad26_3@news1.prserv.net> Mike: One thing that no one will tell you is why manufacturers use plated hardware which rusts instead of stainless. Cost? No. Stainless will not stay tight, while plated hardware will rust up and then never loosen. So, if you use stainless, it is highly desirable to use Nylon insert locknuts or else carefully double nut everything, and add Loctite before assembly. It is no fun finding another piece of the antenna at the bottom of the tower every day after the wind blows a while. -- Crazy George Article: 216982 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Advice on building a 6 meter vertical antenna Message-ID: <7hcvh1tv86rpkssj1kugu5fg4f1hhrecl4@4ax.com> References: <1126100684.670634.172990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <431fad26_3@news1.prserv.net> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 03:47:16 GMT On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 22:02:12 -0500, wrote: >Mike: > >One thing that no one will tell you is why manufacturers use plated hardware >which rusts instead of stainless. Cost? No. Stainless will not stay tight, >while plated hardware will rust up and then never loosen. So, if you use >stainless, it is highly desirable to use Nylon insert locknuts or else >carefully double nut everything, and add Loctite before assembly. It is no >fun finding another piece of the antenna at the bottom of the tower every >day after the wind blows a while. George, I wonder if you tried lubricating the ss parts before assembly. Stainess threaded parts are well known for galling, and can bind before properly tensioning the fastener. It is a widely debated topic, but common advice is to lubricate the parts. Google for debate on what to use (wax, WD40, grease, moly etc) My experience is that stainless threads should be lubricated whenever used with nyloc nuts to reduce heat damage and galling of the nyloc insert. Marine grease seems to work fine, and it doesn't seem to unduly upset the prevailing torgue characteristics. Mike, ss hoseclamps on telescoping tubes with split ends seems to work fine. Put a bit of marine grease on the worm in the hoseclamp. I think you are less likely to crush the tube than through-bolting it. Remember that the joint is going to flex to some extent. A little bit of corrosion inhibitor in the slip joint will help maintain a good connnection through life... depends on the environment as to the necessity to to this. FWIW. Owen -- Article: 216983 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Bob Subject: Re: passive antenna References: <18566-431EFC60-34@storefull-3258.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: <02m5v2-72n.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 07:05:51 -0500 Further to Richards comments You can also model a passive repeater reasonably easily. With a propagation modelling pgm (eg Radio Mobile, UKWTools etc) find out what the receive signal level will be at the "repeater", then do a coverage study with that signal from the repeater site. In my experience the signals are very low and not often worth it. I was however involved in a setup to get signal on 400MHz into a railway cutting from a TX site only 1800 metres away. The measured signal in the cutting was about -107dBm but with the passive setup that came up to about -87dBm. In this case the cutting was on the side of a mountain (ie no other usable reflections) and the useful distance from the passive repeater was only about 200 metres. The repeater was a 14dBi yagi pointed at the distant TX site coax connected to a 8dBi yagi pointed down the cutting. Cheers Bob W5/VK2YQA Richard Harrison wrote: > > Ian wrote: > "Can a passive repeater work on my cell phone?" Article: 216984 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: 80m Inverted L Initial measurements Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 08:38:22 -0500 Message-ID: <21133-43203ECE-123@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net> References: Hassan Schiers wrote: "--and 16 radials on 80m are quite sufficient over my type of soil." Glancing at Fig. 2.17 on page 119 of Laport`s "Radio Antenna Engineering" shows that BL&E would agree. 1000 watts into a 90-degree vertical with 16 radials will produce about 160 mv/m at one mile. Perfection is only about 190 mv/m. 85% should be close enough to perfection, unless you are a broadcaster or the FCC enforcing its rules on a broadcaster. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 216985 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 13:40:00 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Had BL&E been Englishmen I sure things would be different. ==================================== They sure would! They would have been instructed to go back and finish the job. ---- Reg. Article: 216986 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Caveat Lector" Subject: Ham Antennas At Work During Katrina Aftermath Message-ID: Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 07:47:20 -0700 http://easylink.playstream.com/katu/050831ham_operator_530pm.wvx -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! Article: 216987 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:09:23 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> > Dan Richardson wrote - > > Had BL&E been Englishmen I sure things would be different. > ==================================== > > They sure would! > > They would have been instructed (by their employers) to go back and finish the job. > ---- > Reg. ===================================== I am reminded of the military engineer who was dispatched by Napolion, an engineer himself, in connection with standardisation of the Metre, to measure the distance between the Earth's Equator and the North Pole. Measurements began, but the further the engineer departed from his beautiful lady friend in Paris the more difficult it became to make progress along the route. Eventually, he couldn't withstand the mental and physical stress. He returned to her Parisian boudoir and resorted to cooking the books in what time he had to spare. So, the International Standard of Length, The Metre, held in Paris, France, carefully guarded by the German occupying forces during WW2, may or may not be equal to 39.37 English inches. Actually, the most fundamental physical measurement standard is the Mass of the Standard Kilogram on which everything else depends. But it is quite an arbitrary quantity. I have just finished a bottle of Blossom Hill, Californian, white wine. Makes a pleasant change to arguing about what 'amateurs' BL&E might, or might not have done before leaving the site. ---- Reg. Article: 216988 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Advice on building a 6 meter vertical antenna Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 11:19:13 -0500 Message-ID: <11i0p42gsqjjj6c@corp.supernews.com> References: <1126100684.670634.172990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <431fad26_3@news1.prserv.net> <7hcvh1tv86rpkssj1kugu5fg4f1hhrecl4@4ax.com> <1126179531.846744.320350@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> pinpassion wrote: > Dave, Ralph, George, and Owen > > Thank you for your help and suggestions. > > Mike > Thank You Mike. That's what we are here for. Dave WD9BDZ Article: 216989 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 11:22:00 -0500 Message-ID: <11i0p99q0dvpncc@corp.supernews.com> References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Reg Edwards wrote: >>Dan Richardson wrote - >> > Had BL&E been Englishmen I sure things would be different. >>==================================== >> >>They sure would! >> >>They would have been instructed (by their employers) to go back and > > finish the job. > >>---- >>Reg. > > > ===================================== > > I am reminded of the military engineer who was dispatched by Napolion, > an engineer himself, in connection with standardisation of the Metre, > to measure the distance between the Earth's Equator and the North > Pole. > > Measurements began, but the further the engineer departed from his > beautiful lady friend in Paris the more difficult it became to make > progress along the route. Eventually, he couldn't withstand the mental > and physical stress. He returned to her Parisian boudoir and resorted > to cooking the books in what time he had to spare. > > So, the International Standard of Length, The Metre, held in Paris, > France, carefully guarded by the German occupying forces during WW2, > may or may not be equal to 39.37 English inches. > > Actually, the most fundamental physical measurement standard is the > Mass of the Standard Kilogram on which everything else depends. But it > is quite an arbitrary quantity. > > I have just finished a bottle of Blossom Hill, Californian, white > wine. Makes a pleasant change to arguing about what 'amateurs' BL&E > might, or might not have done before leaving the site. > ---- > Reg. > > All the above is/maybe true but remember that all the formule work using the values represented in the METRE and the KILOGRAM. Something must be correct here.... Dave WD9BDZ Article: 216990 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Ground rods.at HF Message-ID: References: <911-431CAB16-222@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> <1126055532.489260.114130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 12:51:30 -0400 On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:09:23 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: >I have just finished a bottle of Blossom Hill, Californian, white >wine. Makes a pleasant change to arguing about what 'amateurs' BL&E >might, or might not have done before leaving the site. >---- >Reg. > I hate to say this, Reg, but calling BL&E 'amateurs' is insulting to me. I knew them well, and worked with B and E in the RCA Laboratories antenna lab, and they are anything but 'amateurs'. I think you finished off the Blossom Hill to rapidly. Perhaps you should take a look at the long list of IRE articles published by Dr. G.H. Brown, reporting his work that shaped the present design of all AM BC antennas. Did you ever wonder what happened to the diamond-shaped AM towers? And why the AM towers constructed since 1940 have a uniform cross section? And did you know that Dr. Brown gave John Kraus, W8JK, the idea of close spaced elements that culminated in the 'W8JK Beam' antenna? L, (Bob Lewis) is also a fine engineer, although he is also a ham, W2EBS. Walt Article: 216991 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim - NN7K Subject: Re: Best wire for FM reception (car antenna) References: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:09:42 GMT Or "Brazeing Rod" might be more acceptable, as most welding rod have seen is coated with flux -- Jim NN7K Richard Clark wrote: > On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 19:51:11 -0400, "Frank" wrote: > >>What is the best type of "wire" for making a homemade car antenna >>to pick up FM radio. Is it copper? Aluminium? What thickness or >>size. Lenght? > > > Hi Frank, > > Try welding rod. > > 73's > Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 216992 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Greg" References: Subject: Re: Best wire for FM reception (car antenna) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 12:15:12 +1200 "Jim - NN7K" wrote in message news:ap4Ue.2814$I7.2658@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... > Or "Brazeing Rod" might be more acceptable, as most welding rod have seen > is coated with flux -- Jim NN7K > > > Richard Clark wrote: >> On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 19:51:11 -0400, "Frank" wrote: >> >>>What is the best type of "wire" for making a homemade car antenna to pick >>>up FM radio. Is it copper? Aluminium? What thickness or size. Lenght? >> >> >> Hi Frank, >> >> Try welding rod. >> >> 73's >> Richard Clark, KB7QHC Arc welding rods are usually coated. Gas welding rods are not, and could be brass, steel etc. Article: 216993 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Mac" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 10:43:22 +1000 Message-ID: References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> Great work and excellent publicity...cya Mac "Charlie" wrote in message news:11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com... > 1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9228945/ > > -- > > Charlie - AD5TH > www.ad5th.com > > > > > > > Article: 216994 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Reflector on a quad - Capacitor use? Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 01:32:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1126073227.540139.163720@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Blue Dawg" wrote > http://www.cebik.com/quad/quad2.html > > why is a reflector using a capacitor a tad bit better on gain/rejection > on a quad? ================================== Because the loading capacitor requires a tad bit greater length of the loaded element which, for the same frequency, slightly changes the radiation pattern. When a loading coil is used the element is a tad bit shorter and, combined with the small loss in the loading coil, it has the opposite effect. ---- Reg. Article: 216995 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: References: <1126100684.670634.172990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <431fad26_3@news1.prserv.net> <7hcvh1tv86rpkssj1kugu5fg4f1hhrecl4@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Advice on building a 6 meter vertical antenna Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 20:53:05 -0500 Message-ID: <4320eea7_3@news1.prserv.net> Owen: We've had this discussion before, and I must be using better quality stainless hardware than you have used. In the dozens of pounds of stainless >from 0-80 up to 5/8" I have installed in the last 40 years, I could not specify when the last one galled if I had to. And I take lots of them apart, in addition to those which I expect to last forever. OTOH, somewhere around 40 years ago when I first started using stainless, I found plenty of it on the ground under a month old installation until I wised up about the fact that lock washers, even split ring style, were not enough to hold under constant vibration. And especially so on tubing where the tubing collapses before the lockwasher will bite into the nut. -- Crazy George "Owen Duffy" wrote in message news:7hcvh1tv86rpkssj1kugu5fg4f1hhrecl4@4ax.com... > On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 22:02:12 -0500, wrote: > > >Mike: > > > >One thing that no one will tell you is why manufacturers use plated hardware > >which rusts instead of stainless. Cost? No. Stainless will not stay tight, > >while plated hardware will rust up and then never loosen. So, if you use > >stainless, it is highly desirable to use Nylon insert locknuts or else > >carefully double nut everything, and add Loctite before assembly. It is no > >fun finding another piece of the antenna at the bottom of the tower every > >day after the wind blows a while. > > George, I wonder if you tried lubricating the ss parts before > assembly. > > Stainess threaded parts are well known for galling, and can bind > before properly tensioning the fastener. It is a widely debated topic, > but common advice is to lubricate the parts. Google for debate on what > to use (wax, WD40, grease, moly etc) > > My experience is that stainless threads should be lubricated whenever > used with nyloc nuts to reduce heat damage and galling of the nyloc > insert. Marine grease seems to work fine, and it doesn't seem to > unduly upset the prevailing torgue characteristics. > > Mike, ss hoseclamps on telescoping tubes with split ends seems to work > fine. Put a bit of marine grease on the worm in the hoseclamp. I think > you are less likely to crush the tube than through-bolting it. > Remember that the joint is going to flex to some extent. A little bit > of corrosion inhibitor in the slip joint will help maintain a good > connnection through life... depends on the environment as to the > necessity to to this. > > FWIW. > > Owen > -- Article: 216996 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Bob Subject: Re: passive antenna References: <18566-431EFC60-34@storefull-3258.bay.webtv.net> <02m5v2-72n.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net> <1126222544.059326.240040@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 21:40:46 -0500 Hi Ian The "back to back" antennas of the passive repeater are simply joined by a transmission cable that suits the antennas. ie If they are 50 ohm antennas use 50 ohm coax. Think of one of the antennas as a source of signal and the other as a load (although they work in both directions) hence the connection is simple. So the system is; - The passive repeater consisting of two antennas. One (yagi?) pointed at the cell tower the other (whatever it is) pointing at the place where you will be using the cellphone. If you are moving around a bit with the phone you may wish to use a reasonably wide beamwidth antenna rather than something too directive. - If there still isnt enough signal you could mount another external antenna on the cellphone itself pointed at the passive repeayter antenna. - Design of the antennas will also include selction of coax etc connection. You could equally as well built antenas with 300 ohm impedence and join with them 300m ohm ribbon. Are you building your own or buying antennas off the shelf? I'd actually suggest some corner reflectors as they are not as critical as long yagi's and have a more useful/wider bandwidth coverage. mr Cebik (http://www.cebik.com)has some corner reflector designs you may be able to scale to 900Mhz. Cheers Bob yhan wrote: > > how about the connection? can you direct me on how to establish > connection b/w two antennas. say, coax cable.How to connect this to the > two antennas? > > thanks & regards, > > ian > Article: 216997 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Richard Crowley" Subject: Re: Best wire for FM reception (car antenna) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 20:37:55 -0700 Message-ID: <11i20skhrp0t34a@corp.supernews.com> References: "Frank" wrote: > What is the best type of "wire" for making a homemade > car antenna to pick up FM radio. Is it copper? Aluminium? Traditional is steel (i.e. coat-hanger wire :-) In reality, it makes no difference except mechanically. > What thickness or size. It is a mechanical issue. What makes it self-supporting? Electrically it is of no significance. > Lenght? Well, the middle of the FM broadcast band is ~98MHz and 1/4 wavelength is ~28.5 inches. http://www.csgnetwork.com/antennagenericfreqlencalc.html Article: 216998 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Paul P" Subject: Help Identify Tower manufacturer Message-ID: Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 12:19:39 GMT Gentlemen, I am attempting to identify the tower manufacture of the tower pictured at: http://www.ppinyot.com/antenna.htm. I would like to properly design a base for it given the manufacturers specs plus perhaps pick up additional sections. The tower seems to be of a stamped steel design (not tubular) with stamped steel cross members. It has been well maintained by the silent key's son. I gather it is about 10 to 15 years old. There is an unpainted ladder chained to one side for storage. Please do not confuse this as part of the tower. Also if you happen to recognize the beam please Identify it too. Unfortunately some one discarded all the paper work not knowing it's value. Thanks Paul paul at ppinyot dot com KB3LZP Article: 216999 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jerry" References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 10:52:46 -0400 "K4YZ" wrote in message news:1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Mac wrote: >> Great work and excellent publicity...cya Mac >> >> "Charlie" wrote in message >> news:11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com... >> > 1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9228945/ >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Charlie - AD5TH >> > www.ad5th.com > > I've noted that the usual rhetoric from the "Ham Radio Will Never > Get Through When Anything Fails" crowd, specifically from the patriarch > of the Feeble Five, Lennie "No Guts" Anderson, has waned in the face of > MAJOR media stories in all facets of "the press" that have lauded > Amateur Radio. > > Even the snide remarks of some lame slime from Motorola has been > laid waste. > > 73 > > Steve, K4YZ Yeah! Where's all those fellers "a-standin' by to pass that 'ere 'eee-mer-gen-cee' traffic thar". We down, we off the key, we gone (thar)" :) J > Article: 217000 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Efficiency of Power Amplifiers From: Cecil Moore Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 10:13:13 -0500 Message-ID: <1126279011_1471@spool6-east.superfeed.net> The latest QEX has an article by k9la: "The Impact of Load SWR on the Efficiency of Power Amplifiers". The amplifier is designed to drive a 50 ohm load and simulated measurements were made for 8 reflection coefficients of 0.333 with phase angles in 45 degree increments. One thing I don't understand. When driving a 100 ohm load, the drain current is 33 amps and the efficiency is 62%. When driving a 25 ohm load, the drain current is 12 amps and the efficiency is 83%. The amp is a Class E/F design from Jan/Feb 2004 QEX. Why would the drain current fall when the load is decreased from 100 ohms to 25 ohms? -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- Article: 217001 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Efficiency of Power Amplifiers From: Cecil Moore Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 10:52:17 -0500 Message-ID: <1126281356_1525@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1126279011_1471@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Tim Wescott wrote: > Cecil Moore wrote: >> The amp is a Class E/F design from Jan/Feb 2004 QEX. Why would >> the drain current fall when the load is decreased from 100 ohms >> to 25 ohms? > > The output filter of an amplifier can act like a 1/4 wave (or 3/4 wave) > transmission line, ... I should have described the output circuitry. It's a push-pull LC tank circuit with DC supplied by the coil center-tap. The output is just a link coupler. The low-pass filter is a single series L and single C to ground. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- Article: 217002 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Best wire for FM reception (car antenna) From: Mike References: Message-ID: <7TjUe.7961$Ix4.2646@okepread03> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 17:45:39 GMT This site has some interesting antennas and info: http://www.ccrane.com/ Article: 217003 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: BBB Complaint # 414840 against Bozak Antenna References: <4315e07b$1@tbbs.net> Message-ID: <_FkUe.389$GK2.384@lakeread07> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:40:08 -0700 anon wrote: > > http://members.tripod.com/~Bozak/HOMEPAGE.HTM > > > heh. he's go 2 dozen popups on that site as well. oh well, he wants my biz, he'll have to do better (and since he appears to be a moron, I won't do biz with him). -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217004 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: Lightning Question References: <1125443164.355999.136830@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:43:49 -0700 wizard12342002@yahoo.com wrote: > Suppose I have an antenna some distance from the house. I run the > transmission line down from the antenna, bury the line, run it > underground to the house, place a lightning arrestor and ground just > outside the house, then run the transmission line up the side of the > house to the operating position on the second floor. Does anyone see a > problem with this arrangement? I can't imagine that a lightning would > "want" to travel back up toward the operating position when it has a > good ground (at the arrestor) closer to the antenna. > > -JJ you would be better to place a lightning arrestor at the tower (and ground the tower as well) and perhaps 1 or 2 along the coax to your house (all ground rodded). This method is referred to as "defense in depth". its how I did it with an old CB setup on a large lot 20 years ago. saved a lot of heartache (though I did have to replace coax a bit more often). -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217005 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: Amateur Radio Assistance to Katrina Disaster! References: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:50:00 -0700 laborkei wrote: > I have been watching wwltv.com and wdsutv.com on the Internet. > I keep hearing about the lack of emergency services to communicate. > Does anyone know if any Amateur Operators are being engaged to assist? > > > -- lots of them. even showed up on fox news and nbc. unfortunately, the DHS/FEMA are trying very hard to keep everything on their plate (thus even hams with the American red cross are being told to pound sand in some cases). -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217006 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Roger Conroy" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 21:33:34 +0200 Message-ID: References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "K4YZ" wrote in message news:1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Mac wrote: >> Great work and excellent publicity...cya Mac >> >> "Charlie" wrote in message >> news:11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com... >> > 1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9228945/ >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Charlie - AD5TH >> > www.ad5th.com > > I've noted that the usual rhetoric from the "Ham Radio Will Never > Get Through When Anything Fails" crowd, specifically from the patriarch > of the Feeble Five, Lennie "No Guts" Anderson, has waned in the face of > MAJOR media stories in all facets of "the press" that have lauded > Amateur Radio. > > Even the snide remarks of some lame slime from Motorola has been > laid waste. > > 73 > > Steve, K4YZ > Methinks a very strongly worded letter from ARRL to the head honcho at Motorola might be a good idea. 73 and special kudos to all those volunteers. ZR3RC Article: 217007 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dan/W4NTI" References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 20:36:12 GMT "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > K4YZ wrote: >> Mac wrote: >> > Great work and excellent publicity...cya Mac >> > >> > "Charlie" wrote in message >> > news:11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com... >> > > 1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9228945/ >> > > >> > > -- >> > > >> > > Charlie - AD5TH >> > > www.ad5th.com >> >> I've noted that the usual rhetoric from the "Ham Radio Will Never >> Get Through When Anything Fails" crowd, specifically from the patriarch >> of the Feeble Five, Lennie "No Guts" Anderson, has waned in the face of >> MAJOR media stories in all facets of "the press" that have lauded >> Amateur Radio. > > No waviering here. The ARS proides usefull service, mostly in keeping > H&W stuff off the plate of those with better things to do. > > It does not properly replace the system used by the cops as witness the > keystone cops bummbling we see and here about > > the ARS is not saving the day or saving civilation, it is hellp people > lessen the impact of the disaster, what I have been saying all along >> >> Even the snide remarks of some lame slime from Motorola has been >> laid waste. >> >> 73 >> >> Steve, K4YZ > As usual our resident dissident has no idea what he is talking about. Here in Alabama we have provided the operators to man the shelters for the Red Cross on the Gulf Coast. They have, and ARE providing the ONLY communications between the shelters and Red Cross HQS in Montgomery. The Alabama Net and other groups are providing links further down the line. Dan/W4NTI Article: 217008 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: assymetrical antenna Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 14:59:11 -0500 Message-ID: References: The original Windom *was* an intentionally off center fed multi-band antenna. Anybody have info on the Windom from the 40's 40's. Dad used one, but I don't know what he did. Steve K,9'D;C.I "RB" wrote in message news:AH_Se.9378$VU6.3783@bignews5.bellsouth.net... > Thanks. > > I think it's one of those deals that goes: yes, there is an imbalance > situation created. But, it's not significant in the big picture. > > I can live with that! > > Article: 217009 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Efficiency of Power Amplifiers Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:16:55 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1126279011_1471@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <1126281356_1525@spool6-east.superfeed.net> I shouldn't, but will. You don't say, but I think you are puzzled by a decreasing load impedance causing a decrease in collector current. I'd have to think about it, but I'd first Try modeling that LC filter at resonance to see if it gives an inverse function like the 1/4 wave line. A "gut" reaction tells me that a decreasing collector current for *either* an increased or decreased load Z would not be a surprise... Steve K9DCI "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:1126281356_1525@spool6-east.superfeed.net... > Tim Wescott wrote: > > > Cecil Moore wrote: > >> The amp is a Class E/F design from Jan/Feb 2004 QEX. Why would > >> the drain current fall when the load is decreased from 100 ohms > >> to 25 ohms? > > > > The output filter of an amplifier can act like a 1/4 wave (or 3/4 wave) > > transmission line, ... > > I should have described the output circuitry. It's a push-pull > LC tank circuit with DC supplied by the coil center-tap. The > output is just a link coupler. The low-pass filter is a single > series L and single C to ground. > -- > 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp > > > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups > ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- Article: 217010 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Dummy Load experience? Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:09:11 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1126098596.599662.122930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> "Ham op" wrote in message news:M7GdnSM_N5cs1oLeRVn-1Q@comcast.com... > My dummy load is 100% enclosed in oil AND a 1 gallon can. This is pretty > tight. I estimate leakage at around -120 to - 130 dB. > > I run about 10 to 11 feet of coax from my transmitter to the low pass > filter to the tuner to the antenna switch to the dummy load. The coax is > good quality 9913. BUT, it uses a woven copper braid as the overbraid. > The braid has a leakage impedance of typically 0.020 + jw10^-8 ohms. The > inductive term means that the little holes in the braid 'LEAK' rf. At > VHF the coax isolation could be -60 to -80 dB. Ahhh! You stole' my thunder. Coax typically only has 60-80 dB isolation at best and that is if it is made well and connectors are on well. Before it even gets to the coax connector of the radio, there'll be some radiation. 73, Steve, K9DCI Article: 217011 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: I wonder... Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:01:52 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1116948846.845758.269720@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1116950811.722761.163430@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1116956452.889209.81740@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4293acf2$0$298$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> <4293be22$1_2@spool9-west.superfeed.net> <1117690429.916477.190610@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <429f04f7$1_2@spool9-west.superfeed.net> <43148C75.606@library.berkeley.edu> <9_1Te.71845$2Q3.57303@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com> ... Filters? Filters? We don't need no stinkin' filters... Bah dum dum... Tshhhhhhh Steve N. "Ham op" wrote in message news:6oWdnQUlhN8CH73eRVn-ug@comcast.com... > > > God wrote: > > > "Daniel J. Stern" wrote in message > > news:Pine.GSO.4.58.0509052317440.6886@alumni.engin.umich.edu... > > > >>On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Wayne P. Muckleroy wrote: > >> > >> > >>Well, me, I'm reading this from RAMC, and so I wonder if God and Allah and > >>Jesus and that lot use K&N or Fram filters. > > > > > > > > Yes, I do use Fram filters. > > God has spoken! So, end the thread! > > > > > Article: 217012 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jerry Martes" References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna Message-ID: <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 00:12:53 GMT wrote in message news:1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >I am looking to set up a laptop on a boat that will receive wifi > signals. I need to install a twenty foot cable from the antenna to a > Proxim orinoco 8011b/g gold wireless card. I have found the cable but > don't know what antenna to attach to it as I want to minimize loss of > signal and I believe I have to get a certain length antenna to > synchronize with the cable length to do this. Does anyone know what the > > right size antenna should be? Also, any suggestions on where to pick > one > up? > I found the cable here > http://sharperconcepts.zoovy.com/product/YSC-CA-RSPNMAXXX > Hi Petercc I have some interest in a similar project with WiFi. Forgive me if I'm not understanding what you want to do. Are you sure that card will fit in your lap top? All the lap top PCMCIA WiFi cards I've seen, that have a coax connector, use a much smaller connector. You didnt indicate if you know from which direction the WiFi signal is coming from. does the marine antenna need to be omniazimuth? Are you willing to accept the signal loss associated with the 20 feet of coax? My weather conditions are not as extreme as your marine environment. I have installed a wireless Ethernet bridge at the antenna and connected that to the computer with CAT 5 to alleviate the line loss problem at 2.4 GHz. E-mail me if you want any info and/or pictures of what I'm messing with. Jerry Article: 217013 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna From: Ed References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 02:21:02 GMT > I am looking to set up a laptop on a boat that will receive wifi > signals. I need to install a twenty foot cable from the antenna to a > Proxim orinoco 8011b/g gold wireless card. I have found the cable but > don't know what antenna to attach to it as I want to minimize loss of > signal and I believe I have to get a certain length antenna to > synchronize with the cable length to do this. Does anyone know what the > > right size antenna should be? Also, any suggestions on where to pick > one up? I'd suggest you post your question to some of the Internet wireless or networking newsgroups. I've seen questions similar to yours posted on some of them recently, such as, comp.os.linux.networking . I've also seen some good antenna sources given in posted responses there. Ed Article: 217014 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Paul Keinanen Subject: Re: lf to HF preselector design needed Message-ID: <8k35i11lmh2sdrn8re7g69gh6d3j8mkqo6@4ax.com> References: <9df4i1546l564jt5uc22lp8gva22v9qdgi@4ax.com> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 12:16:44 +0300 On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 22:01:27 -0400, TRABEM <> wrote: >I need an LF to 30 Khz preselector (passive) for a homebrewed receiver >I'm building. I have most of the details worked out, but I am stuck on >the preselector design. > >I want one band to cover 50 Khz to 500 Khz (or 1 Mhz). That would be 1:10 (or 1:20) frequency range. >The second band would be 1 Mhz to 30 Mhz. That would be 1:30 frequency range and would require a 1:900 reactance range, if only one element (inductance or capacitance) is tuned, which would be completely unrealistic. The alternative would be to tune both the inductance _and_ capacitance in the 1:30 range. However, with a 300 pF variable capacitor, the minimum capacitor would be 10 pF _including_ all stray capacitances, not very realistic. I have no idea what a realistic tuning range would be for a permeability tuned inductor. I have only seen those in FM receivers (87..108 MHz), which only about 20 % tuning range. >50 ohm input with moderate Q (don't want to >have to retune it every 100 Khz. The LF unit can be very high Q, >peaking it every few Khz is ok as most of the signals in that range >are narrowband signals anyway. Input impedance is standard 50 ohms. Maintaining the constant impedance if both inductance and capacitance is tuned would be a challenge. While maintaining the power match makes some sense in HF receivers (and also if you are using some small magnetic loops on LF/MF), but otherwise, I would question the idea to maintain the 50 ohm resistive input impedance on LF (and possibly also MF). On LF, any practical random wire antenna would have a high capacitive reactance. On LF I have simply used a parallel tuned circuit and connected the antenna to the hot end of the circuit with a small (10-100 pF) capacitor. Of course, the tuning scale will not be accurate if you change the antenna, since the antenna stray capacitances will detune the resonant circuit. Use a secondary winding or a source/emitter follower to get the impedance down to feed a 50 ohm receiver input or feed a coaxial cable (if the preselector is just under the antenna). If you intend to use magnetic loop antennas on LF/MF, which have a low efficiency, I would suggest using a (remotely)tunable loop as the preselector, with possibly a preamplifier at the antenna. I would strongly suggest splitting the HF bands and switching in various inductors for various bands and use an ordinary variable capacitor. The situation is quite problematic on LF, since you would need a variable capacitor with a tuning range int several nF to keep the resonant circuit impedances at manageable levels (otherwise, it would be quite "touchy" due to stray capacitances). With practical variable capacitors, you would have to add parallel padding capacitors, with would further reduce the tuning range. Permeability tuning might be an option. You could try making a coil and slide a ferrite bar (from a medium wave antenna) into it, however, I have no experience with this. Paul OH3LWR Article: 217015 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Howard K0ACF" References: Subject: Re: Help Identify Tower manufacturer Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 03:47:46 -0700 Looks like a Rohn HDX series. I had the HDX 48(48ft. tall) The HDX series went to 64 ft. if I remember right. "Paul P" wrote in message news:v5fUe.214720$5N3.62635@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > Gentlemen, > > I am attempting to identify the tower manufacture of the tower pictured > at: > http://www.ppinyot.com/antenna.htm. I would like to properly design a > base for it given the manufacturers specs plus perhaps pick up additional > sections. > > The tower seems to be of a stamped steel design (not tubular) with stamped > steel cross members. It has been well maintained by the silent key's son. > I gather it is about 10 to 15 years old. There is an unpainted ladder > chained to one side for storage. Please do not confuse this as part of the > tower. > > Also if you happen to recognize the beam please Identify it too. > > Unfortunately some one discarded all the paper work not knowing it's > value. > > Thanks Paul > > paul at ppinyot dot com > > KB3LZP > Article: 217016 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Robert Lay (W9DMK)" Subject: Re: loop antenna question... Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 09:23:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 08:46:24 -0400, "larry" wrote: >greetings... > >I have been a ham since the mid 60's and the main antenna of choice appears >to be dipole... However, over the past few months, or so, I have been >reading more and more about this loop antenna..... > >I am reasonable sure I can get more information about it so I won't bore you >with how to build one, etc, .. my question is more of why or how... Why has >this antenna become so popular over the past little while and how did it get >this popularity....What charateristics, besides seemingly not needing as >much geography to need to put up, does this antenna have that make is so >appealing? > >I might consider it...for 80 or 40... > >Larry ve3fxq > Depending upon the size of the loop in wavelengths and depending upon where in the geometry it is fed and depending upon its height, it might very well be a good cloud warmer - in which case it would probably give excellent performance in the immediate area (as opposed to DX). People that I QSO with on 75 seem to do very, very well with loop antennas in the evening over a range of up to 500 - 700 mi. Article: 217017 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Efficiency of Power Amplifiers From: Cecil Moore Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 08:33:53 -0500 Message-ID: <1126359392_6087@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1126279011_1471@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <1126281356_1525@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Steve Nosko wrote: > I shouldn't, but will. You don't say, but I think you are puzzled by a > decreasing load impedance causing a decrease in collector current. I'd have > to think about it, but I'd first Try modeling that LC filter at resonance to > see if it gives an inverse function like the 1/4 wave line. > A "gut" reaction tells me that a decreasing collector current for *either* > an increased or decreased load Z would not be a surprise... The output is link coupled through a series 216 nH coil and a 2.1 nF cap to ground. The load is connected from the coil/cap junction to ground. It's a Class E/F 40m amp. Load Drain Current Drain Efficiency Load Power 25 ohms 12.2 amps 82.6% 129 watts 50 ohms 20.1 amps 77.7% 200 watts 100 ohms 33.1 amps 62.3% 264 watts Can these be thought of as load-pulling data points? Maximum load power appears to occur when the load is greater than 100 ohms. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 217018 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: loop antenna question... From: Cecil Moore Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 08:44:21 -0500 Message-ID: <1126360020_6099@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: larry wrote: > I might consider it...for 80 or 40... How long is the loop in wavelengths? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 217019 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: loop antenna question... Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 13:59:35 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1126360020_6099@spool6-east.superfeed.net> > How long is the loop in wavelengths? > -- ============================ . . . . . and is it in the horizontal of vertical plane? Article: 217020 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Bob Subject: Re: lf to HF preselector design needed References: <9df4i1546l564jt5uc22lp8gva22v9qdgi@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 08:25:39 -0500 I realise that you are after a passive solution but I wonder if an op-amp or two in a Q multiplier configuration *for the first band) might be a better idea? You could then tune the feedback/gain of the device with a R/C combination rather than large values of L. You could of course set the gain to 1 if you wanted. Just an idle thought. Cheers Bob W5/VK2YQA TRABEM wrote: > > I need an LF to 30 Khz preselector (passive) for a homebrewed receiver > I'm building. I have most of the details worked out, but I am stuck on > the preselector design. > Article: 217021 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Bob Subject: Re: loop antenna question... References: Message-ID: <074bv2-39s.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 08:38:08 -0500 Hi Larry You are talking about a shielded magloop rather than a full wave length single quad loop... They exhibit reasonable performance for their size and are very quiet. ie the signal to noise is often better on the magloop than a larger antenna. I have seen claims that the signal strength is maybe 2 S points lower but the noise is 5 S points lower. I have heard of configurations where a dipole is used for TX and a magloop for RX. The at antenna tuning makes for less chance of a strong nearby signal desensitizing your RX. The downside of that is that you have to have some method of doing this remote tuning. Bandwidths in the order of 20-30khz on 80m are not uncommon. They can be built for 2:1 or 3:1 frequency coverage range. I have no idea how the performance changes at the far end. I actually havent built one Hope this helps. Cheers Bob W5/VK2YQA larry wrote: > this popularity....What charateristics, besides seemingly not needing as > much geography to need to put up, does this antenna have that make is so > appealing? Article: 217022 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jack Subject: Re: Question on car antenna (in-glass, rear windshield) Message-ID: References: <25ydndntds9xcoHeRVn-ow@rogers.com> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 15:00:01 GMT I have a new 2005 Buick with a rear window heater/antenna. The heater works and the FM reception is fine but the AM reception is terrible to almost nil.. The dealer is working on the problem with the AM radio reception and has ordered a new cable which they are going to install when it arrives later this month. I doubt that this is the problem but they think it is so we'll see after they install a new one. I'll post a follow up when they figure out the problem with the AM radio. My guess is that it is the radio but that is just my guess. On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 21:24:30 -0400, "Frank" wrote: >Hi all > >Let me preamble this by saying I am new at this, and need your >help. But I am a quick learner! > >I have a few specific questions and perhaps you can help. I am >trying to troubleshoot a Fm static problem > >1) Is the car coax cable lead one or two wires? I am quite sure >it is two (one outer (the ground) and one inner wire) but I'll >ask to confirm > >2) Should a "in-glass" rear winshield antenna be grounded to the >car's body? If so, from which end of the coax cable? (see Q 3) > >3) Does the expression "grounding the antena" (in the case of a >glass mounted antenna) be as simple as soldering a grounding wire >from the outside coax lead end that plugs into the HU to a metal >ground of the car? Or should it be done closer to the actual >antena? SUch as at the junction of the end of the coax and where >the antenna starts... > >Here is more detail on my problem if this helps: inconsistent FM >reception (re: static) with in-glass antenna where I use to get >crystal clear reception with old car. However, there is a twist >to my problem: I noticed that the coax cable (inner cable) from >the HU is not truly connected to the antenna even if it looks >like it is. I tested it with a continuity tester and it is not. >When I try to connect the inner coax wire directly to the antenna >(using a wire and soldering), then I can test it and it is well >connected. In other words, the inner wire of the coax makes a >continuous circuit from the HU's to the end of the antenna. Yet, >I still get some static on some FM station (which is not induced >by the engine or the car's electrical systems). > >Any suggestion? It is an RSX 2004 (Acura). I changed the HU twice >(two models) and the problem persists (same issue with the OEM) > >TIA > Article: 217023 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Hank Oredson" References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 16:18:00 GMT "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Dan/W4NTI wrote: >> "an_old_friend" wrote in message >> news:1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> > >> > K4YZ wrote: >> >> Mac wrote: >> >> > Great work and excellent publicity...cya Mac >> >> > >> >> > "Charlie" wrote in message >> >> > news:11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com... >> >> > > 1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9228945/ >> >> > > >> >> > > -- >> >> > > >> >> > > Charlie - AD5TH >> >> > > www.ad5th.com >> >> >> >> I've noted that the usual rhetoric from the "Ham Radio Will Never >> >> Get Through When Anything Fails" crowd, specifically from the >> >> patriarch >> >> of the Feeble Five, Lennie "No Guts" Anderson, has waned in the face >> >> of >> >> MAJOR media stories in all facets of "the press" that have lauded >> >> Amateur Radio. >> > >> > No waviering here. The ARS proides usefull service, mostly in keeping >> > H&W stuff off the plate of those with better things to do. >> > >> > It does not properly replace the system used by the cops as witness the >> > keystone cops bummbling we see and here about >> > >> > the ARS is not saving the day or saving civilation, it is hellp people >> > lessen the impact of the disaster, what I have been saying all along >> >> >> >> Even the snide remarks of some lame slime from Motorola has been >> >> laid waste. >> >> >> >> 73 >> >> >> >> Steve, K4YZ >> > >> >> As usual our resident dissident has no idea what he is talking about. >> Here >> in Alabama we have provided the operators to man the shelters for the Red >> Cross on the Gulf Coast. They have, and ARE providing the ONLY >> communications between the shelters and Red Cross HQS in Montgomery. > > did you you bother to read my remarks before lighting up the flame > thrower? > > But just How big is Mntgomery I was though there once long ago, and > thought it pretty small. But any reason they could not use GRMS or even > CB to make those links? I don't see any but you might know better than > I. > > as to your other points. > > One am unable judge for myself directly of course because of rules you > personaly have supported for years. > > Two I said most com seemed to that most were H&W, Indeed given the size > of Montgomery could not they diespense with anything but messagers? Not > syaing they should but couldn't they. That is incorrect. All the traffic I personally relayed was emergency requests for rescue. All the traffic handled by the net I helped was emergency traffic, and resulted in many many rescues. Lots of folks are alive today because of ham radio. > The Comms provided by hams are important and of value, But I see no > report of (let alone have one confirmed) use of ham radio that rises to > the level of critcal Your ignorance is amazing. Did you actually LISTEN? > >> >> The Alabama Net and other groups are providing links further down the >> line. > > and what are they passing? > > what vital message are they conveying? Listen and learn. -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli Article: 217024 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jerry Martes" References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 18:31:34 GMT wrote in message news:1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Yes I would like an email address so I can see what you are talking > about. > > I have the cable connector which connects to the main cable from the > proxim card fine. I am picking up the 20 foot cable and want an antenna > that will minimize loss of the signal. I tried an existing omni antenna > that is aboout 30" long and a long cable and the signal was > nonexistant. With the short cable and that same antenna I was using, I > got some hotspots tuned in. > Hi Peter I sent you an E-mail. Let me know here if it doesnt get to you. Do you have any specs on the "existing antenna"? I havent seen any omniazimuth WiFi antennas that long. It is likely that the 30 inch long antenna is *not* designed for 2.4 GHz use. Try to get some specs on the loss of the cable you are "picking up". Since I am not willing to accept the loss associated with coax at this frequency, I have resorted to either USB or CAT 5 rather than use coax from the antenna to the computer. Jerry Article: 217025 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: loop antenna question... From: Cecil Moore Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 14:15:52 -0500 Message-ID: <1126379911_7763@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1126360020_6099@spool6-east.superfeed.net> larry wrote: > A lot of work.... I just hope this loop antenna system can be used in both > transmit and receiver... (just my initial opinion).... Full wave loops are quite different from small loops but both can be used for both transmit and receive. As usual, transmit is the challenge. A one-turn small loop works best if resonated by a vacuum cap. > Any further thinking on this subject... you have my attention... The ARRL Antenna Book has some good information on the subject. Single turn loops work well for transmitting. Multiple turn transmitting loops have a nasty habit of disappointing the user. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- Article: 217026 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Percival P. Cassidy" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <1QGUe.29145$ih4.20237@fe02.lga> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 15:52:30 -0400 On 09/09/05 05:30 pm an_old_friend tossed the following ingredients into the ever-growing pot of cybersoup: > Two I said most com seemed to that most were H&W, Indeed given the size > of Montgomery could not they diespense with anything but messagers? Not > syaing they should but couldn't they. > > The Comms provided by hams are important and of value, But I see no > report of (let alone have one confirmed) use of ham radio that rises to > the level of critcal >>The Alabama Net and other groups are providing links further down the line. > and what are they passing? > > what vital message are they conveying? Several days ago I heard a message being relayed to police/hwy patrol/whomever about people trapped in an attic somewhere that needed to be rescued. The latest ARRL eLetter reports that in some places hams were lending their equipment to "official" agencies because the latters' equipment did not work. Remember that, in this "land of the 'We'll do it our own way, thank you very much'", many govt. agencies cannot communicate with each other by radio even when the equipment does work: every county and municipality, every fire dept. and ambulance service is free to decide what equipment to use regardless of what anybody else is using. I understand that Michigan is one of the few states with an integrated (or at least coordinated) radio system. Where multiple agencies are trying to work together, putting ham radio operators with each agency may be one of the few ways they have of keeping in touch. "Perce" (aka Alan NV8A) Article: 217027 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: loop antenna question... Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 20:35:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1126360020_6099@spool6-east.superfeed.net> It should be borne in mind the best form of radiator is just an isolated straight length of wire. But curved or bent wires do almost as good. Loop antennas are nearly always single turn conductors and provide a means of getting as much wire into space as possible with the largest possible linear dimension being dependent on the size of your back yard. Or your attic. Loops are space savers. Subject to the space available, for a given perimeter, the larger the area enclosed by a loop the better are its radiating properties and its power efficiency. However, when an antenna is already 80 or 90 percent efficient, there is seldom any point in attempting to improve it. 100 percent is impossible. And to improve it to 95 percent results only in an entirely imperceptible 0.2dB or 1/20th of an S-unit. Again considering space requirements, the physically smallest loops are descibed as Magloops. Magloops, not difficult to design, are the most efficient of all small antennas of any type. When the perimeter of a Magloop is only 1/3rd of a wavelength at the operating frequency, efficiency can approach that of a full size 1/2-wave dipole. The disadvantage of a small magloop lies in its restricted range of operating frequencies. Three adjacent HF bands at most. The cost of a vaccuum variable capacitor cannot be neglected. But even at frequencies as low as 1.9 and 3.6 MHz, magloops with perimeters as small as 1/15 wavelengths, diameters as small as 1/50 wavelengths, are quite usable in small backyards and attics. Expect signal strengths 2 or 2.5 S-units worse than a full size half-wave dipole. There are reports of improved signal to noise ratio on receive although I have not experienced this myself. For design of magloops at any HF frequency and any reasonable size of loop, download program MAGLOOP4 from website below. For performance of much larger horizontal loops, for use in your backyard, download program RJELOOP4 ---- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 217028 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dan/W4NTI" References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126315066.262040.67480@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 20:56:19 GMT "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1126315066.262040.67480@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Richard Clark wrote: >> On 9 Sep 2005 14:30:13 -0700, "an_old_friend" >> wrote: >> >> > No waviering here. The ARS proides usefull service, mostly in >> >> > keeping >> >> > H&W stuff off the plate of those with better things to do. >> >> Mostly? This is a left-handed complement in light of the news. > > I have seencoverage of H&W traffic on the news >> >> >> > It does not properly replace the system used by the cops as witness >> >> > the >> >> > keystone cops bummbling we see and here about >> >> In fact it did replace the system used by the cops, and witnesses >> abound. > > Cops dispatched by Ham radio? I don't think so >> >> >> > the ARS is not saving the day or saving civilation, it is hellp >> >> > people >> >> > lessen the impact of the disaster, what I have been saying all along >> >> Well, until you were crossposted here, we have been entirely unaware >> of what you have been saying all along. That aside, and more to the >> point about your comment about ARS not saving the day, there are a >> half dozen FEMA workers who would humbly admit otherwise after they >> were rescued through Ham operator efforts. > > well that is news >> >> >But just How big is Mntgomery I was though there once long ago, and >> >thought it pretty small. But any reason they could not use GRMS or even >> >CB to make those links? I don't see any but you might know better than >> >I. >> >> From your vantage deep in Virginia, I would think that Montgomery >> would be quite cosmopolitan. Going beyond that however, such >> suggestions as offered above seem to miss the point of HF >> communications. > > Virgina? I don't live in Virgina > > but in responf to a quip about the shelters in Montgomery being linked > by Ham radio HF would hardly seem likely to be involved > Now the goof calls me a liar. I have been sitting on HF for the last WEEK helping the shelters talk with each other. Montgomery needs commo into places like the Gulf Coast, Biloxi, Gulfport, and of course New Orleans. Get a flippin map and tell me how VHF/UHF is going to make those distances? Montgomery is the capital city of Alabama. Not what I would call a small town. >> >> >The Comms provided by hams are important and of value, But I see no >> >report of (let alone have one confirmed) use of ham radio that rises to >> >the level of critcal >> >> You should consider your choices made in informing yourself. > > Auf Anglish Bitte? > >> >> To Others, >> >> I've rummaged up at least a couple of dozen references to the Ham >> activities from a variety of news outlets (and not just the bobbing >> heads of salacious cable TV). It would do us all well to stockpile >> such commendations to "remind" authorities who so quickly forget in >> the face of those who can stuff their pockets with money-for-airspace. > > Indeed we should, we should also make sure they are accurate >> >> 73's >> Richard Clark, KB7QHC > Article: 217029 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dan/W4NTI" References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:05:26 GMT "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Dan/W4NTI wrote: >> "an_old_friend" wrote in message >> news:1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> > >> > K4YZ wrote: >> >> Mac wrote: >> >> > Great work and excellent publicity...cya Mac >> >> > >> >> > "Charlie" wrote in message >> >> > news:11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com... >> >> > > 1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9228945/ >> >> > > >> >> > > -- >> >> > > >> >> > > Charlie - AD5TH >> >> > > www.ad5th.com >> >> >> >> I've noted that the usual rhetoric from the "Ham Radio Will Never >> >> Get Through When Anything Fails" crowd, specifically from the >> >> patriarch >> >> of the Feeble Five, Lennie "No Guts" Anderson, has waned in the face >> >> of >> >> MAJOR media stories in all facets of "the press" that have lauded >> >> Amateur Radio. >> > >> > No waviering here. The ARS proides usefull service, mostly in keeping >> > H&W stuff off the plate of those with better things to do. >> > >> > It does not properly replace the system used by the cops as witness the >> > keystone cops bummbling we see and here about >> > >> > the ARS is not saving the day or saving civilation, it is hellp people >> > lessen the impact of the disaster, what I have been saying all along >> >> >> >> Even the snide remarks of some lame slime from Motorola has been >> >> laid waste. >> >> >> >> 73 >> >> >> >> Steve, K4YZ >> > >> >> As usual our resident dissident has no idea what he is talking about. >> Here >> in Alabama we have provided the operators to man the shelters for the Red >> Cross on the Gulf Coast. They have, and ARE providing the ONLY >> communications between the shelters and Red Cross HQS in Montgomery. > > did you you bother to read my remarks before lighting up the flame > thrower? > > But just How big is Mntgomery I was though there once long ago, and > thought it pretty small. But any reason they could not use GRMS or even > CB to make those links? I don't see any but you might know better than > I. > > as to your other points. > > One am unable judge for myself directly of course because of rules you > personaly have supported for years. > > Two I said most com seemed to that most were H&W, Indeed given the size > of Montgomery could not they diespense with anything but messagers? Not > syaing they should but couldn't they. > Sure they could. And if we still had WWI carrier pidgeons they could be used also. Or perhaps they could mail a letter. > The Comms provided by hams are important and of value, But I see no > report of (let alone have one confirmed) use of ham radio that rises to > the level of critcal > Then I suggest you listen in and find out what is being passed. I will be posting on rec.radio.amateur. policy the statements from the ARRL on this subject. Perhaps that will help you to understand. > >> >> The Alabama Net and other groups are providing links further down the >> line. > > and what are they passing? > Everything from relaying between shelters (because of poor conditions, or poor antennas or both), helping various operators with finding links to other nets, Health and Welfare such as passing messages (at our expense) >from the disaster area to families of those in the area. I personally participated in passing Emergency traffic from Huntsville AL to New Orleans Coast Guard about a family trapped in a house and needing their help. Additionally I relayed between a very weak HF station in New Orleans to Tallahassee Hospital to "tell the aircraft to come up on VHF". I have no idea what that meant. But I have no doubt it was important to someone. I am just ONE operator doing what I can. How about stop criticizing those that are.....you may learn something. > what vital message are they conveying? >> >> Dan/W4NTI > Article: 217030 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dan/W4NTI" References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126315066.262040.67480@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126358707.445082.283000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126363970.820311.161670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:07:28 GMT "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1126363970.820311.161670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > K4YZ wrote: >> nobodys_old_friend wrote: >> > Richard Clark wrote: >> > > On 9 Sep 2005 14:30:13 -0700, "an_old_friend" >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > No waviering here. The ARS proides usefull service, mostly in >> > > >> > keeping >> > > >> > H&W stuff off the plate of those with better things to do. >> > > >> > > Mostly? This is a left-handed complement in light of the news. >> > >> > I have seencoverage of H&W traffic on the news >> > > >> > > >> > It does not properly replace the system used by the cops as >> > > >> > witness the >> > > >> > keystone cops bummbling we see and here about >> > > >> > > In fact it did replace the system used by the cops, and witnesses >> > > abound. >> > >> > Cops dispatched by Ham radio? I don't think so >> >> Then get your "believer" fixed, boyo. >> >> It's happened before, it's happening now. >> >> > > >> > the ARS is not saving the day or saving civilation, it is hellp >> > > >> > people >> > > >> > lessen the impact of the disaster, what I have been saying all >> > > >> > along >> > > >> > > Well, until you were crossposted here, we have been entirely unaware >> > > of what you have been saying all along. That aside, and more to the >> > > point about your comment about ARS not saving the day, there are a >> > > half dozen FEMA workers who would humbly admit otherwise after they >> > > were rescued through Ham operator efforts. >> > >> > well that is news >> > > >> > > >But just How big is Mntgomery I was though there once long ago, and >> > > >thought it pretty small. But any reason they could not use GRMS or >> > > >even >> > > >CB to make those links? I don't see any but you might know better >> > > >than >> > > >I. >> > > >> > > From your vantage deep in Virginia, I would think that Montgomery >> > > would be quite cosmopolitan. Going beyond that however, such >> > > suggestions as offered above seem to miss the point of HF >> > > communications. >> > >> > Virgina? I don't live in Virgina >> >> Good thing, too. > cuting you sex ramrks again >> > but in responf to a quip about the shelters in Montgomery being linked >> > by Ham radio HF would hardly seem likely to be involved >> >> "response" >> >> Why? >> >> You think that they only need to talk across town? > > that was the stated report >> >> > > >The Comms provided by hams are important and of value, But I see no >> > > >report of (let alone have one confirmed) use of ham radio that rises >> > > >to >> > > >the level of critcal >> > > >> > > You should consider your choices made in informing yourself. >> > >> > Auf Anglish Bitte? >> >> Cowardly avoidance. > > then you are a bigger coward stilll pretending you don't understand > when it is convientant >> >> Typical Mark Morgan. >> >> Steve, K4YZ > Just where did you get the notion that Montgomery only needed to talk across town? Dan/W4NTI Article: 217031 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: loop antenna question... Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:17:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1126360020_6099@spool6-east.superfeed.net> A follow-on from the previous message - As usual, I forgot to mention the website from which the programs could be downloaded. It may be something to do with a bottle of fine vintage Port I have recently opened. Download MAGLOOP4 and RJELOOP4 from website below and make what sense you can out of them. Incidentally, the number 4 in each name is an indication of previous programs of similar names through which programs have been improved or diverted. ---- ........................................................... Regards from Reg, G4FGQ For Free Radio Design Software go to http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp ........................................................... Article: 217032 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dan/W4NTI" References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126315066.262040.67480@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126358707.445082.283000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126363970.820311.161670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126386571.077673.154380@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <1aIUe.9902$9i4.6598@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:24:13 GMT "an_old_friend" wrote in message news:1126386571.077673.154380@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Dan/W4NTI wrote: >> "an_old_friend" wrote in message >> news:1126363970.820311.161670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> > >> > K4YZ wrote: >> >> nobodys_old_friend wrote: >> >> > Richard Clark wrote: >> >> > > On 9 Sep 2005 14:30:13 -0700, "an_old_friend" >> >> > > >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > >> > No waviering here. The ARS proides usefull service, mostly in >> >> > > >> > keeping >> >> > > >> > H&W stuff off the plate of those with better things to do. >> >> > > >> >> > > Mostly? This is a left-handed complement in light of the news. >> >> > >> >> > I have seencoverage of H&W traffic on the news >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > It does not properly replace the system used by the cops as >> >> > > >> > witness the >> >> > > >> > keystone cops bummbling we see and here about >> >> > > >> >> > > In fact it did replace the system used by the cops, and witnesses >> >> > > abound. >> >> > >> >> > Cops dispatched by Ham radio? I don't think so >> >> >> >> Then get your "believer" fixed, boyo. >> >> >> >> It's happened before, it's happening now. >> >> >> >> > > >> > the ARS is not saving the day or saving civilation, it is >> >> > > >> > hellp >> >> > > >> > people >> >> > > >> > lessen the impact of the disaster, what I have been saying >> >> > > >> > all >> >> > > >> > along >> >> > > >> >> > > Well, until you were crossposted here, we have been entirely >> >> > > unaware >> >> > > of what you have been saying all along. That aside, and more to >> >> > > the >> >> > > point about your comment about ARS not saving the day, there are a >> >> > > half dozen FEMA workers who would humbly admit otherwise after >> >> > > they >> >> > > were rescued through Ham operator efforts. >> >> > >> >> > well that is news >> >> > > >> >> > > >But just How big is Mntgomery I was though there once long ago, >> >> > > >and >> >> > > >thought it pretty small. But any reason they could not use GRMS >> >> > > >or >> >> > > >even >> >> > > >CB to make those links? I don't see any but you might know better >> >> > > >than >> >> > > >I. >> >> > > >> >> > > From your vantage deep in Virginia, I would think that Montgomery >> >> > > would be quite cosmopolitan. Going beyond that however, such >> >> > > suggestions as offered above seem to miss the point of HF >> >> > > communications. >> >> > >> >> > Virgina? I don't live in Virgina >> >> >> >> Good thing, too. >> > cuting you sex ramrks again >> >> > but in responf to a quip about the shelters in Montgomery being >> >> > linked >> >> > by Ham radio HF would hardly seem likely to be involved >> >> >> >> "response" >> >> >> >> Why? >> >> >> >> You think that they only need to talk across town? >> > >> > that was the stated report >> >> >> >> > > >The Comms provided by hams are important and of value, But I see >> >> > > >no >> >> > > >report of (let alone have one confirmed) use of ham radio that >> >> > > >rises >> >> > > >to >> >> > > >the level of critcal >> >> > > >> >> > > You should consider your choices made in informing yourself. >> >> > >> >> > Auf Anglish Bitte? >> >> >> >> Cowardly avoidance. >> > >> > then you are a bigger coward stilll pretending you don't understand >> > when it is convientant >> >> >> >> Typical Mark Morgan. >> >> >> >> Steve, K4YZ >> > >> Just where did you get the notion that Montgomery only needed to talk >> across >> town? > > from your statement obviously >> I never said any such thing. I was talking about comms in/out of shelters. You think ALL the shelters are in one town? Are you seriously this out of step with the rest of ham radio? Seek mental health help. You have been fixed, right? Please say yes. Dan/W4NTI Article: 217033 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <432365BC.26298500@tower_dude.com> From: markus Subject: Re: Help Identify Tower manufacturer References: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 23:01:17 GMT Anyone know if the tower mfg. put any data plates or other identifying markings on these towers and sections ? Article: 217034 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article From: Cecil Moore Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 18:01:59 -0500 Message-ID: <1126393478_8223@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126361293.168132.184530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126364471.656311.316620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126384472.396083.263930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> K4YZ wrote: > So...Amateurs created KATRINA just so we could "posture" in a > newsgroup...?!?! Someone interviewed on network news said today that it was an "Act of God by George Bush's God". A couple of days ago some followers of Allah were taking credit for it. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 217035 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <43236BFF.F90C9FB9@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 23:29:54 GMT Dan/W4NTI wrote: > > Sure they could. And if we still had WWI carrier pidgeons they could be > used also. Or perhaps they could mail a letter. Sure they could mail a letter. After the US postal service reopens mail service to the affected areas. There were notices on the USPS website telling that next day, and some other mail services were not available for the time being. -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217036 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <432372A7.100DD50A@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: lf to HF preselector design needed References: <9df4i1546l564jt5uc22lp8gva22v9qdgi@4ax.com> <8k35i11lmh2sdrn8re7g69gh6d3j8mkqo6@4ax.com> <8mu5i1tmjbj7ukge3ukij7pks785mp222r@4ax.com> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 23:58:21 GMT TRABEM wrote: > > Thanks Paul, > > My old Drake C line had a multiple ganged permeability tuned inductor > mechanically coupled to a variable cap. > > One of the assemblies tuned the front end, one peaked the driver > stage, etc. > > It covered from 1 Mhz to 30 Mhz with a half turn on the front panel > preselector control. Most likely the variable C and L tuned together > maintained a desirable Q across all the bands. > > I was hoping for something similar, but have no idea where to get > permeability tuned inductors today. > > Regards, > > T Fair Radio used to have some in their catalog, and they were used in all of the old Delco (and some other brands) car radios of the '60s and '70s. -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217037 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 19:29:27 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Richard Clark wrote: > On 10 Sep 2005 10:42:15 -0700, petercc@care2.com wrote: > > >>I tried an existing omni antenna >>that is aboout 30" long and a long cable and the signal was >>nonexistant. With the short cable and that same antenna I was using, I >>got some hotspots tuned in. > > > Hi Peter, > > This 30" antenna is easily ten times too long. It will be very > directional, and only if you point it (like a rapier) towards the > transmitter. As it stands, your favored direction is straight up. > This, of course, is strictly counter to your stated desire for "omni." > > Take a cue from the products offered for this class of communication. > Their antennas are short for reasons that go beyond aesthetics. Take > heart that you are on the right path. Antenna height (distance above > you, not length) is always an advantage. > > 73's > Richard Clark, KB7QHC Which means it was a colinear. It is long for a reason. Similar antennas are vailable at CompoUSA and most other computer stores. tom K0TAR Article: 217038 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 19:39:16 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126361293.168132.184530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126364471.656311.316620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126384472.396083.263930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126385863.388711.272520@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <43237cb4$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> an_old_friend wrote: > > sure there are facts but it also a fact that i think you are an idoit > but this sate of being a fact does not make it relavant > > nothing your rant saying why the neds Dan was identifing culd not be > met though other means > > 250,00 is relitive small but the issue was never number but land area > > more of you absurdity You might be more credible if you could spell a bit better. At least use a spell checker so you appear to be less of an idiot. Of course, your arguments would still be suspect even if you did that. tom K0TAR Article: 217039 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 18:10:00 -0700 Message-ID: <11i70v9s8amrb94@corp.supernews.com> References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Tom Ring wrote: > > Which means it was a colinear. It is long for a reason. > > Similar antennas are vailable at CompoUSA and most other computer stores. > > tom > K0TAR What you should look for is small plasic-encased bumps (each enclosing a coil) or obvious coiled sections spaced every few inches along the antenna's length. If it has those, it's probably a collinear like Tom says, and will be omnidirectional broadside to the antenna. If it doesn't, and is just a straight piece of wire or rod, it's directional nearly in the direction of the wire like Richard said. Any reasonable sized coax will have a lot of loss per unit length at that frequency, so do everything you can to keep it as short as possible. Depending on the situation, putting the antenna might or might not help, if putting it higher necessitates making the feedline longer. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 217040 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: lf to HF preselector design needed Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 18:13:12 -0700 Message-ID: <11i715a1qscrc36@corp.supernews.com> References: <9df4i1546l564jt5uc22lp8gva22v9qdgi@4ax.com> <8k35i11lmh2sdrn8re7g69gh6d3j8mkqo6@4ax.com> <8mu5i1tmjbj7ukge3ukij7pks785mp222r@4ax.com> <432372A7.100DD50A@earthlink.net> Michael A. Terrell wrote: > > Fair Radio used to have some in their catalog, and they were used in > all of the old Delco (and some other brands) car radios of the '60s and > '70s. Just about all the radios I've seen with mechanical pushbuttons for station presets used permeability tuned inductors -- the pushbuttons each just positioned a ferrite core to a preset depth in a coil. It wouldn't be difficult to construct one, unless you're mechanically declined like I am. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 217041 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jerry Martes" References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 01:22:14 GMT "Tom Ring" wrote in message news:43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net... > Richard Clark wrote: >> On 10 Sep 2005 10:42:15 -0700, petercc@care2.com wrote: >> >> >>>I tried an existing omni antenna >>>that is aboout 30" long and a long cable and the signal was >>>nonexistant. With the short cable and that same antenna I was using, I >>>got some hotspots tuned in. >> >> >> Hi Peter, >> >> This 30" antenna is easily ten times too long. It will be very >> directional, and only if you point it (like a rapier) towards the >> transmitter. As it stands, your favored direction is straight up. >> This, of course, is strictly counter to your stated desire for "omni." >> >> Take a cue from the products offered for this class of communication. >> Their antennas are short for reasons that go beyond aesthetics. Take >> heart that you are on the right path. Antenna height (distance above >> you, not length) is always an advantage. >> >> 73's >> Richard Clark, KB7QHC > > Which means it was a colinear. It is long for a reason. > > Similar antennas are vailable at CompoUSA and most other computer stores. > > tom > K0TAR Hi Tom Isnt 30 inches a little too long for a colinear at 2.4 GHz? I'd guess that the antenna that Peter has hooked up is a marine radio whip. I'll be interested in reading more about what he is doing, and where the 30 inch long antenna came from. Jerry Article: 217042 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 20:46:54 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i70v9s8amrb94@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: <43238c8e$0$32204$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Roy Lewallen wrote: > What you should look for is small plasic-encased bumps (each enclosing a > coil) or obvious coiled sections spaced every few inches along the > antenna's length. If it has those, it's probably a collinear like Tom > says, and will be omnidirectional broadside to the antenna. If it > doesn't, and is just a straight piece of wire or rod, it's directional > nearly in the direction of the wire like Richard said. > You won't see that on these colinears, the radome surrounding them covers it up. I am thinking they may be the coax style colinears, which would not have the coils. tom K0TAR Article: 217043 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 20:50:09 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: <43238d51$0$32204$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Jerry Martes wrote: > Hi Tom > > Isnt 30 inches a little too long for a colinear at 2.4 GHz? I'd guess > that the antenna that Peter has hooked up is a marine radio whip. I'll be > interested in reading more about what he is doing, and where the 30 inch > long antenna came from. > > Jerry Well, he did specifically state WiFi, so I went with that. And a colinear can be as long as you'd like, they just don't keep gaining gain very well after a certain point. tom K0TAR Article: 217044 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:14:40 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126361293.168132.184530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126364471.656311.316620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126384472.396083.263930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126385863.388711.272520@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237cb4$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <1126402494.029517.184900@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <43239310$0$22197$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> an_old_friend wrote: > > and you give the very reason I don't bother with such most folks have > already made up their minds, why should I put out the effort when in > many cases the aurguement is rejected before it is read > Stupid is as stupid does. tom K0TAR Article: 217045 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:16:15 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1126301413.743957.191760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126361293.168132.184530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126364471.656311.316620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126384472.396083.263930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1126385863.388711.272520@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237cb4$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <1126402494.029517.184900@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <4323936f$0$22197$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> an_old_friend wrote: > and you give the very reason I don't bother with such most folks have > already made up their minds, why should I put out the effort when in > many cases the aurguement is rejected before it is read > And I have the balls to admit who I am. tom K0TAR Article: 217046 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 19:16:18 -0700 Message-ID: <11i74rl9t428kcc@corp.supernews.com> References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i70v9s8amrb94@corp.supernews.com> <43238c8e$0$32204$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Tom Ring wrote: > Roy Lewallen wrote: > >> What you should look for is small plasic-encased bumps (each enclosing >> a coil) or obvious coiled sections spaced every few inches along the >> antenna's length. If it has those, it's probably a collinear like Tom >> says, and will be omnidirectional broadside to the antenna. If it >> doesn't, and is just a straight piece of wire or rod, it's directional >> nearly in the direction of the wire like Richard said. >> > > You won't see that on these colinears, the radome surrounding them > covers it up. I am thinking they may be the coax style colinears, which > would not have the coils. > > tom > K0TAR Ah, good points. I hadn't considered either a coaxial (Franklin) collinear or a radome. In that case, I can't think of an easy way to tell except by pointing the antenna in the direction of a known signal and seeing if it gets better (not a collinear) or worse (collinear). Unless, of course, the manufacturer and model number are known or visible. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 217047 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:52:49 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i70v9s8amrb94@corp.supernews.com> <43238c8e$0$32204$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i74rl9t428kcc@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: <43239c01$0$32195$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Roy Lewallen wrote: > Ah, good points. I hadn't considered either a coaxial (Franklin) > collinear or a radome. In that case, I can't think of an easy way to And why does the world spell colinear collinear? It's not col-linear it's co-linear. Makes no sense to me. tom K0TAR Article: 217048 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:58:19 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i70v9s8amrb94@corp.supernews.com> <43238c8e$0$32204$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i74rl9t428kcc@corp.supernews.com> <43239c01$0$32195$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: <43239d4b$0$22202$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Tom Ring wrote: > Roy Lewallen wrote: > >> Ah, good points. I hadn't considered either a coaxial (Franklin) >> collinear or a radome. In that case, I can't think of an easy way to > > > And why does the world spell colinear collinear? It's not col-linear > it's co-linear. Makes no sense to me. > For instance, we don't say colaxial cable. tom K0TAR Article: 217049 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Mr Fed UP" References: Subject: Re: Help Identify Tower manufacturer Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:25:19 -0500 I don't know myself, but a couple of sources you might try would be any local club or buddies that might have been told. Or also check out any QSL cards that might be around if any. Often that info was/is things to brag about ones station. Wish I had one. LOL Might even have made some notes in a log book if that is still around. Good luck. K4TWO Gary "Howard K0ACF" wrote in message news:jRyUe.74612$DW1.35802@fed1read06... > Looks like a Rohn HDX series. I had the HDX 48(48ft. tall) The HDX series > went to 64 ft. if I remember right. > "Paul P" wrote in > message news:v5fUe.214720$5N3.62635@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... >> Gentlemen, >> >> I am attempting to identify the tower manufacture of the tower pictured >> at: >> http://www.ppinyot.com/antenna.htm. I would like to properly design a >> base for it given the manufacturers specs plus perhaps pick up >> additional sections. >> >> The tower seems to be of a stamped steel design (not tubular) with >> stamped steel cross members. It has been well maintained by the silent >> key's son. I gather it is about 10 to 15 years old. There is an >> unpainted ladder chained to one side for storage. Please do not confuse >> this as part of the tower. >> >> Also if you happen to recognize the beam please Identify it too. >> >> Unfortunately some one discarded all the paper work not knowing it's >> value. >> >> Thanks Paul >> >> paul at ppinyot dot com >> >> KB3LZP >> > > Article: 217050 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: help with a marine antenna Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:39:19 -0700 Message-ID: <11i7np9ndnr9i5f@corp.supernews.com> References: <1126302613.449867.275680@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9ypUe.138$R9.55@trnddc02> <1126374135.512629.189440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43237a67$0$22201$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i70v9s8amrb94@corp.supernews.com> <43238c8e$0$32204$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <11i74rl9t428kcc@corp.supernews.com> <43239c01$0$32195$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Tom Ring wrote: > > And why does the world spell colinear c