Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 04:30:30 PDT From: Ham-Ant Mailing List and Newsgroup Errors-To: Ham-Ant-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: Ham-Ant@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: Ham-Ant Digest V94 #99 To: Ham-Ant Ham-Ant Digest Mon, 11 Apr 94 Volume 94 : Issue 99 Today's Topics: Coax Loss on HF (4 msgs) Egg beater? HF in an apartment Push up mast...advice needed Radio WANs Send Replies or notes for publication to: Send subscription requests to: Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu. Archives of past issues of the Ham-Ant Digest are available (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-ant". We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 16:44:22 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!gbrent@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Coax Loss on HF To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu As Murphy's Law would dictate, the best trees and location for my 80/40 meter dipole are at a point on my property quite distant from the ham shack. If I were to put the dipoles up at that point, my coax run would be approximately 350 feet. Does anybody have any experience with long runs of coax at hf? With good quality coax, I can't imagine the loss would be that great. Theory is one thing - anybody have any experience? Would appreciate all comments. Tnx es 73's, Gerry WA6E ------------------------------ Date: 10 Apr 1994 17:42:46 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news.intercon.com!news1.digex.net!rtp.vnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!indirect.com!patrick@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Coax Loss on HF To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu Gerald J. Brentnall (gbrent@netcom.com) wrote: : As Murphy's Law would dictate, the best trees and location for my 80/40 : meter dipole are at a point on my property quite distant from the ham : shack. If I were to put the dipoles up at that point, my coax run would : be approximately 350 feet. In addition to the loss, which you can look up in the handbook, you will have a considerable problem supporting that much weight - I assume you will be using RG-8 or a derivative. Why not use ladder line? We have always had great luck with it on long runs and you only have to worry about keeping it from twisting in the wind :) 73 Pat ------------------------------ Date: 10 Apr 1994 20:48:58 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news.intercon.com!news1.digex.net!rtp.vnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!indirect.com!kg7bk@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Coax Loss on HF To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu Gerald J. Brentnall (gbrent@netcom.com) wrote: : Does anybody have any experience with long runs of coax at hf? : Tnx es 73's, Gerry WA6E Save your money and your losses, Gerry. 350 ft. of ladder-line costs about $50. Even with an SWR of 1:1 on 40m, 350 ft of RG-58 will eat up more than half your power with a 3.5 db loss. Loss in 350 ft of ladder-line on 40m with an SWR of 1:1 is neglible, around 0.3 db. Here's a question for you... would you radiate more RF with 350 ft. of RG-58 feeding a 50 ohm antenna with an SWR of 1:1 or with 350 ft. of ladder-line feeding a 50 ohm antenna with an SWR of 6:1? The answer is the RG-58 will have more than 3db loss and the ladder-line, even with the 6:1 SWR, will have less than 1db loss. Ladder-line is the closest to something-for-nothing that I know of. Do what the hams did before coax was economically feasible. Use ladder- line... and an antenna tuner. 73, Cecil, kg7bk@indirect.com ------------------------------ Date: 10 Apr 1994 21:17:36 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!crcnis1.unl.edu!unlinfo.unl.edu!mcduffie@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Coax Loss on HF To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu patrick@indirect.com (Patrick Berry) writes: >Gerald J. Brentnall (gbrent@netcom.com) wrote: >: As Murphy's Law would dictate, the best trees and location for my 80/40 >: meter dipole are at a point on my property quite distant from the ham >: shack. If I were to put the dipoles up at that point, my coax run would >: be approximately 350 feet. >In addition to the loss, which you can look up in the handbook, you will >have a considerable problem supporting that much weight - I assume you will >be using RG-8 or a derivative. >Why not use ladder line? We have always had great luck with it on long runs >and you only have to worry about keeping it from twisting in the wind :) Well, ladder line is one good idea. However, if you want to run coax, do it. You will find it an advantage to have the antennas that far from the house. You won't get into the tv/vcr/phone/intercom/etc. nearly as much as you will with the antenna closer to the house. As for the weight, you only have to support the vertical portion. The horizontal run can lay on the ground, tie to a fence, go underground, whatever. Use copperweld for the antenna, and it will hold up almost anything. Use at least 9913 quality cable for the long run, and consider either 1/2" or 7/8" line, if you can afford it. The 1/2" line is more than good enough. There are some people who run 7/8" though. 73, Gary ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 22:48:37 GMT From: netcomsv!netcom.com!wb6w@decwrl.dec.com Subject: Egg beater? To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu I used an eggbeater on 2m mobile during a VHF contest shortly after the antenna became available. Perhaps the best QSO I have with it was a roundtable that included stations in the San Jose and Drakes Bay areas of California. I was mobile on I5 just 75 miles or so north of Sacramento at the time. I was able to contibnue conversing with the two stations as I drove down I505, I80 and I680 until I arrive home in Milpitas CA. I was quite impressed by the antenna. 73 de Glenn wb6w@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 01:57:41 GMT From: netcomsv!netcom.com!potaczek@decwrl.dec.com Subject: HF in an apartment To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu ------------------------------ Date: 9 Apr 94 20:22:53 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news.intercon.com!news1.digex.net!rtp.vnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!connected.com!beauty!rwing!eskimo!wrt@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Push up mast...advice needed To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu In article , wrote: >I have very limited yard space for a tower, so >for the time being I'm going to use a Radio >Shack push-up mast mounted on the ground. It >is the 19 foot model, and the only antenna that >will be on it is a 5/8 wave 2 meter ground >plane. > >Can anyone advise me about setting this thing >up? RS has a reasonably good installation kit, >but it doesn't come with stakes for the support >wires. Any suggestions about suitable stakes >for a small mast like this? > >Also, how far from the base should I stake out >support wires? I have looked through several >books on the subject, but can't seem to get a >definitive answer. I've seen angles on wires >from about 30 degrees to more that 60. > >73's and thanks, KD4CSW >DARRYLB@DELPHI.COM Suggestion for stakes: get a piece of rebar (reinforcing bar used in concrete) and cut it into suitable lengths. It will rust, eventually, but you'll probably take the antenna down and put up something else long before that becomes a problem :-> 45 degrees is a good figure for guy wire angles. If you have guys fastened at the 15 foot level for example, just put the stakes 15 feet out from the base. The problem comes when you try to put the stakes too close to the base. The upward pull becomes greater than the sideways pull and tends to pull out the stake. Stakes can resist a sideways pull far better than a vertical one. Oh, yes. The easy way to cut rebar is to use what's known as a "cut-off" wheel on a circular saw. It doesn't really cut so much as it grinds its way through. The ridges on rebar will help greatly to resist pulling out. 73 es gl Bill, W7LZP ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 10:53:28 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!nsa.bt.co.uk!andrew@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Radio WANs To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu Hello all, I am very interested in finding out about the state of the market for Radio Wans. This is both for potential applications I'm interested in and also for general interest. I am based in a the Highlands of Scotland which has it's own comms problems due to the terrain and dispersion of population amongst other things. I can see radio comms as having uses in our area. I would be interested in any info people can give in this area eg how advanced the market is, who are the main players (plus contacts if possible), costs, performance, future plans, even if there's a more relevant newsgroup I should be addressing. Thanks in advance for your time Andrew Muir Highlands & Islands Enterprise, Inverness, Scotland muir_a@nsagw.nsa.bt.cp.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 00:37:10 GMT From: rit!isc-newsserver!ultb!jdc3538@cs.rochester.edu To: ham-ant@ucsd.edu References <199403310838.AAA11984@ucsd.edu>, <1994Apr3.171753.9535@news.vanderbilt.edu>, Subject : Re: Egg beater? In article wb6w@netcom.com (Glenn Thomas) writes: >I used an eggbeater on 2m mobile during a VHF contest shortly after the >(etc.) >I was quite impressed by the antenna. > >73 de Glenn wb6w@netcom.com What's an "eggbeater" antenna? 73...Jim N2VNO ------------------------------ End of Ham-Ant Digest V94 #99 ******************************