World of Ham Radio 1997/WOHR97_AmSoft_(1997-02-01).iso/usenets/1995_07/_antenna.txt

Text File | 1997-02-01 | 1MB | 22,895 lines

The World of Ham Radio CD-ROM



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!primenet.primenet.com!mercado
From: [e-mail] (Dominic Mercado)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Outbacker Antenna
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 00:56:19 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip041.lax.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

Can anyone tell me about the Outbacker antennas?  Specifically, how it is
made to allow multiband use and well does it perform.


Thanks
Dominic Mercado, kc6zcr
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 12:1 balun
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 95 01:26:30 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3squei$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: randson <[e-mail]>

randson <[e-mail]> writes:

>   Who know where can get find a 12:1 of balun, what factory or comapny
>   sale this one, or who want to sale, active is ok,
>   I want to using on inverted V diploe!
>
>
>                                            de Radnson Huang/ BV2DQ
>                                               in Taipei, Taiwan
>                                         [e-mail]

rPalomar Engineers, PO Box 462222, Escondido, CA, USA Phone [phone]
FAX [phone]......has a 12 to 1 balun.................de N6WR


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!network.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (ESTUDIANTES DE COMUNICACIONES)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Factor
Date: 1 Jul 95 03:09:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Im measuring field streng in dBm, and to make the conversion to strength field
I need to know antenna factor. Im using a whip mounted on a small car(Golf) with
a length of lambda
/4 trying to get a lambda/2 via images from the roof. The area
of the roof is approximately 2 m2. The frequency of measure is 100 mhz from
broadcast.
Any suggestion is very helpful.
Thanks.
Benjamin M.



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:07 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m Marine antenna
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!clint.bradford
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat,  1 Jul 95 03:21:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 11

Subject: 2m Marine antenna

>>I am trying to install a 2m (144-148) antenna on my boat.

There's a great article from QST! Magazine last summer for building your
own 2M j-pole, encapsulated in PVC pipe for complete weatherproofing.
Cost? Less than five bucks. And they work!

Contact the ARRL for a reprint, or scan your last year's issues!
---
 ■ wcECHO 4.1 ≈ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details ■ Mira Loma, CA ■ 909-681-6221


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:08 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Comments please on a few
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!clint.bradford
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat,  1 Jul 95 03:21:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 25

Subject: Comments please on a few antennas

>>Diamond RH-77CA
>>Comet CH-32 Miracle Baby

I happen to live in Repeater-rich southern California. So my experience
with antennas might be a little off-base.

I like the Diamond RH-77CA - despite its length. If cancer of the lymph
nodes in armpits is ever found to be prevalent in males, the
RH-77CA need to be looked at as the culprit, though. <grin> Put that
antenna on your HT, and then use your belt clip, and you will experience
what I mean.

I haven't used the Miracle baby, but I have had reasonable results from
Maldol's Active Hunter AH-209S. Overall length is 2-7/8", and feels like
your rubberized ballpoint pen grip area. More flexible, too, I believe,
than the Miracle baby (for what THAt feature is worth).

AGAIN, I am lucky to live where I do. The RH-77CA gives noticeable
improvement over regular duckies. EXCEPT with my Standard C558a...seems
that ugly little standard Standard antenna is a great performer - and
the difference between it and the RHG-77CA is negligible.
---
 ■ wcECHO 4.1 ≈ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details ■ Mira Loma, CA ■ 909-681-6221


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!zilch0
From: [e-mail] (Michael K. Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Analyzers
Date: 1 Jul 1995 05:47:11 GMT
Organization: Primenet [phone]
Lines: 117
Message-ID: <3t2ngv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr3.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Az0th ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Hiyall,

: Would anyone care to comment on any or all of the current crop of
: antenna system analyzers? Besides dippers and noise bridges that've
: been around a while, I've come across three different devices that
: ought to make short shrift of antenna system tuning and pruning
: problems. The price spread between the devices is considerable,
: but the goals and features seem much the same.

: The most expensive is the AEA device, at around $300. This one sports
: a GUI display of VSWR, which probably accounts for the price. It's not
: clear to me whether VSWR is the only usable output; it may be the only
: output you really need, and a graph is worth a thousand samples.

: The MFJ analyzer is the next expensive, at around $200, depending on
: the options chosen. Freq. counter, sig. gen., Z and VSWR bridges.
: Looks quite versatile, as the included tools can be used independently,
: but has analog readout for all but frequency. Close enough for government,
: probably, and I've heard a lot of happy users talking them up on the air.
: Uses 8 AA's if you want to work outside.

: The Autek is the smallest, lightest and least expensive, at around $129.
: It seems to do a lot of what the MFJ does, runs on a 9V battery, and has
: big LC digital readout for freq, Z, VSWR and such. This one looks and
: reads like it ought to be a sensible choice. Has anybody here used one?

: Anyway, all comments welcome.

: Cheers es 73
: RF Buchanan


Hi:

        I've used the AEA SWR-121 HF Analyst and the MFJ-249 SWR Analyzer
side by side for tuning HF mobile antennae for over a year.  I like them
both and am pleased to testify that if they are inaccurate, then they are
in complete agreement in their inaccuracy!  (In other words, I believe
them to be accurate because they yield identical results.)

        If your mission is simply to tune an antenna to minimum VSWR,
they are evenly matched in speed and ease of use with the exception that
the AEA SWR-121 has a mode where a tone sounds at a fixed interval of
about two beeps per second as it's pitch varies with VSWR -- the lower
the pitch the lower the ratio.  You can make an adjustment to the
antenna's resonance, then step back (so that your body doesn't affect the
measurement) and listen for a change in tone from the beeping analyzer.
If the pitch goes down, your doing the right thing.  Problem:  The beeper
is not loud enough for my taste!  What a shame -- my hearing is fine but I
have to strain to hear it from anything more than about fifteen feet.

        The MFJ-249 (and 259 I'll assume) is equally handy, considering
the AEA's volume problem -- you just have to read the VSWR off a standard
analog meter between adjustments.  It's advantage over the AEA is the
speed with which you can change the center frequency at which you are
trying to achieve resonance.  It may be old-fashioned, but spinning the
knob and watching the frequency change on the counter display is a lot
faster than punching in each digit of the new frequency on the AEA's
membrane keypad.

        If your mission is to find the current resonant frequency of an
unknown antenna, the MFJ-249 (259) is MUCH faster than the AEA SWR-121!
With the AEA, you have to take a guess at the center frequency, enter it
on the keypad, select the dot-size of the plot it will draw (this
determines the scale of the curve on the x-axis -- each dot representing
so many Hz in frequency), and then wait -- I do mean wait (about ten
seconds) while it's on-board processor sweeps the selected range of
frequenies and plots the VSWR curve on it's LCD display.  If you were just
guessing at the antenna's current resonant frequency, the dip in the VSWR
plot will most likely be to the right or the left of the center frequency
you entered on the keypad.  There is a function that you can then enter to
tell the AEA to auto-center the plot to that frequency where VSWR is
lowest, then you wait again for another plot.  The frequency of resonance
will be displayed at the bottom of the LCD panel and the curve will be
centered on the x-axis.  You'll then find yourself re-selecting the
dot-size to compress or expand the range of frequencies plotted.  Each
time you change the dot-size, it begins to sweep that range of frequencies
to create a new plot.  It's lot's of fun, but man what a time sink!
Remember, all we're trying to do at the momemnt is determine the current
resonant frequency!  I dare you not to get side-tracked plotting and
re-plotting just to see the curve at different amplitudes!

The MFJ can find the resonant frequency in about 5 seconds!  You select
the tuning range with a multi-position selector switch, then spin that
tuning knob while you watch the analog meter -- when the needle dips,
wiggle the tuning knowb back and forth a wee bit to find the lowest VSWR
and you can then read the resonant frequency off the counter display.

I can't end this mini-review without comparing them in one last task.  If
your mission is to plot the VSWR curve for an antenna, the AEA is
obviously way out in front.  It can even be connected to a PC to store
VSWR plots and do comparisons using optional companion software -- I have
never bothered to make the investement, so can't make any comments
regarding this feature.

I must say, I've done a lot of tuning with both of them, but for sheer
utility and speed for, those tasks which I do most often, I'd have to give
the win to the MFJ-249.  The AEA is a much finer piece of hardware and I
have a tremendous affection for it, but I really don't need it's plotting
capabilities nearly as often as I simply want to adjust an antenna for
lowest SWR -- and do it quickly, without hassles.


I've never used the 259 or the Autek Research RF-1, but plan to get my
hands on the latter.  Check out WC0Y's great article, *How to Get More
Information From Your Antenna Analyzer* in the July 1995 issue of CQ
Magazine.  He gives some great formulae that will really expand the use
of MFJ-259's and Autek Research RF-1's (or any other analyzer that gives
both SWR and impedance measurements.)


/---------------------\
 Michael K Davis,AB6SL
  [e-mail]
  MIME Attachments OK
\---------------------/


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!vulcan.inlink.com!raiar
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dipole Antenna:  Why won't mine work?
Date: 1 Jul 1995 06:01:55 GMT
Organization: inlink
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3t2ocj$[e-mail]>
References: <3spq4s$[e-mail]> <3sqdjk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vulcan.inlink.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Instead of trying to make a horizontal centerfed dipole, why don't you go
with a end fed vertical.  Most CBers are utilizing vertical antennas so the
majority of the signals out there will be barely perceptable on a horizontal
antenna.

Gary



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!vulcan.inlink.com!raiar
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dipole Antenna: Why won't mine work?
Date: 1 Jul 1995 06:04:14 GMT
Organization: inlink
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <3t2ogu$[e-mail]>
References: <3sifrv$[e-mail]> <3spq4s$[e-mail]> <3ss39e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vulcan.inlink.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

There not supposed to run gigawatt stations either, but unless a law is
enforced it won't be adhered to.  Proof positive - 11 meters.

Gary



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!network.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with picking up stations"
Date: 1 Jul 95 11:40:51 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!network.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help needed on spiral ant from a-7 aircraft (2 msgs)"
Date: 1 Jul 95 11:40:51 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "needed" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:15 1995
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace,rec.photo.misc,rec.ponds,rec.puzzles,rec.pyrotechnics,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.cb,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap,rec.railroad,rec.roller-coaster,rec.running,rec.scouting,rec.scuba,rec.skate,rec.skiing.alpine,rec.skiing.snowboard,rec.skydiving,rec.sport.baseball,rec.sport.baseball.fantasy,rec.sport.basketball.
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!info.ucla.edu!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!tribune.usask.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!top.MTS.Net!worldlinx.com!wchat.on.ca!news
From: Beatas Brasas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: -   F R E E   P U N K   R O C K   in   alt.binaries.sounds.music
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: WorldChat / The Online Source, Burlington Ontario.
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 13:52:57 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ppp-dial47.wchat.on.ca
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3sobjd$[e-mail]> <3sotf1$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Owner)
Lines: 43
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.photo.marketplace:10840 rec.photo.misc:17438 rec.ponds:689 rec.puzzles:44908 rec.pyrotechnics:30609 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11611 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9223 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:13853 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8081 rec.radio.amateur.misc:82063 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28375 rec.radio.cb:21035 rec.radio.scanner:27608 rec.radio.shortwave:54563 rec.radio.swap:38452 rec.railroad:74855 rec.roller-coaster:17269 rec.running:32947 rec.scouting:28555 rec.scuba:59627 rec.skate:38607 rec.skiing.alpine:20825 rec.skiing.snowboard:10877 rec.skydiving:29126 rec.sport.baseball:201543 rec.sport.baseball.fantasy:21426

[e-mail] (Robert Keeney ) wrote:
>In <3sobjd$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Flamers Bite Me) writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>For the past three months 2-3 punk songs have been posted each and
>every day
>>to alt.binaries.sounds.music.  These are name brand punk bands and not
>a bunch
>>of shitty generic bands in case you're wondering.
>>
>>All sound files are CD-quality MPEG's.
>>
>>Free MPEG software is available for:  IBM PC (DOS), Sun, HP, SGI, PC
>running
>>Linux, and PC or NeXT running NeXTSTEP.  386DX or better and 16-bit
>sound
>>card required.
>
>
>********************************************
>
>June 26, 1995
>
>While I have enjoyed, in limited doses, some of this music?, I
>sincerely hope NOT to hear it 60 feet down on a reef!
>
>We divers do all we can to avoid crash-dancing with the reef, sharks,
>conch, each other, etc.
>
>Surface noise has its place, but NOT on a reef.
>
>Enjoy,
>
>Robert Keeney
>--
>Robert Keeney, OWSI                         Marilyn King, OW, DS
>                  FOCUS ON TRAVEL - SOFT SCUBA
>Voice: [phone]                        Fax: [phone]
>                     [e-mail]
>* * * * * * *   Stress-Free Dive & Ski Vacations   * * * * * * *




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:16 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antenna suitable for finicky autotuner
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3smf9t$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 15:09:00 GMT
Lines: 35

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Marcus) writes:
>
>I have a G5RV, a Kenwood TS850S/AT and a Dentron 1kw amp.  The Kenwood manual
>says it won't tune to a mismatch of more than about 2:1.  I am able to tune
>the 10-80m G5RV up on 80-10m and sometimes on 160m.  Usually 160m gives poor
>results.  My antenna is feedpoint is at about 16 feet, not the 35 or so
>recommended.  I cause no tvi, even with the amp at 500W output.  I first turn
>on all the equipment.  When the amp warms up, I put it in the active mode, not
>standby and autotune the rig, (about 10-20w out).  When I see a 1:1 swr on the
>rig, I tune up the amp for maximum power output.  I typically get to the full
>500w out and increase my signal by a couple of s-units.  I managed a +20-+30
>report from somone in Europe on 80m.

You do realize that the autotuner isn't looking at the antenna impedance
don't you? All it is seeing is the Dentron's input network impedance, which
is a pretty fair match on each of it's operating bands. It's the Dentron's
output Pi network that's matching to the antenna. On some bands, and with
some load reactances, it can handle almost 10:1 VSWR.

>The G5RV is fabulous.  I also believe that a coax tuner that is rated at 2:1
>or 3:1 and better will work well with the G5RV.

It shouldn't, unless there's a *lot* of loss in the coax. The G5RV
design offers VSWRs of at least 10:1 on some bands. Lots of loss in
the coax section can make that *look* lower to the transmitter, but
you're just warming coax, not radiating much signal. If you use
quality low loss coax, not crummy RG-58, you should see VSWR values
well outside the range of the autotuner on some frequencies.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:17 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: VHF Ant Help
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <3s9nh7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3t1kgt$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 15:28:20 GMT
Lines: 56

In article <3t1kgt$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Zack Lau) writes:
>Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: I wouldn't even use RG-58 as a jumper cable at 70 cm. I consider
>: RG-213 to be the minimum cable for the job. Better would be Belden
>: 9913, or the Wireman equivalent. Best would be Andrew hardline.
>: Every dB of loss in the cable hurts you twice, once on transmit,
>: and again on receive. You can partially make up for transmit loss
>: by running more power, but once signal is lost on receive, it's
>: gone.
>
>I'd take a more pragmatic approach.  What to you realistically need?
>Are you going to merely talk to strong repeaters and locals or are
>you trying to cover as much area as possible?  It could be that
>sacrificing a few dB of cable loss might not matter--or might make
>a difference between working rare grids/states....

Well, I agree that height is so dominant a factor at UHF that it
may be worthwhile to trade some cable loss for some altitude, even
if it means using crummy coax. However, the price differential
between good coax and bad coax is small enough that it doesn't
make sense to use high loss cables at all, ever.

>At 70 cm, real serious operators usually mount their preamplifiers
>right up at the antenna, to eliminate the need for an exotic cable.
>But, I don't think you need to burden yourself with the concerns
>of someone building an EME station!

Not just EMEers. If you do satellites, or meteor scatter, or just
long haul tropo, mounting that preamp at the antenna is a very
good idea. But you still want low loss for transmit, and normally
you'll now be running two cables, one for transmit and one for
receive, with a sequencer, so that gets complex fast, and
usually isn't worth it just to hit a few repeaters. It's cheaper
to just use one good run of cable and call it a day.

>Sounds like you are best off with ordinary cable with connectors
>that match the ones on your radio and antenna.  I'd use RG-213/U.
>Remember, run-of-the-mill cable with properly attached connectors
>often works a whole lot better than some exotic cable with flakey
>connections...

Kings makes excellent connectors for 9913 and the Wireman's 4XL,
and, of course, Andrew connectors aren't what I'd call "flakey".
Basically, you get what you pay for, and good cable and connectors
at UHF are among the best bang's for the buck you can have. If
you paid over $600 for the radio, and over $100 for the antenna,
don't quibble over a few cents a foot price differential for the
feedline. Use the best, don't settle for less, you won't regret
it.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.inhouse.compuserve.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Burt M. Polson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: ne.forsale,rec.antiques.radio+phono,rec.audio.marketplace,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Subject: VCR/TV/Camcord Service Man. 4 sale
Date: 1 Jul 1995 15:42:18 GMT
Organization: ...in an unorganized world
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3t3qcq$hsp$[e-mail]>
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.audio.marketplace:15119 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11627 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9244

Misc. service manuals for sale cheap.  Email me for a list.
[e-mail]

--
~      Burt M. Polson      ~
~ [e-mail] ~
~   Share the Good News!   ~


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:19 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antenna Analyzers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <3sv693$[e-mail]> <3t1c46$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 15:46:11 GMT
Lines: 39

In article <3t1c46$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ross Alexander) writes:
>>Az0th ([e-mail]) wrote:
>>: Would anyone care to comment on any or all of the current crop of
>>: antenna system analyzers?
>
>From what I've seen, all they report is VSWR (some graphically).
>IMHO, a good noise bridge is a better all-around tool.  It tells you
>more about what's going on than a VSWR reading does.  The downside of
>a noise bridge is that it requires a good receiver as part of the
>measurement system, and that can be awkward at the top of a tower.
>This problem can be worked around if you're Smith-chart literate, of
>course.


You can do a lot with the AEA antenna analyzer, but you need to
be conversant with Mr. Smith's chart, and have a few little
trinkets you can stuff in the line between the analyzer and
the antenna, such as a variable cap hung off a Tee, and an
extra quarterwave of cable coiled and handy. The analyzers
that read directly in R+jX are more convienent for some things,
but having that graphical plot is handy too. And, I like the
fact that the AEA is synthesized and has a constant output,
so it can be used as a precision signal generator with only
the addition of a step attenuator. The fact that it has a
computer interface isn't bad either if you want to document
your antenna system.

Like almost all analyzers, however, it's worthless if there
are strong RF signals nearby. Forget taking one of these
babies to a repeater site with other repeaters and pagers
co-located on the site. Then it's back to the Bird, and a
bit more head scratching.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ixnews.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Lester Falkowski)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: GAP EAGLE DX VI antenna $100
Date: 1 Jul 1995 17:18:24 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3t4010$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-pas11-14.ix.netcom.com



    Los Angeles area. Will not ship. Come and pick it up. 40, 20, 17,
15, 12, 10 m antenna.

    exlibris @ix.netcom.com
    818 352-2063

    Lester


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SGC-230 auto tuner
Date: 1 Jul 1995 18:07:18 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3t42sm$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>>The lost power may be radiated into the car's body or wiring and raise
>>the temperature of those to a minimal extent.

>Not unless that coax is mighty leaky.

What you might not know is that the SGC-230 auto-tuner does not have
a coax connection on the output. The RF hot high-voltage terminal is
about two feet away from the ground terminal on opposite ends of the
box. To quote the SGC-230 manual, "The coupler must be located at the
antenna. No coax may be connected to the coupler output. Capacitance
at the coupler output must be minimal." The SGC-230 should *not* be
mounted in the trunk (when used with a non-resonant antenna element).

Your statements probably apply to auto-tuners with coax outputs
(especially those being used with resonant antenna elements to simply
increase the bandwidth on a single band).

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!netcomsv!uucp3.netcom.com!loretta!red-eft!ibbs!js
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger)
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger)
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 1995 19:45:59 GMT
Subject: Antenna rotator survey
Lines: 21


Hello and thanks for reading.

I would like to know how you set your rotators for your antennas.  Do you use
a magnetic heading, or a true heading when configuring your antennas?  How
offten do you calibrate this setting?  Do you even bother to configure a
rotator like this, and just turn the antenna until you have the strongest
signal?

I am building a computer program to calculate distance and a beam heading.
Due to limited screen space I can either display the heading in magnetic
degrees or a true bearing.  To this end, I need to know if most of you
calibrate using true bearings or magnetic bearings.

Please do not include long stories or technical talk about how you setup
your antenna.  A message that has only one line, reading, magnetic or true
will be fine.  Production time is very limited.


Thanks for your time


--
/* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Stillinger - KB6IBB                              [e-mail]
PSC Box 3429                                          [e-mail]
Edwards AFB, CA  93524                                [phone]N1
          KB6IBB Repater sometimes heard in Los Angeles 449.6250
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!america.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Robert Haviland)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: matching theory
Date: 1 Jul 1995 21:00:21 -0400
Organization: PSS InterNet Services, InterNet in Fl 904 253 7100
Lines: 149
Message-ID: <3t4r35$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: enterprise.america.com
Summary: Summary of theory
Keywords: matching, match, loading
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #5

On the Meaning of Matching, some comments by W4MB

There is a lot of misunderstanding of the process of "matching", especially
when AC is involved. A good share of this seems to come from considering
special or particular cases, and trying to call these general requirements.
The rest seems to stem from some problems of nomenclature. So let us avoid
assigning names to processes until later, when we have the processes clear.

Let us start with a DC circuit, composed of a generator having an internal
or source resistance of Rg, and a load Rl. Here, to be general, we define Rg
as being equal to the terminal open-circuit voltage divided by the short-
circuit current.  The  current flowing is equal to Vg / (Rg + Rl). The power
delivered to the load is i x i x Rl, and the power lost in the generator is
i x i x Rg. Now it is easy to show that the maximum power which can be
transfered from the generator to the load occurs when Rl equals Rg, and that
the efficiency is 50 percent at this point. Also, the voltage at the load
is half of the generator voltage. (We must remember that all of these are
based on linear circuits, i.e., Rg is not a function of i, etc.)

Of course, this is not the only point of operation. If we are trying to develop
the maximum magnetic field possible from an electromagnet, we want maximum
current, which occurs when Rl is as close to zero as we can make it- use a
super-cooled magnet. On the other hand, if we are selling power, we would like
to sell as much as possible of what we make, so we try to make Rg as small as
possible.  The customer also wants the voltage at his place to be nearly a
constant agreed-on value, again indicating Rg as small as possible. The point
here is that the operating condition is set on the basis of what we are
trying to do. And the terminology we adopt later must allow for differences.

Now let us go to an AC generator. As Steinmetz and others showed, we must now
consider new quantities, the reactance of the generator and that of the load.
The current flowing is equal to Vg / ( (Rg + j Xg) + (Rl + j Xl) ). A look at
this shows that we can distinguish several special conditions. For maximum
power transfer the DC condition of Rl=Rg holds true only if Xl=-Xg. At this
point, half the power goes into Rg, half to Rl, efficiency= 50% as in DC.
On the other hand, if we can't change the power-factor of the load (defined
the average power divided by the product Vl times Il) we must have the
magnitudes of impedances equal, |Zl|=|Zg|. Still another condition sets
Xl=-Xg. A factor in this is that this is the point of maximim curent flow and
of maximum efficiency possible for a given combination of Rl and Rg. If
we are selling AC power this is the point we like, since we sell the largest
fraction of the power we make. Since most power plant loads are inductive,
we secure this by placing capacitors across the line. (And again, we must
remember that these findings apply to linear circuits.)

Suppose we don't add the correction element. Now the generator has to supply
the "real current" for the load resistance and the "imaginary current" (or
"reactive current") for the load reactance. The total current is the vector
sum of these, it = SQRT( ir x ir + ix x ix). And the power loss and heating
at the generator is it x it x Rg. Very clearly, this is a minimum when ix
is zero, which is a way of  saying that the power factor is unity. By
correcting power factor, we not only sell a larger fraction of the power
generated, we cut down the heating in the generator, an important
factor in its life. This unity power-factor is the condition, Xl=-Xg.

The situation is much the same in our RF generators, our final and power
amplifiers. We can allow a reactive component in the load, but that increases
the heating in the amplifier. Since this is a limiting factor, we find it
best to set Xg=-Xl by "tuning to the dip", or a combination of this and some
form of antenna matching network. By elininating reactive current, we get more
power to the load for a given Rl. We do have some control of Rl, by the
"loading" control, or by matching to unity SWR, ie, load=50 ohms. But note that
we don't really know what Rg is: it was set by the designer when he chose
circuit constants. Further, in virtually all cases, we can't really
change Rg: this was set by the designer when he chose component values
and operating conditions: sometimes we can, for example, by using the 12 meter
switch position on the amplifier on 15, but we almost always get poor
results, low output, excessive grid current, etc. (Of course, there is
a possibility that we may be dealing with a non-linear
system instead of a linear one. If this is the case, we may be faced with
much more complex relations than the ones above.)

We can now think about the meaning of the work "matching". From the above,
there a several possibilities to think about:
        For maximum Current
        For minimum generator loss
        For unity power factor
        For maximum power transfer
        For constant power factor
Then there are some that may involve non-linearities:
        For low inter-modulation products
        For low harmonic generation
We usually take these last for granted, but the designer didn't if he did a
proper job.

Faced with this range of possibilities, we seem to have two choices. One is
to always use a descriptor plus "matching" to designate our goal. The other
is to pick out one of the possibilities, call this "matching", then use it
with a separate descriptor for any of the other possibilities.

If we pick up any of a number of textbooks, we find almost no discusion of
the range of possibilities. Most cover the maximum power transfer case well.
If it is a a power plant book, the importance of power factor is treated, but,
if it is a RF book, the amplifier section covers the matter of load resistance
effects, and won't mention that this is the zero power factor case. Exceptions
are the old large Radiotron Designers Handbook, 4th ed, (showing the effect of
reactance, but not using the term power factor), and Termans Radio Engineers
Handbook (which essentially states that the theory of reactive loads is too
complex to to be useful). This failure of the textbooks to be complete is
the source of some of our problems. Of course, textbook writers don't like
to admit that they really haven't covered the field completely.

Then there are complications. Most textbooks note that the maximum power
transfer case is the result of securing the "complex conjugate" condition of
Xl=-Xg and Rl-Rg. The term is precise in the world of mathmetics. Some books
omit the "complex" for the same definition. Either leaves a gap in the RF
nomenclature- there is no ready descriptor for the unity power factor
case, Xl=-Xg (for any Rl). In the same way, there is no ready descriptor for
the |Zl|=|Zg| case, although Terman has called it the equal image impedance
condition.

 So how do we attive at useful terminology?

There has been a proposal that the Xl=-Xg condition be called "resonance".
It is true that the condition is satisfied in a high-Q resonant circuit. But
the textbooks show that this is not true for low-Q resonance. We need a term
for such conditions as working with an antenna impedance of 50+j10 ohms.

The expression "conjugate impedance matching" has been used for the condition
Xl=-Xg. This has brought controversy, based on the concept that the "conjugate"
has to mean "complex conjugate". I can't see that this is a necessity. There is
no reason in the English Language that Conjugate has to mean Complex Conjugate.
Just for example, the word "steel" does not mean "stainless steel", which
actually isn't a steel at all. Our language is not always logical- just useful.

The following is an internally consistent terminology:
   1. Maximum current loading     - Low load resistance
   2. Minimum loss loading        - Low generator resistance
   3. Maximum transfer matching   - Rl=Rg, Xl=-Xg
   4. Impedance matching          - |Zl|=|Zg|
   5. Conjugate matching          - Xl=-Xg, any Rl and Rg
   6. Load matching               - Setting Zl as specified by the designer
Here 1 and 2 are called "loading", since we cannot secure the zero resistances
required for exact matching. 3 is usual condition for transmission lines,
to eliminate reflected waves, but 4 may be used. Condition 5 is
usual for tube amplifiers and 4 for solid state amplifiers. 6. is included
to cover special cases (one is the fact that best S/N in a internlly noise
limited receiver does not occur when the source impedance is equal to Zin.
Low distortion amplifers may have special loading needs).

These are not the only consistent set. If the concept that "conjugate" is
different from the concept "complex conjugate" is too much for you to swallow,
propose an alternate set.

But we need to agree on some set.

73  Bob, W4MB




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ctrask
From: [e-mail] (Christopher Trask)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Broadband Dipole
Date: 1 Jul 1995 21:15:15 GMT
Organization: Primenet [phone]
Lines: 80
Message-ID: <3t4dt3$[e-mail]>
References: <3s2v8l$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr1.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <3s2v8l$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Christopher Trask) writes:
: >W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: >: Tom, I have seen some design like the one I described, I think it was
: >: >called T2FD, but I don┤t have any desription left of it.
: >X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
: >
: >: >I have also seen a antenna from Barker and Williamsson that look like
: >: the one I described that they say works from 3.5-30 Mhz.
: >
: >: >The antenna is to be used in the Ham bands, but also in between them
: >: for MARS type traffic.
: >
: >: Yes, but the difference is that your application is for receiving. The
: >: receiver establishes the line SWR, not the antenna. So while the resistor
: >: may help satisfy a transmitter, it will not help satisfy the receiver. The
: >: only effect it can possibly have is to *decrease* the signal.
: >
: >: IMHO  I think adding a lossy feedpoint termination resistance is a
: >: worthless addition to a receiving installation, and that is all the
: >: antennas you mentioned do.
: >
: >: 73 Tom
: >
: >Gentlemen:
: >     I need to point out the <FACT> that the resistor in the antenna
: >is <NOT> a lossy termination.  It functions in exactly the same manner as
: >does the terminating resistor in a rhomboid antenna, which is to force the
: >current in the antenna arms, resulting in the directivity of the radiation
: >pattern.  But rather than argue the point, I strongly suggest that ELNEC
: >or MININEC be brought into the picture.  These are very simple antennas to
: >model.  Having used AMP (the great-grandfather of the present antenna mod-
: >elling programmes) and NEC (the real thing), I have a great appreciation of
: >the simplicity and ease of ELNEC, although I would like to see patches and
: >transmission lines added to the geometry.

: While the resistor is used as a balance element, it's still a resistor,
: and I can say from first hand experience that it gets hot when transmitting
: into a terminated rhombic, or a T2FD. Thus I'd side with Tom and call it
: a lossy element.

        If so, then I would suggest that the antenna itself is being used
        off-frequency.  The resistor sould only be absorbing energy that
        is not radiated by the antenna.  Next chance I get, I'm going to
        re-visit the single-bay rhombic on ELNEC.

: >     Furthermore, it is <ESSENTIAL> that a receiving antenna be matched
: >to the receiver for exactly the same purpose as matching an antenna to a
: >transmitter, which is to enable the best transfer of energy from the anten-
: >na to the receiver.  Mismatching the receiver/antenna has exactly the same
: >effect on VSWR, and can be measured as an increase in the effective antenna
: >noise temperature.

: Of course most RF preamps have best noise figure when their inputs are
: mismatched. They generally want to see a lower than matched source
: conductance, and a capacitive source susceptance for lowest noise figure.
: Since the additional power losses due to VSWR are generally minimal
: compared to the benefits of a low noise figure for the RF preamp,
: mismatching for best device performance is generally worthwhile.

        Yes, you're quite right.  However, when making a low-noise pre-
        amplifier we generally include a matching network that causes
        the antenna input to be 50 ohms with a reasonable VSWR.  I shud-
        der at the thought of having the user, be he an amateur or pro-
        fessional, be responsible for achieving the final alignment of
        the product.

: --
: Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
: Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
: 534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
: Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Trask / N7ZWY
ATG Design Services                       __  __     ____  ___       ___ ____
[e-mail]       _~_            /__)/__) / / / / /_  /\  / /_    /
                         (@ @)          /   / \  / / / / /__ /  \/ /___  /
----------------------ooO~(_)~Ooo----------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.amateur.club.clarc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Multi Band Wire Antenna Help
Date: 1 Jul 1995 21:32:03 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <3t4esj$[e-mail]>
References: <lewis-3006952032530001@199.3.234.108>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup27.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11616 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:13874 rec.radio.shortwave:54616 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8092 rec.radio.amateur.misc:82094

[e-mail] (Lewis Stephens) wrote:
>I want to put up a trapped wire for 80 - 10 meters. Space is a major
>problem. I own the house but the lot is small and the deed restrictions
>are large. I have no large trees to run a wire up to and the house is only
>about 23' tall at the peak.
>
>The question I have is can I put the wire up with a minimum ground
>clearance of 15' and use it as a modified sloping inverted vee with out
>too many problems? I want to tie to the chimney and the top ot the garage
>in one direction and the chimney and a elevated swallow house pole on the
>other leg. This will give me about 60 degrees of seperation with the
>'point' of the vee pointed upward to the east and the other two legs
>pointing nortwest and southwest.
>
>Will the wire be omnidirectional in this configuration or directional? I
>am a neopyhte at this and really need a little help. I am studing to take
>the ham tests and getting my 'shack' in order for the day when the ticket
>finally comes in.

Lewis:

What you describe will certainly not be optimum, however, it should work.  There may be some
directivity on some frequencies, but I wouldn't count on it. You may have to tinker with the
wire segment lengths some to maintain resonance, but that's what ham radio is all about
anyway.

With the proximity to house wiring that you will have, you may experience some mutual
interference to/from TV and telephone service.  This may require some extra effort to overcome
or may necessitate avoiding some freqencies.  You will just have to wait and see.

If it's any consolation (I'm almost ashamed to say this), I have two acres and no deed
restrictions but because my interest is mainly 2M CW/SSB, my HF antenna is a trapped dual-band
20/80 meter dipole 20ft high in the middle and about 10' at the ends.

With 100 W on 80 meters, I can work all of the US and have worked JA, VK, etc so don't
dispair.  Just stay out of contests :-)

Best wishes in your studies and many happy years of hamming.

Regards, Wes Stewart, N7WS



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.amateur.club.clarc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Multi Band Wire Antenna Help
Date: 2 Jul 1995 00:13:10 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <3t4oam$[e-mail]>
References: <lewis-3006952032530001@199.3.234.108>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger212.nando.net
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11615 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:13866 rec.radio.shortwave:54604 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8087 rec.radio.amateur.misc:82079

[e-mail] (Lewis Stephens) wrote:
 >
 > I want to put up a trapped wire for 80 - 10 meters. Space is a major
 > problem. I own the house but the lot is small and the deed restrictions
 > are large. I have no large trees to run a wire up to and the house is only
 > about 23' tall at the peak.
 >
 > The question I have is can I put the wire up with a minimum ground
 > clearance of 15' and use it as a modified sloping inverted vee with out
 > too many problems? I want to tie to the chimney and the top ot the garage
 > in one direction and the chimney and a elevated swallow house pole on the
 > other leg. This will give me about 60 degrees of seperation with the
 > 'point' of the vee pointed upward to the east and the other two legs
 > pointing nortwest and southwest.
 >
 > Will the wire be omnidirectional in this configuration or directional? I
 > am a neopyhte at this and really need a little help. I am studing to take
 > the ham tests and getting my 'shack' in order for the day when the ticket
 > finally comes in.
 >
 > Thanks for the help in advance.
 >
 > Lewis Stephens

Since you have a space/height problem, just put up what you can and
use it.  In many cases like yours, a good antenna tuner is a big
asset, it may allow you to load whatever form of antenna that you
can get into the air.  I have found that low antennas can be somewhat
directional in unpredictable ways due to the close proximity of
surrounding objects.  Put it up and see what you get, it will
certainly be better than nothing.  Later you can try moving things
around to see if it might work better (or worse).

I personally use a 102 foot wire at about 25 feet strung from house
to tree to tree, it is painted with black, then green. then brown
paint to keep it from being obvious, and I feed it in the center
with ladder line just long enough to reach the tuner in the shack.
It's not the best, but it works, and the neighbors haven't called
in the covenant police yet.

In case you need a directional antenna for the low HF bands, first
get your antenna farm plot of ground (with no restrictions)
and go from there - the rest is easy by comparison.

GL & 73,
Don W3FPR

> --
> ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
> Lewis Stephens         [e-mail]     Pasadena,Texas
> ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ixnews.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (ANDRES MARTINEZ )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Underground tower
Date: 2 Jul 1995 07:27:47 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 7
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3t5hpj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-hou8-29.ix.netcom.com

Has anybody ever seen an telescopic tower that collapses underground?

I'm interested in building one because of deed restrictions.
I can't have the antenna up all the time.

thanks
andres - YV5KRI


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gryphon.phoenix.net!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Lewis Stephens)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.amateur.club.clarc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Multi Band Wire Antenna Help
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 1995 08:54:10 -0600
Organization: Amber,Inc.
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <lewis-0207950854100001@199.3.234.34>
References: <lewis-3006952032530001@199.3.234.108> <3t4esj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial3.phoenix.net
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b24.0+
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11621 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:13885 rec.radio.shortwave:54628 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8100 rec.radio.amateur.misc:82118

In article <3t4esj$[e-mail]>, Wes Stewart
<[e-mail]> wrote:


Snip>


> Lewis:
>
> What you describe will certainly not be optimum, however, it should
work.  There may be some
> directivity on some frequencies, but I wouldn't count on it. You may
have to tinker with the
> wire segment lengths some to maintain resonance, but that's what ham
radio is all about
> anyway.
>
> With the proximity to house wiring that you will have, you may
experience some mutual
> interference to/from TV and telephone service.  This may require some
extra effort to overcome
> or may necessitate avoiding some freqencies.  You will just have to wait
and see.
>
> If it's any consolation (I'm almost ashamed to say this), I have two
acres and no deed
> restrictions but because my interest is mainly 2M CW/SSB, my HF antenna
is a trapped dual-band
> 20/80 meter dipole 20ft high in the middle and about 10' at the ends.
>
> With 100 W on 80 meters, I can work all of the US and have worked JA,
VK, etc so don't
> dispair.  Just stay out of contests :-)
>
> Best wishes in your studies and many happy years of hamming.
>
> Regards, Wes Stewart, N7WS

The warning about household wiring was something I hadn't considered.
After reading your message, I have started to consider a different
location for the wire. I think I can get the center up about 20'-25' and
the ends about 12' by adding a couple of more bird houses in the back
yard. This would let me stretch it out above the back fence which is 72'
long.  I'm going to try both for a couple of days and see which if any
will hear better. I'll be glad when the next exam day comes. I think I
have the written, now if the code will come.

Lewis

--
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Lewis Stephens         [e-mail]     Pasadena,Texas
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!news3.digex.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.amateur.club.clarc
Subject: Re: Multi Band Wire Antenna Help
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 95 09:22:02 PDT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, USA
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3t4esj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dcc11286.slip.digex.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:54626 rec.radio.amateur.misc:82116 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8099 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:13882 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11619


In article <3t4esj$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> writes:
> Path:
news3.digex.net!news2.digex.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news
azstarnet.com!usenet
> From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
> Newsgroups:
rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.amateur.club.clarc,rec.radio.amateur.equipm
ent,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
> Subject: Re: Multi Band Wire Antenna Help
> Date: 1 Jul 1995 21:32:03 GMT
> Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
> Lines: 41
> Message-ID: <3t4esj$[e-mail]>
> References: <lewis-3006952032530001@199.3.234.108>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup27.azstarnet.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
> To: [e-mail]
> Xref: news3.digex.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12124
alt.radio.amateur.club.clarc:7 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14740
rec.radio.shortwave:46367 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8478
rec.radio.amateur.misc:75723
>
> [e-mail] (Lewis Stephens) wrote:
> >I want to put up a trapped wire for 80 - 10 meters. Space is a major
> >problem. I own the house but the lot is small and the deed restrictions
> >are large. I have no large trees to run a wire up to and the house is only
> >about 23' tall at the peak.
> >
> >The question I have is can I put the wire up with a minimum ground
> >clearance of 15' and use it as a modified sloping inverted vee with out
> >too many problems? I want to tie to the chimney and the top ot the garage
> >in one direction and the chimney and a elevated swallow house pole on the
> >other leg. This will give me about 60 degrees of seperation with the
> >'point' of the vee pointed upward to the east and the other two legs
> >pointing nortwest and southwest.
> >
> >Will the wire be omnidirectional in this configuration or directional? I
> >am a neopyhte at this and really need a little help. I am studing to take
> >the ham tests and getting my 'shack' in order for the day when the ticket
> >finally comes in.
>
> Lewis:
>
> What you describe will certainly not be optimum, however, it should work.
There may be some
> directivity on some frequencies, but I wouldn't count on it. You may have to
tinker with the
> wire segment lengths some to maintain resonance, but that's what ham radio is
all about
> anyway.
>
> With the proximity to house wiring that you will have, you may experience
some mutual
> interference to/from TV and telephone service.  This may require some extra
effort to overcome
> or may necessitate avoiding some freqencies.  You will just have to wait and
see.
>
> If it's any consolation (I'm almost ashamed to say this), I have two acres
and no deed
> restrictions but because my interest is mainly 2M CW/SSB, my HF antenna is a
trapped dual-band
> 20/80 meter dipole 20ft high in the middle and about 10' at the ends.
>
> With 100 W on 80 meters, I can work all of the US and have worked JA, VK, etc
so don't
> dispair.  Just stay out of contests :-)
>
> Best wishes in your studies and many happy years of hamming.
>
> Regards, Wes Stewart, N7WS
>
>




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:35 1995
From: [e-mail] (Claton Cadmus)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!rosevax!hamlink!fredmail
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What's The gain of a 2m j
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 1995 10:06:47 -0100
X-FTN-To: All
Lines: 19

KI7ZD  wrote:

KI>Lets not forget that a co-linear j-pole (1/2 wave) will deliver somewhere
  >near 7db gain. And that if constructed using 5/8 wave radials the gain is
  >even more impressive!

Huh, you wan to splain that Lucy!  What are you taking about, a 1/2 wave
co-linear?  Do you mean a co-linear with 1/2 wave sections?  And what is
this 5/8 wave radial stuff.  J-poles do not need or benefit from
radials.  Now if you are talking a j-feed 5/8 wave phased two section
co-linear, you got something there.  About 6dbi at best, or about 4db
better than a 1/2 wave j-pole.

But what's that got to do with the original question?

73 de  Claton Cadmus,  KA0GKC
 * SLMR 2.1a * "I'd love to help you out.  Which way did you come in?"




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:35 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews.netcom.com!netcom.com!slay
From: [e-mail] (Sandy Lynch)
Subject: Re: Underground tower
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3t5hpj$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 14:12:01 GMT
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]

ANDRES MARTINEZ ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Has anybody ever seen an telescopic tower that collapses underground?

: I'm interested in building one because of deed restrictions.
: I can't have the antenna up all the time.

: thanks
: andres - YV5KRI


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!mgate.arrl.org!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Zack Lau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m Marine antenna
Date: 2 Jul 1995 17:16:26 -0400
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3t72ba$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3ss342$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:
: Glenn Mead ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : I am trying to install a 2m (144-148) antenna on my boat.

You might consider the J pole in the July 1995 QST,
pages 62 to 64, which is designed for fitting (and
working) inside a PVC tube.  Dimensions are also
given for 6 meters (1 MHz intervals) and 222 MHz.

--
Zack Lau  KH6CP/1           2 way QRP WAS
                           8 States on 10 GHz
Internet: [e-mail]   10 grids on 2304 MHz


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!n4vu!jsm
From: [e-mail] (John Miller -- sysadmin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna rotator survey
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 18:25:06 GMT
Organization: Pan-Galactic Consulting
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jsm.mindspring.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Originator: [e-mail]

Jeff Stillinger ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I would like to know how you set your rotators for your antennas.  Do you use
: a magnetic heading, or a true heading when configuring your antennas?  How
: offten do you calibrate this setting?  Do you even bother to configure a
: rotator like this, and just turn the antenna until you have the strongest
: signal?

: I am building a computer program to calculate distance and a beam heading.
: Due to limited screen space I can either display the heading in magnetic
: degrees or a true bearing.  To this end, I need to know if most of you
: calibrate using true bearings or magnetic bearings.

True bearings.  I'll be interested to hear if anyone uses magnetic.
--
John Miller, N4VU                 Linux!                    Fayetteville
[e-mail]                DoD #1942                    (Atlanta)
[e-mail]                AMA #671301                     GA, US


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!newserver.uri.edu!shiva!swamik
From: [e-mail] (Swami Kumaresan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.quipment
Subject: *** FOR SALE  ***** Almost unused MFJ Portable tuner!!!
Date: 2 Jul 1995 19:49:06 GMT
Organization: University of Rhode Island
Lines: 10
Sender: swamik@shiva (Swami Kumaresan)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3t6t7i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 131.128.51.53
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:82137 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11623

    Hi
                I have an MFJ  that has received about 30 minutes of usage.
         It has three settings QRP, Moderate power (0-60 watts) and High
     (0-300 W)!  All manuals aand original packaging are intact. EMAIL me
     or call me for details and price.

                        Swami K. (KD1QV/AE)
                        [e-mail]
                        401-789-5938



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!stat!phx-az!arca
From: [e-mail] (Arca)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,
Subject: 1995 Ft. Tuthill Hamfest
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun,  2 Jul 1995 21:24:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Arizona Network Intertie Group, Association
Lines: 73
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11633 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9251

rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,
rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet,rec.radio.amateur.policy,
rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.swap



                               A.R.C.A.

ARCA                           PRESENTS                        ARRL

                  THE AMATEUR RADIO COUNCIL OF ARIZONA

                         FT. TUTHILL HAMFEST '95
ARCA                                                           ARRL
                           FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA
                Ft. Tuthill Is Located At The Flagstaff
            Airport Exit #337 3 Miles South Of I-40 On I-17

                           TALK-IN: 146.98- (100.0hz PL)


                         JULY 21,22,23, 1995


MAIN PRIZES                                            FREE ADMISION
-----------                                           TAILGATING  $20.00
                                                      CAMPING/NITE $8.00
WESTERN DINNER - PLEASE R.S.V.P.

Grand Prize > Trip for 2 To Dayton Ham Vention (Some Restrictions Apply)
              Or Ten-Tec Scout 555 Portable HF
Second Prize> Alinco DR-MO6T 6Meter FM Mobile
Third Prize > Yaesu FT-11 2-Meter HT
Fourth Prize> Kantronics KPC-3 TNC
Early Bird  > Astron RS-35A Power Supply

                          HOURLY DOOR PRIZES
                        MUST BE PRESENT TO WIN.

         TICKETS:  $2.00 EACH OR 3 FOR $5.00 Or 60 for $100.00


            T-HUNT SEMINARS  PROGRAMS  LECTURES  MEETINGS

VE EXAMS:
REGISTRATION: 8:30-10:30 A.M. Saturday, July 22
You MUST have original and one copy of your license and/or any applicable
C.S.C.E. Photo I.D. Required.  WALK-INS ONLY.  For Exam Information Call:
602-440-2039

NO-CODE TECHNICIAN CLASS
------------------------
For Information and registration contact:
Morgan Riley, N7DLW at 602-938-4356


NO FIREARMS, BOOZE, DRUGS ALLOWED ON CAMPUS.
ALL PETS MUST BE ON A LEASH.

ARIZONA TAX REGULATIONS WILL BE IN EFFECT.

This is an ARRL Sanctioned EVENT.

INFORMATION & RESERVATIONS:

        VOICE:  602-440-2039
OR VIA E-MAIL:  [e-mail]
          FAX:  [phone]



---
 * OLXWin 1.00 * Hello, I am part number ||#||||#||#||#||


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!news.uoregon.edu!mars.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Doug McFadden)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m Marine antenna
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 1995 21:46:21 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3t7436$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip38.efn.org
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Clint Bradford) wrote:

>Subject: 2m Marine antenna

>>>I am trying to install a 2m (144-148) antenna on my boat.

>There's a great article from QST! Magazine last summer for building your
>own 2M j-pole, encapsulated in PVC pipe for complete weatherproofing.
>Cost? Less than five bucks. And they work!

>Contact the ARRL for a reprint, or scan your last year's issues!
>---
> ■ wcECHO 4.1 ≈ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details ■ Mira Loma, CA ■ 909-681-6221

There's a great article from QST! Magazine in the July '95 issue for
building your own 2M j-pole, encapsulated in PVC pipe, page 62.


Doug
========================================================================
Live from Eugene Oregon:   Doug McFadden,   KC7IMR,   [e-mail]
========================================================================
Stand behind everything you sell, except the manure spreader, of course.



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.inhouse.compuserve.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Dave Egan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RingoRanger Not Putting Out - Help
Date: 3 Jul 1995 01:36:03 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <3t7hi3$rcv$[e-mail]>

I've got a 3 year old Ringo Ranger (ARX-2B - 2meter) antenna that
just isn't radiating worth a damm.  SWR shows 2.5:1.  Running
an ohmmeter on the end of the RG-8/X shows 1 ohm resistance.

I'm pumping 40 watts into this thing and can't hit squat.
Transmission fine for about 300 yards, after that it goes
almost to complete white noise.  My car antenna gets out
better than this! B^)

I've double checked all coax ends, making sure no silicon grease
made it past the threads into the connections.  I've got my
external connections weather sealed.  I've tried damn near
everything and can't seem to get this thing to radiate.

BTW - it's mounted on a TV mast, on my roof, with the radials
at the base up approximately 20 feet from the ground.  It's
mounted to the plumbing vent pipe, which for what it's worth
is PVC!

Help!

Thanks!

--
David Egan  Allen, TX
76175,[e-mail]  or [e-mail]
Comments are Mine - whose did you expect?


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!news
From: Kevin Shea <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Illuminating dish @ 1691 MHz
Date: 3 Jul 1995 02:13:09 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <3t7jnl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: f180-117.net.wisc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

In the July issue of _73_ magazine there's an article  about building a
parabola dish (5 footer) for use receiving GOES WEFAX @ 1691 MHz.

The author states that the "coffee can" feedhorn won't properly illuminate
the dish. The author states that such a feedhorn produces an illumination
angle of 122 degrees which calls for a dish with a 0.424 f/D.  This compares
with most commercial dishes of 0.3 or so f/D.

The author mentions that one could use scalr rings (like TVRO feedhorns do)
but that eould block quite a bit of the dish.  The author's solution was to
build his own dish!

I would hope there would be another solution. Any ideas or comments would be
appreciated.



****************************************
* Kevin G. Shea  N9JKP                 *
* 4460 Dahmen Pass                     *
* Cross Plains, WI 53528 USA           *
* 608.789.4326,voice; 608.798.1747,fax *
****************************************




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: mini quad hf antennas
Date: 3 Jul 1995 09:46:17 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3t8e99$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>Has
>anybody out there used or know anything about a mini quad hf
>antenna that was on the market about a year ago; reliability,
>performance.

As with all mini-antennas you can be assured that the performance
will be apalling. Are you sure, a vertical for 20 m or a full
size dipole will not fit somewhere on your roof?

73, Moritz DL5UH



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dbisna.com!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!mgate.arrl.org!mgate.arrl.org!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Zack Lau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Illuminating dish @ 1691 MHz
Date: 3 Jul 1995 09:49:55 -0400
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <3t8si3$[e-mail]>
References: <3t7jnl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Kevin Shea ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In the July issue of _73_ magazine there's an article  about building a
: parabola dish (5 footer) for use receiving GOES WEFAX @ 1691 MHz.

: The author states that the "coffee can" feedhorn won't properly illuminate
: the dish. The author states that such a feedhorn produces an illumination
: angle of 122 degrees which calls for a dish with a 0.424 f/D.  This compares
: with most commercial dishes of 0.3 or so f/D.

: The author mentions that one could use scalr rings (like TVRO feedhorns do)
: but that eould block quite a bit of the dish.  The author's solution was to
: build his own dish!

A 14 inch diameter scalar ring would block about 5% of the dish area.
This is a signal loss of 1/4 dB.  Commercial optical telescope block
as much as 11 % of the dish area, doubling the loss.  Thus, even with
a small dish, I conclude that scalar rings are in fact acceptable from
an electrical point of view.  OTOH, this may be more of a mechanical
project than you are up to.

: I would hope there would be another solution. Any ideas or comments would be
: appreciated.

An interesting possibility is an log periodic dipole array.  I've seen
examples in which there is an gain peak off axis--which is what you want
when feeding a dish.  But, I've never had the math skills or tools to
design such an antenna accurately.  Perhaps easier to model might be
some sort of loop in front of a circular reflector.

You might also try making a horn optimized to your reflecting surface.
Getting the right gain is usually pretty easy.  If you make a rectangular
horn, it helps to make the E and H phase centers coincide.



:
: ****************************************
: * Kevin G. Shea  N9JKP                 *
: * 4460 Dahmen Pass                     *
: * Cross Plains, WI 53528 USA           *
: * 608.789.4326,voice; 608.798.1747,fax *
: ****************************************


--
Zack Lau  KH6CP/1           2 way QRP WAS
                           8 States on 10 GHz
Internet: [e-mail]   10 grids on 2304 MHz


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Illuminating dish @ 1691 MHz
Date: 3 Jul 1995 09:57:18 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3t8etu$[e-mail]>
References: <3t7jnl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>The author mentions that one could use scalr rings (like TVRO feedhorns do)
>but that eould block quite a bit of the dish.  The author's solution was to
>build his own dish!

Kevin,

The author certanly did not make a wise decision. There is a design
for a scalar horn around by VE4MA, for 23 and 13 cm, wich could be easily
scaled. These horns offer considerable advantages over shallower dishes
with a "coffee can" horn:

The radiation diagram is specifically tailored to properly illuminate
"deep" dishes, with a minimum of spill-over. Therefore the antenna
will be quieter, and hence better for reception (uses a really low
noise preamp though). If shadowing really is a problem, use a slightky
bigger dish.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 03 12:58:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: mini quad hf antennas
Date: 3 Jul 1995 14:04:50 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3t8te2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3t8e99$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: misz.animal.uiuc.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

In <3t8e99$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] () writes:
>>Has
>>anybody out there used or know anything about a mini quad hf
>>antenna that was on the market about a year ago; reliability,
>>performance.
>
>As with all mini-antennas you can be assured that the performance
>will be apalling. Are you sure, a vertical for 20 m or a full
>size dipole will not fit somewhere on your roof?
The smallest yet effective mini-loop is the tuned loop. Its
disadvantage is small bandwith unless it is tuned remotely.


Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Illinois      1207 W. Gregory Dr., Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. [phone]         Fax: [phone]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/4 wave coax stubs question
Date: 5 Jul 1995 17:20:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tevnj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

That's exactly what I use for my HF TVI filter, a series of 1/4 wl open
stubs and series 1/4 wave line sections between the stubs. It handles much
more power than conventional low pass filters and is cheep!  ;-) .  73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/4 wave coax stubs question
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 95 00:33:06 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3thvql$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3tevnj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <3tevnj$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>That's exactly what I use for my HF TVI filter, a series of 1/4 wl open
>stubs and series 1/4 wave line sections between the stubs. It handles much
>more power than conventional low pass filters and is cheep!  ;-) .  73 Tom

I've never heard of this, but it sounds like an excellent idea.  Do you
connect the stubs directly at the transmitter's output, and if so, how?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: Ian G3SEK <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/4 wave coax stubs question
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 1995 07:44:42 GMT
Organization: IFWtech
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3tevnj$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
X-Broken-Date: Friday, Jul 07, 1995 07.44.42
X-Newsreader: Newswin Alpha 0.7

In article: <3tevnj$[e-mail]>  [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
:
: That's exactly what I use for my HF TVI filter, a series of 1/4 wl open
: stubs and series 1/4 wave line sections between the stubs. It handles much
: more power than conventional low pass filters and is cheep!  ;-) .  73 Tom

There are many other possibilities for multiple-harmonic notch
filtering using coax stubs. These are covered in an article by
G4SWX in RadCom (RSGB), November 1994.

Basically, you connect all the open-circuit stubs for the various
harmonics in parallel, and further down the main cax line use a
second identical set of stubs. There's always a 'magic' distance
that will give a perfect match at the fundamental frequency
(a quarter-wavelength being just one special case).

G4SWX's article also contains designs for FM and European UHF-TV
highpass filters with deep notches at 144 and 432MHz. These use
coax stubs for the botches and a few discrete Ls and Cs for
broadband, low-loss matching in the passband. Highly recommended!

Coming soon from G4SWX - an article on all-coax diplexers between
different amateur bands.


Crossing threads, please add my vote *against* choosing an antenna
matching unit on the basis of its claimed harmonic suppression.
The actual performance will be too variable to judge - which looks
like bad engineering to me - and the best you'll ever get will be
a three-pole filter. If your TX needs more harmonic suppression than
it already has, use a real LPF in the 50-ohm section between the TX
and the ATU; or a notch filter to take out harmonics of a specific
frequency.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK            Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
                            'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Professionally:
IFW Technical Services       Clear technical English - anywhere.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!nwfocus.wa.com!krel.iea.com!comtch!n0dh
From: [e-mail] (D.C. Henderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160 Tunable Ant.???
Date: 5 Jul 1995 16:30:42 GMT
Organization: CompuTech
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <3teeni$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3smti9$[e-mail]> <jpurtle-2806951229540001@0.0.0.0> <3t94g4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: comtch.iea.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

George L. Hiscox ([e-mail]) wrote:
: As for the 50 or more radials, I have read where a few ELEVATED
: radials can do as much for you as a bunch of them laying on the
: ground.  I am planning an experiment using an inverted L
: configuration and a few elevated radials.

There was a rather heated debate/thread on this a couple of months back.
The jury is still out as to whether the elevated radial system is really
better than a ton of wire buried in the back yard. I for one use elevated
radial systems for two phased 160M inverted L's as well as my 80 M vert.
This is as much for practical reasons given the nature of my wooded
property and the difficulty with putting down a serious ground radial
system in a heavily wooded setting. By the way I recently moved the
elevated radials on the 160 M antennas from 8' above ground to 15'/20'
above ground and while I did not take any qualitative filed strength
measurements the bandwidth  of the system dropped in half or some might
say that the "Q" doubled, I would surmise that the systems is now more
effecient but is it more effecient tahn a system with 100 buried
radials??...Who knows for sure! :-)

....I believe (for reasons I dont remember) that the original poster had
limitations which precluded the use of raised radials, but I could be
wrong about that.

: I have just ordered the EZNEC software from Roy Lewallen and want
: to model it first to get an idea how it works before I start
: hanging wire.

: If it looks decent, I will post the EZNEC antenna file.

I use NEC/WIRES and have done lots of this. The thing to remember about
any computer model is that it is just that an interesting "model" of
reality. How good that model is depends on the ability of the computer
program to model reality. If you really want to see which is better then put
up both and take really good farfield measurements. As I am fond of
saying, "If the Dead Sea Scrolls had been found on tractor feed paper they
wouldn't have any trouble getting folks to church on Sunday", i.e. people
have a tendancy to believe anything from a computer :-). The computer
models are great for finding out if an experimental antenna design sucks
or not but I dont put much stock in differences of a db or 2....

Dave
N0DH/7 [e-mail]

dit dit



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.cais.com!cais3.cais.com!gttm
From: USCG TELECOMMS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160 Tunable Ant.???
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 13:13:30 -0400
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3smti9$[e-mail]> <jpurtle-2806951229540001@0.0.0.0> <3t94g4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cais3.cais.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <3t94g4$[e-mail]>


I purchased a 1000 pf, 3 KV motor driven remote controlled vacuum
variable from Fair Radio Sales for about $70.  I use it to remote control
my 160 meter 3/8 wave inverted L.  I have it set up with a fixed inductor
in an L matching network.  works great.
Ron W4VR

+                        COAST  GUARD  COMMUNICATIONS                         +
|                                                                             |
|          Telephone: [phone]         U.S. Coast Guard (G-TTM)         |
|          Fax:       [phone]         Washington DC 20593              |
|          Internet:      CGComms/[e-mail]                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.micron.net!cs002p13.micron.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Russ Ellsworth)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160 Tunable Ant.???
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 1995 17:11:07 -0600
Organization: Alster Communications
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3smti9$[e-mail]> <jpurtle-2806951229540001@0.0.0.0> <3t94g4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs002p13.micron.net

In article <[e-mail]>, "George L. Hiscox"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> As for the 50 or more radials, I have read where a few ELEVATED
> radials can do as much for you as a bunch of them laying on the
> ground.  I am planning an experiment using an inverted L
> configuration and a few elevated radials.
>
> I have just ordered the EZNEC software from Roy Lewallen and want
> to model it first to get an idea how it works before I start
> hanging wire.
>
> If it looks decent, I will post the EZNEC antenna file.
>
> 73/George

George, I am using an "L" with 80 ft. vertical and 140 ft. horizontal. The
elevated radials are up about 15 ft. and I have 15 of them with lengths
between 35 and 135 ft. I feed the whole thing on 80 and 160 using a
balanced tuner and ladder line. It seems to work well but I have never had
anything else to compare it to. I will be very interested in what EZNEC
has to say about the elevated radials. I await your post with interest.

Russ Ellsworth, WA6CWV..Boise, Idaho


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 7/8" heliax cable for sale!
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 95 20:30:50 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3srtkr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1a.delphi.com
X-To: FAI <[e-mail]>

It would be niced to know what you want for it.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:43 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard Christensen)
Subject: Active antenna for MW
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: cascade
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (oakhill news)
Organization: AutoSoft Corp., Bountiful, UT
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 21:03:00 GMT
Lines: 14


I am considering building an active antenna for the SW adn MW
reception.  Does anyone have any good suggestions, before I go and
reinvent the wheel?
--
         /\                  /\       .       /\____
 _-_    /  \       _/\      /  \     /\      /      \        /\
/   \  /    \     /   \  /\/    \   /  \_/\_/   Y    \  /\/\/  \
  u  \/      \___/     \/        \ /                  \/        \
----------------------------------v--------------------------------
Richard Christensen                                          KC7JPQ
[e-mail]                 Go Cougars!! Beat Utah!!!
[e-mail]   :-)



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: All-band wire?
Date: 7 Jul 1995 13:23:43 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3tjcgv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu

I'd like to work 80-10m including WARC bands with a wire
no longer than 120' to use with an hf station with
unbalanced 50 ohm output from autotuner/amp, the latter
putting out 600w.  I was at first planning to try the
G5RV, the version terminated with an SO239 jack, but
because of conflicting reports of G5RV antenna's
performance I'm wondering if there is such a thing as
an all-band wire antenna, especially one that would work
with an autotuner/amp such as the Yaesu FL7000.  Before
I give up on center-fed wires as an option and start
saving up for something like a GAP Titan, does anyone
use any configuration of affordable wire to work 80-10m
including 30, 17 and 12m?  Thanks for your help.
Bill KB8USZ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!mgate.arrl.org!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Zack Lau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: All-band wire?
Date: 7 Jul 1995 13:19:23 -0400
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <3tjqar$[e-mail]>
References: <3tjcgv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:
: I'd like to work 80-10m including WARC bands with a wire
: no longer than 120' to use with an hf station with
: unbalanced 50 ohm output from autotuner/amp, the latter
: putting out 600w.  I was at first planning to try the
: G5RV, the version terminated with an SO239 jack, but
: because of conflicting reports of G5RV antenna's
: performance I'm wondering if there is such a thing as
: an all-band wire antenna, especially one that would work
: with an autotuner/amp such as the Yaesu FL7000.  Before
: I give up on center-fed wires as an option and start
: saving up for something like a GAP Titan, does anyone
: use any configuration of affordable wire to work 80-10m
: including 30, 17 and 12m?  Thanks for your help.
: Bill KB8USZ [e-mail]

If you have the space to put up a 120 ft dipole,
you may have the room to put up a full wave 80M horizontal
loop antenna, which is one of the few antennas that
will often tune up on all bands without excessive coax
feedline loss.  It doesn't really have to be horizontal--its
just a lot more practical for most people to put it up that
way.
--
Zack Lau  KH6CP/1           2 way QRP WAS
                           8 States on 10 GHz
Internet: [e-mail]   10 grids on 2304 MHz


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!jayk
From: [e-mail] (Jay Kesterson K0GU)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Analyzers
Date: 5 Jul 1995 15:19:04 GMT
Organization: Morris is a cat, Morse is a code
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3teah8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3sv693$[e-mail]> <3t1c46$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpxxxa.fc.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Like almost all analyzers, however, it's worthless if there
: are strong RF signals nearby. Forget taking one of these
: babies to a repeater site with other repeaters and pagers
: co-located on the site.

If you live near other transmitters this is a major consideration. I live
two miles from WWV and a FM BC station and three miles from a AM BC station.
My Autek analyzer is basically useless in this environment.

73, Jay  K0GU                  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna and lightening?
Date: 5 Jul 1995 20:23:27 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3tesbv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


I recently errected an antenna (RS Bas scanner)
which is about 25 into the air. It is mounted to the side of my house
and it is stuck on a plate of metal which has a stake going into the ground.

Do I need to ground this additionally? Do I need to unplug my radio (BNC
connector) when  thunder storm brews?

Thanks,
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lightening?
Date: 6 Jul 1995 03:34:32 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3tflk8$[e-mail]>
References: <3tesbv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger110.nando.net

[e-mail] (Drew Loker) wrote:
 >
 >
 > I recently errected an antenna (RS Bas scanner)
 > which is about 25 into the air. It is mounted to the side of my house
 > and it is stuck on a plate of metal which has a stake going into the ground.
 >
 > Do I need to ground this additionally? Do I need to unplug my radio (BNC
 > connector) when  thunder storm brews?
 >
Maybe, and YES - not only unplug antennas when a thunderstorm is in
the area, but best to get the feedline outside AND grounded.  The house you
save may be your own, not to mention your life.  It is a good idea
to ground all antennas not in use.  IMHO, only the feedline in use
should be present in the shack.  While that may be overkill, it is safe.

73,
Don W3FPR


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lightening?
Date: 6 Jul 1995 13:22:38 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <3tgo2u$[e-mail]>
References: <3tesbv$[e-mail]> <3tflk8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: misz.animal.uiuc.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

In <3tflk8$[e-mail]>, DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] (Drew Loker) wrote:
> >
> >
> > I recently errected an antenna (RS Bas scanner)
> > which is about 25 into the air. It is mounted to the side of my house
> > and it is stuck on a plate of metal which has a stake going into the ground.
> >
> > Do I need to ground this additionally? Do I need to unplug my radio (BNC
> > connector) when  thunder storm brews?
> >
>Maybe, and YES - not only unplug antennas when a thunderstorm is in
>the area, but best to get the feedline outside AND grounded.  The house you
>save may be your own, not to mention your life.  It is a good idea
>to ground all antennas not in use.  IMHO, only the feedline in use
>should be present in the shack.  While that may be overkill, it is safe.
>
>73,
>Don W3FPR

Yeah, there is never too much safety. At best, move your shack
outside, if possible to your summer house. Whenever a storm is
forecast, leave the summer house at least a day in advance. Keep the
antennas as low as possible.  Also, consider indoor antennas, which
are very safe.  As an alternative, consider operating remotely via an
(indoor) microwave link.  Always operate from the basement.  This
will provide you with an extra protection against tornados. And never
date a woman for she may be infected with AIDS...

On the serious side, the chance of a direct hit by lightning
is small.  While rudimentary safety steps are easy to do and
justified (e.g., disconnecting or grounding all antennas), IMHO it is
better to risk damaging the equipment than to lose all the fun.

Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Illinois      1207 W. Gregory Dr., Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. [phone]         Fax: [phone]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lightening?
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 95 00:30:06 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 16
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3thvl1$[e-mail]>
References: <3tesbv$[e-mail]> <3tflk8$[e-mail]> <3tgo2u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <3tgo2u$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal) wrote:
>On the serious side, the chance of a direct hit by lightning
>is small.  While rudimentary safety steps are easy to do and
>justified (e.g., disconnecting or grounding all antennas), IMHO it is
>better to risk damaging the equipment than to lose all the fun.

It requires only a small effort to at least disconnect the feedline from
the rig.  Direct hits *are* rare, but many rigs are damaged from indirect
static buildup that leave no footprints, other than a "dead" rig.  Through
the years, I've known many hams who were bitten by this, and who now
routinely disconnect the feedline whenever their equipment is not in use.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lightening?
Date: 7 Jul 1995 03:17:37 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <3ti90h$[e-mail]>
References: <3tesbv$[e-mail]> <3tflk8$[e-mail]> <3tgo2u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail701.nando.net

[e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal) wrote:
>
> On the serious side, the chance of a direct hit by lightning
> is small.  While rudimentary safety steps are easy to do and
> justified (e.g., disconnecting or grounding all antennas), IMHO it is
> better to risk damaging the equipment than to lose all the fun.
>
A direct lightning hit is not the only thing to be concerned about.

There is considerable charge induced on an antenna feedline from
an electrical storm, even at a considerable distance. When the normal
summer QRN begins to sound more like static clashes it is time to
get off the air and get the antennas outside.

(Personal experience story follows:) I have been a convert
recent years.  I once decided to change antennas and work
another band (the storm wasn't that close - maybe it would pass over!)
Well, disconnecting the coax was uneventful, but when I brought the
previously unconnected line near the antenna tuner chassis, there
was a large spark and a loud snapping sound.  Lucky I was holding
this charged thing by the insulated part of the coax.  I trust you
get the point.  After that experience, I put a grounding strip for
antennas just outside the shack window, and keep all antenna leads
grounded to it when not in use.  This grounding will likely char
or even varorize with a direct hit, but as I hope I have pointed out,
a direct hit is not the most common hazard where antennas and lightning
are concerned.

73,
Don W3FPR



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!news.Cerritos.edu!news.Arizona.EDU!usenet
From: "Devon G. Crowe" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lightening?
Date: 7 Jul 1995 15:50:56 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3tjl50$[e-mail]>
References: <3tesbv$[e-mail]><3tflk8$[e-mail]><3tgo2u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shino.lpl.arizona.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-URL: news:[e-mail]


        Lightning protection is very important. I had, many decades ago, a 40
meter inverted vee only about 45 feet high that was not in use for a
while, and the coax was disconnected. Whenever a storm was in the area,
I would hear the snapping of discharge across the coax connector. Sparks
were jumping between the outer part of the PL-259 and the inner
connector. In the dry Arizona air, that represented roughly 5,000 volts.
It happened at a high rate of repetition when the storm was close
(several discharges per minute). After a week or so of this I put in a
shorted SO-239 to keep charge from building up, and in those days of
tube rigs, put a very small neon lamp across all RX input connectors to
short higher voltages than the very small ones representing the wanted
signals. I still not only use arrestors which short high voltages in the
coax to ground, but have a coax switch which shorts the antenna
completely when not in use.

        Direct strikes for high towers are NOT rare! I recommend a sufficient
ground system, such as a star of stars topology, to prevent charge
saturation by direct strikes.

        Devon
        KK4TT




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:52 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!n4zr
From: [e-mail] (Peter G. Smith)
Subject: Re: Antenna and lightening?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3tesbv$[e-mail]><3tflk8$[e-mail]><3tgo2u$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 1995 13:08:19 GMT
Lines: 33
Sender: [e-mail]

I think you're getting some misguided advice, particularly from the guy
who poo-poo'ed lightning.  Anyone who has ever had lightning damage knows
that it is not worth the risk for the sake of whatever fun that can be
gained by continuing to listen during a lightning storm.  It does not have
to hit your antenna to damage your receiver.

I would suggest the following:

DO use a DC grounded antenna if at all possible - many of them have a
built-in RF choke at the base of the antenna that performs this
function.  This will help to bleed off any static build-up on the
antenna.  People who use long wire antennas for HF see well over 1 KV on
them sometimes, when electrical storms are in the vicinity.  your little
whip won't have the same magnitude of buildup, but it only takes a a few
volts to kill a semiconductor like those in your receiver's front end.

DO ground the shield of your coax before it enters the house.  Use heavy
wire, as short as possible, and as straight as possible, to a minimum 6-foot
ground stake.  This will help to protect against voltage induced in your
feedline by a nearby strike, in case you forget to take the last
precaution below.

DO disconnect the antenna whenever you hear thunder.  If possible, ground
the center connector of the coax.  You can take a BNC chassis connector
and short it, if your coax shield is well grounded.  But the
disconnection is the most important thing of all.

Hope this helps.  Pete Smith N4ZR  [e-mail]
--
73, Pete
[e-mail]
"Better, faster,cheaper -- choose any two"
"No no no -- it's WEST Virginia"


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna rotator survey
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 20:35:46 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3t958q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <3t958q$[e-mail]>

Patricia,
Here are a few simple hints for easily determining true North.

- Use a detailed map (such as a USGS topographic map) to determine the
true azimuth to an easily identifiable natural or manmade landmark.
Preset your rotator to this azimuth, then point the beam antenna at the
previously identified landmark.

- Assuming your tower is in the clear so that it produces a shadow, you
can easily mark the direction of true south by several methods.

  - -  If you are near city or town, look in your newspaper to find your
  sunrise and sunset times.  Exactly halfway between sunrise and sunset your
  tower will cast a shadow at true south!  You can also determine sunrise
  and sunset visually, of course, at the expense of some early morning sleep!

  - - If you know your geographic coordinates use one of many computer
  programs (or send a request for help on here!) to determine your local
  sunrise and sunset times.  Even if you don't know your coordinates, you
  could still get ur local sunrise and sunset times by asking for help on
  this newsgroup!

- If you know a little bit about the night time sky, use Polaris (the
North Star) to determine true North.  Even if u don't know much about the
sky, if you can identify the Big Dipper you will be able to identify
Polaris!  The two stars that form the outer edge of the "dipper" point at
Polaris.  Using the distance between these two stars as a reference,
Polaris is aproximately three times this distance away from the star that
forms the upper edge of the "dipper."  Once u learn to identify Polaris,
you will never get lost at night (at least on a clear night in the
Northern hemisphere!)
73!
Frank
W3LPL


On 3 Jul 1995, WA6UBE wrote:
<<cut>>
> 8: PS> a simple way to determine true north is to correct the reading of a
> magnetic compass for local "variation" .. Variation is the amount of
> difference in angle >at your location < that magnetic north and true north
> differ from one another.  In order to not have a tower influence the
> compass, stand 50 feet in the clear from the tower and be on the south
> side of the tower. convert true north to magnetic north by
> adding/subtracting  your local variation, then stand so that the tower is
> directly true north from where you are standing. A helper can then adjust
> the position of the antenna on the mast as described above untill all you
> see is an
> end-on view of the beam. That's all there is to it ..
>
> Patricia Gibbons [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!goris
From: [e-mail] (Andy Goris)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna signal strength meter
Date: 6 Jul 1995 18:11:20 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3th908$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: conan.fc.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1.4]

Can anyone point me to a good (or ANY) 2M signal strength meter?  In
looking through the various ham catalogs, I find tons of SWR analyzers,
frequency counters, etc., but nothing that I can use to measure my
antenna performance.  I experiment a bit with 2M antennas, and don't
have a good way to compare performance.

Ideally, I'd like a portable, digital signal-strength meter wich can
respond to a wide range of signal strengths.

-Andy Goris
 [e-mail]
 AA0CM




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!oronet!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna signal strength meter
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 1995 19:20:11 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3thd7u$[e-mail]>
References: <3th908$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Andy Goris) wrote:

>Can anyone point me to a good (or ANY) 2M signal strength meter?  In
>looking through the various ham catalogs, I find tons of SWR analyzers,
>frequency counters, etc., but nothing that I can use to measure my
>antenna performance.  I experiment a bit with 2M antennas, and don't
>have a good way to compare performance.

>Ideally, I'd like a portable, digital signal-strength meter wich can
>respond to a wide range of signal strengths.

>-Andy Goris
> [e-mail]
> AA0CM

Not to belabor the obvious, but how about the S-meter on your 2-meter
rig?  Each s-unit is supposedly 6 dB, and you can certainly resolve
the meter to one dB if you are careful.  If you want to know the
honest truth, I have used collaborative S-meter readings on FCC type
acceptance and certificaition tests, and I believe that I was well
within a 2 dB error margin as later proven on a network and spectrum
analyzer.




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:57 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Antenna suitable for finicky autotuner
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3smf9t$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 01:47:48 GMT
Lines: 59

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Marcus) writes:
: >
: >I have a G5RV, a Kenwood TS850S/AT and a Dentron 1kw amp.  The Kenwood manual
: >says it won't tune to a mismatch of more than about 2:1.  I am able to tune
: >the 10-80m G5RV up on 80-10m and sometimes on 160m.  Usually 160m gives poor
: >results.  My antenna is feedpoint is at about 16 feet, not the 35 or so
: >recommended.  I cause no tvi, even with the amp at 500W output.  I first turn
: >on all the equipment.  When the amp warms up, I put it in the active mode, not
: >standby and autotune the rig, (about 10-20w out).  When I see a 1:1 swr on the
: >rig, I tune up the amp for maximum power output.  I typically get to the full
: >500w out and increase my signal by a couple of s-units.  I managed a +20-+30
: >report from somone in Europe on 80m.

: You do realize that the autotuner isn't looking at the antenna impedance
: don't you? All it is seeing is the Dentron's input network impedance, which
: is a pretty fair match on each of it's operating bands. It's the Dentron's
: output Pi network that's matching to the antenna. On some bands, and with
: some load reactances, it can handle almost 10:1 VSWR.

: >The G5RV is fabulous.  I also believe that a coax tuner that is rated at 2:1
: >or 3:1 and better will work well with the G5RV.

: It shouldn't, unless there's a *lot* of loss in the coax. The G5RV
: design offers VSWRs of at least 10:1 on some bands. Lots of loss in
: the coax section can make that *look* lower to the transmitter, but
: you're just warming coax, not radiating much signal. If you use
: quality low loss coax, not crummy RG-58, you should see VSWR values
: well outside the range of the autotuner on some frequencies.

: Gary
: --
: Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
: Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
: 534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
: Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |
Finally Someone got the G5RV pegged. I get so tired of hearing how this
random length piece of poorley fed wire is!!! I just had to try one for
myself a few years back. Yep, if you make that coax part long enough,
the losses are so great that you get a very low swr on all bands.
A really great antenna indeed! I have a copy of the 1937 ARRL
Antenna Manual which describes a multiband antenna with a 100ft
flat top and open wire feeders about 30ft long to act as a make-up
for the missing 30ft of dipole on 80 meters. The article describes
what type of tuning, series or parallel to use. G5RV may have been
alive at the time but I bet he wasn't making antennas!

Folks act like there is something magic about the G5RV. They even
pay big money for the "kits". G5RV himself recommends using open
wire feed all the way to the tuner for multiband operation. Not
coax.
Now I feel better! And what in the world is this stuff about using
the tuner in the driver to tune an antenna for an amplifier.
What next?
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna tuners: T vs. pi?
Date: 5 Jul 1995 09:37:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3te4ik$[e-mail]>
References: <3tbjl0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Zak  wrote:

>I have to disagree with this.  Most tuners are suppose to work from 80
through 10 meters, without switching tuning elements.  This means that
you essentially have inductors and capacitors with all the parasitics
(unwanted stray elements) of an 80 meter network trying to work at
54 MHz and above.  What do 80M rotary inductors really look like at
channel 2 or channel 6?<

I can tell you Zak, they look crummy. The layout, how the connection is
made to the variables, and other esoteric design results have more to do
with high order harmonic supression than most of us seem to imagine.

Hook a roller inductor tuner up to a 10 dB log sweep system and measure
the response as the roller is moved around and the capacitors are rotated.
Even with a "pi" the response usually has several peaks and dips.

The same is true for the high order response of a linear amplifier. Better
VHF harmonic supression can be obtained with correct layout, terminal
connections and shielding than by adding more elements in the network. In
one amplifier I tested recently, the level of a TV channel harmonic
dropped almost 20 dB by moving the output connection from the common post
of the loading cap to it's own separate post.

I vote with the group saying the best way to supress harmonics outside the
HF region is to use a low pass filter in the 50 ohm line between the rig
and the tuner, especially if a full range of test equipment is not
available to proof the layout.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:45:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna tuners: T vs. pi?
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 95 00:08:26 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3thucd$[e-mail]>
References: <3tbjl0$[e-mail]> <3te4ik$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

>I vote with the group saying the best way to supress harmonics outside the
>HF region is to use a low pass filter in the 50 ohm line between the rig
>and the tuner, especially if a full range of test equipment is not
>available to proof the layout.

I do like to think that my PI tuner may occasionally be of benefit with
tube-type rigs (and amplifiers) that don't employ fixed-impedance bandpass
filters.  However, given the lead lengths in the typical HF tuner, it would
be ridiculous to think that there would be a predictable and beneficial
effect at VHF.  Because of this, I have *always* used a VHF low pass filter
following the transmitter, regardless of power level or type of tuner.

Add my vote to the above.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Jim  W9WU)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antennas and the law
Date: 5 Jul 1995 12:46:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tefkm$[e-mail]>
References: <3tbnb5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim  W9WU)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Fred:

I'm sorry I can't help you with good news on CC&R's and ham radio. I've
been an ARRL Volunteer Counsel for many years and conduct the Amateur
Radio and the Law Forum at the Dayton Hamvention every year. I don't know
of any case, either state or federal, holding that amateur radio is a
national resource not subject to CC&R restrictions.

Hams have to protect themselves prior to purchasing property subject to
CC&R limitations on antennas by amending to offer to purchase to include a
contingency clause that will allow the ham to terminate the offer to
purchase if inspections of the CC&R's (or homeowner association
restrictions) limit or prohibit antennas.

I usually advise my clients subject to CC&R's to start looking for another
house. Most CC&R's provide that if a lawsuit is brought to restrain their
violation, the  loosing defendant pays both sides' attorney fees and
costs. There is no simple or inexpensive way to avoid properly enacted
CC&R restrictions on outside antennas, and as the ham couple in Florida
recently learned, even TVI/RFI may violate a restriction prohibiting
nuisances.

73, Jim O'Connell, W9WU  ARRL Volunteer Counsel



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antennas and the law
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 95 00:20:23 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 27
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3thv2q$[e-mail]>
References: <3tbnb5$[e-mail]> <3tefkm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <3tefkm$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Jim  W9WU) wrote:

>I don't know of any case, either state or federal, holding that amateur
>radio is a national resource not subject to CC&R restrictions.

Wasn't there a Supreme Court decision a number of years ago that removed
the (rightful) power of local municipalities to regulate such issues as
antenna height on any grounds other than public safety?  I realize this
doesn't apply to deed restrictions and covenants, but this may be what the
question was referring to.

>Most CC&R's provide that if a lawsuit is brought to restrain their
>violation, the  loosing defendant pays both sides' attorney fees and
>costs.

Even when it's the local municipality infringing on this area, legal costs
can be staggering.  Local governments are not adverse to using their power
to effectively bankrupt the defendant out of the legal system.  In such
situations, Supreme Court rulings and legal merit have little practical
meaning.

I agree - the best recourse is to move.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.claremont.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antennas and the law
Date: 6 Jul 1995 20:00:34 -0700
Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <3ti80i$[e-mail]>
References: <3tbnb5$[e-mail]> <3tefkm$[e-mail]> <3thv2q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: safety.ics.uci.edu

In <3thv2q$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>In article <3tefkm$[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (Jim  W9WU) wrote:

>>I don't know of any case, either state or federal, holding that amateur
>>radio is a national resource not subject to CC&R restrictions.

>Wasn't there a Supreme Court decision a number of years ago that removed
>the (rightful) power of local municipalities to regulate such issues as
>antenna height on any grounds other than public safety?  I realize this
>doesn't apply to deed restrictions and covenants, but this may be what the
>question was referring to.

NO!  There was NO such case, unless the entire Volunteer Counsel community
has somehow missed it!  Please, be careful about what you say about this
stuff, it is very important to be accurate when you speak of such things.
No Federal case on municipalities or CC&R's either that would "remove"
power to regulate antennas.  There are a few local Federal Appellate
decisions that say that PRB-1 means more than nothing, i.e., that
antennas cannot be regulated away, but there are also Federal Appellate
decisions that seem to say that PRB-1 means very, very little.

Before you repeat opinions on this theme, call the ARRL for your "PRB-1
packet", AND go read the article in CQ magazine of a few years back
on the status of PRB-1 by Wayne Overbeck.

Clark
WA3JPG


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!csusac!holtzman
From: [e-mail] (James Holtzman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc.,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
Date: 5 Jul 1995 20:26:19 GMT
Organization: California State University, Sacramento
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3teshb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3t9ag8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shazam.ecs.csus.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14009 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11700

In article <3t9ag8$[e-mail]> Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>It is 75 ohm and not intended to be outside so UV will
>be a problem. But if it cheap enough (or free) it is something
>you might be able to use. One use that I make of 75 ohm is in
>matching sections.
>
>
Yellow Ethernet cable is for interior use only.  The ultraviolet will ruin
the insulation.  If you enclose it, it might be OK, such in a conduit.
The impedence is 50-52 ohms.  There might be some 75 ohm but I've only
seen 52 ohms.

jrh


--
James Holtzman kc6ncg ([e-mail]) [phone]
"What this country needs is less people telling us what this country needs"
School of Engineering & Computer Science, Cal State University, Sacto, CA


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.lahabra.chevron.com!usenet
From: Curtis Wheeler <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc.
Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
Date: 6 Jul 1995 00:50:42 GMT
Organization: Chevron, La Habra, CA
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3tfc13$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cgwh.sr.chevron.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11707 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14021

"Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> Thick Ethernet cable looks a little similar to RG8/213 except for the
> color of the jacket and its having a tinned core and the double braid.
> Does anyone have any experience or advice on how this stuff works as an
> H.F. antenna feed cable?  I have the opportunity to buy some and would
> appreciate any comments before it all disappears :-)
>
> Thanks for any advice.

It is 50 ohms and works fine for feed line.  It will perform with real
low loss.  However the foam dielectric will break down quickly if
exposed to high voltages - it's designed for low voltage data.
I wouldn't use it between an antenna and a tuner.

Curtis Wheeler   San Ramon, CA
KD6ELA / GROL / Pvt. Pilot


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!ornews.intel.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Collier Chun)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc.
Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 95 07:19:38 PST
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <3tgre5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3tfc13$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cchun.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.8
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11712 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14040

In article <3tfc13$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>"Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thick Ethernet cable looks a little similar to RG8/213 except for the
>> color of the jacket and its having a tinned core and the double braid.
>> Does anyone have any experience or advice on how this stuff works as an
>> H.F. antenna feed cable?  I have the opportunity to buy some and would
>> appreciate any comments before it all disappears :-)
>>
>> Thanks for any advice.
>
>It is 50 ohms and works fine for feed line.  It will perform with real
>low loss.  However the foam dielectric will break down quickly if
>exposed to high voltages - it's designed for low voltage data.
>I wouldn't use it between an antenna and a tuner.

Caveat emptor: while it may have reasonable loss at HF frequencies, the
cable quickly becomes VERY lossy at VHF and higher.  I used to use
(note past tense) this stuff in five foot lengths for interconnections
on my 440 MHz repeater.  After seeing some unusually high loss numbers,
like losing 5W at 90W in on one end, I did some testing at 440 MHz and
was shocked enough to promptly replace all of the Ethernet coax
in my repeater.

Very seductive, especially after you've cross-sectioned the stuff--
double wire/foil shield, and a silver-plated center conductor.





















From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!news
From: Public Area Lab User <cc.swarthmore.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
Date: 6 Jul 1995 19:10:15 GMT
Organization: Swarthmore College
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <3thcen$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3t9ag8$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 130.58.23.20
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
        boundary="-------------------------------7268186885972"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-URL: news:[e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:82359 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14050 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11719

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------------------7268186885972
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I really need more elaboration concerning the types of information
regarding the amateur music
[e-mail] (Robert Casey) wrote:
>In article <3t9ag8$[e-mail]> Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>>It is 75 ohm and not intended to be outside so UV will
>>be a problem. But if it cheap enough (or free) it is something
>>you might be able to use. One use that I make of 75 ohm is in
>>matching sections.
>>
>Ethernet thick coax is 50 ohms, like RG8U.  You may be thinking of
>CATV hardline, that is 75 ohms.


---------------------------------7268186885972
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain

From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 02:34:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3t9ag8$[e-mail]>

In article <3t9ag8$[e-mail]> Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>It is 75 ohm and not intended to be outside so UV will
>be a problem. But if it cheap enough (or free) it is something
>you might be able to use. One use that I make of 75 ohm is in
>matching sections.
>
Ethernet thick coax is 50 ohms, like RG8U.  You may be thinking of
CATV hardline, that is 75 ohms.

---------------------------------7268186885972--


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!hudson.lm.com!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!america.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc.,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 95 22:20:19 edt
Organization: PSS InterNet Services, InterNet in Fl 904 253 7100
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ashanti.ppp
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14065 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11725


In article <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> In article <3t9ag8$[e-mail]> Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
writes:
> >From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
> >Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
> >Date: Mon, 03 Jul 95 11:11:45 MST


> >It is 75 ohm and not intended to be outside so UV will
> <snip>
> Thick Ethernet Cable - like ALL Ethernet cable - is 50 Ohm.

> It works great for HF runs to the roof, but Gerald is correct, it is not UV
> stabilized.

> 73 - Randy WB5TEY
Hey guys guess what you can get it in both 75 and 50. I have a section of it
that is marked montrose 5713 which is 50 it has the same teflon covering that
is on rg142/u I agree it is not the best thing to hang outside but it will hold
up for a year or two. Biggest plus is I got 130 ft of it for 32 dollars and that
was with N connectors install on each end.  ;)
73 dray AD4RR
/ex



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!ub!news.kei.com!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!sandersm
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Does coax RG8U, RG58, RG59 degrade from its jacket ruining dielectrrc?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 6 Jul 95 12:46:45 -0700
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Organization: Brigham Young University
Lines: 25


Robert:

I don't know the answer specifically, however I was under the impression that
it was UV that deteriorated the stuff.  If you just want to get rid of it, I
will pay the shipping to my house <grin>.

Milt



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:
> Heard rumors that coax that is more than a few years old suffers from
> its dielectric being contaminated by the plastic? vinyl? of the
> outer jacket.  I mean coax that has been sitting inside on spools
> away from the weather.  How bad is this effect?
>
> I have a spool of RG8U never used that is about 15 years old, someone
> tells me that it is useless because of the above story.  Is this
> just an urban legend, or a slight effect (like 0.1 dB at VHF),
> a bit more loss but nothing to worry about, or would the coax
> act like a dummy load, eating all my signals?
>
> I haven't noticed any problems myself, but loosing a dB is hard to
> notice.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!hudson.lm.com!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dbisna.com!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!news.nyc.pipeline.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Dave Santoro)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Eggbeatr help pse.
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 1995 18:17:24 GMT
Organization: HYY Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3tjtnv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dsantoro.nyc.pipeline.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Hi All

I recieved plans on building an Eggbeater Antenna which called for a
phasing section of oddball coax.  Couldn't  I simply Move one of the
loops 1/4 wavelength up the mast to get the same effect?

Please pardon my ignorance!

73
Dave N2VYP




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!news.sccsi.com!nuchat!mike.sccsi.com!mike
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Michael Hunter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: GUYING Butternut Vertical
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 19:59:06
Organization: South Coast Computer Services (sccsi.com)
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mike.sccsi.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Just purchased a new Butternut HF6V-X vertical which I tried to install in
Galveston Island. The wind was gusty and I will need to guy the antenna to
keep it from bending. I would like to use a material other than  metal guys.
Since nylon has too much stretch, I wonder if there is any other materiall
similiar to use?     Mike K5HDU        mike @sccsi.com


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.telalink.net!uro!jackatak!root
From: [e-mail] (Jack GF Hill)
Subject: Re: GUYING Butternut Vertical
Organization: Jack's Amazing CockRoach Capitalist Ventures
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 12:17:45 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Superuser)
Lines: 25

[e-mail] (Dr. Michael Hunter) writes:
> Just purchased a new Butternut HF6V-X vertical which I tried to install in
> Galveston Island. The wind was gusty and I will need to guy the antenna
South Texas Gulf Coast... nice choice to retire to, Mike ;^)

> I would like to use a material other than  metal guys.
*GOOD* thinking...

> Since nylon has too much stretch, I wonder if there is any other materiall
> similiar to use?
Sure. Use *dacron* available in almost ANY marine supply/boat shop in
the area. sailors use it for halyards and all manner of applications.
It doesn't stretch much, and is less susceptible to "rot" from U/V

Good Luck...
--
73,
Jack, W4PPT/M (75M SSB 2-letter WAS #1657/#1789 -- both from the mobile! ;^)

+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
| Jack GF Hill        |Voice: [phone] -             Ham Call: W4PPT |
| P. O. Box 1685      |Modem: [phone] -  Bicycling and SCUBA Diving |
| Brentwood, TN  37024|Fax:   [phone] -          Life Member - ARRL |
| [e-mail]  - "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose" |
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!depaul
From: [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
Subject: Re: GUYING Butternut Vertical
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 1995 00:00:04 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspksa.spk.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Lines: 15


NO, NO, NO !

Use clear 30# fishing line...Have three lines and tie off at the
center of the vertical.  You don't need rope!  I have VERY high
winds here in Eastern Washington. (Oh, it'll get over 50 mph on
those special winter days.)  I've never had a vertical blow down
using fishing line.

If you're worried that you may strangle yourself on the line (you
can't see it) use salt water line (yellowish color line).



Marc


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!ornews.intel.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Collier Chun)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GUYING Butternut Vertical
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 95 07:33:00 PST
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <3tjgj8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cchun.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.8

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>Use clear 30# fishing line...Have three lines and tie off at the
>center of the vertical.  You don't need rope!  I have VERY high
>winds here in Eastern Washington. (Oh, it'll get over 50 mph on
>those special winter days.)  I've never had a vertical blow down
>using fishing line.

Our Butternut vertical was originally guyed with monofilament, probably 25-30#.
Caveat: the lines degraded after two years in the sun and eventually snapped.  I
replaced them with 100# polystrand nylon fishing line.  It's been up there for much longer--
although I'd rather change them out this summer.























From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!nwfocus.wa.com!krel.iea.com!comtch!n0dh
From: [e-mail] (D.C. Henderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GUYING Butternut Vertical
Date: 7 Jul 1995 16:00:01 GMT
Organization: CompuTech
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3tjlm1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: comtch.iea.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Dr. Michael Hunter ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Just purchased a new Butternut HF6V-X vertical which I tried to install in
: Galveston Island. The wind was gusty and I will need to guy the antenna to
: keep it from bending. I would like to use a material other than  metal guys.
: Since nylon has too much stretch, I wonder if there is any other materiall
: similiar to use?     Mike K5HDU        mike @sccsi.com

Mike

I guy my HF6V (mounted on peak of metal barn) using Heavy monfilament line.
Actually It is line for a grass trimmer. On galvaston island suspect you
could get some 150# mono line at the fishing tackle places. I used dacron
rope at one time but as it got dirty and wet it held water inside the
strands and eventually arched over when running high power. you wont have
this problem with the single strand mono. Mine has been up for 2 years now.

Dave
N0DH


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:11 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!depaul
From: [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
Subject: Re: GUYING Butternut Vertical
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 1995 19:23:01 GMT
References: <3tjlm1$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspksa.spk.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Lines: 12


THANKS Collier for your observation on the sun degrading the fishing
line!  I will replace my type fishing line with the 'ole weed wacker
"fishing" line...

Ya learn something new everyday!


Thanks,


Marc DePaul


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!dtk20.pakk.fi!oh1kll
From: [e-mail] (Markus Moisio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Helix!
Date: 5 Jul 1995 09:09:49 GMT
Organization: PAKK
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3tdkst$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dtk20.pakk.fi
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Hi!
I have problem with helix.
I can't find dimenson about helix antenna to 430MHz.
So help me!

73 de oh1kll Markus
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help Needed on Spiral Ant from A-7 Aircraft
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 22:03:54 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3spl6s$[e-mail]> <3t1gtv$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
To: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3t1gtv$[e-mail]
Lines: 17

The spiral antenna is, in simple terms, an omni-directional ( in one
plane) broad band antenna.  It is broad band in frequency (typically
several octaves).  The one from the A-7 is a radar warning reciever
antanna and will work in the low to medium microwave area.  Joe Moscow
designs many of these antennas for the Navy and has published an
excellent book on the subject.  The publisher may be ARTECH HOUSE but
I'm not sure.  The antenna will have a constant (rippled) feed point
impedance (could be 50 or 75 ohms) and nearly unity gain (like a quarter
wave stub).  The mathmatics and performance of a spiral is in a simple
sense like a log periodic (except the spiral is not directional) or a
disk cone.

Good luck
Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help with Dentron MT3000A Antenna Tuner
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 95 07:09:53 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 25
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3tdeaf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Herb Rosenberg) wrote:

>I just picked up a used Dentron MT3000A antenna tuner at a swap meet, and
>I was looking to hear back from those of you that have used this tuner,
>to hear your comments and experience with this tuner.
      <snip>
>I want to use it
>to experiement with various dipoles, and loop antennas both 50 ohm and
>300-450 ohm for 10 - 80 meters.  I am in a restricted antenna QTH so I
>working with antennas in a second story bonus room, and / or maybe lying
>on the roof of the house.

I use a modified Dentron Super Super Tuner that I believe is not too
different, although mine has no metering circuits.  It's been a very
good performer since I bought it new around '76.

The only advice I have is that you should remember that the baluns in these
things aren't intended to feed widely varying impedances.  If you run
barefoot, it'll probably handle the power, but extreme balun losses can
occur if the load is too far removed from the 200-300 ohm range.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:14 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!umn.edu!dialup-4-49.gw.umn.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (steve genz)
Subject: HELP! WITH 2METER/440MHZ J-POLE SPECS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News Administration)
Nntp-Posting-Host: dialup-4-49.gw.umn.edu
Organization: u of mn
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 22:52:33 GMT
Lines: 6

GREETINGS!
I am lookin for specs on constructing a 2m/440mhz jpole made with copper
tubing and preferably duplexer free.... if anybody could steer me with
dimensions or previous mag. articles, please e-mail me at
[e-mail]...
thanks in advance!- steve, wi0e


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: Ian G3SEK <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Jumper cables/rotator loops
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 1995 19:18:38 GMT
Organization: IFWtech
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3s9nh7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3t9itj$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3tbi9p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
X-Broken-Date: Tuesday, Jul 04, 1995 19.18.38
X-Newsreader: Newswin Alpha 0.7

In article: <3tbi9p$[e-mail]>  [e-mail] (Zack Lau) writes:
:
: Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : In article <3t9itj$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Zack Lau) writes:
: : >Does anyone have any suggestions on what to use as low loss
: : >jumper or rotator loop?  Heliax is low loss, but isn't
: : >designed to be flexed hundreds of times.
:
: : I like Andrew Superflex. As long as you don't wind it too tight,
: : it'll handle repeated flexing just fine. We use it for the masts
: : on our ENG trucks at 2 GHz. It goes up and down 50 feet for every
: : live shot. (It spirals around the mast.)
:
: Is there a special type?  The specifications for FSJ4-50B indicate
: a minimum of 20 bends, 50 typical.  How big is the spiral?

The problem with running Superflex around rotators is that the flexing
tends to concentrate in one or two small regions, so you very rapidly
run up against the 50-bend limit. That's why you often see Superflex
connectors with a long, tapered plastic sleeve to avoid the stress
concentration right behind the connector itself.

Gary's case is almost ideal, where the flexing is evenly distributed
over almost all of the mast, but it's not very practical for amateur
towers. You can sometimes use hosepipe or other heavy sleeving over
the sections that want to bend severely, and thus spread the flexing
more evenly. Trouble is, by the time you've got it right you may
already need a new length of Superflex.

On the tri-axial (az/el/pol) EME mount I gave up trying and now use
a jumper of Westflex 103, which is rather like 9913 in construction.



--
73 from Ian G3SEK            Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
                            'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Professionally:
IFW Technical Services       Clear technical English - anywhere.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nwlink.com!usenet
From: "S. R. Phillips" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: L Band quadrifilar (GPS)
Date: 7 Jul 1995 02:41:20 GMT
Organization: Northwest Link
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <3ti6sg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.96.80.52
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

I am looking for the design details for an antenna to be
used with a GPS satellite receiver.  Could someone point
me to suitable reference.  Thank You.




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!1-106-1492-0!charles.mccurdy
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mccurdy)
Date: 04 Jul 95 16:49:18
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: looking for 13b2 beam
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: All!
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 12

Hi im looking for a cushcraft 13b2 beam need one like new or in a good used
cond with all the papers on it and all the parts dont have much money but
will pay shipping please reply asap to charles mccurdy leave reply hear or to
1:106/1492
Ok bye.

--
|Fidonet:  Charles Mccurdy 1:106/1492
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!nwfocus.wa.com!krel.iea.com!comtch!n0dh
From: [e-mail] (D.C. Henderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Low-profile HF transmitting rings and loops
Date: 5 Jul 1995 16:38:12 GMT
Organization: CompuTech
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <3tef5k$[e-mail]>
References: <v01510100ac1eb8a48dc7@[169.197.1.28]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: comtch.iea.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Jim Mandaville ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I face severe antenna restrictions in our new neighborhood.  The house is
: flat-roofed and one-storied.  My main operating interest will be relatively
: short skip on 40 and 20 meters, so high-angle radiation is acceptable (or
: even preferred).  I am prepared to accept very narrow bandwidth in exchange
: for good efficiency.

:  Setting aside verticals, the DDRR (directional discontinuity ring
: radiator) described in the ARRL antenna book appears to be a possible
: solution, as it could be roof mounted horizontally and nearly invisibly.
: Another possibility would appear to be a vertically mounted high efficiency
: loop (for which I have several construction articles).  I am a bit troubled
: by the ARRL DDRR design which uses large diameter steel tubing for the loop
: and wonder if copper pipe would not be easier to fabricate and might work
: as well. Is large diam. really that important?  How might the DDRR perform
: relative to a vertical loop for my application?

:   I also wonder (not to forget the obvious) how either of these might
: perform relative to full-length (or shortened) dipoles mounted a few inches
: above roof level. Would appreciate any comments, especially from anyone who
: has built and operated the DDRR.  One more: Does anyone know of a source
: for a non-wiping, welded plate, wide-spaced butterfly variable suitable for
: tuning a loop at the 100-500 watt level?  73, Jim, KG5KP

Jim

If your only interested in short haul high angle work, then go with the
low dipoles. The DDDR is a vertically polarized antenna which means it
radiates at low angles not high angles. Also the dipole is a heck of a
lot cheaper in $$$ and time to construct. Besides it gots hot up there on
the roof in Tuscon in the summer DDDR's require a lot more "roof time"
than a dipole :-).

Good Luck
Dave
N0DH/7
[e-mail]

dit dit



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: matching theory
Date: 5 Jul 1995 17:06:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 54
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3teuti$[e-mail]>
References: <3t4r35$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Bob,

Your posting is very good, but unless I've missed something it neglects
the specific area that is the crux of the disagreement in the Meaning of
Matched
thread.

A source does not have to contain a dissipating resistance in order to
have a real part of impedance. The source resistance can appear very
real because of a finite amount of power available from the next source
upstream, but not dissipate any power.

The "it can only have 50% efficiency with a conjugate match" will
consistently fail when explaining the characteristics of a conventional
PA stage. Maximum power output and 50% efficiency rarely *if ever*
occur at the same matching point, and yet that is something that the
misapplied 50% rule dictates. Nor does the efficiency continuously
improve as the load impedance is raised (Thevenin) or lowered
(Norton).

From what I have gathered, some electrical engineers have the mindset
that the real part of the source impedance must be a dissipating series
R. In fact the source can be power limited (and consequently non-
linear) with a real part that has no or little dissipation and yet acts
externally just like a resistor. Most real world sources, including
generators and alternators, behave exactly like this.

A source can have every EXTERNAL characteristic of being limited
by a internal resistor, but fail all analysis of source efficiency
estimates
that depend on a dissipating internal resistance. Thevenin and Norton
equivalent circuits have very clear guidelines that state they can NOT
be used to determine the internal workings of the source. They also
specifically exclude the models use with non-linear or power limited
sources except under very limited conditions.

If the regulator in an automobile alternator system is disconnected, and
a series resistor that limits charging current is added to the output
lead,
the efficiency will be 50% or less with a conjugate match. But if the
regulator is left in place, and it limits the field strength of the
armature
winding to limit the charging current, maximum efficiency with a
conjugate match will greatly exceed 50 percent.

If the available driving torque is reduced to limit the charging current
the effect is exactly the same as using the field control device. The
alternator is a power limited (non-linear) source, and the efficiency
with a conjugate match can be much greater than 50%.

Not many things we use in the real world are perfect sources that have
dissipating resistances that limit the output. Thank goodness for that.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Opinions/Ideas for an apartment antenna?
Date: 5 Jul 1995 17:11:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tev5b$[e-mail]>
References: <3t98lr$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Steve,

I think you will find the loop outperforms the "half wave" that isn't
really an electrical half wave. I have the MFJ loop, and it is only around
6 dB down from a half wave dipole at 85 feet on 10 MHz, and I can barely
tell the difference at 28 MHz.

I sure think you would be happier with it if you don't need 40 meters.

  73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!online!wb3ffv!explorer.csc.com!explorer.csc.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Brian Phillips)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Opinions/Ideas for an apartment antenna? MFJ-1796 40M->2M
Date: 5 Jul 1995 18:44:15 -0400
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <3tf4jv$[e-mail]>
References: <3t98lr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: explorer.csc.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Steven M. Knapp ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Hello,

: I'm looking for ideas for an apartment antenna. I'm trying to get
: something I could put outside but not be noticed.
[snip]
: Or could this antenna be shortened loosing the 40M section? Any ideas
: for a simmilar home-brew antenna?

You can build a 2-meter j-pole out of 1/2" copper tubing for about $10 that
will perform better than many commercial offerings.  Once built, it can go
on your patio or even in a closet or other unobtrusive place.  You could
even paint it to match it's surroundings, if necessary.

You'll need a "tee", an "elbow", 2 caps, 2 hangers, and at least 81" of 1/2"-
diameter tubing (all copper).  Also, you'll want a couple of BRASS nuts and
bolts that will fit through the holes in the hanger straps when these are
wrapped around the tubing.

The "tee" will be placed so that its openings are at the top, bottom, and
to one side.  The "elbow" is positioned so that one opening is pointing
to the side opening of the "tee" and the other points up.  Cut a section of
the tubing so that it's 58" from the top of the first cap at one end to
the center of the side opening of the "tee" at the other end.  Cut another
length of tubing so that the distance between the second cap and the center
of the horizontal opening of the "elbow" is 19.25".  These will make up
your two vertical elements.  A horizontal length of tubing joins the "elbow"
and the "tee".  It should be cut so that the distance between the centers
of the two vertical pieces is 3".  Any leftover tubing can be affixed to
the bottom of the "tee" and used as a handle and mounting point.  A very
crude diagram follows:

cap==>.
      |
      |
58"==>|
      |      .<==cap
      |      |
      |      |<==19.25"
      |<=3"=>|
      |      |
tee==>+------/<==elbow
      |

Solder the pieces together in the pattern described and illustrated above.
The hanger straps should be mounted 2.75" up from the center of the horiz-
ontal "spacer" with the brass nuts/bolts, one on the 58" section and one
on the 19.25" section.  You then use these to fasten the center conductor
of an RG58 coax cable to the 58" section and the braided "shield" of the
coax to the 19.25" section.

Use an SWR or power meter to tune the j-pole, moving the hanger straps up
and down as necessary to change the "curve" to your requirements.

--
bdp       ([e-mail])        73 de KC5OQG
-- my opinions are my own, etc., etc.  <== usual disclaimer --



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.dacom.co.kr!news.netins.net!mcrware.microware.com!dennisg
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Gabler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Outbacker Antenna
Date: 5 Jul 1995 15:21:49 GMT
Organization: Microware Systems Corporation, Des Moines, Iowa
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3teamd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wahz.microware.com
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #5 (NOV)

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dominic Mercado) writes:

>Can anyone tell me about the Outbacker antennas?  Specifically, how it is
>made to allow multiband use and well does it perform.

I have an Outbacker Perth. The bands are changed by moving a jumper wire to
different tapping points.  It works on 80 - 10 meters including all WARCS.
I am satisfied with its performance, though there are more efficient designs
around. It is rugged and surprisingly broadbanded.

73's Dennis KB5HVN
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!news.ecn.bgu.edu!psuvax1!news.pop.psu.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Outbacker Antenna
Date: 5 Jul 1995 18:18:21 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3tel1d$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3teamd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3teamd$[e-mail]>,
Dennis Gabler <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I have an Outbacker Perth... It is rugged and surprisingly broadbanded.

Remember broadbanded usually means low-Q = lossy. Does anyone know how
the Outbackers compare to a Hamstick?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!fnnews.fnal.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Outbacker Antenna
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 95 13:24:28 MST
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3ter50$[e-mail]>
References: <3tel1d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ggspc.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


Low Q also means noisy and the Perth has a good deal of noise.
I thought it was my mobile making all than noise but it doesn't
change when the key is switched off. Did have some nice e-skip
contacts on 10 last weekend though. I use a bug catcher on the
highway and use the Perth in the woods. The up side is that you
could use the Perth to go marlin fishing in a pinch. Bottom line
I'll keep them both.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:24 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!depaul
From: [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
Subject:   PHASING OF VERTICALS...
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 1995 19:43:02 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspksa.spk.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Lines: 50


Hello Antenna Folks.


I asked (generally) the same sort of questions three years ago, but
not too many responses:

1.  How do you phase your verticals?

2.  What Kind of performance did you actually experience?

3.  Any easy to understand phasing articles?



Phasing, in the past, had driven me nuts...hours and hours of
L/C component phasing.  There were some neat things I DID experience
though...

1.  5/8 wavelength spacing of elements and 0 deg phasing gave me
    a two S unit increase in signal strength broadside to the array.

2.  I could always count on 0 and 180 deg phasing to bring me the results
    I antenna analyzed using AO/NEC Wires.

3.  The phasing between 0 & 180 deg I don't have a handle on.  For instance,
    I would introduce some L or C to change the phase, and, ofcourse, I would
    need to retune the balanced antenna tuner to bring down the newly imposed
    high SWR...Now, did the antenna tuner just cancel out the phasing?  When
    I switched the antennas to see the other component L or C, I would have
    to retune again!

4.  Is there a way to introduce an L/C induced phase shift, know what phase
    you're at, and not cause retuning when I switch antennas between these
    components with each other.  (For instance:  L is in line with Ant 1,
    C is in line with Ant 2...now swap the antennas...you need to retune
    again...)


*  Perhaps there is a neat little black box I can buy that has Ant 1 & 2
   input and Rig input...with a knob on the front that goes from 0 to 180
   phase!



Take Care,


Marc



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!jwc
From: [e-mail] (John Chapman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RingoRanger Not Putting Out - Help
Date: 5 Jul 1995 17:24:09 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <3tehrp$[e-mail]>
References: <3t7hi3$rcv$[e-mail]> <3t93vt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mssjwc.col.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

John, N0KIC



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!news.alpha.net!earth!n9yjz
From: [e-mail] (Joseph Moschella)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Satellite Antenna Ques.
Date: 5 Jul 1995 21:05:38 GMT
Organization: Exec-PC
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3teur2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: earth.execpc.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

        I recently came upon a TS-790 at a very good price, (2m/440 base
rig) and have quickly jumped into the mainstream of VHF/UHF operating. I
now need to set up a good VHF/UHF antenna system that has good terrestrial
performance along with satellite performance as well. I know already that
for truly good sat performance I'll need an az/el rotator...no big deal...
but what kind of antennas should I use to get good performance on both
types of communication, both ground and sat? Can I get away w/ a circularly
polarized antenna for terrestrial contacts, or can I get away with a SSB
beam for sat contacts? Is there an antenna that is good at doing both?
Thanks to all who choose to reply...your response is very much appreciated.
73!!

Joe Moschella, N9YJZ
Brookfield, WI  53005



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Ken N2SQW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Satellite Antenna Ques.
Date: 5 Jul 1995 19:23:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tf6sr$[e-mail]>
References: <3teur2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ken N2SQW)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hello. Name here is Ken, call is N2SQW. I've been using the Cushcraft 20
element circular polarized on 2M and the 16 element circ polarized on 435.
They have been working extremely well for all "earth-bound" contacts as
well. I havn't found the need for an altitude rotor, however. The antennas
have a beamwidth of about 30 degrees, so I mounted them with an upward
pitch of about 25 degrees. This gives me excellent coverage from the
horizon to 55 degrees. For those few passes that are above 55 degrees,
I've seen very little loss with them mounted this way. Good luck, and I
hope we get to talk on one of the "birds".
73 de Ken


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:27 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dorite!news
From: [e-mail] (Ted Wagner)
Subject: Screw driver antenna?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Admin)
Organization: IQuest Network Services
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 19:06:16 GMT
Lines: 25

I was listening on 2 meters the other day and caught a guy down south
somewhere mention something about a "screw driver" antenna.  But, I
was unable to catch his description of what it was and how it worked
as he faded in and out too much.

Has anyone heard of this?

Thanks

Ted Wagner
____________________________________________________________________________
[e-mail]                                     Civil War re-enactor
                                                        Ham-Radio enthusiast
                         Civil War antique collector
============================================================================
"Life is just one damn thing after another!  Life doesn't stop, keep going!"

~Tatter Ted~

      |\      _,,,---,,_
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!fnnews.fnal.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Screw driver antenna?
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 95 15:20:24 MST
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3thn84$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ggspc.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


It is a long coil fed by finger stock. The coil is raised
and lowerer via an electric screwdriver and a piece of threaded
rod thus the name. They are generally MF/HF in range although you
can tune 6 meters with a short whip. The radiating element consists
of the coil above the feed point and a whip usually a 102" CB thing.
The screwdriver can be controlled remotely ie from the drivers seat
so they enjoy popularlity as frequency agile mobile antennas.
The chararacteristic impedence of the system is 25 Ohms so some
matching is required. The entire design is in "40 + 5 years of
HF mobileering" by Don Johnson. A number of vendors offer them but
you can build one from Johnson's book.

Hope thie helps 73 de Jerry


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!mango.epix.net!gmfoster
From: Garry Foster <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Screw driver antenna?
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 22:25:26 -0400
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mango.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

Yes

It is a all band tuneable antenna designed by Don Johnson W6AAQ about
1990. There are several versions of it on the market at this time and
they are advertised in all major ham publications. Basically its a 2 in
hollow mast about three ft long. At the top of the mast is a 10 turn per
inck coil of about 25 inches in length. The top of this coil goes to a
whip of 6 ft or so. The screwdriver name comes from the fact that a
cordless screw driver is modified and drives the coil in and out of the 3
ft mast vis a length of threaded rod. The switch is at the drivers
position and allows remote resonanting of the ant for 40 thru 10 meters.
The design has been published in a World RAdio book "40 years of HF
Mobileering" by W6AAQ and a revision called "40+5 Years of HF Mobileering".
Don calls it the big DK3 as it is the 3 rd in a series of DK antennas he
has designed. There have also been methode of using a phase detector and
auto tunning the DK3. Hi Sirrea is one company now selling a comerical
version of this antenna. About the only disadvantage is how understanding
the XYL has to be as most non-hams and some hams think it looks exterme
where as I think mine will be a thing of beauty.

                                                Garry(WB0NNO)

On Thu, 6 Jul 1995, Ted Wagner wrote:

> I was listening on 2 meters the other day and caught a guy down south
> somewhere mention something about a "screw driver" antenna.  But, I
> was unable to catch his description of what it was and how it worked
> as he faded in and out too much.
>
> Has anyone heard of this?
>
> Thanks
>
> Ted Wagner
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> [e-mail]                                     Civil War re-enactor
>                                                         Ham-Radio enthusiast
>                          Civil War antique collector
> ============================================================================
> "Life is just one damn thing after another!  Life doesn't stop, keep going!"


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:30 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Michael Raider)
Subject: Re: Screw driver antenna?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.3
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 1995 13:50:39 GMT
Lines: 14

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>I was listening on 2 meters the other day and caught a guy down south
>somewhere mention something about a "screw driver" antenna.  But, I
>was unable to catch his description of what it was and how it worked
>as he faded in and out too much.

A screwdriver antenna has a coil that can be moved up or down by the
action of a electric screwdriver motor rotating a length of allthread.
These antennas are typically used for HF mobile. I have one and it can be
tuned for 80M thru 10M.

Mike, KO6BC



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!nwfocus.wa.com!ender.techcenter.paccar.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Arlen Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: testing
Date: 6 Jul 1995 16:11:29 GMT
Organization: PACCAR Technical Center
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <3th1vh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jane.techcenter.paccar.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.4



This is a test post.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!darwin.sura.net!babylon5.ccd.harris.com!not-for-email
From: [e-mail] (Doug Snowden)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Thrust Bearing Lubrication ?
Date: 7 Jul 1995 09:34:32 -0400
Organization: Harris Controls Division
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3tjd58$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rs2.ccd.harris.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I am in the preparation stage of putting up a tower - actually moving
an old tower. I have a TB ?? thrust bearing for Rohn 25 tower. It has
been up for several years and it seems like it needs grease on the
bearings. I don't think I can take it apart to do this. Any ideas on
how to lubricate this thing so I can rely on it for a few more years?

Doug, N4IJ

--
Doug  Snowden
work: [phone]
home: (407) 98409360
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Underground tower
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 00:20:21 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3t5hpj$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
To: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 13

There has been a company in the last four years which advertised in the
HAM mags. They made a hydrolic telescopeing tower.  It was solid tubes
rather than the ladderwork construction.  I remember that they were real
expensive ($3000) and required a DEEP hole in the ground.

I looked but did not see any advertisement in the current issues.

Good Luck,

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!tribune.usask.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!news.magic.mb.ca!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Digitel Communications)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WANTED - 30 3-channel motorola radios
Date: 5 Jul 1995 18:39:52 GMT
Organization: Digitel Communications
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <3tem9o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ttyc4ip.magic.mb.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2

Anyone with info re: purchase or sale of 30 motorola radios please email
me.
Mark Goldade
[e-mail]
"See You In FreeFall"



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 07 16:46:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.bu.edu!dartvax.dartmouth.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian Meyette)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB:  Rohn 25 sections in New England
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 1995 19:16:14 GMT
Organization: not very
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3tjmi1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: v1-p-28.valley.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

I'm looking for used inexpensive Rohn 25 sections in NH/VT or New England, in
good condition.    I need 6-7.
Brian

[phone] ext 210
* Brian Meyette ([e-mail])  Cornish, New Hampshire, USA



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ionews.ionet.net!saxonpub!kthompson
From: [e-mail] (Kitt Thompson)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Distribution: world
Subject: Re: /// Dipole Antenna \\\
Date: 09 Jul 1995 11:03:16 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Saxon Publishers, Inc.
Lines: 29

Brian, I have a few web sites you might try to check out. I do not know if
they contain antenna related material, but they are Amateur Radio related. If
these fall short, try a net search. What Browser are you using for the web?

http://www.tapr.org

http://abs.net

http://amsat.org

http://acs.ncsu:80/HamRadio



BTW:  In three posts, not ONE of you answered his question. Come on people,
focus on the problem at hand.

Sincerely, Kitt Thompson N5XAW.


  -> These thoughts are of my own twisted mind.  Don't blame my employer. <-
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | Kitt Thompson           "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." |
 | Production Department                  - Hunter S. Thompson              |
 | Saxon Publishers, Inc.                                                   |
 |      +---=---+                                                           |
 | Internet EMail - [e-mail]            eWorld - KittThompson |
 | amprnet - [e-mail]  [44.78.04.22]         AOL - CThomps1538  |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: /// Dipole Antenna \\\
Date: 10 Jul 1995 00:18:38 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <3tprku$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite170.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Kitt Thompson) wrote:
>Brian, I have a few web sites you might try to check out. I do not know if
>they contain antenna related material, but they are Amateur Radio related. If
>these fall short, try a net search. What Browser are you using for the web?
>
>http://www.tapr.org
>
>http://abs.net
>
>http://amsat.org
>
>http://acs.ncsu:80/HamRadio
>
>
>
>BTW:  In three posts, not ONE of you answered his question. Come on people,
>focus on the problem at hand.

As one of the three, I think I was trying to help, at least _I_ thought I was.  Sure, I
pointed him to _books_, not WEB sites.  You point him to TAPR and AMSAT for info on DIPOLES?
Get real. Why not point him to QRZs callbook; that's ham radio related too.

I thought the guy needed help with dipoles.  This is probably the best place on the net to get
the answers he needs, but a little READING first might help him formulate an answerable
question.

As I said, "If you have specific questions, post them here.  Many of us will be glad to help."

That includes me.



Wes Stewart, N7WS



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:32 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.scruz.net!cruzio!news
From: [e-mail] (Steve Luzovich)
Subject: 900MHz antenna info needed
Organization: Worthington Data Solutions
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:12:41 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #2
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: cruzio48.cruzio.com
Sender: [e-mail] (The News UID)
Lines: 5

I'm working in the 902-928MHz band and am looking for a low cost omni antenna with
some gain (maybe 6dB or so) for outdoor use.  Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Steve


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:32 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!uwvax!uchinews!gw2.att.com!nntpa!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Andreas Meyer)
Subject: Alarm tape antenna ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Sender: [e-mail] (Netnews Administration)
Nntp-Posting-Host: holdon.ho.att.com
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel NJ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 14:54:01 GMT
Lines: 18

I believe at one time, I'd seen plans for an antenna made using the
metal burglar-alarm tape commonly seen on glass windows.

Does anyone have the plans for this?
(I'm interested in using one for 2m operation)
How much power can one handle, and how well do they work?

It occurs to me that the large window at the front of my apartment
might be just the place for one.  However, I've also got metal
venetian blinds. With them down, I'd hope to be able to reflect more
RF out.  Comments?

Andy
--
    ==--
  -====---    Andreas Meyer, N2FYE                     [e-mail]
  --==----    AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel NJ USA    ..!att!hogpa!ahm
    ----


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:33 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!news.hawaii.edu!news
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Alarm tape antenna ?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: math.hawaii.edu
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Hawaii
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 17:37:32 GMT
Lines: 13

>I believe at one time, I'd seen plans for an antenna made using the
>metal burglar-alarm tape commonly seen on glass windows.
>
>Does anyone have the plans for this?
>(I'm interested in using one for 2m operation)
>How much power can one handle, and how well do they work?
>  -====---    Andreas Meyer, N2FYE                     [e-mail]


Gee, you could tape a Yagi beam on your window using that stuff.

Jeff NH6IL



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!pa.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Alarm tape antenna ?
Date: 10 Jul 1995 17:09:31 GMT
Organization: Objectbroker/COM
Lines: 38
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3trmsb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: oopsla.chi.dec.com
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-68

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Andreas Meyer) wrote:

> I believe at one time, I'd seen plans for an antenna made using the
> metal burglar-alarm tape commonly seen on glass windows.
>
> Does anyone have the plans for this?
> (I'm interested in using one for 2m operation)
> How much power can one handle, and how well do they work?

I'm assuming what you've seen are plans for either a 2 meter dipole or
a 2 meter j-pole.    The dipole is easiest to describe and build.  Simply
take a piece of the tape a bit longer than 1 meter and apply it to the
window.  Cut it in the center to form two elements, i.e., the traditional
dipole.  Attach your feedline to each side of the cut.  Then trim the
length of the two elements until you obtain the best match.

> It occurs to me that the large window at the front of my apartment
> might be just the place for one.  However, I've also got metal
> venetian blinds. With them down, I'd hope to be able to reflect more
> RF out.  Comments?

Not likely.  The antenna you describe is closer to a patch than what you've
probably seen.  A patch antenna is typically a fat half wavelength antenna
mounted closely above a ground plane.  If the ground plane is large enough,
the antenna is unidirectional.  In your case though, the slats of the venetian
blinds are probably not connected and as a result, would probably act like
separate parasitic elements.  Their most likely affect on an nearby antenna
would be to simply detune the antenna, and *not* necessarily reflect much RF.
If you can make sure that all the slats are electrically connected, then you
could consider a patch antenna, but it will be quite a bit different from the
plans you've seen for a tape antenna.

---
73,        Member of AMSAT, ARRL, Palatine RACES, and the Arlington
Todd       Communications League. Weather spotter and sponsor of the Hunting
N9MWB      Ridge Elementary School Radio Club.  See you on 160-1296 and OSCAR.



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!purdue!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!rain!mconner
From: [e-mail] (Mark D. Conner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Alarm tape antenna ?
Date: 11 Jul 1995 16:02:32 GMT
Organization: Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University
Lines: 19
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3tu7ao$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rain.atms.purdue.edu

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I believe at one time, I'd seen plans for an antenna made using the
>>metal burglar-alarm tape commonly seen on glass windows.
>>
>Gee, you could tape a Yagi beam on your window using that stuff.
>
>Jeff NH6IL

And if he was at a low enough latitude like Jeff, he could orient it
vertically, wait until the moon was overhead and do some EME work.

Turning the house to work the area repeaters might be problematic,
though.....

--
Mark D. Conner  - N9XTN                  Opinions expressed here are
Dept. of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences    not necessarily those of the
Purdue Univ., W. Lafayette IN 47907-1397 DoD, USAF, Purdue, or the author.
Internet: [e-mail]   AMPRnet:  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!vulcan.inlink.com!raiar
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Date: 9 Jul 1995 02:16:48 GMT
Organization: inlink
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3tne6g$[e-mail]>
References: <3thvl1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3tn7up$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vulcan.inlink.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Despite large Yagi's a few ground planes and lot's of dipoles, the lightening
managed to miss all that aluminnum in the air and come through the kitchen
window and hit the stainless steel kitchen sink.

It was fthe fourth of July in our kitchen for a few seconds, the sink was
destroyed.  No one in the house was harmed.  And all the radios worked fine
when I turned them on the next day.

I guess this lightening bolt did not have a taste for aluminum!

Lucked out again!
Gary



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna/Feedline Calculations
Date: 9 Jul 1995 05:59:38 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3tnr8a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

Is there any way to accomplish the following except manually with
ELNEC and MicroSmith?

For AntennaLength = 30ft to 120ft step 0.5ft
     For XmissionLineLength = 30ft to 120ft step 0.5ft
          For Frequency = HamBands(n) step 1
               If LMS of SWRs = minimum
                    Print AntennaLength, XmissionLineLength

In the time it is taking me to do this with the tools I have available
I think I could write the whole thing from scratch.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!pa.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna/Feedline Calculations
Date: 10 Jul 1995 15:15:03 GMT
Organization: Objectbroker/COM
Lines: 40
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3trg5n$[e-mail]>
References: <3tnr8a$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: oopsla.chi.dec.com
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-68

In article <3tnr8a$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] wrote:

> Is there any way to accomplish the following except manually with
> ELNEC and MicroSmith?
>
> For AntennaLength = 30ft to 120ft step 0.5ft
>      For XmissionLineLength = 30ft to 120ft step 0.5ft
>           For Frequency = HamBands(n) step 1
>                If LMS of SWRs = minimum
>                     Print AntennaLength, XmissionLineLength

Well you could do it with almost any antenna program that can be run
from a command line and places results in a file.  What you describe is
similar to an "optimizer" (in quotes because it could use some optimization
itself) I wrote for NEC.  Since NEC (or MININEC, or any of several others)
take their input from either the terminal or a file can be run as a batch job,
you can write something that creates the input deck, runs the analyzer, and
then examines the output.

The only thing that's not clear to me is how to model the feedline.  Although
NEC is supposed to be able to do that, I've never done it.

> In the time it is taking me to do this with the tools I have available
> I think I could write the whole thing from scratch.

Well one thing that would make life much easier for those wanting to do this
sort of work would be to modularize the analysis programs and start
building a library of routines (or better yet, objects) that could be put
together quickly to model such things.  Imagine a library full of objects that
could model antennas, track satellites, control rotors, control rigs, log contacts,
etc.  Maybe we should start the discussion about designing the interfaces to
such objects and perhaps some folks might even start contributing to such a library.
A rich shareware component library would be 100 times more useful than the
current standalone shareware applications.
---
73,        Member of AMSAT, ARRL, Palatine RACES, and the Arlington
Todd       Communications League. Weather spotter and sponsor of the Hunting
N9MWB      Ridge Elementary School Radio Club.  See you on 160-1296 and OSCAR.



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.ksu.ksu.edu!news.intellinet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Joel S. Young)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna/Feedline Calculations
Date: 11 Jul 1995 19:16:56 GMT
Organization: Paragon Technology, Inc.
Lines: 67
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3tuin8$[e-mail]>
References: <3tnr8a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-067.lit.intellinet.com
X-Newsreader: NetSuite News for OS/2 [version: 4.0 UNREGISTERED 6 days remaining]

In message <3tnr8a$[e-mail]> - [e-mail] writes:

:>Is there any way to accomplish the following except manually with
:>ELNEC and MicroSmith?
:>
:>For AntennaLength = 30ft to 120ft step 0.5ft
:>     For XmissionLineLength = 30ft to 120ft step 0.5ft
:>          For Frequency = HamBands(n) step 1
:>               If LMS of SWRs = minimum
:>                    Print AntennaLength, XmissionLineLength
Cecil,
   I have some good news.  There is a software package capable of
doing almost exactly what you asked for.  The package is called
NECOPT, and its marketed by Paragon Technology (814-234-3335).
The package is an optimizer built around an NEC2 analysis engine.
   The package gives the user the ability to optimize nearly any
NEC output quantity and a few others such as beamwidth and F/B
ratio.  To give you a feel for the program, I have included a
short input file for this package that performs the basic tasks
you outlined.  The input format is similar to the NEC input.  The
NECOPT package comes with a menu-driven utility to generate the
NECOPT portion of the input file.

CM Necopt Simple Dipole Example
CM Optimized for smallest average VSWR from 5-15 Mhz
CM Optimized over Antenna length and Transmission line length
CM 11-July-95 J.S.Young
CE
GW 1 7 0 0 0 0 ANT_LENGTH 0 .01   ! Simple dipole
GW 2 2 0 0 1000 0 0 1000.1 .01    ! Dummy segment for TL-Source connection
GE 0                              ! End geometry segment Free space
EX 0 2 1 0 1 0                    ! Source
TL 1 4 2 1 75 XLN_LENGTH 0 0 0 0  ! Transmission Line (75 ohm)
FR 0 11 0 0 5 1                   ! Freq. Sweep -- Linear
XQ                                ! Begin NEC execution
EN                                ! End of NEC input--NECOPT input follows
cm  Optimize antenna length
OV ANT_LENGTH 1 9. 36. 20.
cm  Optimize transmission length
OV XLN_LENGTH 1 9. 36. 20.
cm  SWR optimization goal
SI Average_VSWR_into_75_Ohms 2 4 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 1. 5. 0. 75. 0. 10.
cm  Global optimization
OP 3 1 30 100 1 3
cm  Display progress on screen
PO 1
cm  End of NECOPT commands
EN

   Since I have no idea what your antenna is, I analyzed a dipole
as a simple example.   The only difference from what you
requested is that this scenario minimizes the average SWR instead
of the LMS SWR.  Since SWR is always positive, it should give a
similar result.  I asked the NECOPT program to optimize for the
lowest average SWR of the results.  For this case it gave a
dipole length of 31.7 meters and a transmission line length of
10.4 meters.  With this combination I get a minimum average SWR
of 23.9:1.  There were several local minimums found, but this
was the smallest of the 30 global starting points selected.  This
analysis may not be practically useful due to the lack of
information on your scenario, but it serves to illustrate the
utility of the NECOPT package.

Good Luck,
Joel
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!cmchub.rns.com!news
From: John Maetta <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc.
Subject: Re: Anyone tried thick Ethernet cable for h.f. antenna feed use?
Date: 11 Jul 1995 00:03:53 GMT
Organization: Rockwell Network Systems
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3tsf59$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: diablo.rns.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11803 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14223


I agree with Collier Chun....Thicknet Ethernet cable may be fine on HF
but I experienced losses that were twice as much as RG-8 when used at VHF
and UHF frequencies.

Appearances can be decieving. Thicknet cable is very stiff, has 2 foil
and 2 braided jackets. This quality makes the would be user think he's
using low loss coax.

My advise: strip the jacket and use the braid to make HF dipole antennas.





From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!beyond.escape.com!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best 2m SWR meter under $50?
Date: 9 Jul 1995 22:28:48 GMT
Organization: Escape Internet Access (212-888-8780).
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3tpl70$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: majosi.escape.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

What is the best available 2m SWR/Power/Field-Strenght meter under $50?

I found 2 in Amateur Radio Supply, Inc's catalog.  One is on p.89, a Vanco SWR-2 for
$29.95.  The other one is on p.60, an MFJ-812B for the same price.

Are these any good?  Are there better ones?

KB2RVT
Andrew
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for citybound NOVICE CW operator
Date: 11 Jul 1995 20:12:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tv41g$[e-mail]>
References: <3tr6m5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

How about the GAP antennas ?  Anyone have experiance with 'em ?  Does the
bottom of the antenna need to be above the power lines ?


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best antenna for citybound NOVICE CW operator ?
Date: 9 Jul 1995 20:41:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tpsv4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I have power & cable lines going thru my backyard.  Can't  put up a tower.
Novice class operator,mostly interested in CW(but want to try SSB,etc...).
 What kind of antenna should I use.  Will be getting new HF rig.  Please
e-mail !
Thanks !!!

 [e-mail]  (Scott Powell),  Nickel dime shoeshine,don't let your
meat loaf !


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!globe.indirect.com!slip193.indirect.com!tracker
From: [e-mail] (Mark Saunders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for citybound NOVICE CW operator ?
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 1995 21:22:58 LOCAL
Organization: Internet Direct, Inc.
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3tpsv4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip193.indirect.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #1]

In article <3tpsv4$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (BUDDY10) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
>Subject: Best antenna for citybound NOVICE CW operator ?
>Date: 9 Jul 1995 20:41:08 -0400

>I have power & cable lines going thru my backyard.  Can't  put up a tower.
>Novice class operator,mostly interested in CW(but want to try SSB,etc...).
> What kind of antenna should I use.  Will be getting new HF rig.  Please
>e-mail !
>Thanks !!!

> [e-mail]  (Scott Powell),  Nickel dime shoeshine,don't let your
>meat loaf !

Scott,

You might want to look at a hamfest in your area for some type of vertical you
can put up on the roof.  I found one for $35 covers 80-10m.  Its an old Hygain
ATV18.  Its 26 feet tall and I have it mounted on a 4 foot piece of galvinized
pipe 2 inches in diameter.  The pipe is attached to the upright support to the
air conditioner using hose clamps.  Put radials on it!  I used #14 copper
insulated wire.  Figure 1/4 wavelength plus 5%, 40m is 37 feet.  Use two
radials for each band you intend to use.  They do not have to go in a straight
line.  Vertical antennas pick up more man-made noise. This has not been a real
problem in my operation.  I've contacted Pictairn Island, Fiji, and Tonga
using 100w and my roof mounted vertical (a very modest station, too, Kenwood
FT-520S about 25 years old rig).

You may also want to build a dipole for the lowest band you intend to operate
on and feed it with 450 ohm ladder line using an antenna tuner with a 4:1
balun built in.  This configuration also allows you to operate on other bands
too, by using the tuner.  The ladder line acts as a vertical radiator.  City
lots usually don't offer much more space than needed for a 40m dipole.

Regardles of the antenna you choose, be careful of the power lines!


Good Luck.  Let me know what you decide to do.

73 de

Mark Saunders - KJ7BS
Glendale, AZ
INTERNET: [e-mail]
PACKET:    [e-mail]
Mark Saunders - KJ7BS
Glendale, AZ
PACKET:   [e-mail]
INTERNET: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best HF Transceiver for $1200.00 or under ?
Date: 9 Jul 1995 20:36:27 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tpsmb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

What ,in your opinion, is the best HF transceiver for $1200.00 or under ?
I am looking for new equipment only.  Please e-mail me.
Thanks !

 [e-mail]  (Scott Powell),  Nickel dime shoeshine,don't let your
meat loaf !


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!beyond.escape.com!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best material for 1/4 gound plane and mast?
Date: 9 Jul 1995 22:21:28 GMT
Organization: Escape Internet Access (212-888-8780).
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <3tpkp9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: majosi.escape.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

I have trouble choosing the best materials for a 1/4 wave groung plane antenna and its
mast.

Should the mast be a galvanized steel 10ft water pipe or a telescopic mast sold at
Radio Shack and other stores?  I'd like to fit the antenna on the top with an end-cap
screwed on the top of the mast, so the water pipe seems ideal.

I am building the antenna out of a SO-239 and a PL-259 connector pair.  The female
connector would be mounted onto the pipe's end-cap.  The mail connector would contain
the radiator.  What tubing should I use for it?  Should it be brass, copper, aluminum
or steel?  I'd like to solder the end of the tube to the connector, so I guess aluminum
is out of question.  Where can I get thin tubes like this?

How do I make the length adjustable for best SWR?  Should I use a screw at the end, or
a yet thinner tube or rod with a slip-joint and clamp?

Please help me out!

KB2RVT
Andrew
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (BV/N0IAT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DX Station needs Help w/ LOOP ANTENNA
Date: 10 Jul 1995 06:42:02 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <3tqi3q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.167.36.115
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2

Hi everyone, and most appreciative of your assistance.
I have very limited space, approx 130 ft above ground,
on the roof of a 13 story apartment bldg.  I would
like to QRV on 10 thru 29 Mhz but I do NOT have space
for a full size antenna.  I am now using a COMET MINI
DIPOLE (originally made for 21 Mhz but lengthened to
resonate on 18 Mhz).  Unfortunately, current antenna
is 1-band only and the Q es SWR is not satisfactory
(cant seem to tune it below a 1.6:1 on 18 Mhz but 21
Mhz is 1:1 match).  Anyway, I am now considering an HF
LOOP such as the AEA IsoLoop or the MFJ loop, but,
dont know the difference or merit/demerit of each.

I've seen the posts here about these antennas and
decide this is the way to go considering my good
height above ground and the need for low radiation
angle.  Unfortunately, the ant doesnt cover 40 mtrs,
but I guess 30 mtrs will work ok too.  Do these things
REALLY WORK as well as a dipole on 20 meters?

So now the question:  Which to buy...I need solid
recommendations  Is the MFJ any good?  What about the
AEA IsoLoop.  Is it difficult to tune?  Cost / Price
is really not so important, since QUALITY and
RELIABILITY needs to be superb.  I can afford to
purchase and ship only 1 unit, so I need your advice.
Also, are the MFJ UNITS AVAILABLE ?  Before I moved
overseas 4 years ago, I tried to buy one of the MFJ
loops but none were to be found.

Thanks and 73  de Joe  BV/N0IAT in Taipei, Taiwan ROC
p.s.  This antenna will be going with me on trips to
Malaysia and Vietnam during late 95 & early 96, so, it
HAS to work well.  Only one chance to be on the
receiving end of a pileup!

Please post msg or reply to my email above.



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.mailorder.com!news.avatar.com!news.avatar.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Kory Hamzeh)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Egg beater antennas for sat work?
Date: 10 Jul 1995 18:45:03 -0700
Organization: Avatar Consultants, Inc.
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3tsl2v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: avatar.avatar.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11806 rec.radio.amateur.space:4358

I very new to satellites. I have a Yaesu FT-736 with a Diamond X510
omni ground plane antenna. I've had very little success being able to
pick up any of the sats. I can get DO-17 and the MIR, but very faintly.
I now part of the problem is the antenna since omni radiate outwards and
upwards. I'm thinking of getting an egg beater style antenna since they
are truly omni and I won't need to buy a az/el rotor.

Couple of very naive questions:

1. All of the EB antennas seem to have a gain of 1 db. Will this be enough?

2. I think I definitly well need to mast mounted pre-amp. Is this correct?

3. Also, is a lower gain directional antenna (such as a yagi) better than
a high gain omni? For example, my X510 had an advertised gain of 11.7 db
on 70cm. Would I get better sat performance with a lower gain yagi?

4. And finally, this is kind of related to question #3. Can the low gain
be compensated with a mast mount pre-amp? In other words, if I take an EB
antenna with a gain of 1 db and put a pre-amp with a gain of 20 db in front
of it, do I end up with a EB antenna with an effect gain of 20 db? Sounds too
simple.

Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Kory



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsboy.utelfla.com!news.iag.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!pa.dec.com!depot.mro.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: Egg beater antennas for sat work?
Date: 11 Jul 1995 03:49:02 GMT
Organization: Objectbroker/COM
Lines: 77
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3tssbe$[e-mail]>
References: <3tsl2v$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: oopsla.chi.dec.com
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-68
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11816 rec.radio.amateur.space:4359

In article <3tsl2v$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Kory Hamzeh) wrote:

> I very new to satellites. I have a Yaesu FT-736 with a Diamond X510
> omni ground plane antenna. I've had very little success being able to
> pick up any of the sats. I can get DO-17 and the MIR, but very faintly.
> I now part of the problem is the antenna since omni radiate outwards and
> upwards. I'm thinking of getting an egg beater style antenna since they
> are truly omni and I won't need to buy a az/el rotor.
>
> Couple of very naive questions:
>
> 1. All of the EB antennas seem to have a gain of 1 db. Will this be enough?

Enough depends upon a number of things.  For Low Earth Orbit satellites such
as DO-17 and MIR, almost any antenna will be enough.  Antennas with gain
towards the horizon such as your X510 will help.  Remember that the gain needed
is proportional to the path loss.  At high elevations, the path loss is minimized, so
the gain requirements are minimized.  At low elevations, the path loss is maximized
(and actually the LEO birds spend most of their time at low or lower elevations
simply due to the properties of their orbits) and hence gain at low elevations is
beneficial.

For the non LEO birds such as AO-10, AO-13, and the soon to be launched phase 3D
bird, omni-directional antennas, even with gain, aren't going to be enough.  The link
budget for these satellites is such that you need directional antennas to reliably work
them.

> 2. I think I definitly well need to mast mounted pre-amp. Is this correct?

A low noise mast mounted pre-amp is almost always a benefit.  How much of
a benefit depends upon its impact on the system noise figure.  There have been
some good articles in QST over the last 10-20 years that cover system noise
figure and how to determine the impact of a pre-amp (either mast mounted or
shack mounted) on your system's receive capability.  It is safe to say that if
you have a reasonable low noise pre-amp (say  NF of 1 dB or less) and normal
feedline losses (9913 or worse for 50-100 ft), and an average front end (NF of
say 2-4 dB), then a good pre-amp is going to make a significant difference.

> 3. Also, is a lower gain directional antenna (such as a yagi) better than
> a high gain omni? For example, my X510 had an advertised gain of 11.7 db
> on 70cm. Would I get better sat performance with a lower gain yagi?

Well 11.7 dB on 70 cm isn't bad, but even a relatively short yagi on that band
is going to have better gain.  In addition, that gain is only at the horizon, not at
elevation angles greater than say 30 degrees.  A modest yagi (say an 8 ft 16 element
crossed yagi) with AZ-EL rotors is going to outperform your X510.

> 4. And finally, this is kind of related to question #3. Can the low gain
> be compensated with a mast mount pre-amp? In other words, if I take an EB
> antenna with a gain of 1 db and put a pre-amp with a gain of 20 db in front
> of it, do I end up with a EB antenna with an effect gain of 20 db? Sounds too
> simple.

Yes and no.  Antenna gain is always preferable to amplification gain.  A low
noise pre-amp gain only amplify what it is given.  So a 1 dB antenna with
a 20 dB gain pre-amp, is not going to perform at all like a 20 dB antenna
with a 1 dB gain pre-amp.  A low noise pre-amp will help a good station, but
it will not make a bad station into a good station.  Again, get the QST articles on
calculating system noise figures and you'll be able to make the comparisons
yourself.

The primary disadvantage to higher antenna gain is the narrowing of its
beamwidth.  This means that the antenna most be more accurately pointed and
must track the satellite's position more carefully.  These disadvantages though
are more than offset by the improved overall performance.  Given a choice
between 3 dB of additional antenna gain and 3 dB of additional pre-amp gain,
you'd be far better off taking the 3 dB of additional antenna gain.  Remember that
a pre-amp can onl amplify the signals it is provided.  Additional gain over the
losses in the feedline and switching gear only amplifies the noise along with
the signal.

---
73,        Member of AMSAT, ARRL, Palatine RACES, and the Arlington
Todd       Communications League. Weather spotter and sponsor of the Hunting
N9MWB      Ridge Elementary School Radio Club.  See you on 160-1296 and OSCAR.



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!mgate.arrl.org!mgate.arrl.org!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Zack Lau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: Egg beater antennas for sat work?
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Date: 11 Jul 1995 09:44:29 -0400
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <3ttv7t$[e-mail]>
References: <3tsl2v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11817 rec.radio.amateur.space:4361

Kory Hamzeh ([e-mail]) wrote:

: 4. And finally, this is kind of related to question #3. Can the low gain
: be compensated with a mast mount pre-amp? In other words, if I take an EB
: antenna with a gain of 1 db and put a pre-amp with a gain of 20 db in front
: of it, do I end up with a EB antenna with an effect gain of 20 db? Sounds too
: simple.

Yes it is too simple.  You have to take into account the amount of
background noise, commonly expressed in Kelvin. On 2 meters, the
background noise is sometimes high enough that some people get little
improvement using a mast mounted preamp.

Consider the following simplified case on 435 MHz:
Very quiet sky 50 Kelvin average
Warm Earth 300 Kelvin.
70 Kelvin receiver

Omni antenna case:  1/2*50Kelvin+1/2*300Kelvin+70 Kelvin=245 Kelvin

Directional antenna that only looks at 20 Kelvin sky
20Kelvin+70 Kelvin=90 Kelvin

effective gain from lower noise pickup 10*log(245/90)=4.3 dB.

Thus, a 15 dBi beam may actually have an effective gain of
19 dBi.  See chapter 17 of the 1995 ARRL Handbook or Chapter
12 of an older Handbook for more details.



: Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated.

: Thanks,
: Kory

--
Zack Lau  KH6CP/1           2 way QRP WAS
                           8 States on 10 GHz
Internet: [e-mail]   10 grids on 2304 MHz


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Tom Swisher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Eggbeater antenna plans?
Date: 11 Jul 1995 15:24:24 -0400
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3tuj58$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: acme.freenet.columbus.oh.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Does anyone have plans for an eggbeater antenna? I've not seen any
although I've looked.

Thanks,

Tom Swisher, N8GQK
National Scanning Report


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!pa.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Eggbeatr help pse.
Date: 10 Jul 1995 15:02:58 GMT
Organization: Objectbroker/COM
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3trff2$[e-mail]>
References: <3tjtnv$[e-mail]> <Oqr/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: oopsla.chi.dec.com
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-68

In article <Oqr/[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Geoff L. Kennedy) wrote:

> In article <3tjtnv$[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] (Dave Santoro) wrote:
>
>> Hi All
>>
>> I recieved plans on building an Eggbeater Antenna which called for a
>> phasing section of oddball coax.  Couldn't  I simply Move one of the
>> loops 1/4 wavelength up the mast to get the same effect?

>    The problem is, the feed impedence for a full-wave loop (which is
> what each element is in an eggbeater) is around 100 ohms.  Even if you
> moved one element up 1/4 wave, you would still have to feed each element
> with 100 ohm line (coax, whatever) until you get to the point where the
> feeds are joined.  Then you'll have a 50 ohm impedence, which is what
> you want.

Alternatively, you could use any coax you like as long as the sections going from
the common 50 ohm feedline to the feed point of each antenna was cut to be a
multiple of exactly 1/2 wavelength.  You'll need to take the velocity factor of the
coax into consideration when determining the actual length.
---
73,        Member of AMSAT, ARRL, Palatine RACES, and the Arlington
Todd       Communications League. Weather spotter and sponsor of the Hunting
N9MWB      Ridge Elementary School Radio Club.  See you on 160-1296 and OSCAR.



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FM recieving via a TV antenna?
Date: 10 Jul 1995 07:36:43 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3tqlab$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>We have a central large TV antenna in our roof (which recieves, I guess,
>VHF and UHF I-III).
>I would like to know if I can connect the antenna to a FM radio
>transistor to get a better quality.

It may be not a good idea,

The frame syncronization pulses captured by the TV antenna
at a very high radiation level are likely to damage the
FM radio receiver.

Good Luck, Moritz



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.rmii.com!nexus.interealm.com!root
From: [e-mail] (George J. Molnar)
Newsgroups: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FM recieving via a TV antenna?
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 13:07:25 GMT
Organization: ICG/MagNET [phone]
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <3tr8gl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3tqlab$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp202.interealm.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] () wrote:

>>We have a central large TV antenna in our roof (which recieves, I guess,
>>VHF and UHF I-III).
>>I would like to know if I can connect the antenna to a FM radio
>>transistor to get a better quality.

>It may be not a good idea,

>The frame syncronization pulses captured by the TV antenna
>at a very high radiation level are likely to damage the
>FM radio receiver.

What?! That's not a problem....really. The TV antenna will work just
fine for FM band reception....FM signals are broadcast on spectrum
just between the "low" VHF and "high" VHF TV channels, so most TV
antennas are effective for FM listeners.

The "frame sync" answer above is just so much techno-babble.



George J. Molnar
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Internet: [e-mail]
Packet radio: KF2T@N0QCU.#NECO.CO.USA.NA



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!sixpints.demon.co.uk!tonyquin
From: Tony Quinn <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FM recieving via a TV antenna?
Followup-To: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 18:48:58 GMT
Organization: the end of his tether.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3tqlab$[e-mail]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: sixpints.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:
: >We have a central large TV antenna in our roof (which recieves, I guess,
: >VHF and UHF I-III).
: >I would like to know if I can connect the antenna to a FM radio
: >transistor to get a better quality.

: It may be not a good idea,

: The frame syncronization pulses captured by the TV antenna
: at a very high radiation level are likely to damage the
: FM radio receiver.

ROTFL..........this is without a doubt one of the most stunning things I
have ever seen on what is ostensibly a professionally oriented newsgroup.

For many years, I used a commercially available splitter for TV (bands 4-5)
and band 2 FM radio......I couldn't easily get a dedicated FM aerial up...
that radio is still working 15 years on.....my only problem was caused by
harmonics of the CSC causing twitter on the pilot tone.............


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Tony Quinn --- The Voice of Insanity
                Replies to [e-mail]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!paulz
From: [e-mail] (Paul Zander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Forget traps and use Autotuner?
Date: 11 Jul 1995 22:42:31 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <3tuuon$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpscit.sc.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Michael Adams ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Last year I put up an antenna for HF made by Create.  It is a V-dipole
: with traps for running on 40, 20, 15, and 10 meter.  It looks like a giant
: indoor set top TV antenna with 22 foot aluminum elements.  It would have
: been great except their manufacturing tolerances got out of wack (so much
: for Japanese quality), and I had to manually tune the antenna by
: redrilling holes to change the length.  I practically had to put on a new
: roof after taking it up and down so many times.

: Later I got to thinking, that perhaps I could duplicate the antenna
: without the traps (build my own with aluminum tubing), and just use a
: Smartuner located at the balun for matching.  Is there any reason why this
: could not work?

: Thanks for any insight,

: Michael Adams
: --
:                                              [e-mail]

Your idea could work.  There have been lots of short antennas made that
simply use a matching network of some sort.

One consideration is that the traps, themselves are a sort of matching
network.  Because they are placed in the middle of the elements,
generally there will be more current in the center of the antenna, and
possibly more efficient radiation.

The deciding factor will probably be how efficient your tuner is.
I don't have any specifics on the Smartuner.


73 and enjoy,
Paul
        _/           _/         _/_/     _/_/_/_/    _/_/_/_/_/
     _/  _/       _/  _/     _/         _/     _/           _/
   _/_/_/_/     _/_/_/_/    _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/          _/
  _/     _/    _/     _/    _/   _/   _/              _/
 _/     _/    _/     _/     _/_/     _/           _/_/_/_/_/


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Matso Limtiaco)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS MFJ-901B tuner & Windom/2
Date: 11 Jul 1995 18:19:45 GMT
Organization: UW Athletic Bands
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <limtiaco-1107951129460001@128.95.77.80>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.95.77.80

FS: MFJ-901B transmatch with instructions, and Carolina Windom/2  antenna
by Radio Works.  Includes all documentation (extensive!) - antenna covers
40-10 meters with tuner.  Used only six months & works great!  I'm
switching to a vertical for purely aesthetic reasons...asking price $90
for both, plus shipping from Seattle.  Email for more info:
[e-mail].


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news1.oakland.edu!detroit.freenet.org!detroit.freenet.org!ah586
From: [e-mail] (Steve Sable)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV Problem,
Date: 10 Jul 1995 21:57:40 GMT
Organization: Greater Detroit Free-Net, Detroit, MI
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3ts7ok$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve Sable)
NNTP-Posting-Host: detroit.freenet.org


I am on my second G5RV. It has the exact same problem
as the first one. I get a intermittent receive off the
antenna, especially on 20m. It is almost like you were
connecting the coax while the rig was on. The receive
cut's in and out.
I have noticed that the intermittent is more noticeable
on windy days, but the twin lead was hitting the house
gutter. I since have put a insulated stand off bracket
to keep the twin lead away.
I have checked the feed point, and the wires are twisted
around the twin and solder pretty good. The G5 is up abt
32ft and the twin lead does make a straight vertical drop.
The last G5 was a little bit low and I had to loop the
twin lead so thought this might of been my problem.
This one now, is higher and there is no loop.
Some people have said the balun has gone bad, but only
on 20m? I dont think that the balun is anywhere near
serviceable.
This last one seemed to be perfect for abt 2 months than
it started its intermittent thing again.
I have a friend who has the exact same problem as I do.
Any suggestions?


--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/__/
_/   __| |__ __|  __| \ \   /  __| [e-mail] _/
_/ \__ \     |    _|   \ \ /   _|       N8NYU                _/
_/ ____/    _|   ___|   \_/   ___| Maybee, Michigan          _/


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.claremont.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Problem,
Date: 10 Jul 1995 18:04:06 -0700
Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <3tsim6$[e-mail]>
References: <3ts7ok$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: safety.ics.uci.edu

Very strange.  Intermittent only on 20 meters and in two separate antennas.
Very strange indeed.  I have had up the "G5RV" style antenna and have never
had such problems, but I built the thing myself from wire, twin lead and
coax that was lying around.  The "balun" was a loop of coax at the base of the
twin lead only designed to keep the RF off the coax shield.

I would suggest you remove the commercial balun you have (a 1:1?) and
solder the coax directly to the twin lead.  Then coil some 9 turns
of the coax in a 6 inch loop and tape it off like that.  Then there are
fewer mysteries, you should be able to test all sections for continuity
and find the problem if it is still there.

If you have a decent antenna tuner, heck, throw away the "G5RV" design
and just run as much wire as you can as a dipole, and feed twin lead
all the way into the tuner.  Even less problems, and probably more RF
into the air!

Clark
WA3JPG


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!hideg.cc.nd.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Steve Hideg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GUYING Butternut Vertical
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 10:04:38 -0500
Organization: .
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3tjlm1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hideg.cc.nd.edu

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
wrote:

> THANKS Collier for your observation on the sun degrading the fishing
> line!  I will replace my type fishing line with the 'ole weed wacker
> "fishing" line...

But how should one fasten it to the antenna?

--Steve Hideg, N8HSC


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:55:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!dtk20.pakk.fi!oh1kll
From: [e-mail] (Markus Moisio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Helix!
Date: 11 Jul 1995 08:57:31 GMT
Organization: PAKK
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <3ttedr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dtk20.pakk.fi
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Hi all!
I need info about 70cm and 2m helix antenna!

73 de oh1kll Markus
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!dialup53.azstarnet.com!w9koy
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help with R7 antenna
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 11:32:21 LOCAL
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup53.azstarnet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

Hello there,

I just recently purchased a Cushcraft R7 vertical. Assembly has gone well
except when I came to attaching the radiator bracket to the radiator. No where
in the manual does it state what to use to attach these together nor does it
provide any hardware for it. There is a hole in the radiator bracket and in
the radiator but nothing to attach them. The radiator bracket Im referring to
is the one that attaches to the top of the Matching Impedence Assembly. I
wonder if any other R7 owners came across this when assembling their R7 and if
so what did you use to attach them together. Please send me direct email to
the address listed below. Thank you...

73, Smitty
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.databank.com!usenet
From: Ken Johnson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Low-profile HF transmitting rings and loops
Date: 10 Jul 1995 11:05:04 GMT
Organization: Kantronics Co., Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3tr1h0$[e-mail]>
References: <v01510100ac1eb8a48dc7@[169.197.1.28]> <3tef5k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: law1-ts1.databank.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: Jim

Hi Jim -

I have been in the same situation (as lots of other folks have been) of
not being able to put up a high profile aerial.  I had GREAT success
loading up my rain gutters!  Electrically, they formed a nearly perfect
full-wave 40 meter loop about 20 ft. off the ground.  In your case, you
just might consider a wire loop around the perimeter of your house and
load it up.  My main consideration was also local coverage, but on 40 and
80 meters, and it worked just great!  Loops are VERY interesting aerials,
and now that I have more room (11 acres) I have put em up for 160 meters
and had a blast.

Best 'O luck to ya,


de "EMR"




From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.databank.com!usenet
From: Ken Johnson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Low-profile HF transmitting rings and loops
Date: 10 Jul 1995 11:06:29 GMT
Organization: Kantronics Co., Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3tr1jl$[e-mail]>
References: <v01510100ac1eb8a48dc7@[169.197.1.28]> <3tef5k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: law1-ts1.databank.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail],(Jim,Mandaville)

Hi Jim -

I have been in the same situation (as lots of other folks have been) of
not being able to put up a high profile aerial.  I had GREAT success
loading up my rain gutters!  Electrically, they formed a nearly perfect
full-wave 40 meter loop about 20 ft. off the ground.  In your case, you
just might consider a wire loop around the perimeter of your house and
load it up.  My main consideration was also local coverage, but on 40 and
80 meters, and it worked just great!  Loops are VERY interesting aerials,
and now that I have more room (11 acres) I have put em up for 160 meters
and had a blast.

Best 'O luck to ya,


de "EMR"




From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.databank.com!usenet
From: Ken Johnson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Low-profile HF transmitting rings and loops
Date: 10 Jul 1995 11:07:36 GMT
Organization: Kantronics Co., Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3tr1lo$[e-mail]>
References: <v01510100ac1eb8a48dc7@[169.197.1.28]> <3tef5k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: law1-ts1.databank.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi Jim -

I have been in the same situation (as lots of other folks have been) of
not being able to put up a high profile aerial.  I had GREAT success
loading up my rain gutters!  Electrically, they formed a nearly perfect
full-wave 40 meter loop about 20 ft. off the ground.  In your case, you
just might consider a wire loop around the perimeter of your house and
load it up.  My main consideration was also local coverage, but on 40 and
80 meters, and it worked just great!  Loops are VERY interesting aerials,
and now that I have more room (11 acres) I have put em up for 160 meters
and had a blast.

Best 'O luck to ya,


de "EMR"




From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:03 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athens!news
From: [e-mail] ()
Subject: Re: Low-profile HF transmitting rings and loops
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
Sender: [e-mail] (Mr News)
Organization: The EmiNet Domain, FL [phone]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <v01510100ac1eb8a48dc7@[169.197.1.28]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ttyc8.emi.net
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 03:02:27 GMT
Lines: 19

I am new to antenna building and have been looking for a stealth
antenna for the 4 MHz area for Civil Air Patrol use.  I had been
considering a DDRR antenna, but after measuring available areas, I
don't have an area 16+ feet area available.

Two questions:

1.)     Can the DDRR diameter be decreased by maintaining the
circumferance length by producing a spiral, trading diameter for
height (sort of a semi-helical)?

2.)     I am looking for a copy of the article referenced in the ARRL
Antenna Book concerning DDRR antennas.  Anybody have a copy I could
receive?

Thank you in advance.

Jay



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!parsifal.nando.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Terry Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop
Date: 9 Jul 1995 14:23:16 -0400
Organization: NandO.net
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3tp6qk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: parsifal.nando.net

Has any one used the MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop model MFJ-1786?

Yes my space is limited and I am trying to find a small antenna I can
use.  I any one has had any experience with this antenna or similar
please advise. (good or bad)

Thanks,

Terry  WD4CEE

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!ncar!noao!math.arizona.edu!news.Arizona.EDU!nemo!hlester
From: [e-mail] (Howard Lester)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop
Date: 10 Jul 1995 19:17:29 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3truc9$[e-mail]>
References: <3tp6qk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nemo.as.arizona.edu

In article <3tp6qk$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Terry Moore) writes:
>Has any one used the MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop model MFJ-1786?
>
>Yes my space is limited and I am trying to find a small antenna I can
>use.  I any one has had any experience with this antenna or similar
>please advise. (good or bad)

I have one, and I find that it is an excellent antenna - not just for what
it is, but in its own right. I had it once set up vertically on a 7' pvc
pole (temporary), facing east, with a chicken wire-embedded wall 7' feet
behind it. My first contact was EA8 on 30m, followed by a contact with
3B8. Now it's vertically mounted on my 10 ft. flat roof, and does very
nicely. The above two contacts, by the way, were made last November.

Howard Lester  KE7QJ
Tucson, AZ


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!nwfocus.wa.com!golden.ncw.net!bing.ncw.net!kevinc
From: Kevin Cole <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 21:25:38 -0700
Organization: North Central Washington Network
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3tp6qk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bing.ncw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <3tp6qk$[e-mail]>

On 9 Jul 1995, Terry Moore wrote:

> Has any one used the MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop model MFJ-1786?
>
> Yes my space is limited and I am trying to find a small antenna I can
> use.  I any one has had any experience with this antenna or similar
> please advise. (good or bad)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Terry  WD4CEE
>
> [e-mail]

Terry - I'll be interested in following this one myself.  I live in a
metal box (mobile home, or as they NOW call them, "Prefabricated Modular
Housing") and have been told that those loops are supposed to be pretty
good in this situation, relative to what other types of antennas would
do. Be interesting to see what replies you receive...

[e-mail]
a.k.a. WA7ZNB


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!yorks.demon.co.uk!frank
From: FRANK W LEE <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Mini Dipole for 14 Mhz
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 95 21:51:12 GMT
Organization: Uk Amateur Radio
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: yorks.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

Here are details of a loaded dipole for 14 Mhz, which I have recently built
and tried out. It was described in the qrp-l mail also.

  --------------=================//////================|  |
   2 FT ADJUST      3 F.5 FT     COIL      3.5 FT       Coax feed

Only half of the dipole is shown. Made from four lengths of 1" OD ali
tube and two adjustable pieces of 2 ft ali, 7/8" OD ali.
Coil is 18 turns close wound of plastic covered single strand wire on
plumber's 22mm PVC tube, stiffened with hardwood dowel. The PVC tube is
a slack fit in the 1" ali, so wrap with a few turns of tape, secure with
self tappers with washers for the coil wire ends. Cover coil with tape,
then heat shrink. Adjust dipole in situ if possible, but can be
roughly resonated nearer ground, but will alter when up in the air. I used
an MFJ antenna analyser, but a rig on low power with SWR bridge is fine.
Adjust end tubes for resonance. Secure these with hose clamps (3 saw cuts
in the end). Centre of dipole is insulated material (mine was an old nylon
chopping board, but can use anything strong enough). Secure to mast with
U-bolts etc. A small piece of 22mm PVC with dowel as above, is used between
the two tubes at the dipole centre. Hope this is clear!
When first testing, the dipole was 4 feet from the ground and I worked into
Slovenia with 5&9 report. Not bad seeing I was QRP SSB (10W pep)! Works even
better at 32 feet! Not much bigger than a ten metre dipole, this sure works
fine and hopefully will be of interest especially where there isn't much
space! Let me know if you try this, it really does work well.
--
Frank G3YCC (G QRP 042)


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:07 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.ucdavis.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!rander
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Anderson)
Subject: NEC archives ftp site now mirrored
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 02:48:13 GMT
Lines: 18
Sender: [e-mail]

Any who have used the NEC archive site on ftp.netcom.com in the
past have probably noticed that anonymous ftp access can quite often
be difficult due the high volume of traffic on the site. The contents
of the NEC archives (/pub/ra/rander/NEC) are now being mirrored at
the following site: emclab.ee.umr.edu in /pub/aces/NEC .

Access to this site should be much easier. Contents of the mirror site
are the same as the main site on netcom with perhaps a day or so delay
in updating in some cases.

Also note that a new subdirectory (EZNEC_FILES) has been added to the
NEC archives. Presently there about 40 assorted antenna designs there
in eznec format (.ez files).

73 de WB6TPU
Ray Anderson
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!ppp57.cac.psu.edu!jdf112
From: [e-mail] (Joseph Finnerty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: NEC-Win Basic
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 23:35:15 GMT
Organization: CAC
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp57.cac.psu.edu
Summary: Antenna analysis package
Keywords: software
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B]

Paragon Technology in State College PA. has just released NEC-Win Basic.
NEC-Win Basic is a software package to do antenna analyis in the Windows
environment.  It is a powerful program which uses NEC2 as its core.  NEC-Win
Basic provides many features including multiple radiation patterns and 3D
surface patterns.  For more information please contact:

Joseph Finnerty
[e-mail]
Paragon Technology
Suite 240
200 Innovation Blvd
State College, PA 16803
Ph: 814-234-3335
Fax: [phone]


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!parsifal.nando.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Gconklin)
Newsgroups: rec.antiques.radio+phono,rec.arts.wobegon,rec.models.rc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Subject: Re: Personal Service 1-800-559-6557
Date: 10 Jul 1995 10:23:14 -0400
Organization: NandO.net
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3trd4i$[e-mail]>
References: <3tp7p8$4rk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: parsifal.nando.net
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.arts.wobegon:4569 rec.models.rc:55322 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11796 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9379

In article <3tp7p8$4rk$[e-mail]> jjhhggff <[e-mail]> writes:
>Personal Service for Adults Only
>Blonde Girls 1-800-559-6557
>Black Girls 1-800-559-6558
>Two Girls Together 1-800-559-6554


     I have a question.

     Which of the above group is best at
fixing acoustic phonographs?

     Are they better at it if they work on it two at a time?
Can they insert a 2A3 into the proper socket?




From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!aimnet.com!dial-sf1-7.iway.aimnet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Cowan)
Newsgroups: rec.antiques.radio+phono,rec.arts.wobegon,rec.models.rc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Subject: Re: Personal Service 1-800-559-6557
Date: 11 Jul 1995 08:10:26 GMT
Organization: Aimnet Information Services
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3tp7p8$4rk$[e-mail]> <3trd4i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-sf1-7.iway.aimnet.com
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b27.1+
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.arts.wobegon:4572 rec.models.rc:55408 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11809 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9388

In article <3trd4i$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gconklin) wrote:

> In article <3tp7p8$4rk$[e-mail]> jjhhggff
<[e-mail]> writes:
> >Personal Service for Adults Only
> >Blonde Girls 1-800-559-6557
> >Black Girls 1-800-559-6558
> >Two Girls Together 1-800-559-6554
>
>
>      I have a question.
>
>      Which of the above group is best at
> fixing acoustic phonographs?
Nah, I've got a Zenith in the closet that needs some work. Do they fix
radios or just acoustic phonographs?
>
>      Are they better at it if they work on it two at a time?
I've tried that. Too confusing.
> Can they insert a 2A3 into the proper socket?
2A3? I thought this was an ACOUSTIC phonograph!


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!paulz
From: [e-mail] (Paul Zander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: PHASING OF VERTICALS...
Date: 11 Jul 1995 22:26:42 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <3tutr2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpscit.sc.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Properly phasing of verticals and maintaining a match has a difficulty that
is generally overlooked in the amateur radio literature: mutual coupling.
Some of the signal radiated by vertical A will be picked up on vertical B.
This will change the phase and amplitude of the net current on vertical B
from what one might expect just from the length of the feedlines.  Also, some
of the "received" signal will head down the transmission line, where it
is indistinquishible from reflected power.  Hence the impedance match
will be affected.  The same thing happens with the signal radiated from
B and picked up by A.

To do the job right, you must first decide on the radiation pattern and
current distribution in the two antennas.  Having determined that you
want, for example, the currents to be equal and antenna B lagging in phase
by 60 degrees, you calculate the mutual coupling and the effective
input impedance.  Finally figure out a compbination of L's, C's, and cable
lengths that will match the antennas and phase the current.

In some respects, it is amazing that hams often get usable results by
simply making antennas that match by themselves, and then use cable
lengths that differ by 1/4 or 1/2 wavelength.

73, Paul

        _/           _/         _/_/     _/_/_/_/    _/_/_/_/_/
     _/  _/       _/  _/     _/         _/     _/           _/
   _/_/_/_/     _/_/_/_/    _/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/          _/
  _/     _/    _/     _/    _/   _/   _/              _/
 _/     _/    _/     _/     _/_/     _/           _/_/_/_/_/


Marc DePaul ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Hello Antenna Folks.


: I asked (generally) the same sort of questions three years ago, but
: not too many responses:

: 1.  How do you phase your verticals?

: 2.  What Kind of performance did you actually experience?

: 3.  Any easy to understand phasing articles?



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.databank.com!usenet
From: Ken Johnson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rhombic aerial
Date: 9 Jul 1995 09:21:02 GMT
Organization: Kantronics Co., Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3to71v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: law1-ts3.databank.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Ok....so I got a bunch O' wire and eleven acres.  I have read up about
rhombic aerials, and talked about 'em on the air, and have come to the
conclusion that iffin you got the room and the wire you had better put
one up!  My questions:  What if I can only get the thing 20 feet or so
off the ground?  (maybe it will grow if I water it and don't plant it too
deep...)  The wire that I have is 23 strand, brass plated stainless steel
and is about 20 gauge diameter, but pretty tuff stuff.  I have heard that
375 feet/leg is some kind of "magic" dimension (I have room for this and
more).  I'm planning on feeding it with 300 or 450 ohm balanced line to a
4:1 balun and then a short run of coax to the back of the FT-1000.  I am
currently playing around with a V-beam using the above mentioned wire and
400 ft. legs fed with 450 ohm line and the 4:1 balun and it works ok.  Is
there any comments out there in cyberhamdom??

de WD0EMR





From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!nwfocus.wa.com!golden.ncw.net!bing.ncw.net!kevinc
From: Kevin Cole <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rhombic aeriel
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 21:31:21 -0700
Organization: North Central Washington Network
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3to71v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bing.ncw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <3to71v$[e-mail]>

> I am
> currently playing around with a V-beam using the above mentioned wire and
> 400 ft. legs fed with 450 ohm line and the 4:1 balun and it works ok.  Is
> there any comments out there in cyberhamdom??
>

is that dude (vee beam) particularly directional?  I mean noticeably
so...  I used to play with things like that a number of years ago and
never seemed to get the thing tuned or fed correctly to make use of the
theoretical directionality hoped for...

WA7ZNB



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.databank.com!usenet
From: Ken Johnson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rhombic aeriel
Date: 11 Jul 1995 11:14:47 GMT
Organization: Kantronics Co., Inc.
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3ttmf7$[e-mail]>
References: <3to71v$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: law1-ts3.databank.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi Kevin -

Well, it's prolly the MOST effective W4 filter I have used...  Pointed
NE, it drops W4's by a gob - 4 or 5 S-units.  It's not really designed by
choice, more by lot size, but seems to honk pretty well iffin ur in the
way of the thing.

TTFN
de EMR




From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!vulcan.inlink.com!raiar
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RingoRanger Not Putting Out - Help
Date: 9 Jul 1995 02:08:03 GMT
Organization: inlink
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3tndm3$[e-mail]>
References: <3t7hi3$rcv$[e-mail]> <3t93vt$[e-mail]> <3tehrp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vulcan.inlink.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

And then stand back and scratch your head.  The ARRL material is so riddled
with errors, mis-information and heavy bias, that you still won't know which
end of the tower goes up first.

The ARRL will tell you one thing and then do the exact opposite, they are
ready to explain to a longstanding member what they can't and won't do.
Then turn around two months later and do all the things they told you they
can't and won't do for a new novice who isn't eveen a member.

Even to the point of seeing that subdivision made laws are over-ridden.

Gary



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cam.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!microvst.demon.co.uk!tgold
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: SGC Smart Tuners
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 95 10:13:44 GMT
Organization: Microvest Limited, London
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: microvst.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11791 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14184


Does SGC have an email address?

Does anyone have any news about a QRO Smart Tuner which they hinted about
at Dayton?

--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email:  [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Software Authors Read
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 95 22:09:39 PDT
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwbyppp13.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.swap:39209 rec.radio.shortwave:55222 rec.radio.scanner:28324 rec.radio.amateur.space:4363 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28503 rec.radio.amateur.misc:82715 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8289 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14275 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9403 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11830


ATTENTION AUTHORS OF AMATEUR RADIO, SWL, AND ELECTRONIC SOFTWARE!

If your software is shareware, freeware or public domain, AmSoft
would like to include your software in our publication of The
World of Ham Radio CD-ROM.  If you only have a commercial version
you may want to think about a shareware version with registration.
Most authors have had good returns on registrations from the first
year of publishing thier software on this CD-ROM.  If 50 users
registered your program from our CD-ROM publication, what would that
convert to in income for you?  Please give this some thought and let
us here at AmSoft know if you would like to publish your works on
the AmSoft CD-ROM.  If you decide to publish on our CD please
upload your software to our FTP site and send me an E-Mail letter of
authorization to publish your software on the AmSoft CD-ROM.

The FTP site is HAMSTER.BUSINESS.UWO.CA directory /PUB/AMSOFT

We are working on the September 95 issue at this time.  Deadline
for insertion of your new software is August 7, 1995

                Thank You,  Pete, KC3TL

--------------------------------------------------------
 Send E-mail to: [e-mail] ,(Pete deVolpi, KC3TL)
 Publisher of "The World of Ham Radio", Callsign CD-ROM
 @date@ AD, @time@ EST, Hams do it with FREQUENCY
 WWW SITE:   http://hamster.business.uwo.ca:80/~amsoft/
--------------------------------------------------------






From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!news.dseg.ti.com!news!hubanks
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Hubanks)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Vertical Radials
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 95 10:39:16 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: iwpowerbook.dseg.ti.com
X-Newsreader: VersaTerm Link v1.1.1

When ground mounting a vertical antenna, do the radials have to be
symmetrical around the antenna?  I have a location where, I can only put
radials on one side of the antenna.  Will this cause the radiation pattern
and radiation angle to favor the side with the radials?

Thanks,
Bruce Hubanks
Texas Instruments
voice: 214-575-4058
fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!nntp.msstate.edu!ukma!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!stc06.ctd.ornl.gov!usenet
From: "Walter L. Zorn" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Vertical Radials
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 95 12:12:38 EDT
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 1wz.win.ornl.gov
X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_16
X-POPMail-Charset: English
To: [e-mail]

On Tue, 11 Jul 95 10:39:16 GMT,
Bruce Hubanks  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>When ground mounting a vertical antenna, do the radials have to be
>symmetrical around the antenna?  I have a location where, I can only put
>radials on one side of the antenna.  Will this cause the radiation pattern
>and radiation angle to favor the side with the radials?

Bruce,

The simple answer is - No, they don't have to be symmetrical; and - YES,
they will favor a side.  The direction without radials will radiate (as
well or as poorly) as before.  At my location, I have a vertical against
the house ( . . .well, a foot away) - in this installation, I'd experience
better reception/tx in the direction with ground radials and the same
(worse in comparison) in the direction of the house.

Short story - radials help more than hurt, both in matching a direction.
Walt / KF0OS



From [e-mail] Tue Jul 11 22:56:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.iii.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Ron Mathis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTB:  Rohn 25 sections in New England
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 1995 04:42:22 GMT
Organization: iii.net
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3tnmkh$[e-mail]>
References: <3tjmi1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rvm.iii.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Brian Meyette) wrote:

>I'm looking for used inexpensive Rohn 25 sections in NH/VT or New England, in
>good condition.    I need 6-7.
>Brian

>[phone] ext 210
>* Brian Meyette ([e-mail])  Cornish, New Hampshire, USA

Brian:
you and me both only I just need 2 sections. If I find more than I
need I will post it here. Would appreciate any help.

Ron Mathis
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Problem,
Date: 11 Jul 1995 22:28:27 -0700
Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3tvmhr$[e-mail]>
References: <3ts7ok$[e-mail]> <3tsim6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: safety.ics.uci.edu

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Aaron Cummings) writes:

>Sure the problem isn't in your tranceiver?

You know, this sound like the most likely solution.  Really look at your
transceiver.

Clark
WA3JPG


From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!vulcan.inlink.com!raiar
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Alarm tape antenna ?
Date: 11 Jul 1995 22:29:39 GMT
Organization: inlink
Lines: 37
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3tuu0j$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vulcan.inlink.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Andreas Meyer ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I believe at one time, I'd seen plans for an antenna made using the
: metal burglar-alarm tape commonly seen on glass windows.

: Does anyone have the plans for this?
: (I'm interested in using one for 2m operation)
: How much power can one handle, and how well do they work?

: It occurs to me that the large window at the front of my apartment
: might be just the place for one.  However, I've also got metal
: venetian blinds. With them down, I'd hope to be able to reflect more
: RF out.  Comments?

: Andy
: --
:     ==--
:   -====---    Andreas Meyer, N2FYE                     [e-mail]
:   --==----    AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel NJ USA    ..!att!hogpa!ahm


Hi Andy
When I lived in an apartment, I used that stuff all the time, even at 100
watts out, never had any problems.  But FWIW, I found out that t ∩hú¼

the copper stuff used by stained glass folks works much better, it costs only
a fraction more, you can solder to it, and its stronger.

Sorry for the provider provided line noise.

You can build a J-Pole right on a window, even if you have to bend the
tops over toward the center it still works great on two-meters.

Gary



:     ----


From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (AlK0FRP)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hustler Mobile antenna Mods
Date: 11 Jul 1995 22:39:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3tvcks$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (AlK0FRP)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Convert Hustler mobile antennas to a more efficient and wider bandwidth
plus handling high power. I use as QRP antennas and work great.


Send $5.00 for plans 20-17-15-12-10 meters

to K0FRP  11904 East Kentucky Ave. Aurora Co. 80012


From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Low-profile HF transmitting rings and loops
Date: 12 Jul 1995 01:47:06 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <3tv9iq$[e-mail]>
References: <v01510100ac1eb8a48dc7@[169.197.1.28]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite169.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] () wrote:
>I am new to antenna building and have been looking for a stealth
>antenna for the 4 MHz area for Civil Air Patrol use.  I had been
>considering a DDRR antenna, but after measuring available areas, I
>don't have an area 16+ feet area available.
>
>Two questions:
>
>1.)    Can the DDRR diameter be decreased by maintaining the
>circumferance length by producing a spiral, trading diameter for
>height (sort of a semi-helical)?
>
>2.)    I am looking for a copy of the article referenced in the ARRL
>Antenna Book concerning DDRR antennas.  Anybody have a copy I could
>receive?

Jay,

If memory serves me correctly, the patent holder(s) were (are?) Joe Boyer, W6UYH, and
Northrop Corp. While ARRL calls it a "Directional Discontinuity Ring Radiator", I believe it
was later renamed "Directly-Driven_Ring-Radiator", as if it matters.

It's still just a top-loaded (very) short vertical monopole. The short vertical portion is the
radiator and the rest is the loading. As is usual for such things, the efficiency (bad choice
of words) is very poor.

So, IMHO re question no. 1 is, you would be wise to increase the height as much as possible
and then load with an inductor and capacitance hat. Charlie Michels, Roy Lawellen, et. al.
will read this and set me straight, but that's OK, you'll get a good answer :)

As to question no. 2, If you want Dome's article, email your snail mail address and I'll send
it to you.

73, Wes, N7WS



From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Low-profile HF transmitting rings and loops
Date: 12 Jul 1995 02:00:16 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3tvabg$[e-mail]>
References: <v01510100ac1eb8a48dc7@[169.197.1.28]> <[e-mail]> <3tv9iq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite169.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:

[stuff deleted]

>So, IMHO re question no. 1 is, you would be wise to increase the height as much as possible
>and then load with an inductor and capacitance hat. Charlie Michels, Roy Lawellen, et. al.
>will read this and set me straight, but that's OK, you'll get a good answer :)
>
Of course, the first thing they will correct me on is the spelling of their names: Michaels
and Lewallen.

Sorry guys :(

Wes, N7WS



From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news3.near.net!emba-news.uvm.edu!moose.uvm.edu!ajcummin
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Cummings)
Subject: Re: Antenna rotator survey
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: EMBA Computer Facility, University of Vermont
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <3t958q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 03:08:53 GMT
Lines: 29

Frank Donovan ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Patricia,
: Here are a few simple hints for easily determining true North.

: - Assuming your tower is in the clear so that it produces a shadow, you
: can easily mark the direction of true south by several methods.
:
:  - -  If you are near city or town, look in your newspaper to find your
:  sunrise and sunset times.  Exactly halfway between sunrise and sunset your
:  tower will cast a shadow at true south!  You can also determine sunrise
:  and sunset visually, of course, at the expense of some early morning sleep!
(snip)
: 73!
: Frank
: W3LPL

Assuming that you are to the north of the tropic of cancer (about 23
degrees north latitude), at halfway between sunrise and sunset the sun
will be at some angle above the horizon due SOUTH, so the shadow it casts
will be due NORTH.  Also note that the sun rises due east and sets due
west two days out of the year; at the vernal and the autumnal equinoxes,
about March 21 and September 21

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Aaron Cummings               "A little nonsense now and then is
Colchester, VT                cherished by the wisest man..."
[e-mail]        -Willie Wonkka
KA1PYK
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news3.near.net!emba-news.uvm.edu!moose.uvm.edu!ajcummin
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Cummings)
Subject: Re: G5RV Problem,
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: EMBA Computer Facility, University of Vermont
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3ts7ok$[e-mail]> <3tsim6$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 03:32:56 GMT
Lines: 19

Clark Savage Turner ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Very strange.  Intermittent only on 20 meters and in two separate antennas.
: Very strange indeed.  I have had up the "G5RV" style antenna and have never
: had such problems, but I built the thing myself from wire, twin lead and
: coax that was lying around.  The "balun" was a loop of coax at the base of the
: twin lead only designed to keep the RF off the coax shield.
<snip>
: Clark
: WA3JPG

--
Sure the problem isn't in your tranceiver?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Aaron Cummings               "A little nonsense now and then is
Colchester, VT                cherished by the wisest man..."
[e-mail]        -Willie Wonkka
KA1PYK
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!gatech!psuvax1!news.math.psu.edu!news.cac.psu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.funet.fi!mordred.cc.jyu.fi!kajami
From: [e-mail] (Jani 'Dii' Kanala)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Will vertical do fine for me?
Date: 12 Jul 1995 06:27:11 GMT
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3tvpvv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tarzan.math.jyu.fi
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Antenna question...  Building where I live is surrounded by fairly tall
buildings (at least 3 times higher than where I live).  I've been thinking
about buying R7 verical, but will this do for me in this situation..?
Or would tribander perform better?  I guess this is the question of
elevation angle, what is this on R7?  So people, am I going to have
complete radio silence with R7 on top of my not-so-tall building? <G>
Hope you can help me.. Thanks in advance!

73s...OH6LJN

--

regards,
  Jani



From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!red.paston.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Steve Nichols)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 08:20:38 GMT
Organization: Paston Chase Internet
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3u008g$[e-mail]>
References: <3tp6qk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: net1.paston.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Terry Moore) wrote:

>Has any one used the MFJ Super Hi-Q Loop model MFJ-1786?

>Yes my space is limited and I am trying to find a small antenna I can
>use.  I any one has had any experience with this antenna or similar
>please advise. (good or bad)

>Thanks,

>Terry  WD4CEE

>[e-mail]

I have used an AAA or Capco loop for the HF bands. It was 80cm in
diameter and worked well. Compared with a 90 foot long wire it was
usually down about two S-points, but sometimes there was nothing in
it. On a very noisy band it would pick out signals that were inaudible
on the wire. The downside is the endless retuning. If you don't have
thespace for a wire dipole etc I would recommend a loop

Steve G0KYA.




From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.utdallas.edu!corpgate!bcarh189.bnr.ca!bcrkh13.bnr.ca!b4pph186!bressler
From: [e-mail] (Bill Bressler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 450 ohm twinlead
Date: 12 Jul 1995 11:36:51 GMT
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 4
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3u0c4j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: b4pph186.bnr.ca

Will coiling up extra twinlead have the same effect as
coiling up coax?

Bill


From [e-mail] Wed Jul 12 10:13:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.nyc.pipeline.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Dave Santoro)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Here are plans for the Eggbeater
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 13:07:07 GMT
Organization: Alpine Computer Services
Lines: 117
Message-ID: <3u0he6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dsantoro.nyc.pipeline.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11841 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8298

Hi Folks
I got these plans from someone via E-Mail.  I haven't built this
antenna yet, so I have no idea how well it will perform.  (Please note
that when the plans refer to rg-93 coax, I believe they mean RG-62.)

Please, If you build this antenna I would love a quick E-Mail to see
how you made out!

Begin Pasted Text:
------------------------------------
Date sent:        Wed, 14 Jun 95 12:53:10 CDT
From:             [e-mail] (Christie Harper)
To:               [e-mail]
Subject:          eggbeater

For a more omnidirectional antenna you might try what is known as an
"eggbeater" there are commercial versions available for $110 or you
can
make one for about $5.  the eggbeater is comprised of two full wave
loops
placed perpendicular to each other and driven 90 degrees out of phase.
this gives the antenna a horizontal component along the horizon and a
circular component overhead.

looking at the antenna from the top it would look like;




                    |
                    |
                    |
                    |
          ----------+----------
                    |
                    |
                    |
                    |

Use a piece of pvc pipe as the mast.

Make two full wave loops (length = 299.8/F (Mhz) Meters) using #12 or
heavier wire.

A full wave loop has a "resistance" of about 100 ohms so resonate the
loop
at the desired frequency by doing the following;

use a quarter wave 75 ohm matching line (50-100 ohms).  Cut the loop
one or two inches longer than calculated and keep pruning to
resonance.

drill holes in the pvc to pass the loop (NOTE insure that the loops DO
NOT touch at the top or bottom.

Phasing harness..... need a 1/4 wavelength piece of 93 ohm coax

length = 0.25*(velocity factor)*299.8/Freq (Mhz).  Velocity factor is
available in most handbooks (coax is RG-93).

---- braid
____ center conductor

     |----|                              |---loop 1            |-----
loop 2
     |    |        RG-58 (50ohm)         |                     |
     |    | -----------------------------|---------------------|
     |    | _____________________________ _____________________
     |    |                              |    RG-93 (93 ohm)   |
     |    |                              |                     |
     |----|                              |                     |

    favorite
    connector

An easy to mount the phasing line is to take a small piece of circuit
board (radio shack) and drill three holes in it and attach cable as
follows.





               +---------+        +---------------loop 2
    loop1------|         |        |
             ( * )     ( * )    ( * )
             50 ohm     93 ohm   93 ohm

solder all shields to the circuit board.  connect short jumpers from
the circuit board to the other sides of the loops.

Based on homebrew work of W3PM (Gene Marcus)

end
        the views expressed here are the author's

C. Harper
SPARTA Inc               [phone] x1216 voicemail
4901 Corporate Drive     [phone]       FAX
Huntsville AL 35805

Amateur Call:  KD4QIO

Internet: [e-mail]
          [e-mail]

Home QTH: Huntsville, AL 35802
          EM64rp
          34.651 -86.543

"we have met the enemy and he is us."  W. Kelly
"Goin' nuclear fishin' ...except it ain't so new and it ain't so
clear" ... W. Kelly     :-)

------------------------------
End Paste Text



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!mgate.arrl.org!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Zack Lau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Problem,
Date: 12 Jul 1995 11:18:56 -0400
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3u0p50$[e-mail]>
References: <3ts7ok$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

N8YNU Steve Sable ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I am on my second G5RV. It has the exact same problem
: as the first one. I get a intermittent receive off the
: antenna, especially on 20m. It is almost like you were
: connecting the coax while the rig was on. The receive
: cut's in and out.

: This last one seemed to be perfect for abt 2 months than
: it started its intermittent thing again.
: I have a friend who has the exact same problem as I do.
: Any suggestions?
:
Perhaps the problem is a strong 20 meter CW station.
A sufficiently strong signal would not only block
your receiver, but your friend's as well.  You
might keep a log of when you have the problem and
compare it with your friend's.  You might also try
tossing in 20 or 30 dB of attenuation if your rig has
this capability and seeing if it helps.
--
Zack Lau  KH6CP/1           2 way QRP WAS
                           8 States on 10 GHz
Internet: [e-mail]   10 grids on 2304 MHz


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!darwin.sura.net!wvnvms!cerc.wvu.edu!crowe.geo.wvu.edu!randy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: thru-glass on Mazda
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: randy@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_DOMAIN_FILE (Randy Crowe)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 12:34:45 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: WVU Geology/Geography
Keywords: Mazda 2m thru-glass
Summary: information needed
Nntp-Posting-Host: crowe.geo.wvu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 13

Greetings;

   I just bought (leased actually) a Mazda 626.  When I started to put a
trunk lip mount on the vehicle, I found that the clearances for the trunk
lid won't allow the cable or mount for that matter, to pass through.  The
thing is built really tight.  Anyone have any experience with thru-glass
mount antennas on this type vehicle.  I'm going to have to go to this type
of antenna since it's a leased vehicle and I can't poke a hole in it.  Any
thoughts would be appreciated.

73's Randy  N8OZY




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.mindlink.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (David Willmore)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need reference for VHF/UHF yagi book
Date: 12 Jul 1995 13:55:26 -0500
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3u15qu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: venus.mcs.com
Summary: Need good reference book for VHF/UHF yagi design
Keywords: yagi vhf uhf
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8308 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11859

I'm looking for a good book on yagi antenna design that doesn't spend the
whole book talking about HF tri-banders.  I'm interested in 2m and up.  I
live in an appartment and space limitations and the landlord don't allow
for HF operation.  Living on the ground floor, an omni doesn't work too
well.  I need gain and I need it in a reasonable size.

I have been looking for a decent book (w/software would be nice) on Yagi
design considerations for the upper bands.  I'm a Computer Engineer, so
I don't like field equations, but they don't scare me. :)  Theory is fine
as is practicality.  I'm supprised that there isn't more available on the
topic as 1/2" copper pipe is relatively cheap--$3.50(US) for 10".  That's
three 1/2 wave elements on 2 meters.

BTW, is there a good FTP site for antenna design programs.  I keep hearing
about NEC and the like, but I have no idea if these are commercial or PD
nor how about getting them.  If anyone could help me out, I would appreciate
it.  I'd really like to whip up a 6 element Yagi for 2M using 1/2" copper
this weekend, but all of the 'construction' articles I can find sound like:

"build it this way, cut everything to the nearest 1/10th mm and file it
to tune it--oh, and don't forget to do this in free space wearing teflon
underware!"

Can anyone suggest anything for me to try--a place to look, a book to find,
a new degree to get, anything?

Cheers,
David


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!sgiblab!darwin.sura.net!wvnvms!cerc.wvu.edu!crowe.geo.wvu.edu!randy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: thru-glass on Mazda
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: randy@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_DOMAIN_FILE (Randy Crowe)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 14:39:08 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: WVU Geology/Geography
Keywords: glass mount mazda
Summary: Thoughts on glass mount antenna
Nntp-Posting-Host: crowe.geo.wvu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 17

Greetings;

    I just bought (leased actually) a Mazda 626.  Seems like a nice automobile
except the thing is built so tight that I can't get the antenna cable out of
the trunk to use a lip mount bracket.  As it's a leased vehicle, I can't
just poke a hole in it and mount an antenna properly.  Don't really want
to use a mag mount due to possible paint damage as occoured on my old car.

    Anyone have any suggestions/thoughts on using a through-the-glass mount
on this model car?  Any reply's will be appreciated.

73's Randy  N8OZY

[e-mail]
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!senior.nectec.or.th!news.mahidol.ac.th!mucc!srwhm
From: [e-mail] (Wanna Hemasuk - SRNS)
Newsgroups: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FM recieving via a TV antenna?
Followup-To: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 12 Jul 1995 14:54:24 GMT
Organization: Mahidol University, Thailand
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <3u0nn0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3tqlab$[e-mail]> <3tr8gl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.14.162.1
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

George J. Molnar ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] () wrote:

: >>We have a central large TV antenna in our roof (which recieves, I guess,
: >>VHF and UHF I-III).
: >>I would like to know if I can connect the antenna to a FM radio
: >>transistor to get a better quality.

: >It may be not a good idea,

: >The frame syncronization pulses captured by the TV antenna
: >at a very high radiation level are likely to damage the
: >FM radio receiver.

: What?! That's not a problem....really. The TV antenna will work just
: fine for FM band reception....FM signals are broadcast on spectrum
: just between the "low" VHF and "high" VHF TV channels, so most TV
: antennas are effective for FM listeners.

: The "frame sync" answer above is just so much techno-babble.



i think it batter than telescopic antenna. FM radio antenna is vertical
polarization. is it batter recieving if it change from horizontal to
vertical?

HS1LHT
        *************************************************************
        * Wanna Hemasuk      Siriraj Hospital      Bangkok Thailand *
        * [e-mail]               Mahidol University *
        *************************************************************



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 450 ohm twinlead
Date: 12 Jul 1995 15:13:54 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <3u0ori$[e-mail]>
References: <3u0c4j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite29.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Bill Bressler) wrote:
>Will coiling up extra twinlead have the same effect as
>coiling up coax?
>
>Bill

Bill:

It depends on whether you are storing it or using it:)

If you are using it, it will definitely have an effect (bad).  Ideally, there are no currents
on the outside of coax, so coiling it has no detrimental effect.  If there are currents
outside, we sometimes use a coil of cable to "choke off" the current and keep it from
propagating and doing nasty things. The point here is however, what you do on the outside
doesen't affect what's happening on the inside.

Consider the case of the balanced line. The properties of the line (impedance) are a function
of the diameter and spacing of the conductors and the dielectric (insulation) between them.
Because there is no shield around the conductors, they can be affected by outside influences,
as well as interacting with each other. Clearly, if you coil the cable, you effectively bring
other influences to bear. You may be keeping like conductors together in your coil,
however, because of differences in the phase along the line, there is still intraction. These
effects are basically unpredictable and therefore should be avoided.

You should cut the line to the length needed and store the rest (coiled up if necessary).


73, Wes



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:12 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: G5RV Problem,
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3ts7ok$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 15:15:19 GMT
Lines: 38

Steve Sable ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I am on my second G5RV. It has the exact same problem
: as the first one. I get a intermittent receive off the
: antenna, especially on 20m. It is almost like you were
: connecting the coax while the rig was on. The receive
: cut's in and out.
: I have noticed that the intermittent is more noticeable
: on windy days, but the twin lead was hitting the house
: gutter. I since have put a insulated stand off bracket
: to keep the twin lead away.
: I have checked the feed point, and the wires are twisted
: around the twin and solder pretty good. The G5 is up abt
: 32ft and the twin lead does make a straight vertical drop.
: The last G5 was a little bit low and I had to loop the
: twin lead so thought this might of been my problem.
: This one now, is higher and there is no loop.
: Some people have said the balun has gone bad, but only
: on 20m? I dont think that the balun is anywhere near
: serviceable.
: This last one seemed to be perfect for abt 2 months than
: it started its intermittent thing again.
: I have a friend who has the exact same problem as I do.
: Any suggestions?
:
Could be that your wire inside the ladder line is broken. I've
had that happen. Get some of the new "stranded Ladder line" from
Radio Ware or "The Wireman". It won't break so easily. 73
: --
: _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/__/
: _/   __| |__ __|  __| \ \   /  __| [e-mail] _/
: _/ \__ \     |    _|   \ \ /   _|       N8NYU                _/
: _/ ____/    _|   ___|   \_/   ___| Maybee, Michigan          _/
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:13 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Will vertical do fine for me?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3tvpvv$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 15:19:03 GMT
Lines: 26

Jani 'Dii' Kanala ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Antenna question...  Building where I live is surrounded by fairly tall
: buildings (at least 3 times higher than where I live).  I've been thinking
: about buying R7 verical, but will this do for me in this situation..?
: Or would tribander perform better?  I guess this is the question of
: elevation angle, what is this on R7?  So people, am I going to have
: complete radio silence with R7 on top of my not-so-tall building? <G>
: Hope you can help me.. Thanks in advance!

: 73s...OH6LJN

: --
Instead of spending all that money on an R7 to find out if it works. JUst
make a simple verticle from scraps and test it on your favorite band.
Get some cheap electrical conduit or use a wood pole with wire stuck on
it for your vertical. This will give you a pretty good feeling for how
your R7 is going to do. Note that a single band vertical made from
scraps will outperform an R7 because there is no trap loss.
: regards,
:   Jani

--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 450 ohm twinlead
Date: 12 Jul 1995 15:55:25 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3u0r9d$[e-mail]>
References: <3u0c4j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3u0c4j$[e-mail]>,
Bill Bressler <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Will coiling up extra twinlead have the same effect as
>coiling up coax?

The fields are inside the coax so it is OK to coil up coax. The
fields are outside the twinlead so it is definitely NOT OK to
coil up twinlead. Keep twinlead at least two widths away from
any conducting media including the twinlead itself. Do not try
to make a choke by coiling up twinlead. You may make a fire instead.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ns1.win.net!logcabin!bobndeb
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ROBERT G. FRICK)
From: [e-mail] (ROBERT G. FRICK)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 16:00:16 GMT
Subject: unsubscribe
Lines: 0




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:14 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antenna rotator survey
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <3t958q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 16:27:00 GMT
Lines: 27

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Aaron Cummings) writes:
>Frank Donovan ([e-mail]) wrote:
>:  - -  If you are near city or town, look in your newspaper to find your
>:  sunrise and sunset times.  Exactly halfway between sunrise and sunset your
>:  tower will cast a shadow at true south!  You can also determine sunrise
>:  and sunset visually, of course, at the expense of some early morning sleep!
>(snip)
>
>Assuming that you are to the north of the tropic of cancer (about 23
>degrees north latitude), at halfway between sunrise and sunset the sun
>will be at some angle above the horizon due SOUTH, so the shadow it casts
>will be due NORTH.  Also note that the sun rises due east and sets due
>west two days out of the year; at the vernal and the autumnal equinoxes,
>about March 21 and September 21

Assuming you are north of the tropic of cancer, the sun will never
rise or set due east or west of your location. That only happens if
you are located on the equator at the equinoxes.

Gary


--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!butch!cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com!news
From: Tom Childers <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: TA-33 Mods?
Date: 12 Jul 1995 17:08:42 GMT
Organization: IRM
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3u0viq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.189.144.53
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Tom Jenkins) wrote:
>I've acquired a four year old three element TA-33.  Have there been any
>modifications or helpful hints to this antenna?  Any articles in QST etc?
>
>--Tom

In 1982 I bought a TA-33 that was 20 years old.  The last time I saw a
new one it looked exactly the same!  The TA-33 is a good antenna.... no
reason to change the design.:-)

Tom, N5GE



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!butch!cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com!news
From: Tom Childers <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (no subject)
Date: 12 Jul 1995 17:15:32 GMT
Organization: IRM
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <3u0vvk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.189.144.53
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Does anyone know where I can get the documentation for IONCAP?



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!vulcan.inlink.com!raiar
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Problem,
Date: 12 Jul 1995 18:25:04 GMT
Organization: inlink
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3u1420$[e-mail]>
References: <3ts7ok$[e-mail]> <3tsim6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vulcan.inlink.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I've had three G5RVs and all three gave me similar problems, beside, they
all fell apart in less than two years each.

Now I just use plain ole aluminum cclothesline wire or bare aluminumfencing
wire.  No Balun.  Antenna Tuner Yes.

Gary  N0ZOI



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!news.Cerritos.edu!news.Arizona.EDU!nemo!hlester
From: [e-mail] (Howard Lester)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Problem,
Date: 12 Jul 1995 18:28:40 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3u148o$[e-mail]>
References: <3tsim6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3tvmhr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nemo.as.arizona.edu

In article <3tvmhr$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner) writes:
>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Aaron Cummings) writes:
>
>>Sure the problem isn't in your tranceiver?
>
>You know, this sound like the most likely solution.  Really look at your
>transceiver.
>
>Clark
>WA3JPG

Yeah, and don't just stare at it, either - really LOOK at it.

Howard Lester KE7QJ






From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!butch!cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com!news
From: Tom Childers <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best material for 1/4 gound plane and mast?
Date: 12 Jul 1995 18:41:11 GMT
Organization: IRM
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3u1507$[e-mail]>
References: <3tpkp9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.189.144.53
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] wrote:
>I have trouble choosing the best materials for a 1/4 wave groung plane antenna and its
>mast.

What band do you expect to use the antenna on?  That makes a difference.

N5GE



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!butch!cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com!news
From: Tom Childers <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: DX Station needs Help w/ LOOP ANTENNA
Date: 12 Jul 1995 18:48:12 GMT
Organization: IRM
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3u15dc$[e-mail]>
References: <3tqi3q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.189.144.53
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (BV/N0IAT) wrote:

>Anyway, I am now considering an HF
>LOOP such as the AEA IsoLoop or the MFJ loop, but,
>dont know the difference or merit/demerit of each.

I used the AEA Isoloop for 3 years in an apartment and found it to be a
very good antenna as far as small antenns go.  I don't know about the
MFJ, but I suspect is comparable.

N5GE



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!nwfocus.wa.com!golden.ncw.net!bing.ncw.net!kevinc
From: Kevin Cole <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rhombic aeriel
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 20:17:14 -0700
Organization: North Central Washington Network
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3to71v$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail] >
NNTP-Posting-Host: bing.ncw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail] >

On Tue, 11 Jul 1995, Ken Johnson wrote:

> Well, it's prolly the MOST effective W4 filter I have used...  Pointed
> NE, it drops W4's by a gob - 4 or 5 S-units.  It's not really designed by
> choice, more by lot size, but seems to honk pretty well iffin ur in the
> way of the thing.

what bands did you fir eit up on? which were most effective?

(Out here it would be a W6 filter BTW)

WA7ZNB


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (CQ Communications / R. Moseson )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: CQ Antenna Issue 8/95
Date: 12 Jul 1995 21:14:36 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 7
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3u1dvs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-rnwk1-05.ix.netcom.com

CQ magazine's August, 1995, issue is dedicated almost entirely to
antennas -- projects, reviews, etc.  A full description is posted on
rec.radio.amateur.misc.

73 de Rich Moseson, NW2L
CQ Online
<[e-mail]>


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.uiowa.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (John Stroppel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Dish-cone HF
Date: 12 Jul 1995 21:34:58 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3u1f62$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: franklin.uhl.uiowa.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950515BETA PL0]



Can the bottom of the skirt of an HF dish-cone antenna be grounded? In
other words- The copper pipe which I used to bond the skirt wires together,
Can it be buried in the ground?   John  WA0VYZ

 John Stroppel                         | Internet: [e-mail]
 The University of Iowa - Hygienic Lab | Amateur Radio: WA0VYZ
 Oakdale Research Campus, OH-M7A       | Voice:    [phone]
 Iowa City, IA   52242                 | Fax:      [phone]


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.rain.org!warp10.smartlink.net!news
From: DOUG WILSON <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.antiques.radio+phono,rec.arts.wobegon,rec.models.rc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Subject: Re: Personal Service 1-800-559-6557
Date: 12 Jul 1995 23:38:20 GMT
Organization: SANTA CLARITA ROTORY MODELERS
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <3u1mdc$[e-mail]>
References: <3tp7p8$4rk$[e-mail]> <3trd4i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm206-52.smartlink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.arts.wobegon:4579 rec.models.rc:55605 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11862 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9427

jjk



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:23 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Forget traps and use Autotuner?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 01:10:50 GMT
Lines: 25

Michael Adams ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Later I got to thinking, that perhaps I could duplicate the antenna
: without the traps (build my own with aluminum tubing), and just use a
: Smartuner located at the balun for matching.  Is there any reason why this
: could not work?

Certainly you could do this and it would load up. However, using traps
maintains the 1/2 wavelength of the antenna for each band. Loading up
the entire antenna for every band would produce a different radiation
pattern. And, actually may produce a sharper pattern on the higher bands.

This is no big deal for such a short antenna but lets say you did this
on an 80 meter dipole instead of using traps. Then, on 10 meters your
radiation pattern would be vastly different then the trap dipole and
could be a real hinderance since it would likely have some very sharp
narrow lobes.

Get the picture? Good thinking though. Sometimes it would pay to invest
in a fancy tuner instead of a fancy antenna! 73
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:23 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: 450 ohm twinlead
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3u0c4j$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 01:13:47 GMT
Lines: 13

Bill Bressler ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Will coiling up extra twinlead have the same effect as
: coiling up coax?

: Bill
NO. This would cause an inbalance in your line. Don't do it.   Your only
hope  is to cut the twinlead to a non-resonant length to prevent
antenna current pickup. 73
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:24 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!rubenc
From: [e-mail] (Charles A. Rubenstein)
Subject: Icom AH3 tuner-> Non Icom rig?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 02:59:35 GMT
Lines: 10


Can the Icom AH3 tuner be used with Non-Icom equipment?
Is there a way to provide the info to the tuner that the
Icom radio normally provides?

CHarlie KB8BWE
[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!hookup!olivea!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (ED GASS)
Newsgroups: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FM recieving via a TV antenna?
Date: 13 Jul 1995 07:18:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3u2vef$[e-mail]>
References: <3u0nn0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (ED GASS)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


Amost all FM broadcast antennas are now CIRCULARY polarized and either
vertical or horizontal (or any angle in between) polarized receiving
antennas work equally well.

Ed Gass
Houston, TX

**********
ALL usual disclaimer apply.  This is my personal, not professional,
opinion; and does not represent the views of either my employers nor my
clients.  Entire contents, unless noted, Copyright 1995 Edward W. Gass,
all rights reserved.  Permission of use with attribution granted.  The
information herein has been gathered from sources believed to be reliable
and presented in a form believed to be accurate; however, the author makes
no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy or adequacy of this
information for any purpose.  Your mileage may vary.  If symptoms persist,
consult a professional.  Not responsible for typographical arrows.







From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!nntp.gmd.de!news.rwth-aachen.de!news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need reference for VHF/UHF yagi book
Date: 13 Jul 1995 07:28:48 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <3u2hvg$[e-mail]>
References: <3u15qu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de
Keywords: yagi vhf uhf
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8323 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11875

In article <3u15qu$[e-mail]>, David Willmore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I'm looking for a good book on yagi antenna design that doesn't spend the
>whole book talking about HF tri-banders.  I'm interested in 2m and up.  I
>live in an appartment and space limitations and the landlord don't allow
>for HF operation.

Hi David,

Well there are good and not so good designs around. Before thinking about
a yagi, you shold be sure you have a place *in the clear* to put it up.
If it sits between houses, only a very short antenna (three element
or cubidal quad) will not suffer excessive degradation of its radiation
pattern.

I can't see that 1/2 " copper pipe is particularly suited for yagi
construction, you have to varnish it (and maintain the varnish
in good shape) and use a fairly beefy boom to carry the weight.

If you design a yagi, a good idea is to go for a feed point
impedance of 50 Ohms and use a folded dipole with cable balun.
Its a sure-fire no-tune method. (see K1FO)

73, Moritz DL5UH








From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:26 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 11:39:23 GMT
Lines: 8

ROBERT G. FRICK ([e-mail]) wrote:

No he didn't
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:27 1995
Newsgroups: sci.engr.television.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!agora!agora.rdrop.com!caf
From: [e-mail] (Chuck Forsberg)
Subject: Re: FM recieving via a TV antenna?
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: agora.rdrop.com
Organization: RainDrop Laboratories
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3tqlab$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 11:47:15 GMT
Lines: 12

In article <3tqlab$[e-mail]>,
 <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>We have a central large TV antenna in our roof (which recieves, I guess,
>>VHF and UHF I-III).
>>I would like to know if I can connect the antenna to a FM radio
>>transistor to get a better quality.

It depends on the TV antenna.  Some work well on FM, some are designed to
attenuate FM (to prevent nearby FM stations from interfering).  And of
course the TV antenna may not be pointing the right direction.

But it's worth a try.


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Coleman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: lightning models
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 12:06:24 -0600
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu

I wonder has anyone tried modeling lightning protection? Specifically,
I've used EZNEC to model the lightning rods/conductors and estimate
induced currents on other lines such as phone and power lines. Anybody
else try this? What sources do you use? (I've used 0.5 MA current source
at 2 MHz). What loads and ground configuration?

Thanks in advance,
Jim, KA6A

--
Jim
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!Lehigh.EDU!Lehigh.EDU!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 1/4wave mag mount size
Date: 13 Jul 1995 12:09:29 -0400
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3u3gfp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ns3-1.cc.lehigh.edu

Hello, i was wondering the exact size for a 1/4 wave 2m mag mount?
i have a mount, and the rods, but when i use it at 19.5" my radio gets VERY
hot.

thanks

DAvid
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|         David Roseman       |          [e-mail]       OUTTA ORDER!
|                             |                                  |      |
|      SysOp of NODE 3 BBS    |          The Flying HAm - BBS    |      |
|     Running OBV/2 Software  |          TechnoMage - BBS        |      |
|                             |          N3SQE/SVARC - Ham       V      |
|         HAmmy in IRC        |  [e-mail] - Packet  |


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!darwin.sura.net!wvnvms!cerc.wvu.edu!crowe.geo.wvu.edu!randy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: thru-glass on Mazda
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: randy@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_DOMAIN_FILE (Randy Crowe)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 12:21:37 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Concurrent Engineering Research Center
Summary: Info / thoughts on antenna mouning on Mazda
Nntp-Posting-Host: crowe.geo.wvu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 20

Greetings;

    I just leased a Mazda 626.  Fine car except the fit and finish are so
tight that I can't get an antenna lead, much less mouning bracket, out of
the trunk lid.  As it's a leased vehicle, I can't poke a hole in it and
put an antenna on there like I know is the proper way to do it.  Also I
don't really want to use a mag mount due to possible paint scratching as
I experienced on my old car.  Has anyone tried thru-glass mounts on this
car?  Note that it does have a rear window defroster grid.  How bad will
this mess me up?  Any thoughts, ideas, info, etc... will be apreciated.
Please respont to either address below or post follow ups here.


tnx

Randy  N8OZY

[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:30 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!fonorola!infoshare!whome!ve3ied!problem!vigard!mdf
From: [e-mail] (Matthew Francey)
Subject: Re: Antenna rotator survey
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: The International Bank of Intermod
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3t958q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 14:23:53 GMT
Lines: 30

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

>Assuming you are north of the tropic of cancer, the sun will never
>rise or set due east or west of your location. That only happens if
>you are located on the equator at the equinoxes.

minor correction:

from the position given in my signature below (Toronto, Canada) here are
data from a sunrise program for various dates of this year:

                      Sunrise  Sunset
                      Azimuth Azimuth
March 21, 1995:         88.9   271.2
June 21, 1995:          55.7   304.3
September 21, 1995:     88.2   271.7
December 21, 1995:     122.4   237.6

so at least two days it will rise/set very close to due east/west.
these dates will be close to the equinoxes, but not exact due to
atmospheric refraction.  (the above table attempts to include this
effect).

now if you meant exactly due east or west (eg, 270.00000000... degrees)
and neglecting the air and parallax -- well, that can only happen for
an observer who is lucky enough to be on the sunrise/sunset terminator
at the instant of the equinox.  the terminator in this case would be a
line of longitude, not the equator.
--
Matthew Francey | [e-mail] | VE3RQX | GPS(NAD27) N43o34.203' W79o34.572' +93m


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Dan and Carol Clark )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Comments on GAP Antennas, Anyone?
Date: 13 Jul 1995 14:25:03 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3u3abv$[e-mail]>
References: <3s5bh5$[e-mail]> <3t971h$[e-mail]> <3tkn04$[e-mail]> <3tkrd8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-ont3-07.ix.netcom.com

I own a GAP Titan. The unit is easy to put together. No traps. The only
adjustment is the shortening and lenthening of a wire on the bottom of
the antenna for forty meters.
 When I first installed the antenna the 20 meters SWR was high. I
called the factory. They were polite and very helpfull. I was told to
cut 1/2 inch off a small rod. This took 5 minutes. The SWR is now
perfect.
 Eighty meters is as advertized. You will have to choose between the CW
portion and the SSB for eighty. You can change a small cap on the end
of the antenna if you want to change which area on eighty you want to
work, but the antenna must come down to reach the end of it. It is a
tall antenna.
 I am very pleased with it. Is it a 4 element mono bander?  No, but it
meets my needs very well, I receive very nice signal reports and I hear
well.

Good DX,  Dan


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!darwin.sura.net!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!stc06.ctd.ornl.gov!usenet
From: "Walter L. Zorn" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/4wave mag mount size
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 14:33:37 EDT
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 1wz.win.ornl.gov
X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_16
X-POPMail-Charset: English
To: [e-mail]

On 13 Jul 1995 12:09:29 -0400,
[e-mail]  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hello, i was wondering the exact size for a 1/4 wave 2m mag mount?
>i have a mount, and the rods, but when i use it at 19.5" my radio gets VERY
>hot.
>
>thanks
>DAvid

David, If you're using an HT with 12V power, many of them get very hot;
and, it has little to do with the antenna system.  If the VSWR is low -
it's likely the 12V power source instead of the 7.2V one.  Not a big deal.
Mine gets REAL hot  on 12V (too hot to hold if I'm transmitting a lot).

Please advise if your VERY hot radio is an HT and what your SWR is at the
radio.

Respectfully,
Walt



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (William R. Hester)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cushcraft R7 vs.R5 Bandwidth
Date: 13 Jul 1995 14:56:21 -0600
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Lines: 30
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3u419l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx.cs.du.edu

I'm considering the purchase of either the
Cushcraft R7 or R5 antenna for my small
city lot.

The information from Cushcraft shows that
the R7 has considerably smaller bandwidth
on 20 meters than the R5.

I would like the extra 30 and 40 meter bands
that the R7 offers, but I'm concerned about
the limited 20 meter bandwidth.

Anyone had any experience comparing these two
antennas?  Any ways around the problem - like
using a tuner or some modification of the
antenna itself?

The proposed installation will be on the roof
about 15 feet above ground level.

Please post responses since others may be
interested too.

Tnx, Bill, N0LAJ, Denver

--
Bill Hester, Ham Radio N0LAJ, Denver CO., USA - N0LAJ@W0LJF.#NECO.CO.USA.NOAM
Please route replies to: [e-mail] or uunet!nyx!whester
Public Access Unix @ University of Denver, Denver Colorado USA
(no official affiliation with the above university)


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Dan and Carol Clark )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Help in choosing a mobile antenna
Date: 13 Jul 1995 15:07:43 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3u3crv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-ont3-26.ix.netcom.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11867 rec.radio.amateur.misc:82822

I desire to use a mobile antenna on a sailboat and on a fifth wheel,
therefore this antenna must be easily moveable. I have the obvious
choices of the Ham stick, Hustler and Outbacker antennas.

I desire any comments on these choices and any other suggestions a ham
may have. I would like to know about their general ease of mounting,
general performance, noise, ease of band change, broadband performance
and any other comments users may have in regards to these antennas.
Thank you for your time.
Dan, N6FPE, Rancho Cucamonga.


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!psuvm!tjh112
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 16:10:37 EDT
From: tyler harpster <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: circularly polarized sat. ant.for fm?
Lines: 6

I'm looking at getting a decent antenna for my 2m ht.  I'd like to get into
satellites sometime in the near future and am considering getting a circularly
polarized 22 element beam used for satellite work.  How would this work on FM?
I know I'd lose something like 3db because I'd only be picking up the verticall
y polarized signal, but what about reception?  Same holds right?  Would the gai
n of the antenna as listed in the catalog be halved for my FM terristrial?
 any replies would be greatly appreciated.  thanks.. tyler N3SPD


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:35 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Martin)
Subject: Re: thru-glass on Mazda
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Mr Usenet Himself)
Nntp-Posting-Host: world.std.com
Organization: WK1V
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 16:45:40 GMT
Lines: 30

randy@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_DOMAIN_FILE (Randy Crowe) wrote:

:>Greetings;

:>    I just bought (leased actually) a Mazda 626.  Seems like a nice automobile
:>except the thing is built so tight that I can't get the antenna cable out of
:>the trunk to use a lip mount bracket.  As it's a leased vehicle, I can't
:>just poke a hole in it and mount an antenna properly.  Don't really want
:>to use a mag mount due to possible paint damage as occoured on my old car.

:>    Anyone have any suggestions/thoughts on using a through-the-glass mount
:>on this model car?  Any reply's will be appreciated.

Randy, you'll have to find out from Mazda (not the dealer) if they used
pacivated (sp?) glass in the car or not.  I have done no reading on this but
many newer model cars are manufactured with this type of glass which is
impregnated with a metallic substance that has a definite affect on the
capacitive coupling used by glass-mount antennae.

Otherwise, the folks I have come into contact with are very happy with their
glassmount antennae.
73

============================================================================
Jim Martin, WK1V                | I speak for no one....not even myself.
Lowell, Massachusetts           |
USAF(Ret) 1973-1993             |
Ex-KB1LW-N1CLS-KA5MWD-HL9ZF     |
============================================================================



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Martin)
Subject: Re: TA-33 Mods?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Mr Usenet Himself)
Nntp-Posting-Host: world.std.com
Organization: WK1V
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
References: <[e-mail]> <3u0viq$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 16:45:45 GMT
Lines: 41

Tom Childers <[e-mail]> wrote:

:>[e-mail] (Tom Jenkins) wrote:
:>>I've acquired a four year old three element TA-33.  Have there been any
:>>modifications or helpful hints to this antenna?  Any articles in QST etc?

:>In 1982 I bought a TA-33 that was 20 years old.  The last time I saw a
:>new one it looked exactly the same!  The TA-33 is a good antenna.... no
:>reason to change the design.:-)

Yeah!  No reason to change the design at all.  I have the KR-40 (I believe
that is the number(?)) 40 meter adapter kit for my TA-33.  I had it set up in
New Hampshire where the winds get pretty feisty in the wintertime.  Using an
Alliance HD-73 rotator was no good when the 40 meter kit was added.  It made
mincemeat outta the innards of my rotator....and cost me $30.00 to replace
them...we're talking 1990.

I spent a year in Korea (June 89-June 90) with the USAF and had left
instructions with my wife to face the beam elements parallel with the wind
whenever they were up and beyond the 35 mph mark. One night she called me and
told me, "It ain't turnin' no more."  (She doesn't really speak like
that...just did that for emphasis!?!?   ;-)

So, when I got home I climbed the tower and took the rotator out.  Once inside
the shack I took the rotator apart and there was aluminum and plastic all over
the place.  I guess the moral of the story is to use a rotator adequately
rated for the wind-load of the antennae you will have installed above.

The TA-33 by itself worked greatly for the few years after until I retired
from the military and took it down.  Once I move into an area (out of the
city) and can put my tower back up, the TA-33 will go back to where it
belongs.  I miss it dearly right now.

73
============================================================================
Jim Martin, WK1V                | I speak for no one....not even myself.
Lowell, Massachusetts           |
USAF(Ret) 1973-1993             |
Ex-KB1LW-N1CLS-KA5MWD-HL9ZF     |
============================================================================



From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!pacbell.com!ohlone.kn.pacbell.com!mobermei
From: [e-mail] (Mike Obermeier)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Radome Questions
Date: 13 Jul 1995 18:22:56 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3u3oa0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.216.139.46
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Hello all.  I am researching the possibility of building myself various
radomes for antenna arrays that I intend to build.  The domes would range
in size from a 3' spherical to approx. 12' hemispherical and almost
certainly be based of geodesic designs.  Does anyone here know of a good
text on the subject of radomes or could possibily share any of their
expertice on the matter.  For instance, what materials are used for shell
construction, how domes might affect transmission/reception...etc.

Thanks in advance for your help.   Mike   de KD6SNE


From [e-mail] Thu Jul 13 20:37:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!news.crosslink.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Chester Alderman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 450 ohm twinlead
Date: 13 Jul 1995 19:48:16 GMT
Organization: CrossLink Internet Services
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3u3ta0$[e-mail]>
References: ws.ch.intel.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pmloc15.pechan.com
X-Newsreader: NetSuite News for OS/2 [version: 4.0]

Contrary to some reports your going to get, a friend of mine has 10 turns of
PVC covered 450 ohm line coiled in a 1 foot diameter in the basement of his
house. That notwithstanding, right outside of his basement window he has
buried a 3 inch piece of white PVC pipe in the ground and he runs TWO pieces
of his 450 ohm line through those 30 foot pieces of PCV pipe, underground! He
then does a slow wrap of the 450 ohm line around the trunk of a tree that is
almost 2 foot in diameter.
This is not something he told me, I literally saw it and I have pictures of
it. Does it work? Year before last he came in 13th on 80 mtrs in the CQ WW CW
DX contest! His call is K1WGM.

Tom/W4BQF


[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (LONG) MicroSmith .GAM to Z file conversion pgm (0/1)
Date: 19 Jul 1995 05:59:04 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <3ui6v8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx5-33.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

Here's a utility program to convert MicroSmith .GAM files
into comma-delimited files containing impedance data. Both
source and executable files are included. See the READ.ME
file for more information.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (LONG) MicroSmith .GAM to Z file conversion pgm [gamtoz.zip] (1/1)
Date: 19 Jul 1995 05:59:34 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 745
Message-ID: <3ui706$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx5-33.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

begin 644 GAMTOZ.ZIP
M4$L#!!0````(``FU\AYQK%<?Y00``(P-```*````1T%-5$]:+D)!4ZU6;6_;
M-A#^7B#_X>`6J)W:3KRVR)JU`Y)83@PD4BH[Z)!OK$3;1"52HZ@DWJ_?D:(H
MVE'0%9B_F"*?>^Z5O`/]>PN79S?+Z'Y\?K8X>'7PRF[&E*0EW+!$BD7.U`;&
M"(,5R^@0$L$?J%0EK$F>$W@@645+4`)87M"4\(260R`\=62/DBE$2%I6&8HQ
MCEC"A=I0:2AQ!TF1:Y32C*$ZFL)*R)RH,<05AT<TP)$9FTJQ4O#UG)0L`2'A
M:\62'^9K[/FPW+`2"BG6DN1#K>,[JH125#*AVCZ@3S2I%/F.%FAU:'5"$(5?
MDM)L"XXI$05#F[1,RDHEV?<*;1Q#*."12$FXHA3$"@%;^,$0A8K7[(%R$P?@
MHJ4JJZ(04FD$>2`LT]I]H\^W$(LM7--'DF6:X-M)<.U.`2:?/GT<'9^,)K]K
M(7<PI6NT>21)R@BW&2J9X`YR$86+I8;%)(4O,#Z>G'SX^/Z]/=WANA$/%%+Q
MR($@4U5DQK>,<5HZU&T\#Y>[:R=_215@;C'B1:7J!'.24XW`HSG7.R%NG#J9
M>7A[MX3>O!7HFWHC95GE-!WH''\.,,KR3Q`<,Z,$4`RL36[O#]2EQ=XT?+-F
M`UWM]6!Y%83V".`R6D;H'J=V)PBG*.`"89VXJ(O<6*[58=JHA(24=>DHR7+(
M*(:;K^T&)E-_E`5)O$"U=EPOX_G-FWY<_]U=G"V"-WU[/!@,O`">I6E]WU"O
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M$/2%,`\8LK07HN$=0F\FZ=]P<_5/#]<QB$U>ZM5?]6H?OM=!X?YXK[)>3X;^
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MW\QE:T=3]X`UK77WB3$CT<[CXG$US\R=]Z;HS=TW9^S%J'UG]/4<ZB`,M4L[
M!=7T,4Z?%)3X(59VZ':PZRBZ]:=!P;VATFLY!Z]<ASWU\($>!T9*DJ+0G41B
M#!BGM>D%Y7JOHW4_FP&A=\?--*V$D=N?`I_-:3Z#L7)G/M2*VB;SB_9V]:__
M9K`_+CSO[ETF>Y.$UJ5#??KRG%R/X]?1(M#@()SJOW\!4$L#!!0````(`$>S
M\AYI"?WM$7H``!BC```*````1T%-5$]:+D581>R\>UP41[8`7/V8GF$&!@0<
MC8\!C9A$E#6@J+Q51!,C#J`\1&$W-\GNS69SLT,W:*Z!)I,59EJ-C\2XD'5]
MY.%&S9J835!6!`8A8(B@44%\@H\>VR?HC`^<_D[U`)+LWN_>O[_?Q]C=]3AU
MZE35J5.G3IURP9+A1"I"*!C=1;*,E*=P"T)&2"/0___W__6_E]^8.W/!HH5+
M@H,/4F9B,LKO2Y_<]^4'`Y-U?A4\,I45^1ZDG@3>0R81H4R5#]*;RKPU!RF)
M)A&B*B*1T111;2K[\Y"#5-D__`[B%)-2[(6`@Q1'.48J*65LX$'*5/8/Y?TU
M?BNI%?Y]!6B(_'$H3J[N*\KJ<88G'@;QBOD4U/R;87T%"'AD6?F6?3T=$F6Y
M/_O[_X'4J'\A->KGI+Y%XI1_0VI4/ZGF`1IP4;*/!O)?:<!)#WR@GE"HK,()
ML;=Q+Y)$7\";Z.O7?L`G/8U;]"YSD*J,0T8UDU;V:U4_N3AG9M1!ZNEJEG*8
MB2>0L_X=I)*3]#_FO/B+G.:IS(NH>8K>0#1/-4(HUI,06V9%,3@]"4%Z\J#T
M,X/24SWID#V%&4%`:AQ.3?>DQF&P5)RPQ).`(<8GXX0<3P+.O`#1ESW1'%P`
M7E.9EW$(7E$UD/N:)S=]('?)D]PID:]A?*][0)8,@*3W@SCZ0=X$D)\/CQR9
MB.3(6:ALL@I'WH#(Z_V1MR#R)BJ+A(BCT.U(1D_&R=@_EI&_G"R.EMXG8`G]
M8%'_`K;H\;].-,R@WQF`LG7A\#+#Z]_,YS\O%JZGI9J$,\W3U)8Z.ENXO.P(
M)%FND\W1.>[FV,R!!+IY6DXO)"SY98JET(U8;?.TI%XH@B$L=60?3'-4>_.,
MN)5$<ZQM_#O$%IR*PAN;IUZ49BH8]):X423B5-=>TP('3*UNGE;H;)[6*22Y
M6R^,:(R-XO,UE2IT+6C.00I#4F:F7<9(M(U<A7@4.>MF_3=P6R-_::;M!\GT
M<Y1'_L\HW1BEN!*C>]N#CN`O$N$_-$_YOGEJ#7YCIGG8'/5`VX@!+@ST@-__
MI0)U\]3N\$8I0!PQJ(8$_F("U!#U0-J%NX.&%KF:IX45PI2Y#`#-4^\WSRB\
M"WAMK]USUI&L"OA.HIIGM`,R.V)4.H91J53P3"RNK"?"3FTV!%GJ-'P<PQ#L
M<.%,<1'Y*L'Y%L<C9/8JCG\PKH"RU#%`\T:%L.:I<<TP**:MS<3VHT1F\]2P
MHT2O-6X#88W\@*!^M.HW$3NV$E;#=B*B4=?!S6Q@MA!:)-I0J7X=(0!,/=-$
M(+$":2'N8K82LLPQKII9PUF*;YR\;2\A&+\F;&%-T)HP7)'=:MQ"B-VD%1>'
M:IJG,7N)YAFC!8A+AS*AC#0>7IE;N&&N#M=Y2P<2CNM.L?Y\HY^S@>>TD@H^
M&'>P-6XO807D=C&8^JLIHE%H%T,I\T'AOCB.,A\2C@NW6J^V'F\YX7E3CP-.
M\R=07^2^Y3B"&/N3M#&BT:K?3#0P9<0-N8'YL87D*+Z9%^<1X8T1'6(2
MQ?Y7<DPBFQ`SAXW@XSXC$)L;$\K2,9.XC&1I'!_W":08DD0CE9P,Z=XQDUA-
MS(P"5<QD,V'/E"+$,W)Q(TE+C'A<YAOU#=!)""6)KY-_-8GS2.=ADM,J.*#2
MQ@1H..GJ<$*GDNQX9PW#C>'C_D+0!2.<AWDVX-#G1,I^&CT05*Z6H0CMZG1F
M22I^?!/QV'F88'WXRT41'59C&?3+5D)X1,65$53<5L)YV(^C0^.V$\5R%%%(
M'8J"P&?N=ZA#G[G%3U1X%"QQFPEU/M2OP6P\]2+P7S7AF;)'8-"<S`_$3&XL
M\"",U$#:$<*/5?'Z)H)(X2_SFC^HL^S*B,YHRXBHWK5KE^VRS^VB7;E\(V&/
MD(5;PGGAE-`@UA'FU[75G)>L+R.D.^(_"!,P4R;5`B-B.8$LIY"[AH_[F*"Y
M"3IYQ1#<ZC%"0^L%W6&=75?+#<7UD5;#Y]#$OQ'6L%V$-6X/P3\(,/]#?)W(
M>\1?=E?$)>CDY<'SQ!>0Y.2;B8CJ?ULF77`=^I;8L&OCK@]W;=JU85<.M/E;
MPIZQ.$VH%?5(U"&J)3.@+3-`S`RXW]K9>KSU1.LI.S!H@C01LVGX#1BJ$<`F
M_V<V78'ZV/0]9/X.V/0=9#Y@$AI<X[<0PGWAFF#'(=TQ;IO01ITUEV<J7)K7
M)FWXW_N]4BX2PY!Y6/&C'[P+NOEFLK6+LK=VP;MM>9=TR2Z^BU@OX$T5\":5
M["W;DQ_8Q3<1^V#B9//=&*]"9N(0\W5:&P63^YU+X9?L2<G0:\V$#//A@=UY
M^%GN%@_SDY<DS$JW^&8_8#?NM#@1L>TQ8>PUP/)CC%=!$\[5RS"5^.9@F=E,
M`*9B0$%`7"/=C([<1.0]O9N/^Q3FBU],,'LSQHN]%J-EK\3XL)TQOS$S,6\7
MD.-R[>'5]M=Z9>7/'=_\@^?O47S5.:*!)B9'5`LM"?N"U7;H*JWEP7UV&'_1
ME_6I<A+.&@WG4W6+D#15CPF)JJ+(`P121U3;F=5M:ZM[#QTC,F#R]'R:([S$
M\*^HB_8%"[0ND=0ETD*++I%AM^@:5Y#[)KE:736WBURM[)8TD(XZ$DM'';G=
MA\32T8=LGD$KLCZF.39"KFHG=MON[Q&^/^"WP-6Y?N\"YR7J^X!3>\N<5^'[
ML-AQU[_X_.R`#-?YJF.$.(VL_`N3VQQ3_JOF*7AN>9%X/+7D3%8WM_)S1LF(
M:LS`N*>&X8KW?+3GPST;]FS<L[[8X8YWM0NNB.HN[U:I]73KV=9S+6<Z[Q:?
M+*,"'`&M`>V'SA/[_5!X=4I:ZN)T4\NEUI/`L<=`W+4,#F?Y7\X*N),5X,@*
M:,T*:`]$/\ND)W_1>7#A"WLG/^[YLM=2XP]=7NH-ZMV2;+6]3TW82B;TA;Y7
M]8<>:OI""1][]X5,=M^^T+B[_IX0OVFSP1,*_F?54SA$'VH<N79*`MIVXX<?
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MC-QB>Q+2R>PS(!=OX5]&B!JQCK26"[8++?`CZ\(O46U]S)0MM=@5!66$)2Z8
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M-U*J\1Y<32?15TT[85`+A4Q5K:<:(9\Y5`'5W!VHIH+HJV:$IYJ[W!6A_@EJ
MQTWD<'@JH-,SA'P-(!,2-<!HHK!`HVMDS]GNVDX4=_*\S1W^,"*'YJ_RI84R
M?ZD(U!:A+;0F3R.TV[I=;26NTGRW-:<W-@$5?)$NW!;F,,(R6EA`"D,C9,M-
MC7D4_Y`?*=M.VN[8FFV2[;SMO@U8'G+RKKA.6>HUK$^KV-K1VMYZ.IF[-U*&
MJ>)EJ24"?@PX%U"?PQ?*B,NG`@->(@.6T@&)3)ZAM<T#7850P$D/F)S4*Q1J
MK4.M"TCK,MH*%"3U:E]S6^=HE.;6:I#@`@`\+Y3>DD2A6W='UZ.[S6KY?#>O
MO;3\D!2'LV&Y*M3NPG]276C@R)?(D4OID5#K4=<Q6&B.NUHBG`/$+1<X[0">
M6B&_5WN)>\IVP=9@>V0[:W/8?K1UAQ^#=N9_!AE7=4Y8L:J7^R:S'X%^T@H:
M2HOVTHH[UOQ>QRPYHCJB(Z(QXEB$TR%Y!H7$@\((A;1G4,YY!N64T!+16MR)
M>,\X4#63W/'+:W6UUB3WXH@;&(=`NUYE8#$[#>J9D$BZ7J4'(I!##D085TA?
M.`4*84"&:@NX9FGU`-(#$0:7\D32(CJ43(82`YI`VU$RZ<$1I6;A1$[N,IC:
MNH[ENGF@PI^$Y0K:6]R`^$,P9JZ`4P%'`\[G40G?\4*A!@;)NHRQ+J"MBTGK
M5,]X,0@)^IU,UY!*`L3?9TPEC2K"`W#H2-82X4QHFUD7;=RB,JN$KM24(ZDI
MV[:J$CA51+5C'B6';55!!Z9G&"LF>*UM,ZJ%=*9*@_9$U[)^"9M8[X\BJO?+
M<O>7@DN2-OT9>I9<?3K(,RG`0A11C?>'AJ!K9Q)AUPTV`H>3_&9R\Y@8,@_0
M,Z8CJR[$:LF]M-EX:*V7$$FB4%>Q&_F9J2KD]W#MJ>*Z'S6/\O01U9$-S&[5
MZB'7WO*/04+]5_3Q"_,B=^Q462ZY(ZWCOU!1+BN476T//>?J^.;%YC&1JXTD
MLVTBBMPQF8%P&`/E)S+%R*#N/?2C9G^+)O1H1'7/%X8@07]`TT7*K1C]T"%E
MFE2P%MPHB_.+088@7O\J0Y2EIQRD[!44BO2`*!2L]<)MV$$S%6AJ\QBK\;9J
M-=.M4GHX;"U#,N.%R(GH,/,%L_IT1$<D[N8\E2'((;LC#S-?0F(EH,.IAB`G
M$TE3+%,/'W3$4U0_$77%K:V)D,?SL8B=LM\'576J>CYC=?OEHHCJ[B^Y,=)E
MQJ@.`@5>QWQ%[YXXT^QS[,(&_%5I:[^0;AJ"8'@C^<]U(,%08O,8L\Y9R[-,
M)/^^CDF8O^)R59/F4)-&_#NJ^IHY]"TC?H:.X/I)QV09QBJB40J$SWX"22`H
M]R-"4L$'E&W8F!NK?M1`_XDLZL/Q>U0<]T_-R9,<+1MJ-3@1<M-1']@"5/::
M;PP"GAB2J;UDXG260@8,$@U)C(S`8AB#()7S`0%MDHU)3.8W+S6/R<TYHG2C
MNI)4&-5XV'!;58%"FL<$'8EVY>DMMVA!I9M#LMWR:.FF?9#])F.Q:+BW+/=(
MQF*#6GP;S)4YZ-`"^O%!V*W/1AM`L]L`6FZK[J3N.'=3<.T+WCL9LH6CH3_V
M?#D7?TJ].[73$PG@^F.9DO>!%^C0DYFZ:JP0]P)6X.1CKGOKX=\FU[U-&UWW
M-MHA,P`2CUOLA.MD0+>K-:#)U1)0:P=U=<.>]7M*N@=3A]#&[\I@&GPRI]_X
MM%A\]Q8H"`-_"]+F+)@^C4&_?:T@+"QL;L9+<*YP"0TENL'",8DQ,[X,1?PW
M<8`X1%@>>1?XMG89]P=XK6T/DS_R0T%'?&19:)'N)R^</BW61VL$V9B[MEX?
M%"'W*ER4NE^%JN:@/BX*!RYBKTJQ$-P;W//EPO&VH=IC;`B>R$7"^>XO%X8^
M$HXR0<)QD!;?)#2/T0<=>!'M)Y5P4#U#(R2-6A?4/&0<V2)NIQ$?!RFL5DP:
MEZ>J<,NPM5J(Q*>Q@!%'PB3?@=`.$FVET6:[6-@'K.KH`G"[)T)V=&W3HQU^
M("RB`#E+@0*UPQOMT"`[E+4:2&3?KT,54Z8>,J+F,0G6T:OGD)8&NK/GP%9=
M5:[NT"R=!X_7@<7J*E)]Z%=JHSZH8DK(?@T&[WPDG(2/<`IH]^`)`3S&PT,A
MGH#1W+5''/,@>!:,9L*9\LCV:?#\*E*82UOJ](!%:(,%5;1T499'%$O,ZKRU
MS0^%,GJTS]O90]7:E:;MV([LO'X8(CVH*/X'4HG3=M-BR_51PO7V?*P8/DHS
M5L"P@<IC2R+#94O<=H0-'T<)9P/!:7<2+`-AQWMH)PGF:#>DTISW3IK5\$=I
ML9>4VIT-&@#38#"-XP1I,S*(/U+-=SUV'A]KA^)!)B%)PU]2QSX$3L[TYB4]
MQ$.F4[&(R.3(*81'-T5>C`8%95OJ1BW[FWR((S/MIC3A#&YPI'4NDXWMEHXN
M,CTM)35#R*&%9-)UW-;,7YS>XFAQ'#_B;*AF4X5T37'W!<)96\T%NVJ#"2[!
M6>O':9RU&LX@35G'/_1G]?S#0-9+>F:=J]:/X(+YJ_%"I!^*CO2'%HO'W)9Z
M;RO$R]N=Y1TQ#A7AM%,L);VX[@EFUDLI24E3U^DZ6$:L1E+H.@\./>!P5$';
MJ?)V5WG'Q">I8JG;<E/![+1[<R:AQW+E-DR'$>4=<2\BV#I*8(@H[PB#,-@'
MH+PTJ;\L^S1_Q!NC4S`"78.01O0C'=1NG=+NIW"[*2EIG:T)-N('ZDS'.U?<
MP55?MW2J6SJ%)N'X\29G+<6-DWS7M1YI/0+H778*L3UV_@>Z/HF$'G@-Y2[)
MRLYQ_-8]SBT.)3R1ZX]YO0:1*4*RAK]8S3^H9O\`P>*+TRG+`]#Q+`_\@"TN
M3K8\F,PMPD,R^N<=_,?'/^M@*)I2?!'1Q34T84W6B-\A<1'*LER<S@,R#0_(
MQO%W-,6--0S.78^DYSV5$<4/$,%28A$2Q\&TYW](4%BHL;RM%;_/MI6?C3.@
M<BUC0%GC'CNF/2[O*/0O%Y)'N&KD(G:,,^DIGC.4GW_37TFW%(Y`K'>Q(RZ!
M2(81>=/?#O;'9']K<J`UV6!-'FY-'B&)F(5#J@G^+A%;C3+S*)%"CO.]SKH$
M;B%4;\Q(3TD#&H`\H9V_K.:;V_BN:KX'N`4XE&^D#^=K5SE6IP>N*318"_WK
MDPSEUN1A]4E/'9%S_+.S<G*#GE!L-Z;M$YQU-#=]GPTV)]SS^TIW\ESH/JNS
MCN#&[2O>27#&?9:=-#=\WWL[-9S_OC_M]..\]ZW:&<PQ^TIV)G!(F<S;$-(Q
MV-2^$2]A&[,](N`I/BX0)K=A>R`*JV>>5Z\+:V#"U4*U1,MP1AR4>70'@T)B
M9`^P9L<(&*BP$6B'%MFW,<C>)PMU'F*W&M"X>!U,VA`Y",O%$.3M*1=<WAZG
M1>6"7HOXRSVZFGXTY>V]\`5<.`?L9#W:RZ7C=;#HO#5TV?L,K(F_'83DN?\)
M28=1"6G1MA%(,(SZ5VS7`I8)M<)Q\2DT:*ZH'_7-%5P1%#$@+V!DC=X;.5MM
M82"PFFOYR_':9AP;AH!/SK/MZQUY[D?EIL7&=.'ZX7R-C>:]JY.3K?F:%A'_
MG"WCAGN/7U6WM]Q*I\&J),4]*@?UTN01IDKW-BG=2\(BLHH)1'U=#"@KPI?V
M8U40/D>#UKTH,[J.>U9(($(>38YMG\RI;0EDS&VS`:?([MB.3E8'P=CS%UBJ
MGEZ7G1.T+//HN@1OIVZ<]V;O.._[NO'PC?06=0;X3O&^H@N$[SQOMVXB?'_2
M]>HFP#?1NTW'P+=%]U#W+'RK]9_IWS$N-V[5E^F_U%?H]_ILU!_PJ8/W97AN
M^3SP^:/>JG];K](OT&?I7]5'#(T?,6J8[:F;0S\<\>+P[J=&&'\:M5'O&O&T
M\:?1$XPI(U<&_4?0[X)R@OX09`XJ"-JH;W[ZWM,!3\<_O5'O^<T*+A^7.6:C
MOGWD\T8<WVZ\;CQG[#8^,#8JWW-]O\OP.V=$0=>5],O&%;Y=>I?^*OP\WWOP
M6^9[#V(X;O+]FY\;OOZ^;CW^CO+MS_?W'>6+TR?X>_)]?(?YWM3[#.3WP]-,
MPBR"4JG[-1^B>I##1`+J/YRK1@D\*??_Q2LFM")9+BKR9-\N\F3<*NH_<!^$
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M<]:?`ST2V>9?>_M&X_&O-0#5^*S7Z%]=JK.!3`*\E?EOQ663N]?B'OWUK8B_
MM031'V.H3966-R[<S:W&_=8WS1D\S9D&VEH-T_:HH-ND6Z<KTSTR,;!RI*:D
M@24`MC>]<$#6<+@P<.Y<88%;:&^QM]A!OVNUA\F?9^C6)NDE[>J.M7:)7GU\
MK7UU$BF-63>`P`#%%8-Z/PK`P#NFM!QN.6P[:^D*:NT")-O50K?$"K>EMX1\
MM#:)M*DVSZ5N2R\+MZG!\52AGFH!"7J[+S[+`TU-M320H/7T0WOB(>OZH3WQ
MH0/YDA9"W1(M3)T[UUH8:!NMB,52XR>H`58Y%-QRP_/#].F=-02KK4CW,0&9
MW>IU:4*[I8N!;82_)ALW"PMRP6VYY6V-^P!)IG4*OHCJ0X#Q_-H&C'.'`=G.
MMDB>7Q]"+T!`:ASOHW7B2\B<`*>GR%E#LS1&XK1K0!_N(9TU)#L:X#K5`QJ7
M5]]*(66(K7>E[CZJ.M6B_:X%U@U"BO>08SO!=XZR=;=<(4^&.T,?1L?IT?TB
MXIY=S"9@*[(,]-7LK"6PM*L=$^\/BF4>W690=%T-`XM/BRT.%I^CM:`G:1N<
M+7^3SW.'X>01-7,_`-\4!EH:*,]0\@_4!?N%)&\AG1;RM<`-J]/)7P[ONKYN
M^]Q?TQ\:T1_Z"$)]+<S7]+70+M[ND7KZ0<<.%)J@<=4P6)F]-L2Q;0B$->RX
MXCL4Z:JA&&Y(\0.ZF%4W,%AXV)5%Z_?;O)$UR=_NJD%^K#>\:2CK-<0A^O6%
M&WP=E;YX?&!D`'^XYDEXUJ!PJJ?>40[3$/X.K83]X*3#81L"IZXL-OWP0_`0
M)-C7'4"\]/2Z`SR21J^+.%;YA48:#M\25V631M+C%/@R^&O3V.;HL`E>FZC;
MW'J!:@OGM.&+M&!I`YM;F/R,X+*=%%-0Z6*M':.F)5)P>88YMJI;$][-7RD2
M1R+8X'BRJ]P:Z9HGI/52X`3@IK!/G_R`2Z%[[3@YVL5Z*Z;(_D0GHX,>.AQ^
M<GF-M$JH%\Y;ZAE+`P,G8(][/N\UTS`W+4*/HU`.K5FI*7&MZJ:^=[6YVF)G
MH\)?+4X5.,U!`H6?7$&ZS@I#L?$53+#O,+H;RRG'KVG+-<+2CN#4TW(>.01J
M<6I*^,F/!7&/T`)'87N$MCT1SI*;L.EXR^+6KQRAN\%2EB8"CCA;A2,";/TL
M-_T*+K-IYN<L;F9EQ(?::KQ=)&QUMLX/_XU5MV`(^VSK98_)K[4EB>N1GBKY
MT74X'C:9EN9@Q=1[#A^(==X5?@2K['W783D>9Q%_R5P^=L#0NY+)\VL][S'T
MMI[-P_D)PFW'!]2`418@1D0X7:?`*-L*QMFS]_J,P6X`^YP4;F?R=WF3XR_D
M8K!?=Z=2-0FFL0_!?BE!FV@P\7@+0W7'6,;5*8A"$]A.E40_83$)J5ZNSB<6
M5$CV56"?I&;J:O#1<%\)NB^OWV!*_AS1@%'U9X@\J9DZNPEHPEG:P695\N>8
M^Y-_0>*`W74`:U_*B>++<GRF[K`IXD:J!YEVL%'X%W0/6(1_V7C%,#Q`VX`]
M^%];K!A^#\,)Y3+AH8=IP!2EC&F.HX5X,+(FO'MQ:GK&SS@Z-T?A0(7]@`\W
M@'EP$\+S(4+^BUG7>JW/RG]^SF)KW`@DOH@R&I@1(%;$!)0AQL`S'1TD^-:+
MF,E:CYG'5FU"T8L8SCLZD>;4T4M)CHSVSO/6U>IJ='8M<"8,\ZFL[-P<1PKX
MP7R,(N3HDWDOPYDT'7V[8*;+F9KV$?#`O6V;L/F/=ET5NDW;-N,PX[I*W0ZX
MMJT,1S00$2W'T`;!,`)EAQX?^6/VR+/+1HH?;EB_,2]@(:7?A`*,FU$`4X8"
M#!^CO!OVA:&0-A+21D(:I8<\(^35"H9-Z)[4N&XOK9.Y8)A@[N^!(Q\)[;#_
M/A%Q0W*`@,%B(G.9X^"C=:X&)'.C8&Y]]//3A8\^M/UDNQ!>_2&&X+GER0/S
M[A1.8&])K^I.Z)JT,$'A["`1RZ3@%M$\$AY?V"?S!:/-SX`AAQTK!6;"$;1Y
MA.0-69XP*7GS#00X>.31AQ"?!)US0FBRM4OS/75Y#ZIKW58=:A'S\EM$$!VA
M_;5DPO-2\6.H16TV.&L)=DC$#7QTTAQP-N"Q!^FV#]!'@PYM,I?QE_C25[5@
M44]X1U_L)JH+%UDY3?T<';([BI!"U@_2?L!;KX3_+E4YC#+4_.!#;9VVUG8%
M#$G\E?L?`A6?]E,1`L]30`5=\(PYT@F'3<]+1NA;\;</H2*[@B9(:?53?:T&
M*OEZS6`J(VZ$'W.DR1BC1FDI_IGU\(P%D2^.5C!!3*O4Z:SC.;'*X"6JE/3^
M-/!=NC9^CW!__!Y;2VOU.*+E^U5U@ZP?>=?[K!]\$Q_NC)'9,3&(C2A]13NQ
M:+,U45/*ZDH7J:TK89TK3:2MB:25MD-F!4KXEH33->X,<%$;_R,A'8=4G.`-
M"9H*HAJG'<(TD(`H`0YC6HYICZUP2;M`N>'`UT)H<VP&S8?@_(6E*ENBVO:*
MMO7"-W)KFZ,80=CQ&7*L18XV4&D4Q291:WM)!X;U&MM+6E@C8WGTSOG88KGP
M+%UD>T6]"I]G7VQM$P)UBT@M:#Z`4[>(8J<IG6#30]\Y\,\\$9[PXH>(-X\J
M4#GM!#O4U@)F:7"1"F]9X26TM';R;IDU;-PEV'?9`=8)YW-GI=OPOBZ=P,B>
M'81L.#S/APG&<5[`/=K>L&UCO7`YJ1[257@TNB#S627SJLV^*VS;>*]=TM_P
MD#1)ES&RR:XVU;MR['#TSK3U"NFV6FV]L(@6EC+*4M=$8`^./!SHO+?J,G0+
MX%*FX3E\P.<(D95^-,DE;G'7M1(W:+=Q,+!Q_C#_+0V@E_HA&'D1GA9XOH?'
M!1;:_MGSBR]_A"]=JK:^I+(NHJQO$+IF79/M+G^%+V6UX<[2*7#LAVV[^!<K
MJUG?6#"'C)XD4QX>L7L8XA'/W=(U<A(>_"LXIH.8&KCA6T(ZJ3`#E!`F"HM(
MX27<2N"+OMIU'2MZK!.MBTCK2[1U*1/NE#[#C.*E.(CM<HP@,*O$"HL(82DE
M)*IL+ZE;'(J@/OW+[P8\!D+M+MM*+1P<5]PNTE[5UNP"3K(MU?)=/#Y];D$.
M'2']=9V'MSR,=1LSUAL:/&'?.5?\F.@M[+#14%_?0#AKU6RJPDU/)F(4/).=
MM30[PUFK8Z<,4,9?+++4:F`Y!+;B6]&*\9`P!R->.4I*:[F8=U("8XV9;KEH
M_F%PF?^M0<)AE4RU7O#\M'@B\!=Y[<5==LLMQL.:2@,',6@@/*.K)GCU:8%[
MM%V[I%9(H[4=("G"O:0KV@[VO'1/X<7BPS(%*ERSI8:VP=GT%=ZV2`W32'@#
M*"1:K@$E9UO;.IU`1A\]TBHL5N#0_'D0T6>%XQ6^:)!<&2GVR97PQM*7=,)1
M\$`#%?%\Z1M:1Q8Y"*[G:A]<1+55D2]8RC`-B1JB&B3*-T3I*SI[.H9W)NI(
M;CJ\"2Y,>$EC>>!;-$%X@Q96,D*@L)04)Y#@=CH<Y@B<;=.NTRP=4;O<*Q?H
MA%,+R:,]8_W\1M^,N*\[S,:"!G2\(F@PV:]<_5>RO2TNV7)/MAS&BQ(T`)K,
M.#X@'--EX7'$C4E^R%%"I(L:A"O#<F.`VID*M>$*M4%%$8.I74GH;G!C/-1Z
M6WID2[<,2Q3P3(1].0,4"Z?MNM.L4R&[$O$1Q^Q]L[CM"?W8T9&-KX@?3/\G
M5_Z5?@JLU`K9G"]4JH/%_AJ<UQ^;%(P</R*'V9T.;HP?;<A5AO4P'MDG+5BH
MM&"JTH+XHIF#6W``>:@'DS^*:%@^LM_^?Z5_'Q<A*WQQ0KJL>ZQ[I'O(D5*'
MTAY8VJ1+H#Z?``7Z]+T!?TZE5D]-[P0/KLD$O*%KZ&NO&MHK#D-VA4,&<4P]
M$"HY(AK[/3#-9.==4.//XAE$U8"4L@9:EY+6-VCK2NC?:HL#O.1>6/D;T!H>
M)+R3#6<#A0&ZX[H3+.E-"*<\;J@6QV3PFE(PY)$M+9W=_;&6GT`C&^]98&'S
M1'//X8^&>UY;._9"R_4\'>`'?:,M0`RX;]\+WHW];JU2@P?PFC-1RW/M4J?R
M/2,=]4BBOC&\<*EO#$O<JZM7GUY;N[8-JZ?]X?%[++=@']8OG$$PASMCX0A!
M$<DAD^3XP2*Y>"7LY+D;T)VZ-TC=1*X+B^9SPAN,KC^E3SPW*4(@X@8(X3>4
M;GJ#D2[CL[8@7'>%7*2]LFN0Z?JE2P/#C"5T!>)W_0O,LP,PS@:2V^<1Y8,!
MU`,`_:N\1B7'>Z2/]HIMI4XK<W6X^EV@@?:5.=XU4`8K+:]HBSP!*`13!`X%
MX+``GPL([EUVL`#@SX"AYBM?VQS-.-\)WX.GT''1MD"K!3].5QN5J'E+'PN:
MGRX6%#]?Z#[["B_H/6`I2KH#W:/PE@@^HA()Y]B*H8@E801`*7E5&]%A6ZIK
MZ6KITBZ##Q@,7M:$7UB>I*U>0<-F^3RT*7J.9N6(HB#8?GCV(<JVVJM`7\_X
MH`0I`7\(:0;^("D<?V9*H9Y->?<X?OD%&`8E<AD6_^7M4HLG=BK\`L392ND,
M;(D"!W7JUYV#.VCO3,5\I`<%:E4=J'_JRFN:L%/;?3RYT()Q/!:"T`3%7/.N
MIG*MES2JLLQ+&E;YF9?D7_FUE^136>4E:2JCO"2XTN,UB%&G=?8QJM"#%8_!
M!@?P&KZ11R]QY-P`RT6]=S0`%6G$5;=`+9%N*38S(!`,,:/8D=B6)B8HT)-O
M[(>1HX71NZRCDI(ZP6SUK)(^_,:@6FLN]M6*"Y:XQ.=O`:)J@O43'UW'P-)U
M/$_$$;=@D@[NF#]?[.^8Q9A:;'"+N`%.]K"U`QIO>@MS-*&)FAU;T(`98P[S
M#@/V#6G6NNA$QAQ2X!^]%/QO"G31+Y'F805T=*!YB%B)+'%PF9$=*98@KDT*
M],1\1`&)6Y&8A[@Z"0FL1GA'"ULHDW#8<KE7%[85V<;[(/[2(S@W4_&7'DOX
M%'PGJ#NP@1C#7SJ$XPEPFH;CP?PE-XX3I5`DXH9C3O=6'SCUQN4\<#B:@*-N
MZ0R`2:>PZNGMH4,%1X+2+7N_VY>LWX):+\-M`]QL`MD'^9G-41@"/+7M+6?R
M@EM:S/Z@Z,`AWDC)"Q_X76LY8_83W&!?$C^#(2T&85$,/)2H_1M/<>?2#[V(
M&N:`*1NX?1[H=5B[6T3"*;LZ`318;$BY#\Y6ED=N,_5`FI%:P>UU=1ULRZ"N
MY5$'P1_C>$2UZQXEMH(2(=2X[CT(&`B",05>9X7O+35$P#F\+_=X;#7,`0M^
M@PJ/7"X>2/&CZU4O(G''=1E,:"Y[QJ'2GW%C52G*M4?=D-)7-ZYM%Q3%:;RP
M6,MW\E&MW!PF/0,$@<;(!*E+7"5-_&6"OT)$W>.>U=XH:((%J;A&C@=P37&M
M'!_=Q`WIF\6?<^K/.?ISCL`F!?7JFK7M]D,KD;C]>D9ZVJ&WD/CGZPIE]Z2<
ML#WK<\7_4J(IZ560=5'*`1Y.%]-E\;:4D]7I$,[EI*>)34HR0&=G"(_$N.L*
ML(($<K)2<!%<>H>4DRZ.E,5_>(JZ<CU#9T3I@V9)^;G^N0F\GB-Z7[=7-GF)
MRV0[CL,^(%$+L[#O.'+0)&'/]4\2I=X$:2^J2O42Z]UYD6`G@2ZV2^E5.5[B
MQVXE?[A4E>0EON\6O:2<#&`/R'FW/P<JE?82)L%5&:85+WE2;U_+!(7:J^IU
M+W&)6[Q[S4,Y<&+E%JU8[<XH<2E@E=?ZQ_70-7D.'M'_=ZJKSO93C6]K9")Q
MM"2X<S(.O8+$`$E8IFF8`T<@5?E>HOMQ`0TL,CL-D]WV6*DB&2K+SDT3_Q-E
M@Y[1P<X06E;07\-U#?"2?Z&U*^]11FL'8,)+%RA(-5A!@BJJ7O&,C&&`U/'7
M_A<JAP]0F8%[<L6U]*IWO<14#Q6B(T<\XU`:6WE-*W[C2:UV]&/_TO%S+RG\
MA[UW2,6OC@Q9S=`A!UX.J2#!`ZSB:261@41-R($70RJ>QFYA=J,I%;+##ALP
MS)+,(+LIU2@Z9$A@^D"69(;)84S(NK"S<2@D93^%.MU984XX?>=96LP]<Q1R
MR1#&5#81G-7`T?\;\FO9<7C:-\C^C6Q'Y#\HRHM4(8JQ4=J;A,Y`^=PB]"'4
MT$AJU&O4Z!1*4T%Z'27\12+P=ZAH.[F.>-="_VE52:G5)JQ>L];7;\B&@`\^
M-`P;_M2(#S_^RY:_.@TFC6.[SB2N]]YZDAQ'Q9"<;C)SDA2+O37PR;2GV8PG
M2;Z+<C*Q:AGN1H'/T7`Q>19<FULZBW^$H2%?-,W2P"<;''=24L$;$-]["E=;
MC5/4I<88>&+A>8T6OZ/$/R!Q%Q)'(>TQ3B5N1'#GZ$NDH&:OBJ\C-;B:9-K!
M%<0)=8-)*?R86#"6\W'K8]7B$-+QQ6SQK_%0,C`V&.7YIE7.0V&GLG="MXTK
MLK6(_LB>DBX<Z=)4_4XEMJ*(CIPLNZEBXVAIF*FB<+0TQ,G$0`MZ3!4K1DNT
MJ<(R.M5F@*9U4OQ#\'D4#.^JY)8EF7;+([^5E/B-7%KR.]5LNTFAA-.([CAP
M_=@B9]K3Q<URU7!4[)X'ZU'8]$!69:FGI-O%[ADH3U4/=:`P>1$AZ?AKP?Q#
M;S,EOAF38T\#RJ!'+%UJ<.`*/5)E5(N_0CE9V78^$HBRVW$+Y<AW5;@V!OQ;
MAA+B&.)]YEV5D@-1Q]7)::GB50+LKX!':0JK%I]#YC'2L%##%#5U7'>LT$>`
M'A<#D=D;`XGSD=@,-V_$&]%+8&12P.-8#X!-Q0]DE`]+Q+-I.!YZ9"8N]7C-
M=Z_1@IMZV/-);_;>X#6'(-;4\P4!J._GYF1!LS-2<&+/)UF$/ER="TT2LPA<
M3324!F^H\4C\-9$-J;.55)CBZODR0$I,'X`*B?$`D`*68JLQ4@V*7E_UH4U*
M;2ZJN^>3YZ"^W)PE68#G$1+Z>*B^Y#4:B:2"_3+R\);8@W#T),+$*PF=2L)A
MU,][D4I9\0C"K(<YLX\LS7QQ"($IR\[L2\0$<A#=&^P@W#:H3/1Z+(/WAJ@F
M`$8!F3];:<40N+E@ONMIT&PQ$N5!.%P-"L`_9.E>MKV_BB'SP2L_SZGT@>B'
MS,[9?6`K%#`3K@/N(P;&S,@/B)EI]HY9DJ^#&U=TS-OYU'V)>-!7J:<-T]6>
M)D:I/=-+,$2J!?UT=6A3ETJ<B\"A$,`4DK0*[0MZ9TNW!7T4=*VNL5"?LC=8
MC.KM?)0%9UD`>P0C#CW2I1:](0K,\312YIS),_LIUC\5SP3WCYS*%KE:]:)X
M9O@2W$_B#_%1XU>K..-`AVD!\<5'XF%9\M1[XI&X7P9,&7Q<`4-Q_L"')B8U
MI8R'F_<[7F<RH:YER;EV4`#$:&2[$#.6I;Z9F"R<C&C<'57'ZK35%UPS^=Z)
M+)'L:H<OYYLLN!?N#8ZJQK>?6&(F,%"0?;?DLQONJCV"NVHNN*O6XW@35=#(
M\:JV@B8<N?`F'5G:"@URI,&;<"R`-^F8JZT8CAPSX4TXHN%-.J9J]]&Q^X;'
M[M,X)GNC;XDHPWLJCK892E33X0&G2OOVU:KM?U*5ZM^#*;U*1:2X&TOU):HL
M^\#%N/-V5,^L8,AZ9B7SH!YT6)/X=8(]_%BIX67--X0C,-QF^)/J&T;4P68C
M7$/6TZ1=4/\9]PT)NRCX!'()0@89T;'AJ^"GJ]_1?#7)=3K`[FI+3ZGZC;IT
M5/I^+4J%?="=[(VN.^`OG%Q*"V"LX*3,T/JLY%)OX5Q"CMW1.1&$K>#>3#V(
MKLD;LSZTAFH)O;]W\BI5S%2S?Y?W0IO*71T3969F==Z=N??Y+Q;:+GHND\V<
M<)'\B3^)#L6K8859.V5WXIJ$%8GP?F'-"RL2\4],Q%[V0@XC;@@3E_JRXX1$
MOQW)M)/6<J.<=#`WPAJY"2X8(:H*O,5EDLC!_O6.F[$.)@[>!X(G>KB`A"/6
M(4A\C*I>9YQ,`1PG4Y:;M#T#R!;G/R\;PC3F9G#VI6%,NRMS:)`#^V44,Q;6
MF8<3.=6!L6.E2-X]E@V!.XD+8[3<:$AFF2_@)&P%4@J/`R:08GPX&E8%?U!Z
M]%'UK%]4+>N-818K,'E5,1/92`5Z,E3CA-BS4&*H+9&*<;(TW'Y]2LD,`%2^
M:8+2K'?5;S#B5M_L\.HOBAV(<+5;]3DTB#BA1YT+:GT.+:-4L(]P7C""E3(2
M0P*6>$C'Q>U5.73T.=8K+;WLCO]!2F@#V<FD"RRI=`E(@3.]TCAH_]W>W`RA
M-G0."9=02_V%(C('`U&W9[8Z>CZU&E]GLD4R`$M:[.'!O*&V1KZNML;]3KTF
MQ]MJ?!DD0J$:!O_>H3?5H$-`"?TF1LC16HW+U76%X+BOFK<C7SUW[GB;:OO;
MZKG6N%?4JYG70)8L5XMG:"?SMAH\?/?&B]MHF,<?TV+B?9P&=ZW%;I<POE"]
M+5^]@U57O4;704E`,G=[`73,&QJW!L9.9CA&'-HKZSE&C1/!NTE?P(##*?^`
MKGR=,5-R`2E/RV?D`K=<`&"L&NYK3V0KQ%`:C!AB)"V.I;=Q3(*H]1?&OPPK
MGQF>M^!Y4RU<=RR1,6(/WC3Q/I4IJFBI#@:J&C/<5"_,<*!Q_PX<-UY7KX6>
M$<+>5,MA;T'\9?76`F;S.'WH;2N$<<]5,+Q83U70%'CGG28]_UN(L6*MRE2V
ML?\_"5EV)"W%]`UC^["%%)>&I5?]G@8-A#7&S.+B0-['O,!-`XD5D\Q-%F,1
M%YK#OZ3RDU0Y_"NJ6YDF9QNX%L#UX;\3XA]#M)=@=*_.DF98EQ*9L+CGB*=G
M.1Y%\3&((T!T>7E$%]XP?O=(6VTOA0IC'G!TJ>$=QMZ<^%'B7Q+Y7BJ?<GP;
M9:O;/*_UPL:J;YE,"&);-'6[@2E5T=!NFPI&X--/U4))/;,C"SP9/K_C!0O9
M4D),`0JX?X(,+G:O8+C13J:02>`,IK3P2^)/XR!KF]7X-L/K(34[4SR.;.K9
MJ<)0#,L.L2VBG8DJ\.$5]\GBKQ$(Z]FHE".6=)ZV@X\$3#T?/FZ&AN`8YQP&
M?*#%-3+_*N.&>32*7\`0"@X='T-S#+^2!LW$M%<KO@[*DE@C1W6;X7JQV9M_
MJ*3[B%]".B10[GH[E*>^1?88#<=HG2SI_M%N^[25Q,,&D@?<VPO\80TEYK=V
MV4K.D^&7$A0ALW0&SD^'$EP/R(Y;I89S).Y"G"D^@TRK+H1?:KV@.D<*]S.Q
MXI51M8(YI$=PA<0DG!&[W)FY6/%*`].CO;M5LG7A,'3>Q''92C,H,60FIB"=
MUU\C-0W,)I#R53\R8J8J!RY(;)@7ZT8%KR3`&=[P*&:UBO4WV6"1$-GAF3AJ
MIK8J"X>G"1J@TO)0YA@;K"_A3B`XU/((1XVK5>$RV-U&14&(8_#RPWJGF#:6
M-(FAP\U,9M:R)EC5\J9_2^"25EB0E:4_':N'">Q0K"F*G?)6DP8FA8]H&[9$
MG#HDQZ,[9PX1_P.9^-[)+!S8B7,0O!)0.MP"V633KU3#400EQ@W3=131X=62
M>C<,`+EW).QJY[L;.0=I7*F&?..P\&JX<9^3"=/`W<Q]+6TUI4%%Y-[@%/&W
MP\242%Q1FI@W3/`M!9PI<%//-I?<;)KGX=-,T1?A^FGP-E'#@$!GIX1?^DKK
MO*.:/'G5A2R[I9Z&96E&H<_>R>XZOO=Y3H$L=D]&^5K`5?'\9'!$@74),PN)
M,NUX#!!R7)\*+$Q^XR=V=C.>I(UPP*^2?,1C4]?6C@=N!B)[U';!MRO>DR\4
MD(I"S3T'HS*!L:@V)[!&,/NWA[;ET\+WPG%%U_DN6/2?G$T=Z=**:K1;_-/4
MSB8[[G(Q+C(?6-+A]!5ZI.]LAE6J;PF[Z)25O/]R.XZ&H2OZW;!6KO%9$%?R
M8LF+<5K\$Q-?2[SG@].O^P2B>SY/?HL2[_C@M34W<0@*G1\Z_[X6_^[XV,8#
MP]A>\8>'MO<ONR.?$2^KV1!^)=SX93R++Q]#L,/PNHLYD\`\64=ZUMW\2,>*
M2,$7VML5(IS#BQ"X^RCK]-6N0%CH%"F5(=P/$PY^YO.1W))K[WH,WD87W2:\
M,?&`3ZIG8(([F6LDS8V',C!?8AZSZHD/8T@S,;/R!P8F+@;!VQ;@L]^X):<S
MD>*YG_"T/PKVJ-"E?A8)F(2M!7O8?.D^H#8)=P&-^'LY$T\YO*Z>]'%,T.!`
ME8]CC*:D1RCR0PO]=T<7,>PX$`K:TID!<SMO6XO\%-E0NM#?O=`_9@0G.N>J
M>+93NL3'T^Q4R$XIZ1%#)Y3T9(&GQT+&7(?SN:ID82X<$B5-R`%)FZ=]@J'S
MEK1[6S)MG>OGF#<5W_N3IE20I/2KBD`D3:@()*20BD!2"H9[=9*F@H(]4P6%
MW3+3=Q3`DLK(!@D<!RI(HB]I#4ZZ06Y=SFR>!\<"2H\]G<#]2C;<(K&7U%=Z
MYYT)/ZS?;%+I00-Y3&:9`\7G",EW[T39<(^4U+*AAQ0_0+!2Y2S;27%J?(&F
M28-@(&'6BVWWA!ZJ+:%>'0Q>\=($\7N(\_'!')DT#^ZR24%I@GKO6(PH.TTV
MN$A/6/(1U&FX+D]BMN-[[0;9<(?D>\'7P%8GT1M@!F#Z0`9I)M29Z:C:/"]8
MKFA,RP-[Y<NT56TM`!75PPM#/?-'D8=>L"[P(!4./MO`2.3S?@W,#?*!+VZU
M3SV\X+)`>M4Y1IR!%$6%2=\JD]KJY6.YD1E"7*%ZX4+AKJ5>"QK*8Z.ZY]->
MX9;E,)D+WCVPPJR7<]3X)C?6!@_=(F%GW/,IZ%?I&;!O&9IB4(-*E0'*4$5P
M<,^NG"S9\(@$90@O_C+6`\X,\1"):\43`IJR7(5)'*&0Z.4'TAJR0((L.P+&
MS0Q:F$N:OM*+"4%9ZU.^\A:G!V5;YY*\+X$19##B:?FCA0N-V&DBG9&8#<HM
MT@U_+W!:BTAU+IYE^\C8?8&Q^RCE^JDUC`>;1@&3!LJ0`5%9<."K![7+<A$:
MF9N#Q7=$M5&>8I+SM7*^!BZ`E^V$?1#.81!4%HZRT\0I/6L[P#%H3#(C-G8'
M@7Z$E5$#;"M_IBQ#CSA>"W<L"Q>,O!K:`"V!5KQM_,BI(C@U3A3'R`)'VK&(
M3DJR0@@I)#)@'MC0LRN/^`)V\I^(WVK4N'I-?Z8W6M_SR7H,<.D+Z:*0[YV^
M1YA25Z@1DAGP)U`)/L([9.CW>315`^=]C@/!P=D*7I@/(&!'"KEDM+%4;?:'
MUAG34LJR0=/%K?:L>^(==5Y(R6DLQW@-?'V![I+35E_H\"ZOC=:Y[I+38IA&
MZ:5&89@8H9&.>:@"A=9S57T4-?JM\>(?U24/TT0?)'3#R6^FVM.QPCFXS[@)
M*\EYQ">.\VK'_.>A<%\O8XT;=[KRG[GASO9<%E9CLI,TH&0+OAM!3$;[YD,H
MNKKG,Q"NOANC?3=^+'ZHWBBN5__%4\D`.3E,FGB-R4H3'AKAS@:N-:"QYY,@
M#S%]Z)FZ?/UJNY#LC;LOB=%5=SW'&N`*O0KZ$MA@;0=T-%QM_")(&IV6[MD1
MFS(4"B7O3>Q=$Y.1KG2@@M.[OVZ,+)TYG*\'Q,+IT'8NH"L9%/%5]!=)G2[A
M"$8H)72-*&GJ\BMIRKLL-+DZZ@KU0*34[OFF,AFI2F5+/HKH,*:G,:94A0NA
M-J5N2OQ4'=17IUBF/E+QF[=!\LU<XJD?]]@P./8*BF@4-S!I)4W0;8)[HU&]
M.\IN9J(:"L@IP5]T=F=O5##`=4PB]AM2F4J>WO;M>@ZZ>R]X1\$UPIXO6</,
MA<*IT`P2_[<+6NK!PKYM/:@\4YB-GAF&Y,@\1HZ$O<6'DRQQ>0QBQ\,)15"T
M,8_AG*EETV<>I."XR1_O#I:#B2N/$>:Z=^0QTO'W83_R/I/'*!((JH>1SF&B
M[7G#Q`G/>"+"#R(7[0F*46HU'F*D7"_V:&F2SX#")OB&-HGQ2-'`[H0IR5IE
M3JR\#;?M7BQI72F"Z=*(I.&".K0&SMN6J6!W(6FC:]\AA1;QMZJ-F"]TQU:.
MX-3B3)QGCQX&0SE,U_@."7V9I-IH=VP.0^FB>;IMJ9P#,A=\F*E0]C$LI.R0
MZ4O!1LF#1GP34L"R:(]P@D0L.0["$!KFVY4D#A\/)XT%9$K/)Z4^6;/8B9)!
MW#(.SKB>F\5IJTRT>#@$5#NO\.H7V1$@[0WB0;KDN/AG4#M!>CJ"PARI88[?
MACEFAZ5'.#>(-=/8I]\+Y%R@9\@K[ZQ9&D`M94K.9>S^DE.#/+GO"`G++3DG
MM>78T_FX7V,/[0BGN&8:[&!6(NDN*-:P."2P:M@+'0+SK;("I&>L481(E[\P
M6APKLZH4\"W(F@NK.C!<A2R<A]OX221V9G\3"5T>&9YJ.K)ABIBXXR7\JWRA
M\H4_Z/#OR(P^Y80S")'OJL&NZ@9",DR2-]8@[A@@V*_<"/>I.(`08JWP`<5?
M-KR+M\Z*-7`U8S6N!7Y&PL+;782],A`YJB8!I7OU8M13&X'4F5W$"]:%=)<W
M7`]>R^Q8S>#!=ZI)]I8`A1WK)RE<@`8@NRU%M^&B<-?%)_"DLM:LDRU%W3*7
M9U*8,T@\`5ZEV>R,B&IQ#&6)XQB"G=0`K`K7B'-(J/V?PS?RSSR6]>LP<>":
M,[?;.O>V\E_8B4GR>O':4VF0KF`,!NBU`]"9RQJ2;B.4M:1L[:*#5'8V=%]?
MDJS?P&29%`RTG`*;L*SA6:#*2]^F"#5?@6HZ/"M]$\BC2EG>`S/))[K&K()I
M0FQ,2I)N!LUFJ?DY]FOXOR7<MIHYLFTM$W$,HP*1!IJWNJ^=CC.APMR;\Y8S
MH;GWA;G7[:;TV7!\>H0`2V*>$:[HPFCG!8@D."NC/)VX#__?77F4XY^A<(TT
M)Q.8?95:H.'0\KE866;'1;<5!+,!UE&S0^TEYZ@><#6!?(N=M#\8P@#@.27H
M*60H58,),V^X$/F>NL2P2@W^-'FZ:`@4T%9X`Q1&.S:!G01F[/OS!!_E(LA,
M=BQ5`\;NVU8:&CI*J,$^Z7!AI9ZR7'%'=^<W"2<?V'&>68VK=OQ1%D[BO99'
M^$-5PBCP8.0"80&;1*+H>FXN-<U36+HLN&>SXZD>#\3=`8@0H4%%(ECJ!%]+
M#857#.E,J(NEDJU3K7&KU.I<18%V:$)-Z=O>4T??9@UFG2C(XE%"'(HDO]#Z
M>;@;WE.+!;)82=S/P9M83,VFT'KQ/!'=9I[EJ=&'F$L.$'-=Z:,?0_7OJ5L=
MEILD[H/'H&\1##3!N$I-M5GA+>A+P?C[@M57G0OZN&B0Q26$*!`RE`7SZOO0
MY7;8<(=:XFQJQ(;"8>D8<!FQJ85`J\'V__3U+0!1E6G_[SEGYIS#`,,(B)<,
M1E.T4%(H,VXB#'B7$5(139=5+'<5W.$<J3ZK,5IEYBAI5FML%]'Z/M=+.P:U
MHVR)CH&7R$M;ZZ6+@6UG'#.3EJO,_'_O&;3Z_M_WB<.<\Y[GO-?GO3W/[_<B
MO*!S5/@![U%B9-X!_.2G\*=Z#K%<`T8X[]?WKN^U<^5SU_>*W+\]R.W<!5A!
MN8C2>_,=^)C/3%NZ4-""E5/S,9MO#RP`EOQSS=2%^A`\L`85-(C<PU-U<+Z8
M2*6'I_'9?D`NWPZ4]V!Y:54\&WFGX!":I^H","$@,LVG\:/B`:KZHIH34'JV
M<16LVA+8IIR]'7.AEJH5/9##`L)3"9["!&QY*MCX5%2Q[1Y\50D50QB+/[11
M'JA$3+&?8#;.\J>>DD0^SKO\7C4W"6ZD?&40T/)9JC,P`RN!I2QWL4D@BXI^
MUN;03,G$-:7R50)0"(B1ZA)ZQ@+UG:34C'=`HFG2@WSTCIB:L4^TX6J?6/F#
MT*P/H(4#C@PTBC_/D;:4]@_:2G$4-*NGI@(.[-*9L$\,VWBW8QA@6AL?96D+
M+,;B"[D/H4NP<@[-HCSZZY!G_8L\#N2C&56U"QK0134OH1,J&!Q_#D:3PR+G
M0#MC*'`;.=31WFU[]V[3\Z2U0VC.Z2$4<Q2OQ.[@4\]+NIDJ3]SC"63GQVN=
MXI2F@I*0+=W'M?MN0BD'IUZHB(Y/C7U'+`]7XK(Q(#B&=4>U^SZ_HZ(?+_&\
M/*H[[G_[F3=_08L)2PE0=-_DIBLQM=P,CSVCAB.>B3N>YWRZB3LJN?R)2LQN
M#D`+[2?I2JRUL[7Z(K;&A3M_JXLK0L=U9E1R]9QZ()"UX696BA?;?*.3:^+M
M''5-6&OM'`PWG/HG4NB;0O?^="]OS_@C^._#M;3DH;5.SC>XMHKS16GALKH^
MP\X)HV'`<PNC82?,5Q.YH.B!&1MNSJ#I6>M9-3-0&`R=E(K$I/NVUL.B%.CX
MR"S'=?#;!9TTV)[Q!C=$&H`%834J-F:93MB*\3D]M*APEYVCO1&[TO9T8;2T
M%O:A/W/VWBAI=?*)ZB/VWDPYC,8!'I2Z*-8W/SXP<1W!KV=(?#._CESGXS?%
M/D.@>]QK]HP_<R*F8WR%VTS.6`\'P+'KB]>E</]Q7\CK+CML;(UU&VFFI]2'
MJ(H__@4>T;R`:`1/OA45]X0?C.6F`]RGES^EAP6<"<1\RNWP<,[+QV+?I[[+
MHM28*D[FSWK7>XB>GGX9/T'(SF[M7KC>,XEIO5[D^QLU5"6?<"9NT/M;J*'+
MF;%1/]-_6LWP`P&5L9<#E?RZQ&3"-1+F5^_Q![U/>"?-^&];N/,,8.47N8M@
MK7T^3'M4S_2!W&#:/SVTL9Z1Q/V8B?330Z_<\MSR%HR"]ZD\-(V1V230)+"X
MV'@A/Q!3QZGG^1VO<T[C&YPZ\5^PR^WA*OB4^#W<6C:Y,1#S-\Y#JU.4!].F
MV/&2$)_"FW3Q.TU88,$#KS#=M2]PBG$;9QN2PM?`DY42_QHGAZ4DOH&"IQA?
MYR2F^S5U)A*C:=U.J.7;U\O#U!_90,Q[2/][K'6^_%ZUPE!PD*.*IC;VU6[E
M:.+JPK[D$QN,5K&-4^^]IM[5AV;=U>?C:S?!O]R'V8[8,[9C^.6`1;#'?\X>
M3@;U,WZ'2>>\O.LEH3Y"_>R6\Y_.SIW5G//CM$Q9Y]+YPIV7&_S\/^U7F#1F
M+>RDUORYZC'B&D\/C#HTF-0/4&MO92UT7BTJM,Y53_H7%FKE"J-E08E0+GJ"
MY<L<LZ.&<Z*LNU[@:BNY75NYVM>Y7=LX^ZTALHFJE""'N,/"=CFYG56<NNV6
MP[@)J`"\AN7PO%L2=XB!'XW6T0R[$7YUS4QVX5J7)VBT9+1&ID\RM9<D@WJ,
MT2HK08_4:,U006II^'L?K;7;BK$`YIJ=V^%FJ!%,9.>K0E7\-O@]L!Q.OE1_
MEWJ\-^TN.=N9,RJ-MZ4Y'YW@S!FW\Q7A6#K\'[LVP6^1P^ZL%IK0W*8F_E7!
MM%LGS:<7@]7OB*V(AHM-V'TPOLPZ4WVD^E1OA^>6G+7C96'4>)(V7F;]QU*^
MDY.HG$Z3TUP<^@K.?H2W>T-LAO=T$OL>4Y7XJN#W)`4.\)^V.6)K!-\@Q#!R
M/"(`QQR/C,'L8TV)B(P2]$Y]<:@T0,1=94:-8*:>%7R10X%`_0_JOWNHJ=Q,
M91DIBJ9MIH\S"5;SAK.)-<*APYR+N4ZUA,5Z_$03_R>!.721NS:2<5[&KY1C
MWU"G@O%/=)(O]&CC36V5CAXBD;];E-D'V'AGO$E7%?^R8+\RGEIJ$;2;E4;2
MR_#U\9N$@%^K+-\]37RU0&@(86B("/I,(^H3->MBT29HC6X/S8<H)P?'-1JQ
M_>/Q._[,C13&PN-MO_*#BZ$IQ5?A"7`+KPC@;]4EHZZ-/1YB3AV>-B+]GHR1
MDT=EQD\9G34F^U[+?7],V,"6PRHNA4X-JS#F1>8/73ML]MTS8Z?%69\MP,KL
M-<P4]8PAWB6TQ&"^D/G7I6O=OEF+:#"Y$YQT#OL7$:/%7>]ROD1[A@M=*@P6
M+S'M,CXW)%W2%=^@#_\U8MO!(21Q?\IWDJZURV5WGG$V)UWITAP$&,8NP7IY
MZ#6A?G++<,IXV_$:!:AXYCJ-SV$.V,^1"GZ#<0/FI@W&C5P5`A=J2J[^H]N)
MKG7?)_XC2=_3L=89NU>;,W3P,<?NXUQFC+T1W=JP\)=N3<\)PW(Z/6_T#TU[
M-N8NTX#!0]+B*B+3PM?R:<-LAK'&[=L2G6_^<,\V3\,K=,0YP)U3=_Z)\Z@[
M;SEC,`!-?(-SQ+PA.#->0UHUG"/V!6'#^0W=*1=E78I?6E5`!ZJ%MCF8^^)I
M!T\^1P<`24BZ`L_[I!EJ,;$E;;R0@@E*_D=*+`:%3X(#Y`.T?]X>X*Y=5AFO
M^@P3'$*[?#&*\0VA]@4A^9PZG`3'0B!`NCUN)K)N0H%Z?Q=]V4TB%ZDCNWR'
MYCHS_B'0>G`F/H?\>KC`Q'V<RO<4OF8_1YX8M&L?5X7`*CRL@E`5A`,Q7W.O
M+]3P6&.&9#+'X1B(F,S:B2`(A.R^_P.N('Y??,SHX_=WW6\>GS,^=S1X^=8A
M=C8HJ",,=UO0^M\%!0B>89<PQ!7!0I!0P3^.^H#;?4<P?K0F*`;_D<'!?PV+
M1[F@PZ\*]/R@#/0':<@(OII+`S`DJ;'!,,K>/4;2-R2/<K'LL8/W$JM:S1;N
M^C-'*_,>.;Y>"*X$PFF?SZS@Z5A]YEH5YB4:)2L!:?"?7`0B"Z?WP^CYG7_E
MW/?OV,?M?(YKYC=P:X0NSX+DQDET\!['!]<3X;1SS](=T'VJ[MK-'=Z!Q?YN
M#G=MR8V8K;&JXSRMO3`A'AB3?@"KX)0+TBS:PMURCCTP1$J=1K,4UBT]I&6A
M6[[?'DB03%KK=TLC[(&D;GF83V_O'4-SMX?C@EG7G4G<@S9Z@^ORP-3P5RH^
M6!KD9B-IGA)DCJK`^-OK.8P%6L_4;JA`$EV@4+E(=^2`I$NWY=R"X`O#KTG\
MGSE$<7NBH;U$6[^II1V>7>A+QVAL^N!2,27V;:YBL.&FX2?9E(+:JPA+8VR\
M2Y18U^`NNG&,V<=1Q6MC?;IN[_-$=75*/'I6^X:CZMOT,J)"W="DUG1*!HA\
MB=L+&YJ#4UU4L+'"G$T=9PQ'1PH2BY7)4>CI!A##(\ZTVEM-!LRXP@'=N2N[
M390R3='T:$YH;_QS6I,.DR.I(CLO)@5HGD.U/'=1C5:O1]O"DJZTW$=-\'[^
M`%V%8Y)WQAM)57R=<&@XZ;EFOW5+YD;V7N_=^:Z@+HNFQ_^9Z!AKSZ@3;JT5
MZ)=?#HG?\8INI&FGB^Z-DQLQUT)*"JT1\C_@U,1H-2':'E_"_^!)W!3[Q6@/
MH;O:6*&R^UXY?.[A3[F#@XB[.ZY][\+#-9PQ3FF_U?X6'P=]HUVOB?^'0*AU
MT+,@,/%]H<":=&5'/382^<K9Y!-T5:@8WQ<X8Q/G,#8)13\'.8S'A4+E>/*Y
MGP-."DYCO5!E_$18I)SZY8./^Q^<%I3FG?7""_S[T%0E]C0:_2SGL6XZ/Y'C
MS[/5Y[$.V-08O&XLU,(3^L.O;SB6=7T&,):'CG$N]GJ6*^+ZH4_H[)B5U'A]
M!@VAW_#K]`>($`G@6]!$9[CTU[-VO,.--%T'R`FU4Q]P#K+W,'#!MY,/A^HD
M[D.=KBH:#=]S]CNUC5*$.>\%HBR(4?*&`LWFS!O69&%(DX5ES;/8)LL`'4+,
MLP8H>=&.69%*WF#'K.CD$P_GP9"OY/&.60*]">N_T3=;.()W0_`QX!.*3QAQ
M5C#.!2S<VB%VORB'U`=\<^U^G=1IOZZODHS.F_8>UA;V/N,_Z6_"STFYJTH*
M=T[E_,>?T-EG&75*GDZ]3.H#;7>I]S"8_**5/!'I*GEA2%#),SAF<;XAP15Z
ME7&WJ`[5EEF:JJFYD6ALN$>K+VY\F>CB'"^/$>%?Y>K]GH+Y'^H2&SX7*"?K
MP_9Q#>>%@V$_K/]@C-C%2=S!T,Z>RJ,ZU+F/5%[EIEU7/E?:G4?J*3IVV"8+
M&RL8X^J!>^7CG-]>&3X"2/U_#4]N[%VRR#._P-K0(0`=(<&&(%+[%S(?[<AC
M'7E\P\7^!ZH0?-`<[5C`.A;PA8L`/<QO>#!!.9N=G:A$9&>WZ5+/RNVX!,IQ
M)B%\*1FD>X40;BQC9PK91N+2_8:(6#[])F0\:8P<3.RCP@B9R6O@7@6%K#S*
MN>S7*Z^RSH]\Y/H,YQ'\=JX*QQS[K=-B-'R$YPA!T9)/^,BUUM[*HWI\9^&#
M_U66L!DSG!:LH,)"@E*N4'S3I[`X./]%;3?@?IQ*#M@S=HM$?D+]VI1TQ6D)
M`^H_HA+.72GD?2YU'5=>YC^VVTR#]#1(E[I.7[X8078:)-`@?>HZH7RZ_QB&
MC"E*-P:/H1N[%;#?X<`XK5STO0&Z>G>YL/ZH"S2OP:&!PX&`O,G]$.ELM?U1
MZ?*MI]XQ('STHF1__U9Z4@<U`,TO@'XC/@ZZKDZ`TY[(HW]1\97/(L,&^[H(
M(IE<0WTB7VV)5!^+$D*O^-BD1K2#?9T!&%CP6^IY<"6&U;-@4\34PY\IF^H#
M*""8A?9U(03;LRNW]=RC'5J#9-'R2)E'RFA[J_I/?R$(WLA`(CJ'VA"1BD[C
M[;&O8X@<A3X62#[GC*:]D#;8=2TKT>JQ2*%7.UH%"HIL?QB,$1G_4"<J"T1E
M%I\P2TRZHFG:W/S_GB8M'2@D2_Q85O-:4=MAXP$6&Y8P>N(=IMI?I.DB;4PF
MU/QZ\U2@DM#,/N(FINLS['Y.8NO%GN?CWX7IY\IP@Z;?P;["H:.XPC0)5VCL
M1X-H+^B-@SH+,`XF7]KX^AA1ZVZ.U]'=@(Q<D)]8C6%:B;E//#Q4YXOX.6",
M>%BGLQ;,SZ)Z!5._,>F*<B,_,?!26F)/D<^W9-$A,W&9H7>%14OC3K<F_BTQ
M-]&2V.M)NJ(I[[61L=)`^],#B,3;GPXGL@Z.!GU5CJ'>7GE53QL\/=C@2H68
M6L%+\?:G(XB,Z*[UVI\V$<D`!SS?E!,1\$4;CO'5.9'JC`&"3Z3/FW)"L"!<
M']#IL*7W?A".%T()0*+MM&.G!SNV5M'H)7@S6ATS0+CN:<H!&0']2$<[4$Y8
MY=-0<!UPW-&53^OIE5DR5#Z-KB%"AW15\T(]-%:IFYX4,(.6QBQUTQ9XD>3/
MM]]B*ZS.+Y("9]O@)C\VH2H^67=HO,[-I+<,MSVDG->.G*4'SHYV,Q;[27-2
M1\MP=4VXS>`VT`=-=GEPK#N35)_OM(B!0!Q4-J-E>#V3?`DJ?F5)$>#*5N4?
M!X,'CQ;9Z*:!K6>`3[92.<P9_0MWP30@,BIZ8,R@X'VT,.GAE-2T](S)]HQM
M*-R8'?\0@G/OX4AQP4<3_\J!]M#^UIZB.!=+EP8F;6E`)]N@?!R,X[(N]8PT
M*!#S`6<S;>ARD9_EZ,I&6_ET:2N?F]K*YYH]`ZM'Y%\$._(*/1(#B\5;"G8B
M;W-38.?/C=__:F4`.Y`7X_>_2$%)-'KPZN;2%!;:1K=^K4DJ%^;,Z9O9+\M!
MM@`"#;!/V?2M*L4FWX*#_I6MRDD??#-?*J<"L2E\OX?N9FKL'W@P7V,7PH<&
M(ZGO'N4"YB/86NT9OT?W$IVQ<_BJV-^+5`(V7F7IK8T7MK_"_0B'Q/ZX)1YK
MI8?ZZ$,%N:/2ITO-8^6NU(=L/R&TT+-KI'A@A/K'P-;D2^G*%\JQA".VI'&1
MQ#8NE5_`VT:_P(\47^#C,8=03S"<B$"K6^F_A&\<B7`IPN892!PI@KNLSP],
M'"E"RKLY"N-Y':Z<N?S.23KJ,GDJNH'?XMT9M3YC$T]>*A_O%NUJ9C2L=%&!
MK6TCW`:[FA0-WQ4`<;+H)B^I(Z-]80?-N7C/'6)78Z+=H7;5%(W=?9M?^;&R
MB2(:4+9]<:HUNK7#'697VZ/@]X(KVY6BID<K\UEGDVJ.=A[UWA4]/Y9"YO;Z
MJR^]0JF""ZE[)@:@W@AX)D*W[4=K'5WK>]&G[O=]&Q=ZZ47-TZ:>C(*?1GTC
M2BG5:5G>#HI"5D"MB_(6DMB8N,VQ+OVF0;5[])@_:Q?Q5L=4WC%5K'V4GS;-
M,=60,)6?IBPU-`O^P"*'$$<C;.81":G=PH?R+_+20&]X9-#[$ZR>X%,UA.R8
MI+/6#!R01NC:LI<N.>GQL%^V@1K1$'(G(X+VN&_)J5BL6L]/5(QCQ#:=PTAT
MN+RO_S(.YN_^]U5[B#J#\5X")S0,Y)IP.]Q-JB?2]X+FB0%69A28[^V'?\>G
MZ\!>J/Q!MY5:^-572`,2`K!6M(4W1&A7@V$UCR).C]IZ3CF:_VKRT82C1:F>
M9Q]4CG)'\#UNZS;@2^YY:^;E6Z[Q[7ND4%?B'GJAG&I_JR$#*]$$3Y.>T+[8
M><'7]M9T28``=[;]+7=.0N@YRGJO'Z<E*#/30%.J6][13H\O"!N_9\.Q?X#_
M&3Y^_%[?^Q^NX#4A>NXFS9)0<QX5YC,!'=ORH-#R\+"6])HS"*F*S1#V;4_'
M-*>WI\$2DW!FJ^<J?4!@^3_`WAF^]/3,5IT(\]D!9J:D4C974F-]<LOPJIBQ
M8M(Y%T.O/4[<]%]6TG:0]#4E#WS`!5VWX4%#'*<2G_IYNWHNH%GF.'FX^MP`
MMV!7YP\X>)RX56Z:W-?:Y19H*]"F4)</.!689:+V$,?$-!%020H(DD,!!0>K
MX[]TZGJBYC+-?!KF1<R;WN\&49#X4'<@`#D=-I.ZD;+!JOX'*;3IP)/(]'@_
MB:!AH]P,23ZGQ94(F&V'#C"!!$M8Y47"64R5YTCWDX.]?X]0+&'*(T8-@B1N
M52R\NIUL[:).*CW@DXS'NRXBN=$701%=/.)+3VZ$1_\L!2LL9NJS,`6`D^1=
M&U&@966FLMA$?>S34A>'25'.S*B`Q80'6V1]VE!I1-<BC\L/&!NT;<'F=5'`
M/BX5*-K`80F#$WFQR?<)??>">M,/;W>O:VBW[Y/4Q;S-37%E%I/WAG$K12-V
M?J,<]Q1LO-CYS;:-9['V"N'@8GU1.85L_&#TOL]1`L<I9$[Y9_UD^(U@8`0A
M`J0P6QNU+&FSB@W[&D*5?DIK^$$[;(9)(H;B@X2E5V:)`O/F%EBI`;3#->IY
MA`&92=3QEY,OV3,FB(`(VC.2\&7*IK>L)-);5F*RP7;\/6,;0&]%^='*`",7
MJK,8GYR.F38:O4IZ6GM1#DW')&SUCC)ZEQC362+''$)2)^K3D+-9V]2AC/(U
M]A;E!9"2Q]$DB'P/S=E(*11KGL'*US-]+_L>#*9BJ`R`0TM/2'W.>X)%9-+N
M8&XBO8%P&L$U=:UHTZ?G$_FZ][/PPJ*%&S_-G\L9O].]&Z@/@,2UT#&+1V-P
MW0K"YG](^4=+%@%=#0RVSD7JT3E>Q+IAW*C*3,,QT:)W,94GS>]KX;956J;D
M`<T6GB'![.@U*L:.)+%*I^F="*LGMDUZ,^`6*>K!/N5XZ%%I['JOG4`+RW7T
M+S:H;_9MI6JO-O0%5=PF@B4+]?1]JS[?M[798B(8*SQJR4`O"0=)1U13_,U\
M"@0]J#9#['A1\=33M0BW#=OSY!-SGX]/$J7A;5SED?"-%^#FS'\7:*F8HHT7
MG$;D*ZS*PE4]HEOH\?XEC,QY<)_%IO$R4F>DSKC-RR`3]UG^IC^J-Y#*W,K<
MTA#ZHUKZ<1(1#;;,('=N8,-S]_A,M^$1V]9[=),2E3A';*+HV9DDSE7W?.E`
ME2Z<(L&;<N(9$P54#)VDUG[5#ZKS=H06@+*60N?,4`450`^MAMX&USW)'8Z)
M*>+&8#"G_A2%-;8V51CH^MK[76APWJ!_T>6&_4I$5?P$L0I586B#KZ.=LT5B
M^4I!-8#;A*EK`A24YO6&WHY`/MS$0ZN:^/$B49:$`?.227VNSCA[V]?HX_;>
MZ=)=F?;>/&F@2V?OS9>,+M'>.P5&I=XL.<9E#L)U`-6!>WN1VOB-%OLB;;@:
MEWP"[6[6\"I?8YF_<9:I#;OA_,V/1-'Q`DL\V\#4(RA0`BG2G`_YV["9O>'[
M%J4,I1KSFNKUORZ'JD?T,N=-#/6FA'H-]`$+9'MFZI%"*5*3TA3F,"2_\?YD
M\-B-X,=H1`,/FT)QP=M#I30VY>>?OP/Z0MMVGV7R],EW^#=0`PU.@R&M(U,=
M$BV%J*<NI7CDGWP_+-$P(D&X$G8O`V`N"-?`M0^KBX+`I4F&(%0/`V4H?7+M
M874*\44$5>-!-X\.LKWS3#]L93Y%[#UQ2;H[N?%5IPYOS93"9\H-L#1:8(E3
M+(R&B/,.,,Q7\R])G>K&+Y9X9B[,LO@+LO/G]&7GS2FXE9TW>T(O?B7US+(^
M,J$;OY*Z\"NYTSK=FM-!"O+G4S@%`&01"S:_OIY,?R8<6[L46=@_7=UWTJ>;
MHHYF]CHR,L5QF2E2!.P3SC/U$UN&+UR468B*'LF\V"8X=>#^23'@Y"4USM7`
MF7GVIP.+)<ZU>,]"]2AI*]^G%I_<D]I;,2(M48ZV]SQ?/L3>\USYN(XF5HZP
M?\+ZAJMO$7F)6D9\Z;Y'TNX#Z6BRS-D_8>P]E>46B&*;>BZ+OA)K[]&M'4+?
MB[3WA-@B7(D;<@)[$,6[C.^KO!FMKT!HK6ZJ.HILW:.<7IIPVMDD+('QP6L*
M`82Y>\'<PY'"P5!R\QWI^X5+?2\C?EF7E^>+0Y[DH5BY@)8%WK+4E8H"VT[2
M.^R9NJ8>>@YDYPS1D[988M/N]RS8S<NFZ5SWE/7=ZTG%KGU[*+I]J:=^")I.
M/R7%,Q<%!Q&[?BH=7(!1\&X7*6H%E5PY66]+``\C11YU>$>*4=#^YL+0^7#6
M[E,S3KPCZ;GN);ZKK3>7`$UH:*1[>8I)\1!P\_K_@DB6N(FWB&Z==I.+FVFB
M>Z1V,P,WLT1CW*&9N=K?P3B4E^O6X5OU,(+V)TI$SQU+`^9G>_Q3^DYO0H<]
M0\=SFG52E$;3=6$G]D+Q'\5DB5HLN,H5M7AP-0-I:51J&`JL:F.;5>4N%P+Z
M?E?%77`QYE.'QPSJ\0"6[JNOP3^YSOH&^1+@<C9NT,^=OL'KC('3>>)&_0S_
M)]3?C&42K]9^7?0^$S0C1UQ6]W]="+M!&EO!=GE<I)LN;?JAZLF7@'0HI%0*
M<-142UM51IZH^?6E\:K_:^I0ITY_I1NBU+&S+X7/P\*S/J3%E%7/MICRY.]S
MYRBG?7*1KX0*)E^"]Z3C7^S1R._.7G;&5G)GV[B-.X0_L6>=L!$#.L8!L$!3
MH*Z\^SJH(T^Z)Q^^O-XM/==@1HG"7O^G?2G-MK]NP[9?ZMVVM_7;WJ(V`PW2
M[6WMRIV3<':1YGAS_,FJHY`'S$76_'<%-\-/XN>(4@_EH-/R.0=EU_,MPUL[
MBX*N+11@9YYX*$^,%?K_K`9]<.C9#*WN/;VQ!9KI8=.ERHR7L([D08_G?3`Z
M/XNU@3ZY<5'<Z9X"Y8OD$QN-VRE<&";-P8NJ/=6?*M_TSE5.[WQ&3\]-"8NM
M_K+#HK/'P7A^Q7EDUSK][H!L;.*?U3/UX2W#Z06&>3N8P6M@E/#CBOXAF]IU
M^H8J[6BWJ&8!1*^E;+,P)<69^(R>W.^+1I043RZ2>$=$/`"FL%G'/0H:E)K7
M;<]`5'(1K%?SH2ZSP!'-`:<O@\9D2&,E"UPK*3X=KL9X']'3-L<B:YZZK,\6
M`5?RPI;A8)5+7/IPTO5HG$9"1H\VZOO_I^J]%NUWJAZ\Y3WZVMWZD7YLJT70
M[O2[MNL]#>QV[6^;U;ZB5XS;]>H5(U!O67H/_**[`&@=?@F,OV836"W8>CFF
MAFEFI&;XG3P`(X7%5^ER4RM`OE,`9JL("TP5E]!P0[SSE^&&0!["K?GS]=CH
MG"/HS_0<S=8>K#O#E!LJ./%@BI-R@!RV+J&D7;ZZL7XZT-,"8$5-F6K<+>6K
M^FDMP\OY=*S9@/I/%[#KN$J0:>]+.I+4N('_K48HR@?WRW"N2-+(#*&P(^S\
MK>C)MV<LQFMWU_Y&#.67BG)TZ!7U#ZWE/#SPW3YQUV_$JIBE8E>11_TL4&Y0
M>WI]'>JI@,T4?&L6WG+BN0_&7#6UU=9M[S';]"!SV@#B_PUJH@E1XM=K^H!G
M?CZ8\Z`!)76<:3W3RMU4HJMB%L,2723%.28^*OH88$(?%?=SNOOXQ:+]"_+*
MOJ0K2>?\QL7B$M^[=#K#GIC:-+T-!*#)A3\X8E>(5HH`GLJJVV\`KUF8RMOT
M4L@NFYZ"@1]B@D#BFYE2*H5URJG3I+1=RS7,<!Z;[@](D53`D7<C@$TQ6'.!
M1#R,62&J>S]WQ"X7U2-:B)]_7/3I*/R2XCR)E*9>^!R[AP>UR//\M9D\H&VR
M6)N!;U8:A`6-WX%'R.'?KE/DLI8G#HWE8GQZC$')C71R5F)M>N!0Y3FPH[05
M*NT.(Q)\DT#M*[O]TDC0NVA.:I>+^=::B`D?<,VY-P,!QS,W[&%L@-_"W\ZJ
M<EKU?X;E?PP`UBO$!:<H_N1QL4V@6%)`2CVUR./YA*E="5.OXS_L*M:":=/F
M66L>&@A]AO(N/_]HX2+E<@!H71LP:TTH*PRY,&8]KL=C`,=@,MA;^R(^U?Q>
MV(<^?%R_'TJ_?YLB`)Z]?]<6?%[$IYH'(C<UXYOLG[*WAG^.WWW91LMX2Y8E
M>,@$P"[=*'I5\"2)?+I88:6PR@PL2`$QL1'?3!H$KXPZYCAU"UKAR1L]%B`^
MR0@:Q=U`@/!CC6G\NBBV<7O!MKG`$%W,4H==A(/#-Z`00\Q:3OTS40?T^)O4
MV)-%0=01K'L-.M)OX"M$ETUATL)=!ND[S2U?H)P']5$`#^U4C^)1F_`K+<0F
M2H/!1S:L-?KY&KWB6>1Q&XBZIP<;46%'C5XGCNS*W%FC]WVKY5SB4R;^45^N
M2P&;WN-BU7N[U>3C7M<)L&[O"@2I]AU-@GP3;$A5/D*/6;GH00:/!M:&^#\!
M[-'&@G4&.O[="!Q";#&4E1^,.!0`-7U`TCD1OX?RUFVA*2"IV?3=$MLUPZ-=
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M4`/(,R4_N@,$IL>&-%(`D(/^U/Q^VF+"(4!,>7?`I`X_I-R(K;ZX+PZ&([V:
M3'PWZ;`.+1M#8`2\AVC(D,</4P055=/@29AGJ-&G<&2$;LOHZ,S1^<H9.I\7
M>1H,L*+0DP+:[4?'(X&?E*.!LX6X`!(#.5H?.'4@U!=Z@)^8"D.HQ![0%Q:]
M?JLW)B[?ZKS@?<^_X"!&F2/3U(]T33G&`(S\I#DGDI!6WU*/LPUHL3VZRJ<C
M*1AMF+]*3YG1OR/J%);**5_[>7@03[0VX8M@Q!V@/@ESAF3!)]M^C57_J%M(
MM]W`^TQIY6'(2$\^4>B<9Z3&^OHX]=\WVCAL[NE&WB%'-N=@']V1,XS1]N,F
MC_>C/N_QON8<W5A&K65LG&,>\L>RZI.,+>Z@'LNTQ)2-XZ9*H=FM'=Z:OCEY
M.;,+JAYE@68NOP'G@J"N9FSAE3UZ6VMECUCQ9=4\)OE<Y=.ZT@HQR_XT0P]X
M4.]G;".=9^Q7)\#?6]%PIE4>H`Z#=<1Y61W(I#^8*._V'U5#F?+:JGE`+#8A
M9XX<L3G'H'+-.6$JY\B)<>0,5:\2`)6ZO4<)7ON*I!?DRX/LLX>Q*(A9UFMG
M=:G-Q';>VWDKW9J'%#X'%/Z0:;1C'@\QT7<XO<`BBVHC<<P+\[V;;LG&31UN
M1-_;Z079<ICZG[@Q0-3L>RD]*Q]/7T9`C&]C>M8C<HA:A9NAWB<#Z;FS9!IA
MIF]K^O0L.5HMH&QU)W)ADI]'N,G[1""]8(IL4E-(6C9$2X;Y?=]X'P^DYUCE
M+@CHO`L"D!;EH4J.F)H35L$I.6'88QTR4/<AJQQWS.8]/Y^[,58*3RNVL;K+
M6"SHYA@:L8"&H>2K@&WT'/5\X-_EYK'CTT(J!FT_VVJ+5"[B=Q@^(O>I3<>=
M*?_2>[5WD2?VH]AW167JV#C,D9.4>3%8PH0?(BSE!(!$@S(J1Q%E5&?;2,?L
M:"5GJ-9S"(LZ1_"MCC;!,7NPQ_N?O0I<2C&=WHN]5GH5UJGD#%;YSD(/Y;++
M6-:I(PBLCADD>Z;B`<!5]0(BIYYIP[=RL;`(N^/O*&B"&@<'4B8+YKI&8L.6
M'7P6IT7LTBZZ/546$5J9Z5'WT->WMN%;X[TP62\FG_.H+]'0_VC#MW*$WJ]E
MZHF6@3#*V!5<0YVC5*'-ZAP%_Z):WK90G1O0.IGZ=Q:(J4+O8F:!FL54S3,N
M]5`_*I#UOI`VSBOUI%ZT=2NGCL4FB]@'#%J@]%+.UU+EY`)U*%D:7R5DM_[;
M9U1.JGH&[&?U:9+=VOFBX%GP,R=&RV4(2D++X;L?^HJ<BJTP8Y#7,:4^<M-W
MS;I`;2*!V::EA?#RA6O9%KJIA=/'=,&NM8>>$@!/=BMPG-`GB=<DHO*=C^B<
M<H0Z@%3)$44>:-2S*.2(5N\6XF_")CA&]5'BOY$B&4,PL,42*H)Y+"T$R!H:
MT1E,@)\&Z-37Y0JA9-]!ZM\#21UX!CX11L&_!ESA4$V[!Q/P`(3:I3=H%-J[
M+]$3`Q3_)^4;_4V^2BLL.87.D@@/MM&'2T7M:/KFNSU@870$SJH>C$R]=,PY
M'`\+D1X0X$MGVP+#S_HJ/4\[8A>*V&HT"UQPEY&=US25G>T=THWZ5?]&RJ/5
MGUHPGJO[2'F(>OF&"G9N+=%@_?HSM0#M-TFYB@;JWR-*X=S3C#T=6%@NI\\7
MAA6V[3[%7XFHNR@&W]'/":AL$IIT8'>\(S;I,:+T.2P,)0-HR'_0P*B%.84J
MC1[D+]^/BJ5/\2=TV=-UDN%.W-\[+'T)-_`B=P.,EC'TH9#P=)_2Z3OBF+A/
MI&R9?8B(<D,M?9#@NSW<>=]0:7""A^:J/:&]2<?\'`?7KI%+D$XOS<E4\%]/
MP;.R%^#1JFC'XKZ$=IA;.8V1IJ^:%?!AT.Y-:*?$-/4/Y&>B3##OA>I;S)WL
M7T><05+;:'6S%GP#SI4F=1919O6=]<[)H_R4W*EW*L+W#_I8"OE5S?2S96K?
M$7?M$WT_@LHQ7TV!RQGK1!1#X\;0K*5M7LPE+.X#_^`57M;',S!B5J[K)-((
M97$W,Y5R.T2(J_G$-UN9U7G6.U]YB+&P`*YW+O&EVM-8^5YE<2^D0N"9=UAZ
M(8L\*E\EP$++57I!^SSK58^VP!79V@5!1J"O<,Q4PT+M3":`\I3SRO&-LSHW
M+NZ>XLCSG_4JDQUZ1PX+_E+K3TMO0]P7O+@-SKUV=3J1+,I76-$B+VT_0'A=
M-RKQYE\%N969Y\=8:*Y<U<E*)J4S+X^GM&E016!#-R0'-J[K;L[Q<V2IMCSU
M'NO@?92[`<NO&$\;@5(MKG.TSB-1+?UJ%"02"F`2@@!SG>4>F&-=T*]:#^=`
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MB0CV%EI`K<>HACY:T86>N0OR%926ECH5`5(4>`&TV]U48O:(8%<[4&-4LFCI
M0D^P@ZWKFYIZ4[H?<NK3?MH??MP\BTF`GC4G'%$G]H')%$9]FIWGYR!!FJR^
M\[RO)4\YF7!:N>F8I07-9@3`G^9KC0WNTCOBVC"`5!;W!L[2IOZ>FB$7J`_[
M:4^R#:7Y-]SI3NE*9__8$]JX-*B/Z@_0C$X0J+ZB/.S*HZRZ^Z32PSV+B=:_
M\2OUV,E*@576L:#`.Q[U0V.?.KGT#E\#;FSUTJFB(,0\?A+_&UZ*T`A#,S'+
MA9#XVIT\4(W))R@E&(8\Y=;!KZUJ=@"6MZ6/>FA+AVH]-`$L=5\\2@!DFQSK
MG"IBXJKTA''G)Z;>;3-.3'V4K8!;7QUT"Z6'361QIR)U;R[T[X^GNEDQ:&*J
MWA8Y,36'K0B;,T<1'+IF`8RIF:GM:[]\94F"I=MAZ90%&N:P@%D!D%/-E;D?
M<,I$8!3HZ:G!77.0DIGX!YX:,'FZ!-'IQQ/KJ:OW`$8Y5P,T3&5WU8O*0XZ)
M[XK6T*9"Z7ZH:75C*C\7F\Y4/H^W#8I7+(DA?!G_%\+*37^!.^W(7^`\^[OR
M$-[UG5KH`:9!R9C'N^W^O9F9J;VV[E-@&:OO?J]NO*I&MJKKKZK/7%4;O\>>
M7I6OJCOK-`SG*?"1D==C#]"$-_'U(EP3=F,I;Q*6G/)^=G,^GWRBAB<1(6KV
M5?4OGV$`0Q0MMF^%)1YM9X,N9H\OY7TP9A[#@@OVLL'Q2IXQX70L"`D[4.BS
MWN3&=EC>=_*;8I?QF.>U\Q?H"8Z-'3R2D:-OOVC$BR8AX32=&P[;^8/#"%SF
M7]2<0VVJ+WY-W>4TAGZZZ*YE&E64W#[,Y,/C,$L7--$S#=1"LDB][[A[!:^Q
MQEL>XG_'P[N?-E@.:WG`N%7?DIJQ@O>-3\.VH>7!V-_QOE$8WN$PCT7HT)H'
M21K9]3O>$;-*<Z]'2X)R\=743ZDG>-J/"^C!DTW\VPRC7CB0%B]'5\6^S:BG
M#C282-HT2:@3T_(D9H[RB?\C&43LA$^F'UX!Z]RK!?-K[)%T%_@V`WK333G4
M_LUI.%TNT7.T7TV]*.L[CL#K:C]AWWAQD;-WF_H4XI8>QK(BMN/(;^0A&*X'
M;GO5_LVSNU;PVUI2^16\EMF6]+1[I'O3ADNCTD;)`SN.V*5AWOH;WITW$)O\
M;\3F"P-[1^CXB)6^\S%SMCEC*WA(`0;0RTI&*F2T]T9C0D)146)?/)6,MO<.
MEB/F?_A?#+(.^U_[VTM\E.<J_U?+PTA8?<^O?NUJ25^JG=3@W7M#`\K\1($R
M/VA`&2\@M@#*N/\OH(QR"\VOK0`"B>]K2)EO?ZA\!H:QH;=?IOS[S2MZEBZA
MAJM';TM=_J$S]WK@63E*$_X^*.371$YYI]P(/NS0'I[1'C[C5Y9H//!<2N('
M&SQ6*"R$%9X6:W-)5W[!*;IEE0?25Z0(:EJ#*743#RN2(_?&*0V^:<WG8XUQ
ME1D@\\OA_0>RLF03KR.'DDF;[J,8E@3/7!6*"D^=)O_KO__")X\AU>0`PY!W
M20MQI:7ESBZ8FI$QV&0I6;MR68E96KFZI$R6R)#;`2N*Y542N0LV?\E<ML*\
MIGA-B8V,,<TOMJTL_NVJ$K.MY`_R2EO)<I)DRIV>,\MB+EM;8ENQJJR"/&#*
M*EYN7K$20J7%JTO,939SJ;SZMWC]05.N%EHFF5>4R:7+R<2?15>7+2\A#P4%
MBE?92HJ7/VDN6U-22B;UQU\N%4LEJTM*)7/Q,FGEVA+R\.VL3K\_SUQBLY79
M2,JOWR]Y8F6Y5$Y2M51L)<O*;,O-JTI*'Y,>)^DFR\KRWYM7R*M6D0S3]-(U
M*.::XG+)7%*ZG):7YHE,_N6+_67(_'7I2+;ID;(R\^KBTB>UP'*28\HN6[U:
M+EVYK%A:658Z[K?RBA4EMI^K9VHP95H)6B[)-"U@W.J2Y2N+^\LQPY1?HM5=
M\3);67FY>3D$RLE,D[58>OS^8!&7+2O!@Z#X+.W!+^J5-14\62H5/]'_G#/E
MYSPR+W^.N6*E]#A:V3PUKV!>%M'=;ES+E$>F$+UI^JI5)8\5KT*EE"ZC63<O
M*T;M\*:\VUD7;K^PNF1UF>U)$F(JD'];OLRV<@U"@T]LQ:6/E1"#R2*O645K
MH,2\O&3%RM*5-#X2BI*N75E.H_[MD^:G2FQE)-STR)-KT/HKRU<72\L>)\;;
M291+MI6ECYG+UQ0O*R$F4T'P=D69;;6\JM@LH<Z7E:U>LZKD"1)EFE-FSL\I
MF#<[AT2;@A=W2AJL@&2TL%1B*T7A@@&6V[HCEQ:O+5ZYBJHTR3592VS(B9;!
MY26E*Z'=TTVY)<62;/NUI/5.J`TUL19R`=.\TC7(HJ1UCF`BQ)Y?LKS,O,)6
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M&\;U9^=V?PHW$%9[ED2?(01I(0]KRM`66H]`R/*2Y1#C-+%D*H9G)8\A\\NA
MCLM+J#(B9J+3!!Z@`C1C28D3QM/!:Q6TV/;S>"=J4I.H%(V^I+1,?NSQ_AJ$
M>IJ+;8_)=)@J1XPAFNS#_ZML2>G:E;:R4BH.Z3`J/4$KQ\K^KEA:@HK0RH(L
MR.4ED`K7I))_*;7B_Q,R:D):49:5E4JVLE7CLO)SILQ$BLLP0D!0JY((3>Q!
M*B:7ECRQIF29!!W4(J*U#HE`3;CA3GMJK6,F@4`@DW^72,3E#["83\*(ZWDR
MB521X#"JC8UC$J=.F6TN+B]'72R_EU9C6@Z--L-<5KI*4V,ZT*ZQE3UF*UZM
M(\<(E;^/?$R@(G<B^;_?$DD/R46SF&=/>XHG/)-O+GM\=3E/3$RA=O5P3S5P
MAO;)L60$,Z]4ZY>(@,XI9NEQJIQWTHDCEO])HNP76?D&Y83W*A!@.%R%$M>#
M1Q\?OO-BQ`G_Y(#V[X=G(_%@`G'="M[[L[6I-RG*A.!8XN(GW%,P9\H<?,W%
MEW["/=/GY&J_+4$Q8E\QDM@O/_2D9PI]\SY2POR<Q,]7%U^^.6["=X^^W7O8
MVS1_?VK;@[LZ)G_VW:,#RU>L?/7&X;\GK?PF:VC:;N_DX16ZI;5O5_[XS>%;
M0\_R'R^K^.G"Y!G<ALQU)6/?/WMX,WDW`)BN?_+]-Q-OSOZ7]_6^P_?/^>QB
M9M?E]=V37__J=U=^;//N:3\\(;9[_93*GAO7)J\]0-Z*[7C\TV\/G]>7.:\:
M_G7KR\G<9X9]'S\X]L)GA^\;:)E36MF],S"9E@4+8]9*\+,4)4<J$TS=$8]8
M5EATX4QV:GAZ^+1PJRGPQ0`=Z$$Z[F[DY"D"]BHA:P1!)PB&X$M#"&]@?D6.
M)"!':E1&^N^_GZX@,,P88F=$P@GD,Y+,_._G,/S//S3;Y4AY('&Q=(D415S`
M]YB#B2%+YFCB(B0Q:TH!2<PIS.E?5ZW014,VAG$!\!3,-L,,MC*#"9DK6@G1
M$Y(Y+%>39$B`G`FA>C$"@F.)BV.""A6"ATNSE^9.GY6S%!J1ESX`X4.)*YJL
M7[^>803<#2*N!+XZI#_-#1%I_^/G"\L'7+_(&7%NB,38R-J'\/8TXJ*Z]!@3
M%7*622-70]((Q3!1"!-%,.'S`(,F"R'AAG\8OS0^9O08DXT/&E.,6:;_WF@T
M[EEHKS!:%R@3PQ(M24$TA(2&A8](&*N1`A8]NHZ8466HCO<L9RSO67XSD_Z$
M(3.;&-=8$_VAKT6&O)?T`8?NP;&T8_WJWU,H$2'5+`F[RW"7(3]+43<UZDW$
M&+=+1S@^C%0W*D:>*-UY2F=?^UM6]P/8SF[R;#H_K?I\=>/A"`+^@2O0_LY4
M!;O_:5K(`9W2U'GF4W73Q80SY;I-YQ/.?7J9NU%]46G60H]JH8U::%?UT7W.
M,W/V*\=SG4='^M-<LGY?^QX?G_:NO+K]+>=10%4.?)C$@%(8JR.WDL]!L"T*
M\&M/=>-^I:L21OX!\<S=K>WK>\@-*6;]46+R?;&I,;.ZL?('$QX@/[Y6&"4R
M@/^;B&GI!L.S9)R)T*PW$-)3_;GR7:_R46+@_OK,!I8<C"&;3E9?/#2,`6(Y
M,*MEN!737TG_$G1E^>T9\@TRO^8ADDGR20GY':D@?R0*V4K^3':CVH]B7/V&
M^$@?QL:!S`AF/#.126-R&2M3PI0Q3S!/,QN8%YCM3"VSAZEC#C/'F!;F2\;+
M7&<Z&8X5V0'LW>P(=C*[@!W$#>/NY29RV5P^MXA;SJWFGN2>XQ3N)6X']Q?P
MMM_G0*;05>CVZ4[J$O15;VYZ<\N;>_3'].3/+[TYS;C&6&'<:_RG\2MC94S*
M8&'8QKO?&'%CQ&>I[9$3HE[+W)Z=D/-@3DK.6[.?FV/(B\I[)^^]/$_>7=;[
MK!.L_[)V%\Q^Y,??#"W.+AZP?'?MW*@GHOX9]574U:B>J%M18P9F#=Q76U[Z
M5MG[9:?+[EJS2][X'VGK=,\L>"9E_;;UDV)"WHQ^<_";P]XTOSGRS3%OCGUS
M[.:4S86;/]O<MSFZ^JEJ;W7F"^3__*=BI;0$AD?WZ?\`C.;T?\B#C''KF[:P
MA[>P!PU$HY7R[B>@@O73&L820%"B-$U48CE2Z1NWI7Y&RW#?%31[?#.PNB*!
M)B0'C'$':RBZAW?_%B\:X]S#M>W=`6SOZDC]J$/O(9Z80H[?SN[Z*ZE]A=VU
MG\044BT!VR"F,)'CM[`]U6<2E?@7V5ZZG:=HWN2.Y,#5J74W8[,(TXY\2N'I
M9"9\[B))#"0>($;A-+5LQ;I9(':!!7B7*.?K)Q^J89&7P4AN?48-.[M('NUF
MLVAL*"KIJ]`,`%8E9B<+VG5KPM%Q-2Q,4VRAS/K*\JUNL@"Y-NXGCIB_`F-P
M<`M+W\.%@1S:S0)R8-77(`CH[LX?,W>]P3IB7F.;X04".(C?PP8"L*3BNK`H
MX>BN=\`&Z$\7[P\FR!<4GEF@('8%L2,X@_YY$6J1L^0!BZD-Q+?W+#3$/'VZ
MN7SE8Z7:RCS<L+!,MIFQ2M26\W27<_LEL[;5P#)<6P;T1Y`_I2@O'ZN\527%
MY25WQ,,-!<5/8GU8,@X?\S1+N.$1O-._`%E-MW4K[B1MR9GRR#3:(U>68K5G
MKL"+Q2O02U<6TT45W9"8IV,;6[9"JL!B-S'<\(N[__NU7Z6`%RT&3(7$1`Z'
M_#]02P,$%`````@`&K7R'LDY1*L0`@``#`0```<```!214%$+DU%;9-/;]LP
M#$?O!?H=B)Y2(#'6P]#UV&S!+FF++@6Z]L9(3$Q$E@S]B>=O/TJQG0Q8+HDM
MZO'I1P7RY^?CT]O+)W``A-:[O<<&H@/E[)%\A"=6WFT:CC544@H[-A1@%I*J
M`0/$V@6ZOBHDV:V3(@W;'E;KY]5W0*MA]5E^!>C(F/PMJV?H[:E7T^!BH&@R
M+"N".;42D8ALV>Z!FY8T6D5P1),H5+!TXA5<\O)..3V:S$Z'JI:/F]LB@;E'
M*SP-<JK`SDXUJ]\KJ?$$;)5)FG0%;_4(ND!/&Q5:V!+X9*'+L93#!+>+\+K$
MP`J<A]?$ZE">JH$D3*`_I%+$K:$IZ0N8H-'V131%\M#5+!GG@KSZXV4SD+!M
M#2N,XB()O+FR'/^+GT/L6QI&7,%[3=(C'$@/J)VH"I^M="QQ@\6&YK#G(Q5D
M?H39*9D\@1;SR-Q.`KVX&`-MNA\5?+A4S)VL#VZ1;(FO5'79I)>B?SL)>&#E
M5V>M.6SE%^KB@'!3W4`Q[T'F+U&=Z;'&L04;,](4ID#YI.2]\V>]TCUC)-V%
MH3V:DT?.)1NX%$<%F>,T20[G@%GF=W$)\V6[F(.`FC`?I[SS1*:?I%S+I,L.
MS2%ZEC/FV_?LH$/OT48JB62_`TN5M,W"=E[V6#>"0FI;YV/Y"Q^13>Y\UOWE
M>EA3A\;DG>_WJ_6P`'#W\/!U\>5^<??M^NHO4$L!`A0`%`````@`";7R'G&L
M5Q_E!```C`T```H``````````0`@`````````$=!351/6BY"05-02P$"%``4
M````"`!'L_(>:0G][1%Z```8HP``"@```````````"`````-!0``1T%-5$]:
M+D5815!+`0(4`!0````(`!JU\A[).42K$`(```P$```'``````````$`(```
B`$9_``!214%$+DU%4$L%!@`````#``,`I0```'N!``````
`
end



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:31 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!rutgers!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!xetron.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Tim Huster)
Subject: Re: 1/4wave mag mount size
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: timh.xetron.com
Organization: Xetron Corp.
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11
References: <3u3gfp$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 13:12:48 GMT
Lines: 39

I guess I'm kinda confused by what you are asking, David.
You want to know the exact size for a 1/4 wave mag mount? Isn't 1/4 wave
sufficient enough to figure out the length of an antenna?
You have a mount and rods,  but when you use 'IT' at 19.5"
your radio gets VERY hot? What are you using at 19.5"?
If you have a mount and rods, did you try assembling the pieces so that
it resembles an antenna, or did you lay the pieces next to each other
and expect them to work by some divine intervention.
Which radio do you have? Most radios heat up when transmitting into a dummy
load with a 1:1 SWR.
I suggest you dig out the books you 'read' when you got your 'license' and
then assemble the antenna and connect it properly to the radio.
If a 1/4wave mag mount is a task that is proving too difficult for you,
I imagine there are plenty of people willing to provide an antenna for
your use, for a price.

In article <3u3gfp$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Hello, i was wondering the exact size for a 1/4 wave 2m mag mount?
>i have a mount, and the rods, but when i use it at 19.5" my radio gets VERY
>hot.
>
>thanks
>
>DAvid
>|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
>|         David Roseman       |          [e-mail]       OUTTA ORDER!
>|                             |                                  |      |
>|      SysOp of NODE 3 BBS    |          The Flying HAm - BBS    |      |
>|     Running OBV/2 Software  |          TechnoMage - BBS        |      |
>|                             |          N3SQE/SVARC - Ham       V      |
>|         HAmmy in IRC        |  [e-mail] - Packet  |

--
  Timothy W. Huster
  [e-mail]
  kb8bnk@kc8tw.#cin.oh.usa.na
  "I like Daddy's car. It goes faster than Mommy's car!" Andrew H. age 3



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 450 ohm twinlead
Date: 19 Jul 1995 18:51:13 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3ujk71$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


No, unlike coax which has essentially no field outside the shield,
two wire lines have considerable fields for some distance from the
wires.  Coiling will cause coupleing between each turn and all the
other turns with unpredictable results in characteristic impedance
velocity factor and input impedanc e seen at each end of the coil.
Charlie, W7XC
--



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:33 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!pacbell.com!gw2.att.com!nntpa!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Andreas Meyer)
Subject: Re: Alarm tape antenna ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: poster
Sender: [e-mail] (Netnews Administration)
Nntp-Posting-Host: holdon.ho.att.com
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel NJ USA
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3u586h$[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:32:01 GMT
Lines: 29

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna,
Jan-Martin Hertzsch <[e-mail]> writes:

> [e-mail] (Robert Seaman) wrote:
> >[e-mail] wrote:

> >>Gee, you could tape a Yagi beam on your window using that stuff.

> >How would you go about rotating this sucker?  ;-)

> I guess by opening and closing the window ... but one will have only about 90
> degrees of range of the possible directions ;-).

Windows in the US generally don't pivot in the middle like they do in
Europe.  I probably should have mentioned that mine is immovable,
so I'm looking for something with a more omni-directional pattern.

It's also interesting to note that while I'm getting plenty of responses
that say it can be done, I have yet to receive any specific data, like
the critical measurements, which would be most useful.
The window is 43 inches square and has an aluminum frame.

Thanks,
Andy
--
    ==--
  -====---    Andreas Meyer, N2FYE                     [e-mail]
  --==----    AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel NJ USA    ..!att!hogpa!ahm
    ----


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Date: 21 Jul 1995 05:29:18 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3undve$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


>I know two hams who suffered DIRECT HITS last year.  BOTH lost
EVERTHING that was PLUGGED IN (despite the fact that their antennas
had been disconnected or grounded.
<

DOes this mean that the diskcone antenna that I just errected (standing
at about 25') is actually going to increase the chance that I will have
a lightening strike? There are many, many much taller trees around, and
I really had not even thought about this as a problem. As a precaution,'
I have been unplugging the antenna to the radio, but why do I need to
unplug everything in the house? If I have never had a lightening strike
anywhere near, do I need to be concerned?

THanks for any feedback!!
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:34 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!uknet!bcc.ac.uk!news
From: [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby)
Subject: Antenna design Software - announcement
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News System)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 17:21:41 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UCL Dept of Medical Physics
Lines: 32

TITLE:   yagiu109.zip

PURPOSE: To analyse performance of Yagi-Uda antennas. You
give the dimensions and positions of each element, and the
program calculates gain, input impedance, front-to back ratio,
beam-patterns etc. An optimisation program 'optimise' tries to
optimise a design. The optimiser can also tell you the sensitivity
of a good design, to small mechanical errors.

AUTHOR: David Kirkby BSc. MSc.  G8WRB.
email:[e-mail]
             Department of Medical Physics,
             University College London,
             11-20 Capper St,
             London WC1E 6JA.
             Telephone: [phone]
             Fax: [phone].

anonymous ftp from medphys.ucl.ac.uk

What you get:

386 protected mode executables.
Most source code (some code from 'Numerical Recipes in C' needed too)
20 page postscript manual.
Unix man pages.
Both DOS and unix makefiles.
All code is PD.


dave kirkby



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!america.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: antenna size 2mtr
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 95 02:01:09 EDT
Organization: PSS InterNet Services, InterNet in Fl 904 253 7100
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: warp.ppp
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


> Hmmmmm, I am a bit dissapointed.  I purposely posted a message with
> information in it that should have been caught by another ham.  And guess
> what.  Nobody bit even.
> Fred     ke8tq


Then again Fred Maybe some of us considered the source. H._. H._.

Actually I didnt even see it.

73 dray




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Any RS antenna good for 2m/70cm???
Date: 21 Jul 1995 06:36:05 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3unhsl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


Are any of the Radio SHcak mobile antennas worth considering? I actually
wanted a trhu-glass mount, which it does not appear that RS has any of those.
But I thought I would ask anyway since the jury is still out on the thru-glass
models (re another post... :) I know most of you think pretty lowly of RS,
but they sure are convienent. I could always order a better antenna later
if the RS one doesn't work out so well. :)

Thanks!!
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!mr.net!news.mr.net!dawn.mmm.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Ron Harshbarger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Backfire, Normal Mode Helical ?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 06:10:51
Organization: 3M Company Memory Tech Group
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3uo1ta$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.6

Can anyone recommend a technical reference on the subject a short helical
(monofilar) where the diameter of the helix is very small compared to the
wavelength (normal mode) AND the ground plane is equal to or less than
the diameter (backfire)? This should be the approximate configuration of
a "Rubber Duck". The usual references mention it but I can't seem to find
any real design details such as feed point characteristics, near and far
field patterns etc etc....

73


--
Ron Harshbarger - Engineering Specialist /*****************************/
3M Memory Technology Group               /* The views & opinions are  */
OFB&U - An AVOIDER and proud of it!      /* mine alone and may or     */
                                         /* may not reflect the those */
KA0TUT (was K3PID)                       /* of my employer            */
Landline - 612-778-7670                  /*****************************/
Fax      - 612-778-5945



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!nntp.teleport.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Dave Calhoun)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: beam won't work, help!
Date: 20 Jul 1995 01:36:11 -0700
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3ul4hr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linda.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Well, I tried to make my own beam antenna, but something is wrong and I╒m
hoping that someone here can help. I started with the plans from  ╥The
Radio Amateur Antenna Handbook╙ by William Orr and Stuart Cowan. It is a
three element designed to work at 144mhz. The plans called for:
Reflector: 41.75 inches
Driven: 39.4 inches
Director: 37.5 inches
Spacing: 10 inches
using 1 inch aluminum tubing. Of course I didn╒t read the instructions
carefully until I was done. I used 3/8 inch solid aluminum tubing
instead. It doesn╒t work very well. I used a SWR meter and got a reading
of approx. 3.5

Does anyone have any suggestions for me?
dave

btw, the driven element was split in two and mounted one above the other
--
[e-mail]  Public Access User --- Not affiliated with Teleport
Public Access UNIX and Internet at [phone] (2400-14400, N81)


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!nntp.gmd.de!news.rwth-aachen.de!news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: beam won't work, help!
Date: 20 Jul 1995 13:17:36 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3ull1g$[e-mail]>
References: <3ul4hr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>using 1 inch aluminum tubing. Of course I didn╒t read the instructions
>carefully until I was done. I used 3/8 inch solid aluminum tubing
>instead. It doesn╒t work very well.

Dave,

Asuming that the dimensions given work (there are many designs
around that don't) you would have to make the elements  a little
longer to get them to resonance.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!braintree!news
From: [e-mail] (Boris The Spider)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Best auto/portable CB antenna ??
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 06:30:03 GMT
Organization: BrainTree Ltd.
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <3uds5h$[e-mail]>
References: <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p20.tpl1.nwrain.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12002 rec.radio.cb:21295

[e-mail] (Daniel J. Dechant) wrote:

>Hi:
>
>I have a hand held CB with an 8 inch "rubber duck" antenna.
>While driving in my car this setup is virtually useless.
>
>Does anyone have experience with making something like this
>work without having to mount an external antenna? My preferences
>would be:
>   1.   Buy a longer antenna that would work
>   2.   Use a magnetic mount as temporary antenna
>I would also consider a telescoping antenna that I stick out the
>window for short durations.
>
>Any advice on getting this unit to work would be appreciated.
>
>TIA, Dan

Range is purely a product of your antenna. The better your antenna,
the better your range. TX and RX.   I use a Wilson 1000 Mag-mount on
my wifes car, and it works great (I have a hard-mount on the roof of
my truck). They aren't cheap, but you get what you pay for, and you
gotta pay for what you get :-}


>
--------------------------------------------------------------

------------------Boris The Spider!---------------------------


<<<<<<< CREEPY CRAWLY CREEPY CRAWLY CREEPY CRAWLY>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<>>>>>>> CREEPY CREEPY CRAWLY CRAWLY>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


               -John Entwistle
                The Who

--------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------@@@}}}}}}{{{{{{@@@-----------------------



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Gordon Pritchard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Best auto/portable CB antenna ??
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 18:36:53 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <3ugusm$[e-mail]>
References: <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1> <3uds5h$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: line037.nwm.mindlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12016 rec.radio.cb:21304

[e-mail] (Boris The Spider) wrote:

>[e-mail] (Daniel J. Dechant) wrote:

>>I have a hand held CB with an 8 inch "rubber duck" antenna.
>>While driving in my car this setup is virtually useless.
>>
>>Does anyone have experience with making something like this
>>work without having to mount an external antenna? My preferences
>>would be:
>>   1.   Buy a longer antenna that would work
>>   2.   Use a magnetic mount as temporary antenna
>>I would also consider a telescoping antenna that I stick out the
>>window for short durations.
>>

>Range is purely a product of your antenna. The better your antenna,
>the better your range. TX and RX.   I use a Wilson 1000 Mag-mount on
>my wifes car, and it works great (I have a hard-mount on the roof of
>my truck). They aren't cheap, but you get what you pay for, and you
>gotta pay for what you get :-}

        Here's a twist that may interest you:
        I have a 2-meter antenna on the car, but for offroading in the BC
mountains with unlicensed friends (and no repeater coverage, anyway!),
I got a MaxRad base-loaded CB antenna with the same NMO base.  So, I
can just unscrew the 2-meter ant, replace it with the CB one, and
change the co-ax connector from one radio to the other.

        The point above is a good one:  a 102" CB antenna will outperform my
42" whip with base loading.  But aesthetics were a concern, as was
getting in and out of my garage without screwing around with long
antennas...

        I also tried (and currently use) a handheld unit in my car (both ham
and CB radios are handhelds).  Using the external antenna makes it
_vastly_ easier to use in the car (and _vastly_ more effective!).  I
would also advise getting a remote microphone, if your handheld
supports this option.  Then, you will have a comfortable and
easy-to-use solution which is not unwieldy.

        Gord Pritchard ([e-mail])



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.dal.mobil.com!usenet
From: "Jake A. Hellbach" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: butterfly
Date: 17 Jul 1995 20:34:15 GMT
Organization: MEPTEC - Mobil Oil Corporation
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <3uehg7$[e-mail]>
References: <3u5u56$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nolpc201.nol.mobil.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (ferret) wrote:
>Does anyone use a Butternut butterfly antenna on any
>of the HF bands?   I do not have room for a full size
>tri-bander, and find the 5 band butterfly, although rather
>expensive, would fit the bill size wise, although I tend to
>doubt their published gain readings...  Does this antenna





Dave I have a Butterfly beam and it works good on 10, 15, and 20.10 meters being
the best. On 20 I usually have a louder signal on my G5RV.
On 17 meters forget it, I have low SWR but no signal. On 12 it works about
the same as 10 but you have to remember that the back of the antenna is now the
front.

Jake KK5HY



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: butterfly
Date: 18 Jul 1995 07:35:05 GMT
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u5u56$[e-mail]> <3uehg7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi
In-reply-to: "Jake A. Hellbach"'s message of 17 Jul 1995 20:34:15 GMT


I also had a HF5B a few years ago when the propagation was still
pretty good. I had it on the roof of a block of flats with 6
floors. The mast was about 6 meters.

The small beam worked just about as one might expect from two elements
(only a dipole on 18 meters). It did have a noticeable directional
pattern even though it was just as wide as any 2 element yagi has. The
side minimum was quite ok and there was a noticeable front-to-back
also. At that time the WARC bands were new in Finland and it was easy
for me to get through the pile-ups on 12 meters, as the rest of the
fellows usually had only a dipole. On 10 and 15 the big guns surely
beat me and on 20 the antenna was quite hopeless (as you might know,
the standard DX-antenna in OH for 20 meters is a 6 element monobander).

The years passed and finally the antenna began to perform less
perfectly. The reason was that the connections corroded. That small
antenna surely has many connections and the mechanical design is not
robust. One needs to take it down every two years and clean every
single connection.

I would, however, recommend that antenna to anyone who needs a beam
but has restrictions on it's size.

                                                -Jari, OH2MPO, OH3BU
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:43 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!pacbell.com!gw2.att.com!nntpa!ssbunews!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (-Leciejewski,L.M.)
Subject: Re: butterfly
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Netnews Administration)
Nntp-Posting-Host: ihgp2-ebb.ih.att.com
Organization: AT&T
References: <3u5u56$[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 19:41:25 GMT
Lines: 26

In article <3u5u56$[e-mail]>, ferret <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Does anyone use a Butternut butterfly antenna on any
>of the HF bands?   I do not have room for a full size
>tri-bander, and find the 5 band butterfly, although rather
>expensive, would fit the bill size wise, although I tend to
>doubt their published gain readings...  Does this antenna
>work?
>
>Reply here or to [e-mail]
>
>

Yes, the Butterfly really works well. I worked 3 or 4 Hams that were using
them and all were extremely happy with the performance. One of the things
they all liked (besides its size) is that it can be turned using a Radio
Shack Antenna Rotor which is ALOT cheaper than the real heavy duty rotors
you need for a full sized beam.

73's

Lou

--
==============================================================================
      Louis Leciejewski - AT&T Bell Labs - [e-mail] - WB9DKY
==============================================================================


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!news.tek.com!emerald.cse.tek.com!royle
From: [e-mail] (Roy W Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Camping antenna ideas needed
Date: 20 Jul 1995 23:34:34 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 33
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3ump6a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: emerald.cse.tek.com

[e-mail] (Paul Egan):

>I am going to be camping by the sea shore at the end of August.
>I would like to bring my rig and work some 40m CW with low
>power using the car battery. The campground that I am
>staying at has low trees (abt. 15' high). Which antenna
>would perform better at this site; a dipole which is too low
>to the ground or a Hustler mobile grounded to the car and using
>the 40m resonator or should I leave the rig at home and just
>enjoy the beach. Thanks for your help.
>Paul Egan VE3GFY

You definitely should enjoy the beach! But you should also be able to
have some good QSO's. 40 meters gives good, solid skip during the day
for distances up to a few hundred km. A low dipole is a good antenna
for this distance range, and QRP does well since the band is usually quiet
during the day. With the kind of tree height you're talking about, you'll
do best by getting it as high as possible.

A vertical does wonders when it's close to salt water. During the night
you should be able to work DX in the direction of the ocean. I believe
the Hustler to be a particularly inefficient vertical, but you should
still be able to have some good QSO's with it. You might improve things
some by attaching a couple of wires to the car near the antenna mount
and running them out along the ground. I worked JA on 40 m from highway 101
on the west coast using a base-loaded (using a powdered-iron toroidal coil)
CB whip on the bumper of a VW squareback. I was running about 8 W output,
and was driving at the time. So it can be done.

Good luck, and have fun!

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roger J. Buffington)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 17 Jul 1995 14:18:53 GMT
Organization: USC Law
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3udrgd$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]> <3ubf6a$[e-mail]> <3ucf14$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: comserv-b-48.usc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83083 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28588 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11981

In article <3ucf14$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Sorry but PRB-1 says expressly that it does not reach private covenants.
>
Yeah, I know.  But it also indicates that public policy favors amateur radio
and letting us put up huge, 170 foot towers and 6 element beams in the
middle of quite, leafy, suburban neighborhoods.  We are permitted and
encouraged to run 1.5KW rigs, and raise hell with people's telephones, none
of which nowadays are able to function anywhere near a ham SSB station.

At least I think that stuff is in there.

:-)  :-)  :-)

--
Roger J. Buffington
1L, USC Law School
[e-mail]
AB6WR
Go Trojans!
WARPing with IBM OS/2 3.0 and PM-Mail
Scotty, beam me up...



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:46 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.ucdavis.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!stevew
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]> <3ubf6a$[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 15:23:04 GMT
Lines: 48
Sender: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83088 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28590 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11982

Roger J. Buffington ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <3uba16$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
: says...

: >Just think of the pro-ham restrictions you could add to your deed.  How
: >many houses have you owned in the last few years?  Has anybody published
: >a do-it-yourself guide to writing CCR's?  Or do you need a lawyer?
: >


: What little I know about it suggests that if you did, the restrictions would
: not be enforced by the courts, because they would most likely conclude that
: such restrictions were against public policy.  If a community bans antennas
: later, one CC&R in the middle of the neighborhood to the contrary would
: probably be struck down by a court, I'm guessing.

Uhmm...Well...yeah I think you might be wrong on this Roger...but
then I'm guessing ;-) And I ain't a lawyer either ;-)

: I'm not sure if anyone has challenged an anti-ham antenna CC&R on the
: grounds that it is against public policy (PRB-1, which indicates that ham
: antennas are FAVORED by public policy).  However, a sympathetic court could,
: if it chose, refuse to enforce it if it chose.  Just like courts won't
: enforce racist CC&Rs (i.e. property can only be sold to X religion, etc.)
: and the like, because this violates notions of public policy.

This has been argued VERY recently in the Jimmy Rich case up here
in Foster City.  That is roughly the arguement used to support the
setting aside of the CC&R's that didn't allow antennas.  The
city had inacted an antenna ordinance that wasn't near as
severe as the CC&R's(this later changed thru the course of the
trial...) Jimmy used the city rules to apply for a tower(he was
encouraged to do this by a city employee no less...) Anyway, the
neighbors(many blocks away!) complained, and filed suit.

From my understanding, Jim's lawyers used the arguement that the
state had an over-riding interest in fostering amateur radio, and
thus the CC&Rs were against public policy.  I guess the court
disagreed. Jim lost.

: What we really need are more hams on the bench!

Well...we do have Judge Rod locally...it helps when you have the
president of the ARRL on the bench ;-)

: Roger J. Buffington

Steve KA6S


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!jupiter.planet.net!earth.planet.net!billsohl
From: [e-mail] (Bill Sohl  Budd Lake)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 17 Jul 1995 15:13:58 GMT
Organization: Planet Access Networks - Stanhope, NJ
Lines: 48
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3udunm$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]> <3ubf6a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: earth.planet.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83089 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28591 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11983

Roger J. Buffington ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <3uba16$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
: says...

: >Just think of the pro-ham restrictions you could add to your deed.  How
: >many houses have you owned in the last few years?  Has anybody published
: >a do-it-yourself guide to writing CCR's?  Or do you need a lawyer?

: What little I know about it suggests that if you did, the restrictions would
: not be enforced by the courts, because they would most likely conclude that
: such restrictions were against public policy.  If a community bans antennas
: later, one CC&R in the middle of the neighborhood to the contrary would
: probably be struck down by a court, I'm guessing.

A community can not ban antennas through the use of CC&Rs after you
own the property.  Antenna banning CC&Rs are initially established
by the developer (usually) and then continue to be enforced through
whatever homeowners association may exist for the community.

That, however, is not the same as a town, city, county, etc. enacting a
zoning ordinance that restricted antenna hights or tower hights.
Those zoning rules carry the weight of law and even if your deed
said you were allowed antennas, that cab and would be over ridden
by the law... again, to the extent that any such law, zoning
restriction was still consistent with PRB-1.

: I'm not sure if anyone has challenged an anti-ham antenna CC&R on the
: grounds that it is against public policy (PRB-1, which indicates that ham
: antennas are FAVORED by public policy).

As others have said, PRB-1 has no applicability to CC&Rs.  So far,
I've yet to see or hear of any CC&R challenged on the basis of PRB-1.

: However, a sympathetic court could,
: if it chose, refuse to enforce it if it chose.  Just like courts won't
: enforce racist CC&Rs (i.e. property can only be sold to X religion, etc.)
: and the like, because this violates notions of public policy.

Many CC&Rs are not enforced at all for extended periods of time and that
is probably the best method to have them invalidated.  Often, the homeowners
association disbands, etc.  If it can be shown that no enforcement
has been done for an extended period, the case can be made that the CC&Rs
have been abondoned.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl  K2UNK     (Budd lake, New Jersey)      ([e-mail])
ARRL Local Government Liason, Mount Olive Township, NJ
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.lahabra.chevron.com!usenet
From: Curtis Wheeler <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 17 Jul 1995 16:35:38 GMT
Organization: CITC/CSD
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <3ue3gq$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cgwh.sr.chevron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83107 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28593 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11986

[e-mail] (CRONIN) wrote:
>In article <3u5u5r$[e-mail]>,
>Roger J. Buffington <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>Make sure that your place doesn't have any CC&Rs or deed restrictions.
>>Those are even tougher to fight than ordinances.  PRB-1 doesn't apply at
>>all.
>
>Would it be possible to place a deed restriction restriction on your
>house to prevent future owners from placing any antenna restrictions
>on it?  After all, if you can make all future owners agree not to put
>up antennas it you should also be able to make all future owners
>agree not to place antenna restrictions on the house.
>
>Could you also add a convenant directing future owners not to enforce
>existing antenna restrictions?  Seems a little more shakey, but probably
>worth a try.  Or maybe direct future owners not to hassle antenna-owning
>neighbors.
>
>Just think of the pro-ham restrictions you could add to your deed.  How
>many houses have you owned in the last few years?  Has anybody published
>a do-it-yourself guide to writing CCR's?  Or do you need a lawyer?

Speaking as someone who has been subject to CC&Rs in my last two
residences and served on an HOA board, I can tell you that CC&Rs can be
changed but it isn't always easy...

Most CC&Rs are writen by the developers of an area.  They can be changed
by a homeowners association assuming that the authority to do so has been
given to them by the developer (AKA the decalarant).  Usually the
developer gives up most of it's authority when all of the units
(houses, condos, whatever) have been sold and they are done developing.
While the units are being sold the developer has more votes than owners
(In the case of where I was living - both areas - the developer had three
votes for every unit they still owned to a regular owner's one vote.)

Certain items in CC&Rs may been required in order to subdivide, get
permits, or financing.

The purpose of many of the use restrictions (where ant. prohibitions are
usually found) are there to keep the place looking "sanitary" while the
builder is selling the units.  After that, the HOA might relax some items
- we lightened up on parking restrictions and let people park in their
driveways - but antenna restrictions stayed.

You can usually petition the board of directors to change the CC&Rs and
have those changes recorded.  You might have a complete antenna
prohibition changed to allow antennas on a case by case basis with
association approval - perhaps an archetectural review or whatever.  But
be aware that what is a thing of beauty to a ham (a big shiny tower) will
probably be an eyesore to your neighbors and potential buyers (effecting
resale value).  With that in mind, the association will likely stand
behind a restriction on towers in the name of protecting property values.
And I have to admit that in my situation (townhouse with small yards) I
would not support a petition to permit the contruction of a tower.

A major change would have to be recorded

PRB-1 will not help you if CC&Rs prohibit antennas.  You are on your own.
Be prepared to make a political investment, offer A LOT of compromises,
and still not get what you want - if anything.

--
Curtis Wheeler - San Ramon, CA
KD6ELA / GROL / Pvt. Pilot




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsgw.mentorg.com!wv.mentorg.com!hanko
From: [e-mail] (Hank Oredson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 17 Jul 1995 20:47:47 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics, Wilsonville, Oregon, USA
Lines: 38
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3uei9j$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: hanko.wv
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83123 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28597 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11988

In article <3uba16$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (CRONIN) writes:

<deletia>

|> Would it be possible to place a deed restriction restriction on your
|> house to prevent future owners from placing any antenna restrictions
|> on it?  After all, if you can make all future owners agree not to put
|> up antennas it you should also be able to make all future owners
|> agree not to place antenna restrictions on the house.

Yes, one can do this.  I have.

|> Could you also add a convenant directing future owners not to enforce
|> existing antenna restrictions?  Seems a little more shakey, but probably
|> worth a try.  Or maybe direct future owners not to hassle antenna-owning
|> neighbors.

No, you cannot do this.  CC&Rs are contracts, you cannot create a
contract to abrogate existing contracts.

|> Just think of the pro-ham restrictions you could add to your deed.  How
|> many houses have you owned in the last few years?  Has anybody published
|> a do-it-yourself guide to writing CCR's?  Or do you need a lawyer?

Before signing any important contract, see a lawyer.

The CC&Rs associated with real estate are a contract, like any other.
Good legal advice is simply prudent, if you are concerned with
the details of the contract you are about to sign.

   ...  Hank


--

Hank Oredson @ Mentor Graphics             Library Operations
Internet     : [e-mail]    "Parts 'R Us!"
Amateur Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roger J. Buffington)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 18 Jul 1995 14:37:23 GMT
Organization: USC Law
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3uggv3$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]> <3ubf6a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: comserv-e-30.usc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83156 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28608 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12007

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>: What we really need are more hams on the bench!
>
>Well...we do have Judge Rod locally...it helps when you have the
>president of the ARRL on the bench ;-)
>
>: Roger J. Buffington
>
>Steve KA6S

That's pretty funny.  I'll probably never make judge, but if I do, amateur
radio will most definitely have a friend on the bench.  The attitude of many
neighbors towards our hobby is outrageous.  They sure do like the traffic we
run when the earthquakes wipe out the fones though...

See my article in the Feb. '94 QST if you like lite reading.

Oh well...

--
Roger J. Buffington
USC Law, Class of '97
[e-mail]
AB6WR
Go Trojans!
WARPing with IBM OS/2 3.0 and PM-Mail
Scotty, beam me up...



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!agate!news.ucdavis.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!stevew
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]> <3ue3gq$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 14:39:29 GMT
Lines: 50
Sender: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83161 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28610 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12012

Curtis Wheeler ([e-mail]) wrote:
: stuff deleted
: You can usually petition the board of directors to change the CC&Rs and
: have those changes recorded.  You might have a complete antenna
: prohibition changed to allow antennas on a case by case basis with
: association approval - perhaps an archetectural review or whatever.  But
: be aware that what is a thing of beauty to a ham (a big shiny tower) will
: probably be an eyesore to your neighbors and potential buyers (effecting
: resale value).  With that in mind, the association will likely stand
: behind a restriction on towers in the name of protecting property values.
: And I have to admit that in my situation (townhouse with small yards) I
: would not support a petition to permit the contruction of a tower.

Most of what Curtis stated is true EXCEPT for the statement implying
that towers affect property values.  They do not.  As simple as that.
I can quote two studies that show that they have no bearing on home
prices, or purchasing decisions. Better than that, I can quote my
dad, a real estate appraiser of 20 years on the subject.  "Towers
don't affect the price of a house."  This is an "urban myth." ;-)
It is used as justification for the restrictive an often retentive
CC&R's that many of these communities have and has no bearing in
fact.

To me, one of the most comical, if not just out-right sad situations
is Foster city.  Here is a completely planned community...and they
went after poor Jimmy with a vengance.. to the point where his life
has been threatened and his property has suffered physical damage
from vigilantes.  (That is the sad part).  The hilarious part is
the 100+ high-voltage towers running straight thru the town and the
fact that they are right in the landing path of SFO with the planes
going overhead at a few hundred feet!  Oh yeah...Jimmy's 50 foot
tower was a real eyesore, and really upset the architectural balance
of the place (tongue was in cheek on that last.)

If someone is interested...I could post a little letter that another
ham in Foster city received some years back...unsigned..that threatened
all sorts of stuff if the guy didn't get out of this evil hobby.

Anyway...back to the original reason for the post... there is NO PROOF
that towers affect housing prices.  Repeat after me in a mantra
fashion...there is NO PROOF...


Steve KA6S
: stuff deleted
: --
: Curtis Wheeler - San Ramon, CA
: KD6ELA / GROL / Pvt. Pilot




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 20 Jul 1995 06:12:45 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <3uks4t$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


I once saw CC&R that forbade ANY DEVICE THAT GENERATES RADIO
FREQUENCIES!  Wonder how they got along without microwave ovens.
Charlie,  W7XC
--



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!news3.digex.net!universe!gmc
From: [e-mail] (Gordon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cell antenna question
Date: 18 Jul 1995 12:23:11 GMT
Organization: Universal Access by Digital Express. 800-969-9090
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3ug93f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: universe.digex.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I hope this isn't too far out of line although I am a ham and I didn't
see any other newsgroup that this question might be relevant to.

Anyway, I've got a handheld cell phone that I usually only use in my
car and I'd like an external antenna for it. I'm not sure if I can
actually attach a directly connected antenna to it or not (non-standard
connector and such). I have seen an antenna that clips over your side
window with a small antenna inside that picks up the signal and sends
it to the larger outside antenna. I'm wondering if anyone has tried
this type of antenna and could comment on how well it works.

--
Gordon Charrick    [e-mail]
                   http://universe.digex.net/~gmc


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!newsfeed.tip.net!nic.tip.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coil loaded delta loop
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 16:12:16 GMT
Organization: Sydsvenska Dagbladet, Malmo, Sweden
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3ulvag$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: a3119.dial.tip.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

In Fine Tuning's "Proceedings" 1989 issue, Guy Atkins has an
interesting article about coil loading a Delta loop, thus making the
antenna somewhat smaller while still keeping its benefits.
To shorten the loop one needs an air-core coil (model 3022)
manufactured by Barker & Williamson, Bristol, PA.
Would anyone know it this coil is still available, and if so, where I
could obtain it?

Regards,
Hermod Pedersen
Malmo, Sweden




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Comments on GAP Antennas, Anyone?
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 95 01:42:12 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3s5bh5$[e-mail]> <3t971h$[e-mail]> <3tkn04$[e-mail]> <3tkrd8$[e-mail]> <3u3abv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Dan and Carol Clark <[e-mail]>

I've used the Cushcraft R5, a couple Butternuts, and the GAP Voyager DX-IV.
Bottom line:

R5 - worked very well for me.  Easy to assemble and put up.
Butternuts - also worked very well if you put a *good* radial system under
     them...a LOT of work.  It does pay off, however.
Voyager IV (GAP) - by far the best vertical I've ever used.  It's a beast,
      and can be a real pain to put up (and keep up) but the effort is worth
      it.  It takes three to four people to erect it safely and it *must*
      be guyed a lot better than the mfr recommends if you expect to keep it
      up in anything more than a 20mph wind.  However, there is no better
      vertical for working 80 and 40 DX.  I made hundreds of contacts
      with mine and am looking forward to putting it up again at my new QTH
      (almost an acre with *no CC&Rs!*).

Have fun,

73, Mike KB3RG


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:35:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dish-cone HF
Date: 18 Jul 1995 09:55:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3ugehc$[e-mail]>
References: <3u1f62$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


>Can the bottom of the skirt of an HF dish-cone antenna be grounded? In
>other words- The copper pipe which I used to bond the skirt wires
together,
>Can it be buried in the ground?   John  WA0VYZ


NO. 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dish-cone HF
Date: 18 Jul 1995 09:55:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3ugehf$[e-mail]>
References: <dragonsl-1507950828050001@192.0.2.1>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>If you are talking about Disk-Cones, Yes. As long as the cone is 1/4
>wave it will not matter. The Disk-cone is normally built with the shield
>of the coax attached to the disk

>Ralph

It will absolutely matter. The open end of the cone has voltage on it. It
MUST be insulated from everything else. It particulary matters when the
cone is 1/4 wl. If one end of a 1/4 wl section is grounded the other end
will have a very high impedance. That means if you ground the cone, and it
is 1/4 wl long, the feedpoint becomes un-terminated at the coax shield!
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!usenet.cis.ufl.edu!usenet.ufl.edu!freenet3.scri.fsu.edu!freenet3.scri.fsu.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Bruce M. Marshall)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: Egg beater antennas for sat work?
Date: 17 Jul 1995 21:28:08 -0400
Organization: Tallahassee Free-Net
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <3uf2n8$[e-mail]>
References: <3tsl2v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.scri.fsu.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12084 rec.radio.amateur.space:4450

Kory:

Your questions are typical of those that everyone asks as they think
through setting up a LEO (low earth orbit) ground station. You are
asking the right questions, so you are on the right track. I have not
tried an eggbeater however I would like to. I would like to find the
perfect LEO, non-az-el-rotor ground station combination. Most "omni"
antennas are not omni in 3 dimensions but in 2. This is fine for
signals coming from the direction of the horison. Of course satellites
don't always come from the direction of the horizon. However their
signal is most attenuated when they are near the horizon. Therefore an
antenna with some more gain on the horizon is benificial. An "omni"
antenna with 8 to 11 db gain will do very well for passes of low
elevation and the low elevation portions of higher passes but will
loose the signal above 40 to 60 degrees even though the satellite has
the strongest signal at this point in the pass. I suppose the egbeater
will perform better at these higher elevations than a gain omni which
will have a gain of less than 1 at high elevations. The eggbeater will
perform poorly at low angles. When setting up a ground station an
important question is "how much of the horizon can I see?". Here in
eastern Tennessee the mountains and high trees can result in much or
little very little view of the horizon. In this case an antenna such
as a quadrifilar helix with a high gain at higher elevations would bea
good choice. In Kansas, or on a mountain top the choice would be
different.

As for preamps, a mast mounted preamp is a must for 70cm. At 70cm the
attenuation even in very good coax is unacceptable if you have more
than a short run of coax. Get a copy of the satellite experimenters
handbook and work some of the antenna/preamp/coax equasions. They are
tedious but very educational.

I have more ideas on the perfect LEO groundstation however I have been
summoned for dinner (and it looks and smells exceptionel) so will
write more if coaxed.

Bruce.
N4USH
--
Bruce M. Marshall  [e-mail]  voice 615 481 0990  fax [phone]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.internetmci.com!news-admin
From: [e-mail] (Bob Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Eggbeater antenna plans?
Date: 16 Jul 1995 21:26:55 GMT
Organization: InternetMCI
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3uc06v$[e-mail]>
References: <3tuj58$[e-mail]> <3u7a0h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr7-dialup1.atlanta.mci.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Give me your fax number Tom and I'll send them to you.

--
Bob Smith, Atlanta, GA
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
TAPR 5412  ARRL  AARL



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!glenn
From: [e-mail] (glenn v. jensen esq)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: end-fed longwire design
Date: 19 Jul 1995 00:44:07 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3uhkgn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsanse.nsr.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL0.11]





I can install an end-fed longwire at my new qth without
much concern from my neighbors.

What I need is some advice on length, wire size, and method
of installation.  I already have RG-8 installed, and have
a MFJ-949 tuner.  My plan is to operate at under 100 watts on
all bands (160-10 meters).

BTW, I live on a 3.5 acre lot, so the only challenge that I have
is how to support a long-wire (weight wise...).

Thanks in advance,


Glenn
WA6BJQ


--
Glenn V. Jensen

(1|619) 467-2646 (FAX)

internet:       [e-mail]
CC:mail:        [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:03 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: end-fed longwire design
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3uhkgn$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 12:29:28 GMT
Lines: 34

glenn v. jensen esq ([e-mail]) wrote:




: I can install an end-fed longwire at my new qth without
: much concern from my neighbors.

: What I need is some advice on length, wire size, and method
: of installation.  I already have RG-8 installed, and have
: a MFJ-949 tuner.  My plan is to operate at under 100 watts on
: all bands (160-10 meters).

: BTW, I live on a 3.5 acre lot, so the only challenge that I have
: is how to support a long-wire (weight wise...).

Multiband long wires will present a very high impedance at the end
on many frequencies and make the use of 50 ohm coax as a feeder
very undesirable. Also, if the wire is more than one wavelength
long, it will be extreemely directive along the path of the wire
thus rendering it useless for many directions.

Possibly you could use a 4:1 unun available from Amidon Associates
to feed it on the end and use the coax. I've tried one 600ft
long and about 40ft high and I was a terrible antenna.
If you are stuck with "end feed" you may consider end fed
half wave antennas described in QST about a year or so ago.
These were made from coax and acted just like a dipole. If you
want, I can dig the article out for you. 73
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:04 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!eskimo!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Doug Brooks)
Subject: Re: FAQ antenna's for condos
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: UltraCAD
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.10
References: <3uisdc$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 18:39:25 GMT
Lines: 22

In article <3uisdc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Could someone please tell me where I can FTP the FAQ's about Antenna's
>for CONDO's
>
>Please respone to my Email address because I don't keep up with this
newsgroup.
>
>
>Thank you in advance,
>
>Nick Palomba KD1LR
>
>[e-mail]
>
I'd appreciate it if you would do the same for me. Just bought a vacation
condo and am just beginning to get back into amature radio after 40
years!!
          [e-mail]
Thanks for your help
Doug Brooks



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ralph.vnet.net!news
From: "Chris M. Bridges" <n4fan.vnet.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV
Date: 17 Jul 1995 21:28:47 GMT
Organization: Vnet Internet Access, Charlotte, NC -  [e-mail]
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <3uekmf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n4fan.vnet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Does a G5RV type dipole need a 1:1 balun at coax to 450 ohm line ?
Thanks ahead......



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!gate.net!rstdenis
From: [e-mail] (Ronald St. Denis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV
Date: 19 Jul 1995 05:49:25 -0400
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3uekmf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: navajo.gate.net

"Chris M. Bridges" <n4fan.vnet.net> writes:

>Does a G5RV type dipole need a 1:1 balun at coax to 450 ohm line ?
>Thanks ahead......

        Chris...

                No... everything that I have read about the G5RV tells
        me that a balun is not required at the coax feedpoint... although
        I have seen some commercially advertised G5RV's that do come with
        a balun. I'm useing a half size G5RV very successfully at about
        30 feet in the air and we used a full size G5RV that I built for
        field day on 40 M that worked very nicely... 425+ contacts...
        In my opinion, the length of the coax is a much more critical
        factor when trying to get the antenna to tune on multiple bands.
        If you can't tune the antenna on a given band, try adding a 1/8
        wavelength (for that particular band) of coax at the rig end.

                                Good Luck...
                                        73 ES CUL KE4NLW

--
 +---------------------------+---------------------------------------+
 |       Ron St.Denis        |       Amateur Radio - KE4NLW          |
 |  Palm Beach Gardens, FL   |         [e-mail]             |
 +---------------------------+---------------------------------------+


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ralph.vnet.net!news
From: "Chris M. Bridges" <n4fan.vnet.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV
Date: 19 Jul 1995 16:47:15 GMT
Organization: Vnet Internet Access, Charlotte, NC -  [e-mail]
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <3ujcuj$[e-mail]>
References: <3uekmf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n4fan.vnet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Thanks a heep. Ron, I never considered trimming the coax, only the 450
line , I'll give it a try!

--

     Chris M. Bridges
     >>>>>N4FAN<<<<<<
      [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:07 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: G5RV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: n4fan.vnet.net
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <3uekmf$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 18:17:57 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3uekmf$[e-mail]
Lines: 12

No it does not but....

I sugest using a ferrite bead and/or coax loop choke balun since a G5RV
has lots of current running around lose on both sides.  This may make a
small internal to the radio auto antenna tuner much happier.  Four to
six fairly tight turns of the coax and/or a snap over type HF bead
generally help.

Bill Harwood
Ab6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!crl14.crl.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Lance Halle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV tuning ?
Date: 18 Jul 1995 08:38:24 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access        [phone]  [Login: guest]
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: crl14.crl.com
Summary: Need help tuning G5RV Antenna
Keywords: G5RV ANTENNA WIRE TUNING HELP
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I have a very restrictive homeowners association, so decided the most
performance with the least visability might be the G5RV. The problem is I
can only put the center at about 6 feet above the roof. One end is
attached to a roof corner at about 10 feet above ground, and the other
end is attached to the corner of a 6 foot block fence.

In this configuration, VSWR does "dip" on each band as it is supposed to,
but only drops to around 2.5:1.  Since all bands do exibit a null, it
would seem to me that I should be able to "tweek" something so I don't have
to use a tuner.  Since the G5RV is a 102 ft dipole with a tuned 31 foot
300 ohm feedline going into a balun and then to the 50 ohm coax, I don't
know where to start.  I have been told that if I prune one part, it will
require changing the feedline length, and possibly the balun......

Any G5RV experts out here ?????

Lance Halle   KC7FVX  in Phoenix Az.





From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
Date: 19 Jul 1995 01:20:33 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <3uhml1$[e-mail]>
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip117.ft.worth.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Lance Halle) wrote:
>I have a very restrictive homeowners association, so decided the most
>performance with the least visability might be the G5RV. The problem is I
>can only put the center at about 6 feet above the roof. One end is
>attached to a roof corner at about 10 feet above ground, and the other
>end is attached to the corner of a 6 foot block fence.
>
>In this configuration, VSWR does "dip" on each band as it is supposed to,
>but only drops to around 2.5:1.  Since all bands do exibit a null, it
>would seem to me that I should be able to "tweek" something so I don't have
>to use a tuner.  Since the G5RV is a 102 ft dipole with a tuned 31 foot
>300 ohm feedline going into a balun and then to the 50 ohm coax, I don't
>know where to start.  I have been told that if I prune one part, it will
>require changing the feedline length, and possibly the balun......
>
>Any G5RV experts out here ?????
>
>Lance Halle   KC7FVX  in Phoenix Az.
>
>
>
It is largely serendipitous that any G5RV installation will give you
under 2:1 or so on ALL the bands.  If you play with lengths to get it
under 2:1 on 20, for example, it is also likely you'll find some other
band going wacko in the other direction.

Most internal auto tuners, even though they have limited range, can
handle a 2.5:1 load without difficulty -- depending, of course.  If you
have one, use it, and forget about the SWR not being where you'd feel
better about it.  With relatively low losses at HF in short coax runs
even at 2.5:1 its not worth worrying too much about.  And if you are
worried about it, just forget the coax all together and feed the thing
with ladder line a GOOD tuner and a GOOD 4:1 voltage balun.

And besides, you should have an external tuner anyway -- but I'll
stay off the soapbox tonight.  You know, a chicken in every pot and a
tuner on every operating table .....

Grant/NQ5T



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:10 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 01:33:22 GMT
Lines: 52

Lance Halle ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I have a very restrictive homeowners association, so decided the most
: performance with the least visability might be the G5RV. The problem is I
: can only put the center at about 6 feet above the roof. One end is
: attached to a roof corner at about 10 feet above ground, and the other
: end is attached to the corner of a 6 foot block fence.

: In this configuration, VSWR does "dip" on each band as it is supposed to,
: but only drops to around 2.5:1.  Since all bands do exibit a null, it
: would seem to me that I should be able to "tweek" something so I don't have
: to use a tuner.  Since the G5RV is a 102 ft dipole with a tuned 31 foot
: 300 ohm feedline going into a balun and then to the 50 ohm coax, I don't
: know where to start.  I have been told that if I prune one part, it will
: require changing the feedline length, and possibly the balun......

: Any G5RV experts out here ?????

: Lance Halle   KC7FVX  in Phoenix Az.


GOOD NIGHT MAN! 2.5 to 1 SWR. First of all. There is no reason whatsoever
for the swr to be low on any band except 20 meters. The G5rv was
designed for that band. The fact that it can be used on other bands
is strictly a compromise. This thing has been totally misrepresented
over the years. If you change the length of any part of the antenna
or feeder, your swr will change. Reason? Because you have standing
waves on your feeder! You will find one length that works fine for
one band and the rest are messed up. If you make the coax part long
enough, your loss will be so high on the coax that your swr meter
will read very low. Don't believe me? Just try it with about 10 feet
of coax instead of the usual 70 and watch that swr climb. Now put
about  150ft of coax on there and see what a nice low swr you have.

So. There is little point in making the flat top 102 feet as if that
was some kind of magic, secret length. Just make it at least a
quarter wave on the lowest band and feed it with open wire.
300 ohm line will be easier to match than 450 ohm stuff. They
make a transmitting version of this. It has about 1/2 spacing
and looks similar to the 450 ohms stuff. Using 300 ohms line
will reduce the voltage/current excursions. Run this to your
tuner if it has balanced feed connections or use a 4:1 balun outside
and run some BIG coax into the tuner. Sorry, there is no secret
lengths here. Doing it this way will minimize your loss and give
you the biggest signal. By the way. Those Cushcraft R7's work
pretty good if you can't stand a tuner. I had one 8ft off the
ground and it did great.
73
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!gate.net!rstdenis
From: [e-mail] (Ronald St. Denis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
Date: 19 Jul 1995 06:06:22 -0400
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: navajo.gate.net
Keywords: G5RV ANTENNA WIRE TUNING HELP

[e-mail] (Lance Halle) writes:

>I have a very restrictive homeowners association, so decided the most
>performance with the least visability might be the G5RV. The problem is I
>can only put the center at about 6 feet above the roof. One end is
>attached to a roof corner at about 10 feet above ground, and the other
>end is attached to the corner of a 6 foot block fence.

>In this configuration, VSWR does "dip" on each band as it is supposed to,
>but only drops to around 2.5:1.  Since all bands do exibit a null, it
>would seem to me that I should be able to "tweek" something so I don't have
>to use a tuner.  Since the G5RV is a 102 ft dipole with a tuned 31 foot
>300 ohm feedline going into a balun and then to the 50 ohm coax, I don't
>know where to start.  I have been told that if I prune one part, it will
>require changing the feedline length, and possibly the balun......

>Any G5RV experts out here ?????

>Lance Halle   KC7FVX  in Phoenix Az.


        Lance...

                I've used dipoles at low elevations and am currently
        useing a G5RV (half size - 51 ft.)... I think that, in your
        case, I would try varying the length of the coax at the rig
        to the ladder line feed point before I'd start re-sizing the
        antenna and/or the ladder line length. This antenna will react
        very differently when you change the length of the coax, and
        you may be able to get the SWR at an acceptable level, even
        at 6 or 8 feet from the ground. I had a 3 band multi-wire
        dipole, pasted to the eve of a condo at 10 feet, 2 feet
        behind the rain gutter, and I was able to make some very nice
        contacts. Ya gotta make the best of what you've got to work
        with...!!!

                        Keep working at it...

                                73 ES CUL     KE4NLW

--
 +---------------------------+---------------------------------------+
 |       Ron St.Denis        |       Amateur Radio - KE4NLW          |
 |  Palm Beach Gardens, FL   |         [e-mail]             |
 +---------------------------+---------------------------------------+


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:12 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 18:33:29 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3ugkhg$[e-mail]
Lines: 10

You may just not be high enough but make sure that the high inpedance
feed line (TV or ladder line segment) is as straight as possible and
perpindicular to the "flattop".  Down is better but a slope is ok with
some pattern impact but 90░ is critical in some axis.  Installation as
an inverted V generally gives a little better match than as a straight
flat top.   DO NOT BEND OR ROLL THE high impedance transformer segment.

Bill Harwood




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:13 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 18:41:02 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 11

This is excellent advice!!!!  The guys at antennas west tell you to keep
a 25 to 50 foot role of coax and a couple of diferent length jumpers
around to help the G5RV field day kits.


I had for got about this!!!  It is an excellent suggestion!!!!

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:13 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!uknet!bcc.ac.uk!news
From: [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby)
Subject: Gain of Yagi/Apeture area of Yagi.
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News System)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 09:02:08 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UCL Dept of Medical Physics
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Lines: 9
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12116 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8468

Can anyone tell me the maximum gain one would expect of a Yagi of a known boom length?
Better still, whats the apeture area of a Yagi? I know a formulae relating max
gain (without supergain) to apeture area.



davek




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!netnews.lightside.com!user35.lightside.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Raymond J. Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ground question
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 21:45:47 +0100
Organization: Raymond Sarrio Co.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: user35.lightside.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In article <[e-mail]>,
Steve Roys <[e-mail]> wrote:

> This isn't exactly an antenna question, but...
>
> I am having an in-ground pool put in, and I was wondering if I could use
> the pool structure as a hefty RF ground.  The metal pool walls, rebar,
> lights, and pump will all be tied to my house ground, so I don't want to do
> this if I'm going to fry any of my consumer electronics in my house.
>
> Any thoughts on this would be most appreciated.

Pool rebar should work fine, depending how far it is from the rig? you
want the run to be very short, otherwise it will act as an antenna. Have
you considered using copper foil for your ground? Use it from your rig to
groune no need to connect to any grounding rods,it can be run horizontally
just a few inches below the surfice. It has a very low impedence so it
wouldn't act as a antenna. Ham web site http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html
sells the copper foil at a discount. check it out. 73's Ray

--
Ray Sarrio Co.
http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!eff!news.umbc.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (kowitt shai)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: HEY GUYS! CALL 1-800-55*-****
Date: 19 Jul 1995 12:05:02 -0400
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3ujafe$[e-mail]>
References: <3uh66f$qdp$[e-mail]> <3uhgv8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: f-umbc9.umbc.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12066 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9557 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14637 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8437 rec.radio.amateur.misc:83252

In article <3uhgv8$[e-mail]>, Burt Fisher  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>BOOKS <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Are you naked? Call me for action. 1-800-55*-**** Christine
>
>The only action hams want no REAL man would want.
>

Hams do it with more frequencies!

Shai Kowitt N3VAS
[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!alterdial.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: Burt Fisher <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: HEY GUYS! CALL 1-800-559-6554
Date: 18 Jul 1995 23:43:36 GMT
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3uhgv8$[e-mail]>
References: <3uh66f$qdp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.172.47.203
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12026 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9538 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14605 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8420 rec.radio.amateur.misc:83196

BOOKS <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Are you naked? Call me for action. 1-800-559-6554 Christine

The only action hams want no REAL man would want.


#================#=====================================================#
|  Burt Fisher   |  Teacher of video, broadcasting and electronics     |
| Amateur call   |         South Dennis, Ma. (Cape Cod)                |
|    K1OIK       |  If you sit in the fence, it is a pain in the butt  |
#================#=====================================================#
| [e-mail]    [e-mail]       [e-mail]   |
#======================================================================#

Get a GIF of K1OIK by telnet://ccsnet.com and go to FREE downloads
                           for bf1pres.gif




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: HEY GUYS! CALL 1-800-559-6554
Date: 19 Jul 1995 01:39:42 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3uhnou$[e-mail]>
References: <3uh66f$qdp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip117.ft.worth.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12031 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9540 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14612 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8422 rec.radio.amateur.misc:83205

BOOKS <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Are you naked? Call me for action. 1-800-559-6554 Christine

Nice.  Perhaps if '[e-mail]' got inundated by mail
complaining about this chap (or chapess) he/she or whatever it is could
be encouraged to keep the slime to the alt newsgroups where it belongs.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:17 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!mv!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Joel B Levin)
Subject: Re: HEY GUYS! CALL 1-800-559-6554
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: levin.mv.com
Sender: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Joel B Levin)
Organization: At home.
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 14:57:53 GMT
References: <3uh66f$qdp$[e-mail]> <3uhgv8$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99.82
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Lines: 18
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12055 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9552 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14629 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8431 rec.radio.amateur.misc:83235

In <3uhgv8$[e-mail]>,
   Burt Fisher <Burt Fisher <[e-mail]>> wrote:
|BOOKS <[e-mail]> wrote:
|>Are you naked? Call me for action. 1-800-559-6554 Christine

|The only action hams want no REAL man would want.

Projecting again, Burt?

--
Nets: [e-mail]  | Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of
  or [e-mail]| Evolution, as not adequately supported by facts,
pots: [phone]  | seem quite to forget that their own theory is
ARS:  KD1ON          | supported by no facts at all.       --H. Spencer






From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:18 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in1.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: Bob Archer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (               )
Organization: MSGSC Columbia, SC
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.0 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <3u949p$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 14:58:24 GMT
Lines: 20

John,
Several years ago I used a commercial one by SWAN that had the "Bug Catcher"
look on 10-80 meters. I had the best results on 40. Of course that may have
been the band conditions. Anyway, I was very pleased with it over all. The rig
I was using at the time was a Kenwood 520. Hope this helps.
Bob Archer N4ECO
>==========jbmitch, 7/15/95==========
>
>I am building an HF mobile installation and would appreciate
>input
>from hams who have been down this road.  The antennas I am
>considering
>include the Bugcatcher, Screwdriver, and Outbacker.  Does
>anyone
>have any experience with using these on HF mobile?  What about
>ease
>of tuning, reliability, and mounting position?  Any input would be
>appreciated. Thanx, John
>
Bob Archer N4ECO


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 01:38:44 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u949p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1c.delphi.com
X-To: jbmitch <[e-mail]>

jbmitch <[e-mail]> writes:

>include the Bugcatcher, Screwdriver, and Outbacker.  Does anyone

screwdriver!


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 01:41:25 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u949p$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1c.delphi.com
X-To: "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]>

"George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]> writes:

>promised in WorldRadio.  You may want to watch for it.

Hi George: I was at the "shootout". All the screwdriver variations were
right up there close.........SGC, again, was the bottom, way down. Ham that
runs the tests says that happens all the time. regards,


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:20 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <3u949p$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ub7b9$[e-mail]> <3ubgk6$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 19:33:41 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3ubgk6$[e-mail]
Lines: 17

I will add my two cents worth.  My SPIDER ANTENNA short top loaded
arrangement has always tested better than anything except the
screwdriver types with the long whip on 40 and 80.  The screw driver
tyopes toped by about 1 S unit (approximately 6 Db).  I use it with an
SGC-230.  The 230 allows me to operate over the entire band not just a
segment.  The SPIDER did better than the screwdriver types above 14MHz.

I like the SPIDER witht the marine stainless steel mast and I run it
with seven loads for seven bvands (I can use the 40 meter on 30 with the
SGC-230 if I really want to do CW while mobile).

For what it is worth,

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 95 01:54:15 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u949p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: jbmitch <[e-mail]>

jbmitch <[e-mail]> writes:

>I am building an HF mobile installation and would appreciate input
>from hams who have been down this road.  The antennas I am considering
>include the Bugcatcher, Screwdriver, and Outbacker.  Does anyone
>have any experience with using these on HF mobile?  What about ease
>of tuning, reliability, and mounting position?  Any input would be

Hi John,

I've operated HF mobile for several years.  I put a screwdriver antenna
on the car a couple months ago, shortly before moving from CA to PA.
I highly recommend the screwdriver - fantastic performance on 10 thru 40,
and very very good on 75.  Easily the best out of the antennas I've used
(Hustlers, Bug Catcher, assorted whips).  I mounted mine on a trailer
hitch on an 88 Chrysler LeBaron convertible (got some interesting looks
on the Interstates!).  I mounted the switch that controls the screwdriver
motor just below the dash (using velcro).  Easy install and excellent
performance.  Go for it!

73, Mike KB3RG


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:22 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!newsfeed.acns.nwu.edu!ftpbox!mothost!schbbs!news
From: [e-mail]
Subject: How to view/change SWR's, varied conditions
Organization: MOTOROLA
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 23:10:27 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (SCHBBS News Account)
Nntp-Posting-Host: 129.188.159.81
Lines: 45

As a relative newcomer to ham radio, I'm stumped about something and
would appreciate any wisdom you can contribute.

Let's assume a transmitter, a SWR meter, an amplifier, and an antenna
tuner (in the HF case), all seemingly in good working order. Also
assume the antenna has been tuned with neither amp nor tuner in the
circuit (case 1 below). Finally, assume all connections ("VHF") are
good.

Depending on the transmitter-to-antenna circuit, I find surprisingly
varying SWR ranges in these cases ... (in each case, the SWR readings
are for low-high band ends)
1. 1.4-1.9 with meter reading taken between transmitter and antenna
   (no other components involved)
2. 1.8-2.6 with meter reading taken between transmitter and antenna
   tuner (no amp in circuit) ...with the antenna still in the
   circuit, of course ... as true in all these cases
3. 1.6-2.5 with meter reading taken between transmitter and amp "on",
   no tuner in circuit
4. 2.3-1.9 with meter reading taken between transmitter and amp
   ("off"), no tuner in circuit.  Note the switch in
   where the higher SWR is, compared to the preceding case.

I don't remember the actual SWR numbers are, and believe that they
probably don't qualitatively change the answer(s) to my questions,
which are:
   - why such substantial variances?
   - do such variances indicate that the amp or tuner are somehow
     misbehaving?
   - which measurement point(s) should be used when tuning the
     antenna?
   - what the heck is going on?

I realize that changing the transmit-to-antenna circuit in any way
can result in some change in SWR, but the changes above are far
beyond what I'd have guessed might occur.

Answers via email would be fine. and thanks to all who try to explain
this to me.  In fact, email might be better in saving me from
embarrassment, if I'm dumbly overlooking something I should have
learned (or simply recognized) already.

Tony  KC7HDT




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!labtam!news.mel.aone.net.au!OzEmail!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ic260e no ssb power when tos >1
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 12:26:43 GMT
Organization: Private Subscriber
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3udldg$[e-mail]>
References: <3stoln$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slcan1p02.ozemail.com.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] () wrote:

>i've got a strange problem with my icom260e
>this tx has an ouput power of 10 w in ssb and fm, and provide this power
>only when the tos in 1. when this tos is greater (1.4) the ouput power in ssb
>is only about 1w and only in ssb mode.
>gp6 antenna    tos =1  10w in ssb and fm
>1/4 wave       tos= =1.3 10w in fm and only 1w in ssb
>2x11 elements  tos= =1.5 10w in fm and only 1w in sbb

Is "tos" the french abbreviation for standing wave ratio (SWR)?  If
so, the protection circuit for the output stage is automatically
reducing the output.  It does this by sending a voltage from a
"reflected power" detector back to a gain controlled stage, probably
an IF or post mixer stage in the transmitter.

Thus, the reduced power output with higher swr is entirely correct
operation.

Oh - the reason for this power reduction is that otherwise the
reflected power "may" in some conditions of line length and mismatch
level, create excessive voltage at the output transistor and destroy
it.  Such protection is in all modern radios.

Hope this helps.

Au revoir



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!inews.intel.com!dbraun
From: [e-mail] (Douglas Braun)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ic260e no ssb power when tos >1
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 23:30:06 +0300
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3stoln$[e-mail]>
 <3udldg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.134.10.100
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3udldg$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Andrew Davis) wrote:
> [e-mail] () wrote:
>
> >i've got a strange problem with my icom260e
> >this tx has an ouput power of 10 w in ssb and fm, and provide this power
> >only when the tos in 1. when this tos is greater (1.4) the ouput power in ssb
> >is only about 1w and only in ssb mode.
>
> Is "tos" the french abbreviation for standing wave ratio (SWR)?

I don't know, but I do know that in Italian, "SWR" translates to "ROS".

Doug Braun (N1OWU)


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:25 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ic260e no ssb power when tos >1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <3stoln$[e-mail]> <3udldg$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 18:09:03 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3udldg$[e-mail]
Lines: 23

Let's start simple!

1.  What type of watt meter/SWR meter?  Averaging or peak

If it is an averaging meter this reading may be in the ball park.  A
little low but could be related to item 2.


2.  How hard are you driving the SSB modulation with the microphone
gain?

On SSB if you are under modulated the power will be low.  While FM is
constant.  Check for occasional transition (on voice peaks or a few
times every ten seconds or so) into the "red area" on the modulation
meter.

Nothing sounds out of line so I bet one of these two things solves the
problem.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (BV/N0IAT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Icom AH3 tuner-> Non Icom rig?
Date: 18 Jul 1995 03:28:01 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3uf9o1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.167.36.115
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2

Hi Charlie.  I'm using the new Alinco DX-70 HF
transceiver and it contains a connector on the back
panel and a front panel "tune" button.  The manual
gives instructions on wiring up to various auto-tuners
including the AH3.  So I suppose the answer is yes,
this can be done but it depends on the rig.


--
73 from Joe   BV2/N0IAT   Taipei, Taiwan R.O.C.
Ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  KA0ZDH (MO,USA) YU3/N0IAT
(Slovenia)
Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986   //views and
opinions are mine only.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.databank.com!news.probe.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dale Botkin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Larsen KG-2/70 - anyone else killed one?
Date: 20 Jul 1995 07:25:57 GMT
Organization: Probe Technology Internet Services
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3ul0e5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup5.probe.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

Well, I killed my Larsen dual-band thru-glass again.  This time it's an
internal connection broken.  Anybody know what size the Torx bit is I
need to get it apart, before I go buy one?

More to the point - what are the other collective experiences here?  Should
I bother reinstalling it if I fix it?  Is it not rugges enough for normal use,
or am I just too damn hard on my antennae?

Dale - N0XAS


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Coleman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: lightning models
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 11:20:35 -0600
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) wrote:

> This is interesting. What sort of results does the program give?
> Will it back calculate loop currents and voltages from strike data?
> I hadn't considered that such modeling software would give any
> information of value for lightning protective analysis. I figured
> all you get is pattern displays. Tell us more.
>
Well, EZNEC also gives you currents on various lines so what I did
specifically was model the lightning protection as accurately as I could.
I fed it with a current source (0.5 megaAmp) near one of the spikes at a
high point. I chose 2 MHz as a frequency although the strike has about a
0.5 microsec rise time and a 2-4 microsec decay. Then I modeled the phone
line as a single wire with a 300 ohm impedence to ground. Since this is
NEC2 I used perfect ground. The result, depending on geometry and loads
etc, is an induced current on the phone line of 60 -1000 Amps.

Problems remaining: Is my model for the phone line realistic? Dunno. How
does perfect ground distort the results? Dunno. I also haven't really done
too much freq variation but first attempts show little effect.

Anyone have any suggestions?

Jim, KA6A

--
Jim
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!netmbx.de!sietec.de!rio70.bln.sni.de!news.sni.de!kebsch
From: [e-mail] (Waldemar Kebsch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Loaded dipole antenna design
Date: 18 Jul 1995 12:29:44 GMT
Organization: Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme AG, Paderborn, Germany
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <3ug9fo$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Waldemar Kebsch <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: neurotic.pdb.sni.de

Hello,

I am looking for an "expert" for loaded dipole antenna design.

If you don't have enough space for a halve wave dipol you may use a loaded
dipole. Sometimes you see loaded dipoles with the coil (a) very close to the
feeding point, somtimes (b) in the middle of one leg and sometimes (c) near
the end of one leg.

Just to illustrate the three versions ..

  feeding point                                            end of the leg

      +---+
a)  o-|   |------------------------------------------------------o
      +---+
                                +---+
b)  o---------------------------|   |----------------------------o
                                +---+
                                                     +---+
c)  o------------------------------------------------|   |-------o
                                                     +---+
    <............ a, b, c = constant length .....................>

I know that the necessary value of the inductivity of the coil is
lower for version (a) than version (c) and for version (b) is the
value between (a) and (c).

My questions are ..

1. is there a difference in the bandwidth (at a given SWR)?
2. is there a difference in the impedance?
3. which one would you recommend, generally?
4. would you recommend a special position for the coil?
5. dou you have any hints for the adjustment of the antenna?
6. anything I should know about this antenna type?

One last question:

I know that in version (c) you may find a special position for the coil
to get a 2-band-dipole (i.e. 160m+80m or 80m+40m).

Do you have any experience with that construction?

Please excuse my lousy English .., hi.

73 de Waldemar, DK3VN
--
Waldemar Kebsch,    c/o   Siemens | DK3VN (member of DL0SNI - Radio Club)
Nixdorf  Informationssysteme  AG, | The last courtesy  of a QSO is a QSL!
33106 Paderborn, Federal Republic | Big  antennas,  high in the sky,  are
of  Germany,    [e-mail] | better than small ones, low, hi! [68]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!yorks.demon.co.uk!frank
From: FRANK W LEE <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Loaded dipole antenna design
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 22:18:35 GMT
Organization: Uk Amateur Radio
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: yorks.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

Hi. I have posted details of my loaded dipole before, but here it is again:
(only half of the dipole shown)

   --------============\\\\\\\\\\\==========[]

    2ft       3.5ft        coil      3.5ft   coax
    7/8in     1in                     1in
     OD        OD                      OD

Coil - 18 turns plastic covered wire close wound on 22mm PVC tube, which
is stiffened with dowel rod. Aluminium tube used, the end 2ft is for tuning.

Works VERY WELL and a little bigger than a dipole for 10 metres.
The impedance is lower if coil at centre of the dipole, increases if placed
further away (I think!). I use a few turns of coax at the centre as an
'RF choke'. My dipole is up at 32 feet and works well... I only use QRP
and have worked through a few 'pile-ups', since making the dipole a couple
of weeks ago.

73

--
Frank G3YCC (G QRP 042)


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!yorks.demon.co.uk!frank
From: FRANK W LEE <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Loaded dipole antenna design
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 17:48:58 GMT
Organization: Uk Amateur Radio
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: yorks.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

About my loaded dipole I posted yesterday: think I forgot to say which band
it works on... It is for 14 Mhz.
73
--
Frank G3YCC (G QRP 042)


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!hermes.dna.mci.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Paul Ermisch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Loop antenna supports for small lot?
Date: 18 Jul 1995 21:24:09 GMT
Organization: MCI Communications
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <3uh8pp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: hun.dna.mci.com
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

After over a year's absence from amateur radio, I'm hoping to get back into it
this fall.  I want to put up a couple of new antennas but am wondering in
particular how to support a loop in the small lot I live at now.  The other
antenna will be a vertical.  My interest is in HF.

The available area I have to work with is a square about 50-60 feet on each
side.  The front of the house borders one edge.  I figure to use the corners of
the house for two corners - any suggestions for supports for the other side?
I'd like to get at least 20 feet up.  An OT I know supported his loops using
discarded fiberglass pole-vaulting staffs embedded in concrete-and-old-tire
bases.  I'd love to do this but was wondering what else I could do.

Right now, I've got a "TNT" up but because of the lot size, I've had to bend
the ends.  West and north come in great but everything else is definitely
fainter.  I want to stay away from a tower because of cost and I'll be moving
from the site in a few years.

Paul Ermisch / KB0LUR



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!news.magic.mb.ca!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet
Subject: Manitoba Telecom
Date: 17 Jul 1995 21:46:09 GMT
Organization: Magic Online Services Winnipeg.
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <3ueln1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ttyc10ip.magic.mb.ca
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:11990 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9515 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:14542 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8399 rec.radio.amateur.misc:83125


         ___  ____ ______ __  ___ ___ _______ ______ _____   ______
        /   \/   //  _  //  \/  //  //_   _ //     //  -  /\/ _   /\
       /        //     //      //  / \/  /\_/  /  //  -  < /     / /
      /___\/___//__/__//__/\__//__/ //__/ //_____//______//__/__/ /
      \:::\\\::\\::\\:\\::\/\:\\::\/ \::\/ \:::::\\::::::\\::\\:\/
       """"  """ """ "" """  "" """   """   """""" """"""" """ ""
       __________ ______ ___     ______ ______ ______ ___  ____
      /___   ___//  ___//  /\   /  ___//  ___//     //   \/   /\
      \__/  / \_/  ___//  /_/_ /  ___//  /__ /  /  //        / /
        /__/ / /_____//______//_____//_____//_____//___\/___/ /
        \::\/  \:::::\ \::::::\\:::::\\:::::\\:::::\\::\\\::\/ (C)
         """    """""" """""""" """""" """""" """""" """  """
            _
           / |
          O|_|
         O. ==__                CABLE AND WIRELESS TELEC0MMUNICATI0NS
       /)_ OO(__\_
      (//_| O_  \_\
    _-_--_-_/ )   _              MB-TEL (C) South Central Comm.
   /          |  ) \/\           1-204-775-3038 USR 16.8 DS HST
  /  o        /O )    \          usenet newsgroups, internet email
 |    2O4    /   \     \         h/p file and message networks
 |           \__ /    _/|__      email: [e-mail]
 \        \\   (_)   /_ |_/
 \\__________      */ /\_o
             \___  / \_//        Information Overload!
                / /
                |/ * located in Winnipeg, Manitoba


                 Cult of the Dead Cow (cDc) Global Domination
               Underground Experts United (uXu) Canadian Outlet

    ___    ___                                  _   _
   _\__\  /__/_                                ((___))
  __\__\\//__/__  Underground Experts United   [ x x ] cDc communications
 |  U  |\/|  U  | uXu Central Distribution      \   /  cDc Global Domination
  \___/ /\ \___/  uXu Canadian Outlet           (' ')  Factury Direct Outlet
    /__//\\__\    August 30, 1994                (U)   September 10th, 1994
    Est. Not!                                  Est. 1986

            Freq zorlac @ Infinet 69:650/200, Hacker 666:3204/0,
                  Hacker Basic 66:204/0, Fido 1:348/103

      To apply type "APPLY" at prompt, then for password enter "RADIO".




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:32 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!msadams
From: [e-mail] (Michael Adams)
Subject: Re: nearby powerline noise - SSB
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3ua4ko$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 06:04:33 GMT
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]

ANDRES MARTINEZ ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Hi,


: I'm using a vertical antenna for 10-80 meters.

I have heard that vertical antennas are bad for static and powerline
noise for two reasons:

1.  Most verticals are ground plane antennas, while a dipole would have
some cancellation since the noise is hitting both sides of the dipole.

2.  Most noise is vertically polarized, although that may not be the case
with powerlines.

Michael Adams
KE6BOO
--
                                             [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!ppp23.cac.psu.edu!jdf112
From: [e-mail] (Joseph Finnerty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: NEC-Win Basic Demo File Name Correction
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 17:27:09 GMT
Organization: CAC
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp23.cac.psu.edu
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B]

The correct name of the NEC-Win Basic Demo is nec-win.zip

I would like to apologize to anyone who attempted to download
the demo and could not find it.

Thanks,

Joe Finnerty
Paragon Technology


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!ppp3.cac.psu.edu!jdf112
From: [e-mail] (Joseph Finnerty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: NEC-Win Basic Interactive Demo
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 03:46:36 GMT
Organization: CAC
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp3.cac.psu.edu
Summary: Antenna analysis package
Keywords: Software
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B]

                             NEC-Win Basic Interactive Demo


 A demo of NEC-Win Basic has been uploaded to the net. It is available at the following sites:

        ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC
                      or
        emclab.ee.umr.edu/pub/aces/NEC      (mirror of netcom but easier to access)

The name of the demo program  is "necwin.zip" and it is approximately 1.3 megs in size.

The demo, although interactive, will  not allow you to actually run NEC or save any files.  Although these two options are not available, six antenna exam

NEC-Win Basic supports 500 segments with a 1500 segment version available. It currently does not fully support all of the NEC2 command cards such as near

Paragon is currently working on other antenna support packages for NEC-Win Basic which will include the ability to import NEC files, create wire grids, an

 Join the NEC-Win family today and be eligible for upgrade notification and
 special pricing.


Here are some examples you will want to try with the demo version.

1) Using the mouse click File then Open.  Choose the file LPDA.nwb and click OK.

2) Click on the button of the Eye(NECVU)  which is the 4th button from the right at the top. You can spin the      image of the antenna by moving  the mou

3) When you are happy with the image press "P" to send the image to a print buffer. Press "Q" to exit NECVU.
     A box will open allowing you to preview the antenna and change the colors before printing.  Click on the Exit      button when finished.

4) Click on the upper right most button (Surface plot). When the Surface-Plot box appears click on Continue.
    Press "Q" when finished viewing the surface pattern. (printing also available)

5) Since the antenna is a Log-Periodic you can look at the transmission line geometry by clicking on the main             menu bar Options then Transmissi

6) Click on the 2nd button from the upper right (polar plot).  Compare the radiation pattern of the Log-Periodic          with a Yagi by clicking on the A

     You can add a title, copy and paste,  or analyze the antenna by using the menu options.

I hope this example will be helpful in allowing you to see the power of NEC-Win Basic. The manual, included with the product, includes many examples and f

 For more information please contact:

 Joseph Finnerty
 [e-mail]
 Paragon Technology
 Home of the NEC-Win Family



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need source for 6:1 balun
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 02:08:52 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u8rqo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1c.delphi.com
X-To: WeaverJa <[e-mail]>

WeaverJa <[e-mail]> writes:

>balun.  I tried Radio Works but they will not sell their 6:1 balun

THE place to go for baluns of MANY ratios is : Palomar Engineers, Box
462222, Escondido, CA 92046...ph 619-747-3343  fx 619 747-3346. Jack
Althouse is a most helpful guy and KNOWS Baluns!


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Need source for 6:1 balun
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3u8rqo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 15:55:16 GMT
Lines: 17

[e-mail] wrote:
: WeaverJa <[e-mail]> writes:
:
: >balun.  I tried Radio Works but they will not sell their 6:1 balun
:
: THE place to go for baluns of MANY ratios is : Palomar Engineers, Box
: 462222, Escondido, CA 92046...ph 619-747-3343  fx 619 747-3346. Jack
: Althouse is a most helpful guy and KNOWS Baluns!


Als try Amidon Associates. They advertise in QST. Their baluns are
expensive though.
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news1.oakland.edu!news.nd.edu!news.bsu.edu!bsuvc.bsu.edu!00tlzivney
From: [e-mail] (Terry L. Zivney)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Phased Antennas & BIP-BOP switch
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Jul 95 12:27:10 -0500
Organization: Ball State University
Lines: 22

Subj:   Phased Antennas & BIP-BOP switches

I have been thinking about constructing a BIP-BOP switch using DPDT
relays.  I notice that in the diagrams published in the mags using
commercial switch boxes, an extra half-wavelength of coax is switched
into one of the antenna feeds to provide the out-of-phase signal.  I
do NOT see any where the second antenna's phase is switched by merely
reversing the center conductor and the shield of one of the antennas
using another DPTD relay.  This appears to be easier and cheaper than
yet antother piece of coax with all the extra connectors.  What am
I missing???

I would seem the same idea would be usable for a pair of phased verticals,
that is, reversing the center and shield on one of the antennas.  Again,
I don't see this mentioned anywhere in print.

Please enlighten me, especially if you have tried it!

Thanks.

Terry Zivney, N4TZ/9
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Proper ground for antenna?
Date: 21 Jul 1995 06:40:33 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3uni51$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


My antenna (the discone antenna I referred to in my previous note) mast is
stuck into the ground with a stake that goes down about 2 feet. Is it still
necessary to stick another stake inthe ground and run a copper wire to it to
ground it? From the instructions, I get the impression that the grounding
is for mast that are attached to the side of the house. SO do I really need
to do this since it sticks on top of this stake that is driven into the ground??

YOu have really got me a little parinoid about this lightening bit, especially
considering how much lightening we have had lately.

Thanks!!
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QRP camping antenna ideas needed.
Date: 17 Jul 1995 10:20:52 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3uddi4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

Paul,

Why not consider a full size 1/4 wl ground plane?
At fouty it can be made of a fibre glass rod or so,
and will perform really well at the seashore. you will
have to lay out a fair number of radials though.

If you are stuck with a *short* vertical, remember that a
good set of radials becomes even more important.

Remember that the signal enhancement by the sea is a thing
you can only dream of inland.

73, Moritz DL5UH



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!mkeitz
From: [e-mail] (Mike Keitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QRP camping antenna ideas needed.
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 95 17:20:06 GMT
Organization: TSE Systems
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <3ue63d$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mkeitz.beve.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Paul Egan) wrote:
>
>I am going to be camping by the sea shore at the end of August.
>I would like to bring my rig and work some 40m CW with low
>power using the car battery. The campground that I am
>staying at has low trees (abt. 15' high). Which antenna
>would perform better at this site; a dipole which is too low
>to the ground or a Hustler mobile grounded to the car and using
>the 40m resonator or should I leave the rig at home and just
>enjoy the beach. Thanks for your help.
>Paul Egan VE3GFY
>
On a recent trip, I helped my friend John WD8MQN set up antennas
by the riverside.  First we tried a Hustler mobile, not grounded
to the car but set on about a 6 foot tall pole, and attempting to
ground it with a short ground rod at the antenna and another about
10 feet away at the rig/tuner.  A MFJ tuner was used.  The rig
(Icom 745) was set on the hood of a car and powered from the car's
battery which was still installed.  Several SSB contacts were made
up and down the US East Coast on 10 and 20m using the Hustlers,
although signal reports were not particularly good.

While John was doing that, I strung 120 feet of #16 copper wire in
the trees.  It was probably 30 feet off the ground.  (the
horizontal portion 90 feet long, 30 feet at one end leading down.)
Both ends were tied off with nylon cord.  We fed it from one end
using the antenna tuner.  The ground rod seemed to be doing a good
job in the damp sand, there was no problem with "hot knobs" or
other signs of stray RF.  (Several non-technical campers didn't
believe that touching the bare antenna wire would burn them.  One
appointed himself as guineau pig.)  Performance of the wire was
vastly better than the Hustlers, even on 10m where it would seem
to have been entirely too long.  It was hard to tune like any
end-fed wire would be, but would eventually come up to a good SWR.
 He used 80 meters for a while in the evening until the band died
and we lost interest.  I would be tempted to try this again, even
at a lower height.  The highly-conductive ground near water seems
to help a lot.

I do realize that this is all stirctly anecdotal, but I just
wanted to share my experiences.  I suppose if you already have the
Hustler installed on your vehicle, it is a no-brainer to just park
at the beach, but in this case the wire antenna seemed superior.

-Mike KD4QDM


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QRP camping antenna ideas needed.
Date: 18 Jul 1995 15:32:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3uh27v$[e-mail]>
References: <3uddi4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

In my work with what is called "NVIS" for " Near vertical incidence
Skywave" ... I have found that dipole antennas close to the ground will
work extremely well for qso's with other stations out to distances of
400-500 miles ..

for example: a 40 meter dipole antenna at 6 feet off the ground only
looses about
4 dB of effectiveness in comparison to a 40 meter dipole that is a full
1/4-wave off the ground.. so what is 4 dB?? it is less than one "S-Unit"
..

additionally: I've even run 40 meter dipoles at 10-1/2 inches off the
ground supported on plastic tent-stakes at a local park .. the ground
condx were extremely soggy due to recent rains, so the losses I found
would have been worst-case .. the results were:  20 dB below a 1/2 wave
dipole that was spaced at 1/4-wave off the ground .. at the time I did
this test, my 1/4-wave antenna at 10-1/2" off the ground produced signal
reports of "S8" from stations that would have been outside of ground-wave
range .. (20 to 50 miles away from my station) .
Close to the ground really does work!

s/ Patricia Gibbons - [e-mail]
"The Vertical Skywave Girl"


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Don Kirkman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QRP camping antenna ideas needed.
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 22:45:25 GMT
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <3uhds0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3ue63d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: a113021.sna1.as.crl.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.81

[e-mail] (Mike Keitz) wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (Paul Egan) wrote:
>>
>>I am going to be camping by the sea shore at the end of August.
>>I would like to bring my rig and work some 40m CW with low
>>power using the car battery. The campground that I am
>>staying at has low trees (abt. 15' high). Which antenna
>>would perform better at this site; a dipole which is too low
>>to the ground or a Hustler mobile grounded to the car and using
>>the 40m resonator or should I leave the rig at home and just
>>enjoy the beach. Thanks for your help.
>>Paul Egan VE3GFY
>>
>On a recent trip, I helped my friend John WD8MQN set up antennas
>by the riverside.  First we tried a Hustler mobile, not grounded
>to the car but set on about a 6 foot tall pole, and attempting to
>ground it with a short ground rod at the antenna and another about
>10 feet away at the rig/tuner.
 [snip]
>While John was doing that, I strung 120 feet of #16 copper wire in
>the trees.  It was probably 30 feet off the ground.  (the
>horizontal portion 90 feet long, 30 feet at one end leading down.)
>Both ends were tied off with nylon cord.  We fed it from one end
>using the antenna tuner.
[snip]
>I do realize that this is all stirctly anecdotal, but I just
>wanted to share my experiences.  I suppose if you already have the
>Hustler installed on your vehicle, it is a no-brainer to just park
>at the beach, but in this case the wire antenna seemed superior.

>-Mike KD4QDM

Years ago I carried a multi-band dispole made of four- or
six-conductor ribbon cable when we went camping (rig was 1W 40M
rockbound, to tell you how long ago.  No meters, no way to tell how
anything worked, but it _did_ work enough to get on the air.  I fed it
direct w/coax, and rarely got it over abt 10 ft up into the trees in
the campgrounds.  With proper placement & care, should work at least
for casual QSOs.  73

Don  N6IM

Don Kirkman                           [e-mail]
Cerritos, California  90623-2402

This mind intentionally left blank



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (KE6BER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Quad vs. C-3
Date: 17 Jul 1995 00:37:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3ucpe4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (KE6BER)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Here's my situation.  I live in Northern California, and I'm going to be
putting up a new antenna.  I've looked into multi band quads for 10-20
minus the WARC bands, and the performance is VERY good.  But within the
next year I will be moving to Massachusetts.  When there, I will not be
investing in any new antennas, since most of my money will be spent
getting the QTH ready for my shack (220 wiring, coax lead ins, room
remodeling, antenna setup, etc.).  I'm also very impressed with the Force
12 C-3 antenna, and I'm torn weather to spend the 500-600 clams on a
Standard C-3 beam, or only 300 or so on a quad.  I'm also concerned with
icing etc in the MA climate.  How will a well built quad weather a winter?
 How does ice effect the tuning or a quad vs. a beam.  I know it detunes
them, but is one better than the other.  Well, I've got lots of questions.
 I'll appreciate all answers.  You can answer here if it's relavant to
everybody, but if not, e-mail me at [e-mail].  Thanks es 73 de
KE6BER  Al.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Date: 21 Jul 1995 06:30:05 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3unhhd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


About a month ago, I bought a discone antenna from radio shack. I bought
thinking that I would eventually get into HAM, but got it specifically
for the Pro39 scanner I have. Well, in the interim, I have learned that the
R58 is not very good for long runs. I bought 70'of the R58, 15of which is
coiled and hung at the antenna so that the antenna can be lifted down by one
person. THe antenna is 25'. In the RS catalog, is says that the "loss in dB/100ft
at 100mhz/400MHz is 4.5/10. vs 1.9/4.1 for the R8.

What exactly does this boild down to? ANd now that I am just about to get my
HAM license and received my dual band FT-51r today, how will it affect me on
xmitting that it would not really have mattered for just casual scanning?
Would it really be worth the $48 to replace the cable?

THanks for any feedback and opinions!!
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:44 1995
Newsgroups: alt.radio.pirate,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!utnetw.utoledo.edu!uoft02.utoledo.edu!ASCHNUT
From: [e-mail] (blackie)
Subject: Radio Shack's FM antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Manager)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University Of Toledo
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 17:47:02 GMT
Lines: 7
Xref: grape.epix.net alt.radio.pirate:9232 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12060

    I've heard about some people using Radio Shack's omni-directional
FM antenna (#15-2164) with their Ramsey fm10's.  How well does this
antenna work?  Are there any modifications needed to use it on the
FM band?  What is the best way to hook it up?  Any info would be
appreciated.

blackie


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Rodney Linsalato)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: REPEATER OPS
Date: 18 Jul 1995 23:51:24 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 16
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uhhds$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-pas13-27.ix.netcom.com

To: All
From: Rod, KE6MGB
RE: REPEATER OPS

Dear Repeater Operators,
I currently run 2 Meters, and I was wondering if there is anyone out
here that needs a repeater control op. I would really like to be one. I
live in So. CA, near the Pasadena area, so if you are a repeater op, or
know of any repeaters on 2, 440, or 200 MHz, please notify me at
[e-mail]

I think it would be alot of fun to become a control operator.
Thank You,
73
Rod KE6MGB, (hoping to become a control op soon :-)



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!its.hooked.net!bass.hooked.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Gary York)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Requesting Info on R7
Date: 14 Jul 1995 05:43:40 -0700
Organization: hooked
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3u5ops$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bass.hooked.net

Wondering if anyone out there can give me a report on their Cushcraft R7
vertical.  I am new to the group today & did not see anything on it. Thanks

Gary York
--
N6UGJ
S.F., CA


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!news.mindlink.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!sanjuan.amtsgi.bc.ca!salmon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RG213 coax & 70cm
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 12:45:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
References: <3u5khh$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 11


M>you will have to live with. 4 dB attenuation ahead of the RX on 70
M>is a bit much though. This common problem may be solved by using
M>a mast head  preamp or/and low loss cable (Aircom+ has half the

I decided not to put the 70cm on the tower.  A mast head preamp and low
loss cable is not feasible.  It's only for FM and I don't want to spend
that kind of money just to hit a cross band repeater several miles away.

---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ It's only a hobby ... only a hobby ... only a


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!news.mindlink.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!sanjuan.amtsgi.bc.ca!salmon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RG213 coax & 70cm
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 12:39:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
References: <3ubsl5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 9


K>Secondly the Cushcraft 11 elm yagis are dogs. I have the 430-11 and I
K>cannot use it on a metal mast. I beleive it has something to do the fact
K>it has a Gamma match.
K>Build yourself a quad or get yagi driven by a T-match.

That's what I have decided to do.
---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ The universe is laughing behind your back.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rhombic aerial
Date: 18 Jul 1995 12:15:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 92
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3ugmnd$[e-mail]>
References: <3to71v$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

> My questions:  What if I can only get the thing 20 feet or so
>off the ground?  (maybe it will grow if I water it and don't plant it too

deep...)

The main problem at 20 feet is ground losses. Good design criteria
dictates
that the antenna be installed at least 1/3 of it's leg length above earth.
One of the primary limitations in Rhombic gain is inability to maintain
current on the wire any distance from the feedpoint. This is cause by
radiation "losses", ohmic losses in the conductor, and coupling losses to
the
lossy earth below the antenna.

To combat these losses, a Rhombic is constructed with large diameter
copper
(or copper clad) wire, and usually uses several such wires in a parallel
"cage" or "fanned" configuration. It is also mounted very high above the
earth or placed in a highly conductive soil location. It may be
advantagious
to place a couterpoise system under the antenna.

>The wire that I have is 23 strand, brass plated stainless steel
>and is about 20 gauge diameter, but pretty tuff stuff.

I would worry a *whole bunch* about this wire. It not only is a *very*
small
gauge, but it also has very lossy materials. An antenna built from this
wire
may be directive, but it may also wind up having almost no transmitting
power
gain!

> I have heard that 375 feet/leg is some kind of "magic" dimension (I have
room for this >and more).

Hmmm. I don't know why there would be magic involved.. I do know that with
a
proper Rhombic installed 1/3 of it's length in height above average soil,
and
using good construction techniques and materials, the gain limits at
around
three wavelengths per leg. The gain actually begins to decrease when the
antenna is over four wavelengths per leg. At that length additional losses
exceed
additional gain caused by pattern compression.

The gain limitation will certainly happen much sooner if lossy wire and a
low
antenna height is used.

Most of the detailed books on Rhombic, inverted V, and V design are long
out
of print. The best book I have read is an out of print book by Dr. John
Kueklin. Probably the reason data is scarce is because log perodics and
other
antennas offer much more gain in less physical area. That is also why new
commercial Rhombic installations are unheard of, and old ones are rarely
used. VOA has some very large Rhombics at some plants, and they also have
physically smaller Curtain Arrays. The Curtains occupy less than 15% of
the
Rhombic area and have much more gain!

A Rhombic on the other hand may be a good antenna for a Ham, because it is
very simple to build. That offsets the gain and space disadvantage.

The older ARRL Antenna Handbooks contained some Rhombic data, but
neglected practical installation data.

> I am currently playing around with a V-beam using the above mentioned
wire
and
>400 ft. legs fed with 450 ohm line and the 4:1 balun and it works ok.  Is

>there any comments out there in cyberhamdom??

You may find a second V beam, spaced 1/4 wl back from the original V and
fed
as a uni-directional phased array will work much better, or even use a
second
V placed at the end of the first V and fed with a separate feedline. Then
you
won't depend on the power remaining at the wide end of the 3 wl (40
meters) V
to feed a second identical antenna (a Rhombic is really two V beams placed
wide end to wide end). I really believe the extra effort to change from a
V
to a Rhombic will be a waste of time for signal improvement, although it
will
dazzel people by the name alone   ;-)  .

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuhou.aloha.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Steve W. Teegarden)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rotor system for Sat.
Date: 19 Jul 1995 03:18:36 GMT
Organization: Hawaii OnLine - Honolulu, HI
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <3uhtic$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: oahu-43.u.aloha.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11

Aloha,

Does anyone out there have any ambition to design or build a a new and better
rotor system for satellites ? Both AZ and EL are required and I'm looking for
perhaps something along the servo motor design ?

I'm an engineer and am willing to work with someone or a group of folks to
design a better "Mouse Trap"... Obviously the price has to be equal or beat
the the 5400 B system from Yaesu, but performance is the key !

So, how about it ? any takers ? Anyone already working on one, and need help ?


Let me know....


swt @aloha.net

Steve Teegarden
WH6IC
SAREX Telebridge site (Hawaii)



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!news
From: Kevin Shea <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rotor system for Sat.
Date: 19 Jul 1995 12:01:03 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <3uis5v$[e-mail]>
References: <3uhtic$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: f181-160.net.wisc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Steve,

I already have a 5400 and it looks like I'm going to be buying another one.

The 5400 is not well made nor very accurate.  I'd love to have another
option even if it cost a few dollars more.  I'd be a customer, I also know
some others who have built the boards and software to control AZ-EL
rotators, I'm sure they would be interested also.

Good Luck and let me know if I can help.

Kevin

--
****************************************
* Kevin G. Shea  N9JKP                 *
* 4460 Dahmen Pass                     *
* Cross Plains, WI 53528 USA           *
* 608.789.4326,voice; 608.798.1747,fax *
****************************************




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:51 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!icon!greg
From: [e-mail] (Greg Dolkas)
Subject: Re: Rotor system for Sat.
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 20:41:26 GMT
References: <3uhtic$[e-mail]>
Organization: HP - Information Networks Division
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]
Lines: 28

Steve W. Teegarden ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Aloha,
:
: Does anyone out there have any ambition to design or build a a new and better
: rotor system for satellites ? Both AZ and EL are required and I'm looking for
: perhaps something along the servo motor design ?
:

Well, I just "finished" cobbling mine together.  AZ is done with an off-the-
shelf Radio Shack antenna rotor.  The antennas are reasonably small (5' each),
and it seems to handle them.  For EL, I borrowed a design idea from the ARRL
Handbook (or maybe it was the ARRL Satellite Experimenters book).  The antennas
are mounted on a 2x2 wooden spreader which hangs by a pair of hinges from a
small T-shaped support which is stuck in the RS Rotor.  I found a 12V geared
motor, about 100rpm, which I attached to a threaded rod.  An arm attached to
the spreader has a threaded nut attached to it which rides on the threaded
rod.  As the motor turns it raises and lowers the arm, which moves the antennas.
I added some limit switches for 0 and 90 degrees, and a potentiometer to sense
position.  The pot is used with another in the shack to form a bridge, with
a meter to display the current position.

At some point I'll build some hardware to sense where the antenna is, vs where
it should be, and flip relays to move it.  For now, I just use a DPDT center-
off switch for up and down manual control.

A fun 4th of July weekend project.

Greg  KO6TH


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!pendragon!toad.jsc.nasa.gov!user
From: [e-mail] (Ted Kell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Source for AL tubing
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:50:29 -0600
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, USA
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: toad.jsc.nasa.gov

In QST last fall  (November, I think)  there was a description of a
walking stick antenna.  This was a bunch of nested aluminum tubing that
could be extended to a full size 1/4 wave vertical antenna.  My question,
where can one get the tubing?  My local sources want a $500 minimun order
which seems a little steep.

Ted  KC5CUW


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (BV/N0IAT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for AL tubing
Date: 20 Jul 1995 01:34:55 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3ukbrv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.167.36.115
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2

Texas Towers, in Plano Texas carries (or used to)
aluminum tubing for antennas.  Give them a call.  They
are on Summitt Road, Plano Texas.  The area code is
(214).  Their 800 number is in QST, or call
information for the local number.  Bought some to fix
an antenna damaged by a Typhoon.  They were helpful
and are honest folks--even shipped it to me.  I talked
to Gerald, K5GW. who is the owner and knows a great
deal about this stuff.

--
73 from Joe   BV2/N0IAT   Taipei, Taiwan R.O.C.
Ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  KA0ZDH (MO,USA) YU3/N0IAT
(Slovenia)
Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986   //views and
opinions are mine only.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!america.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for AL tubing
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 95 16:14:36 EDT
Organization: PSS InterNet Services, InterNet in Fl 904 253 7100
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lanetos.ppp
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


Try Texas Towers In the last pages of the same QST. They seem to have the best
deal.
> In QST last fall  (November, I think)  there was a description of a
> walking stick antenna.
> Ted  KC5CUW


73 AD4RR dray



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:54 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: STEVE GOT HIS WENCH
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 21:53:47 GMT
Lines: 19



Found a great winch at W.W. Grainger. This is  a large national company.
If anyone wants the address I'd be glad to share this info.

This winch is a WORM type drive. It is manually operated via a small
hand crank and rated for 2000 pounds dead weight.
The nice feature about a worm winch is that no brake is needed.
Worm gears are self breaking. The ratio is 40 to 1. Kinda slow
but it comes with an adapter for an electric drill to speed things
up a bit! Cost was $65. Catalog nr is 4z183.

This seems like a good compromise and a safe one. No worry about
brakes slipping etc. 73
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!mkeitz
From: [e-mail] (Mike Keitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: STEVE GOT HIS WENCH
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 00:40:23 GMT
Organization: TSE Systems
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3umstp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mkeitz.beve.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

[...]

>This winch is a WORM type drive. It is manually operated via a small
>hand crank and rated for 2000 pounds dead weight.
>The nice feature about a worm winch is that no brake is needed.
>Worm gears are self breaking. The ratio is 40 to 1. Kinda slow
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[...]

Hopefully this won't be true.  This is more funny than the original 'wench'
slip-up.

-Mike KD4QDM



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:55 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!mr.net!news.mr.net!timbuk.cray.com!ned.cray.com!strecker
From: [e-mail] ()
Subject: SWL antenna lightning protection
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 26
Nntp-Posting-Host: ektar.cray.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9]
Date: 20 Jul 95 10:58:36 CDT

I just got my SW monitor back from the shop were they put in a new front
end.  It appears that static build up was the cause of the damage and not
a near strike.  I have an idea that I thought I would throw out to see if
others have done this.  I want to place two large power diode across the
antenna long wire and the ground circuit like below....


-------------------------------------------------------  <- Antenna (longwire)
            |                        |
           ---                      ---
            ^                       \ /
           / \                       v
           ---                      ---
            |                        |
------------------------------------------------------   <- Ground wire

The idea being this would clamp any AC voltage above .7 volts and allow
the antenna system to discharge.  The idea is to prevent damage for the case
when it's not obvious that storms are in the area.  If there is a lightning
producing storm I would and do disconnect the antenna mechanically.

Any thoughts?

Scott Strecker
KD0FV
Chippewa Falls WI.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: SWL antenna lightning protection
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 17:31:25 GMT
Lines: 36

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
>I just got my SW monitor back from the shop were they put in a new front
>end.  It appears that static build up was the cause of the damage and not
>a near strike.  I have an idea that I thought I would throw out to see if
>others have done this.  I want to place two large power diode across the
>antenna long wire and the ground circuit like below....
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------  <- Antenna (longwire)
>           |                        |
>           ---                      ---
>           ^                       \ /
>          / \                       v
>          ---                      ---
>           |                        |
>------------------------------------------------------   <- Ground wire
>
>The idea being this would clamp any AC voltage above .7 volts and allow
>the antenna system to discharge.  The idea is to prevent damage for the case
>when it's not obvious that storms are in the area.  If there is a lightning
>producing storm I would and do disconnect the antenna mechanically.
>
>Any thoughts?

This can work fine, *but* if there are any strong signals present,
the diodes will work as a mixer, and you'll get all sorts of signals
popping up in places they don't belong. This is particularly bad if
a strong AM station is nearby.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!prairienet.org!dhughes
From: [e-mail] (Dan Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SWR meter question
Date: 17 Jul 1995 09:43:26 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <3udbbu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dan Hughes)
NNTP-Posting-Host: firefly.prairienet.org


I have heard conflicting opinions on tuning a 2-meter mobile antenna with
an SWR meter that was sold as a CB SWR.  Will it or will it not do the
job?  Thanks!     ---Dan
--


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: [e-mail] (David Newkirk)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 18:42:51 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <3um88e$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dpn.arrl.org
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Dan Hughes) wrote:

>I have heard conflicting opinions on tuning a 2-meter mobile antenna with
>an SWR meter that was sold as a CB SWR.  Will it or will it not do the
>job?  Thanks!     ---Dan

No. It will not usefully or accurately indicate forward and reflected
power, even relatively, because its *directional coupler*, an internal
network that can tell the difference between energy going to the
antenna and energy coming from the antenna, will not have sufficient
*directivity* at 144 MHz.

Building a good directional coupler is not trivial at 144 MHz even if
you want to build it for only that band.

Regards,

David Newkirk (WJ1Z)
email: [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!uknet!news.roke.co.uk!news
From: Paul Wilton <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: T2FD Experience?
Date: 20 Jul 1995 12:36:37 GMT
Organization: RMRL
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3ulikl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.118.192.150
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna#3ub73o$[e-mail]

Has anyone had experience of using a Tilted Terminated Folded Diople
(T2FD) antenna for receiving?  I have seen a details of how to construct
one in a book ("Practical Wire Antennas" I believe) and think that it
would fit in well with the constraints imposed by my garden.  My
interests are broadcast DXing as well as Ham Bands.  At present I am
using a 18m long wire orientated E-W with a Yaesu FRG-100.

Please either post replies here or to my email address.

Thanks

Paul




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:36:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: T2FD Experience?
Date: 20 Jul 1995 18:33:06 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3um7h2$[e-mail]>
References: <3ulikl$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: misz.animal.uiuc.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

We used one at SP8KIT 20 years ago. It tuned well but the performance,
particularly on lower bands, was mediocre. The lower the frequency,
the more power ends in the resistor. Unless you want antenna that has
low SWR notwithstanding losses, you would be better off taking the
ballast out and using the antenna tuner, or give up on T2FD and use
a dipole (or loop or delta) fed by the ladderline.


Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Illinois      1207 W. Gregory Dr., Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. [phone]         Fax: [phone]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: thru-glass on Mazda
Date: 21 Jul 1995 05:35:38 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3uneba$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


>I currently have a dual
band Larson, and an AEA cellular on the MPV, along with a lip mount
VHF and a lip mount UHF.
<

I have been trying to decide on a 2m/70cm glass mount as well. What model
number do you have ? Are there any other models to consider? Would you buy
another Larson or a different model?

Thanks!!
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: re: thru-glass...any good?
Date: 21 Jul 1995 05:57:28 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3unfk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


>The thru-glass antennas, which don't work that well anyway, certainly
don't like to couple through defroster wires. I'd say either forget
that option, or mount the antenna on the windshield.
<

Why don't they work well? I really do not want to drill any holes. I have
a 95 S10 extended cab. I am wanting to get a thru glass antenna to connect
to the back window. Is getting a trhu glass one just a waste of time? Or will
it help at all?

Thanks,
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!cnn.exu.ericsson.se!news
From: [e-mail] (Mike Groves)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: thru-glass...any good?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 07:50:42 GMT
Organization: Ericsson North America, Inc.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <3unm8f$[e-mail]>
References: <3unfk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc125011.exu.ericsson.se
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Drew Loker) wrote:

>>The thru-glass antennas, which don't work that well anyway, certainly
>>don't like to couple through defroster wires. I'd say either forget
>>that option, or mount the antenna on the windshield.

>Why don't they work well? I really do not want to drill any holes. I have
>a 95 S10 extended cab. I am wanting to get a thru glass antenna to connect
>to the back window. Is getting a trhu glass one just a waste of time? Or will
>it help at all?

They don't work well at 2 meters because they are simply a series
capacitor with plates on both sides of your glass.  You have to keep
the capacitave reactance down to a minimum to avoid loss.  There are
two ways to reduce capacitave reactance, get a larger capacitor (a
bigger glass-mount patch area), or move up in frequency.

That's why it's easier to make lower loss glass mount antennas at 440
MHz and up (including the very popular cellular phone antennas) than
for 2 meters.  Not to mention that the weight of the antenna is
usually sitting right on the outside patch.  This weight will be more
for a 2 meter antenna than the equivalent design at higher frequency.
So sometimes the antenna itself is scaled down a bit (less gain) which
contributes more to the somewhat poor performance Gary was mentioning.

Mike Groves  KD6PKJ



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: "James A. Storm" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: re: thru-glass...any good?
Date: 21 Jul 1995 09:03:17 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3unqgl$[e-mail]>
References: <3unfk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sf4-21.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1PE (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

I've been using a Larsen thru the glass antenna on the drivers side rear
window of an extended cab for a couple of years now. It works very well.
The Larsen has a rather large footprint which makes it pretty tough. I
usually remove the whip before driving into the garage since it otherwise
must almost double over when it hits the top of the garage door and the
overhead beams. I've forgotten at least half dozen times and it takes all
that punishment without a sign of wear and tear. You might get a little
bit better performance from an antenna mounted in the middle of the roof
but I would doubt you could tell the difference.


                        73, Jim WB6LWS Pacifica, CA




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: "James A. Storm" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: re: thru-glass...any good?
Date: 21 Jul 1995 09:03:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3unqh4$[e-mail]>
References: <3unfk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sf4-21.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1PE (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

I've been using a Larsen thru the glass antenna on the drivers side rear
window of an extended cab for a couple of years now. It works very well.
The Larsen has a rather large footprint which makes it pretty tough. I
usually remove the whip before driving into the garage since it otherwise
must almost double over when it hits the top of the garage door and the
overhead beams. I've forgotten at least half dozen times and it takes all
that punishment without a sign of wear and tear. You might get a little
bit better performance from an antenna mounted in the middle of the roof
but I would doubt you could tell the difference.


                        73, Jim WB6LWS Pacifica, CA




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:05 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: thru-glass...any good?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3unfk9$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 17:44:45 GMT
Lines: 49

In article <3unfk9$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Drew Loker) writes:
>
>>The thru-glass antennas, which don't work that well anyway, certainly
>don't like to couple through defroster wires. I'd say either forget
>that option, or mount the antenna on the windshield.
><
>
>Why don't they work well? I really do not want to drill any holes. I have
>a 95 S10 extended cab. I am wanting to get a thru glass antenna to connect
>to the back window. Is getting a trhu glass one just a waste of time? Or will
>it help at all?

There are two basic problems with through glass antennas. First, of
course, the signal is capacitively coupled through the glass. To
be effective, this coupling needs to be a relatively small reactance,
and that requires a larger and larger contact patch as you go lower
in frequency. Through glass antennas can work fairly well at UHF
and cellular frequencies, but the little coupling foot is too small
to do a good job at 2 meters. (The antennas are typically end fed
1/2-waves, so the reactance doesn't have to be as low as for a 1/4-wave,
otherwise these antennas wouldn't work at all.)

That's the minor problem. The major problem is that the coax shield
isn't decoupled properly, and in many cases does the majority of the
radiating *inside* the car. Leaving aside the possible harmful effects
of exposing you to a high RF field, the RF also often gets into critical
auto electronic systems, such as the EFI computer, anti-lock brake
controller, cruise control, or instrument cluster, and screws them
up royally. In one case I've experienced, it didn't matter whether
the external whip was present or not, the antenna worked equally
poorly with or without it. Meanwhile the instruments went crazy
every time I transmitted, and the cruise control would kick off every
time I transmitted. VSWR read fine, so that's not a useful indication
that everything is well.

Even supposing the antenna works as advertised, you've got a RF
source at eye level on the outside of your windshield. That glass
won't stop the RF, so you're getting dosed good and heavy every
time you transmit. That's not healthy. Put some metal between
yourself and the antenna, mount the antenna on the roof. That'll
decouple the coax shield properly, and it'll shield you from
antenna radiation.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news1.oakland.edu!warp.cris.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Math Problem
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 13:10:05 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <3udnf6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: crc6-fddi.cris.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>I have a 60ft tower on a hinged base. The tower weights 176 pounds.
>On top, I have a 22ft vertical that weights 20 pounds. It is
>mounted against the house. In my attic I wish to install a wench and
>run a cable out to the tower to pull it up. The height of the cable
>will be 12ft. Thus, it will attach 12ft up the tower from the ground.

>Question. How many pounds will there be on the cable?
>--
>  Steve
>[e-mail]
>
The maximum tension alongside  the winch cable should be 789.43 pounds
and will be when the tower is laying on the ground.  Better get a good
winch and may your home be stable enough! Calculations assume that the
weight of the tower is concentrated at its center and so with the
antenna on top of the tower. I would recommend that for safe measure
you add 10 percent to the above results and don't let anybody stand
underneath the tower when you are raising it up!

Ramon
kp4ge




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:07 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Tower Math Problem
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <3ucd75$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 13:03:56 GMT
Lines: 23

Jeffrey Maass ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Steve Ellington ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : I have a 60ft tower on a hinged base. The tower weights 176 pounds.
: : On top, I have a 22ft vertical that weights 20 pounds. It is
: : mounted against the house. In my attic I wish to install a winch and
:
: I doubt if she'll do it.


: : run a cable out to the tower to pull it up. The height of the cable
: : will be 12ft. Thus, it will attach 12ft up the tower from the ground.

: : Question. How many pounds will there be on the cable?

: --
: Jeff Maass                     NW of Columbus Ohio      Amateur Radio K8ND
: USPSA/IPSC # L-1192   NROI/CRO
OK WINCH THEN! I need math help too!
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Gordon Pritchard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Math Problem
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 23:55:30 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <3uet5s$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3udnf6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: line025.nwm.mindlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] wrote:

>[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>>I have a 60ft tower on a hinged base. The tower weights 176 pounds.
>>On top, I have a 22ft vertical that weights 20 pounds. It is
>>mounted against the house. In my attic I wish to install a wench and
>>run a cable out to the tower to pull it up. The height of the cable
>>will be 12ft. Thus, it will attach 12ft up the tower from the ground.

>>Question. How many pounds will there be on the cable?
>>
>The maximum tension alongside  the winch cable should be 789.43 pounds
>and will be when the tower is laying on the ground.
>I would recommend that for safe measure
>you add 10 percent to the above results and don't let anybody stand
>underneath the tower when you are raising it up!

     My $0.02 worth:  Add **100%** to the above figure.  To allow for
winch/cable weathering, bounce loading (due to wind, or your cyclical
winching), etc.  Nearest standard figure is likely 2000 lbs.  This
will still be quite a small cable anyway.  The winch won't be huge,
either.  You could consider a smaller 12V electric winch (just an
idea...)

        Gord Pritchard VE7AGW



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: Steve Ellington <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Tower Math Problem
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 23:50:44 GMT
Lines: 42

On Mon, 17 Jul 1995, Alan Larson wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
> >I have a 60ft tower on a hinged base. The tower weights 176 pounds.
> >On top, I have a 22ft vertical that weights 20 pounds. It is
> >mounted against the house. In my attic I wish to install a wench and
> >run a cable out to the tower to pull it up. The height of the cable
> >will be 12ft. Thus, it will attach 12ft up the tower from the ground.
> >
> >Question. How many pounds will there be on the cable?
> >--
> >  Steve
> >[e-mail]
> >
> >
>
>
>   Cute little puzzle.  It provided a couple of minutes interesting
> diversion.
>
>   One needs to assume some things, as in the physics books, (i.e.
> uniform weight along the tower and antenna, cable weighs nothing, pull
> point on house is up 12 feet, the force of concern is the static force
> as the tower is horizontal...)
>
>   Now, for your amusement.  Where on the tower should one connect the
> cable for the minimum initial pull force?
>
>   Also, how does the force vary as the tower is raised?
>
>       Alan
>I will settle for a ballpark estimate. It's beginning to look like there
will be too much stress at the 12ft point and some means of starting
higher on the tower and sliding down gradually as the tower is raised
would be the answer. But how?

  Steve
[e-mail]






From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!genmagic!bug.rahul.net!a2i!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!unixg.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!spot.YKnet.yk.ca!barbie.yknet.yk.ca!netword
From: [e-mail] (Claire Eamer or Alan Daley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Math Problem
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 21:13:44
Organization: Net Word Business Services
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: barbie.yknet.yk.ca
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

The load on the cable (rope?) will depend very much on how low you allow the
tower to swing. If the tower is supported on something which keeps the top
above the hinge, there will be far less load than if the top of the tower is
allowed to drop to ground level. More importantly, how long is your wench
willing to stay in the attic?;<)
Alan

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
writes:>From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
>Subject: Tower Math Problem
>Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 00:15:14 GMT

>I have a 60ft tower on a hinged base. The tower weights 176 pounds.
>On top, I have a 22ft vertical that weights 20 pounds. It is
>mounted against the house. In my attic I wish to install a wench and
>run a cable out to the tower to pull it up. The height of the cable
>will be 12ft. Thus, it will attach 12ft up the tower from the ground.

>Question. How many pounds will there be on the cable?
>--
>  Steve
>[e-mail]
>
>



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Math Problem
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 22:21:26 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3udnf6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>The maximum tension alongside  the winch cable should be 789.43 pounds
>and will be when the tower is laying on the ground.  Better get a good
>winch and may your home be stable enough! Calculations assume that the
>weight of the tower is concentrated at its center and so with the
>antenna on top of the tower. I would recommend that for safe measure
>you add 10 percent to the above results and don't let anybody stand
>underneath the tower when you are raising it up!

My mechanics is a bit rusty but if the cable attached to the top of the tower
and the weight were known I would calc the following :

                  [length of Cable / Height] * Weight

When the attach point is not at the top how do you account for the moment ?
Since a greater portion of the mass is at the top (rotor, antennas etc) as
the attach point moves further down the load is considerably increased. Just
try to walk one up from the horizontal.

I am installing a similar system. I purchased a one ton worm drive 64:1
winch. The plan is to fasten it to the roof by bolting it to a series of
three foot long angle iron (4 sections) bars lag bolted to the rafters.
Tough to describe here.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
Distribution: world
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tower Math Problem
From: [e-mail] (Forrest Gehrke)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 18:20:00 -0500
Organization: Central Core BBS   201.575.8991
Lines: 40

References: <[e-mail]>

DD> My mechanics is a bit rusty but if the cable attached to the top of
DD> the tower and the weight were known I would calc the following :

DD> [length of Cable / Height] * Weight

Wrong.  This is a torque and vector problem.  The lifting
force will be greatest at the starting position and will
continually decrease from that point.  What is most important
to this calculation (besides the weight calculation) is the
distance from the hinge of the tower to the lift cable
attachment point, the length of the tower, and the angle
the lift cable makes with the tower.

You want to make that angle as large as possible, while at the
same time attaching the lift cable as close to the top of
the tower as possible.

DD> I am installing a similar system. I purchased a one ton worm drive
DD> 64:1 winch. The plan is to fasten it to the roof by bolting it to a
DD> series of three foot long angle iron (4 sections) bars lag bolted to
DD> the rafters. Tough to describe here.

One thing for you to think about: Unless the lifting line is
exactly perpendicular with the windup drum, the line will
tend to ride up on itself at one end of the drum and
then suddenly collapse as the number of turns increases.
This shock can be more than your system can withstand
if it occurs early on.

The perpendicularity is extremely critical and difficult to
achieve.

I have found that I must continually observe for this condition
whenever the cable layer reaches the end of the drum to prevent
it from ever beginning.

--k2bt
 * RM 1.3 02583 * Why can't women remember to put the toilet lid back up!?


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.cerf.net!ni1.ni.net!xband.ni.net!user
From: [e-mail] (J. L. Blanton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: underground antennas
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 1995 21:37:49 -0800
Organization: Network Intensive
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xband.ni.net

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

> I was reading in the book "wire antennas" a discussion on underground
> antennas.  Basically, you run a long stretch of wire in a PVC conduit a
> couple inches underground.  Losses were approximately 10dB BUT was made
> up for be the "low noise" factors assocaited with this antenna.

About the only advantage I can think of for an underground antenna is that
it will probably survive a nuclear attack.   However, a wire antenna
almost anywhere else will probably work better.  Some possibilities might
include on top of (but insulated from) the ground surface, along a fence,
etc.

Most natural HF noise is sky noise originating in the Milky Way.
Reduction of this noise level probably means reduction in other signal
levels as well.  Perhaps an underground antenna might be less susceptible
to locally generated interference from appliances, etc.  If you try it I'd
be interested in hearing how well it works out.


Cheers,

Lee Blanton, WA8YBT/6
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: underground antennas
Date: 19 Jul 1995 22:33:01 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <3uk16t$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Suggest you investigate the resulting radiation patterns.
Charlie,  W7XC
--



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Vertical Radials
Date: 18 Jul 1995 09:50:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3uge6h$[e-mail]>
References: <3uc2mf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I agree with Charlie. The lack of radials will increase loss in all
directions with ground or near ground mounted antennas. If the thing is
way up in the air in terms of wavelength then non-symmetrical radials will
cause pattern distortion. 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Vietnam Operations
Date: 17 Jul 1995 22:45:11 GMT
Organization: San Diego State University
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3uep5p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: annex2p32.sdsu.edu
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.90.4

Are the Vietnam Hams back on the air yet?
 With the establishment of full relations will it be possible
for licensed American hams to get operating privileges, i.e.,
reciprocity, and operate in Vietnam. Would it now possible for me
to operate from Hanoi now?

K6LZM


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.i.net!news.world.net!guardian.tessi.com!nasty.tessi.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: what does A/U mean in RG58A/U
Date: 19 Jul 1995 16:02:20 -0700
Organization: Summit Design, Inc.
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <3uk2ts$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nasty.tessi.com
Summary: what does A/U mean in RG58A/U
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #5 (NOV)

 I went coax shopping this week, only to find some vendors
 selling RG58, others offering RG58U, RG58A/U, RG58C/U.

 Anyone know what the various specifications actually mean ?

 dan


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:17 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: what does A/U mean in RG58A/U
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3uk2ts$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 18:05:41 GMT
Lines: 21

In article <3uk2ts$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Daniel Taylor) writes:
> I went coax shopping this week, only to find some vendors
> selling RG58, others offering RG58U, RG58A/U, RG58C/U.
>
> Anyone know what the various specifications actually mean ?

Very darn little actually. RG-58 and RG-8 are no longer recognized
JAN type numbers. Anybody can call anything they want RG-58 or RG-8,
and usually do. You'll do better sticking to a well respected
manufacturer's internal type numbers. Belden and Times Microwave
are both well respected. Call or write them for their line catalogs
and trust the specifications printed there for their internal house
type numbers. Tandy Wire and Cable is not well respected, take their
specifications with a large grain of salt.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
Distribution: world
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where to get a Winch and
From: [e-mail] (Forrest Gehrke)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 09:03:00 -0500
Organization: Central Core BBS   201.575.8991
Lines: 34

References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>

KF> Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a
KF> winch that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48? It is hinged at the
KF> base, and rests on a septic mound. This gives it about a 15 degree
KF> angle from the ground. Rohn wants 1400 bucks for their 2000 pound
KF> capacity one. By the way, this should be a winch that that is
KF> capable of braking - don't want the tower to free fall. So,
KF> recomendations from any one on where to buy and what the price might
KF> be? Thanks.

Check out Thern, Inc.
          5712 Industrial Park
          Winona, MN 55987
          507-454-2996

The model I bought was #474 (1 ton) a worm gear type without
an attached motor.  They sell them either way.  They don't sell
direct, so you will need to get info from them for the nearest
distributor.

I use 2:1 mechanical advantage with the pulley arrangements
to reduce the amount of force needed to start the tower
up from that low angle.  This, of course, doubles the time
needed to raise the tower. You would be advised to do this, too.

My price is old so I won't mention it.

The Thern winch, since it is worm drive is self-braking; I
wouldn't advise using anything else.  With an earlier winch
I had a brake failure and a free fall--not good!

--k2bt
 * RM 1.3 02583 *  6.9999831538   You Don't Need to Know What's Inside


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!prodigy.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Florence)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where to get a Winch and Prices
Date: 18 Jul 1995 02:33:02 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: inugap3.news.prodigy.com
X-Newsreader: Version 1.2

Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a winch
that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48? It is hinged at the base, and
rests on a septic mound. This gives it about a 15 degree angle from the
ground. Rohn wants 1400 bucks for their 2000 pound capacity one. By the
way, this should be a winch that that is capable of braking - don't want
the tower to free fall. So, recomendations from any one on where to buy
and what the price might be? Thanks.


-
  Ken Florence  [e-mail]
  KA3PLS



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Where to get a Winch and Prices
Date: 18 Jul 1995 03:33:28 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3ufa28$[e-mail]>
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>,
Kenneth Florence <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a winch
>that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48?

Last time I was in Las Vegas, I saw a wench that could probably do that
but I didn't get her phone number. (The devil made me do it :-)

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:21 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Where to get a Winch and Prices
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 01:14:23 GMT
Lines: 24

Kenneth Florence ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a winch
: that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48? It is hinged at the base, and
: rests on a septic mound. This gives it about a 15 degree angle from the
: ground. Rohn wants 1400 bucks for their 2000 pound capacity one. By the
: way, this should be a winch that that is capable of braking - don't want
: the tower to free fall. So, recomendations from any one on where to buy
: and what the price might be? Thanks.


: -
:   Ken Florence  [e-mail]
:   KA3PLS

I just got back from Walmart. Their 1500lb 12volt electric winch is $129.95.
They were out of the 3500lb model but it was about $195 or so. Don't know
about braking but I immagine if you lost power that the motor would hold
it or the gears would make it lower slowly. Check that out first.
It also had an emergency hand crank. 73
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Where to get a Winch and Prices
Date: 19 Jul 1995 02:02:11 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3uhp33$[e-mail]>
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite12.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Kenneth Florence) wrote:
>Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a winch
>that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48? It is hinged at the base, and
>rests on a septic mound. This gives it about a 15 degree angle from the
>ground. Rohn wants 1400 bucks for their 2000 pound capacity one. By the
>way, this should be a winch that that is capable of braking - don't want
>the tower to free fall. So, recomendations from any one on where to buy
>and what the price might be? Thanks.


You might check out your local boating supply and four wheel drive houses.

You might also think about some different rigging methods that offer mechanical advantage at
the expense of pulling more cable.

73, Wes, N7WS



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ingr.com!inn23b.b23b.ingr.com!monty.b23b.ingr.com!gjmontll
From: [e-mail] (Greg Montllor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Where to get a Winch and Prices
Date: 19 Jul 1995 12:49:54 GMT
Organization: Intergraph Electronics, Huntsville, AL
Lines: 43
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uiv1i$[e-mail]>
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: monty.b23b.ingr.com

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:
|> Kenneth Florence ([e-mail]) wrote:
|> : Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a winch
|> : that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48? It is hinged at the base, and
|> : rests on a septic mound. This gives it about a 15 degree angle from the
|> : ground. Rohn wants 1400 bucks for their 2000 pound capacity one. By the
|> : way, this should be a winch that that is capable of braking - don't want
|> : the tower to free fall. So, recomendations from any one on where to buy
|> : and what the price might be? Thanks.
|>
|>
|> : -
|> :   Ken Florence  [e-mail]
|> :   KA3PLS
|>

Sorry, I missed the initial postin on this.  My HDBX48 (with rotator, mast
and 4-el beam installed) was tilted into up into position.  No winch was used,
I pulled it up using my small pickup truck.

A line was anchored on the second story of my house.  It led down to the
tower, thru a turning block shackled half way up, then back up to the second
story, thru two guide blocks fastened along the upstairs balcony, then down
to the bumper of the truck, out at the street.

If such a rig is suitable for your site, and you don't plan frequent raisings
and lowering, then it might make more sense than a expensive winch that just
sits there.

WARNING:  I believe Rohn cautions against this practice of tilting up a
fully staged HDBX. (Then why do they make/sell the tilting base kit?).
In my case, the side thrust during the erection did cause a minor bending of
the base mounting bolts. They only protruding the recommended distance from
the concrete (1 or 2 inches), but bent enought that they had to be straightened
out so that the third leg would align properly.

Greg  AC4WF


--
 Gregory Montllor   GIS Projects / Geo Systems / Solution Engineering Div
 mailstop LR23B3   Intergraph Corp.  Huntsville, Alabama USA  35894
 email: [e-mail]    phone: [phone]     fax: [phone]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Where to get a Winch and Prices
Date: 20 Jul 1995 01:21:33 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <3ukb2t$[e-mail]>
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger110.nando.net

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
> I just got back from Walmart. Their 1500lb 12volt electric winch is $129.95.
> They were out of the 3500lb model but it was about $195 or so. Don't know
> about braking but I immagine if you lost power that the motor would hold
> it or the gears would make it lower slowly. Check that out first.
> It also had an emergency hand crank. 73
> --
>   Steve
> [e-mail]
>
IMNSHO - For something that is going to exert as large a force as
a winch trying to move a tower, I would not trust "I imagine" or
any such assumptions, nor would I trust a salesperson's say-so.
I would want to see the specifications as written and tested.
A tilt-over tower suspended only a few feet above the ground is
a VERY DANGEROUS THING.  It should be treated as though you will
be trusting your life and the lives of others to the winch and cable.
Indeed if anything ever goes wrong during the lifting and lowering process,
you will be depending on this contraption.  Please don't take it lightly.

73 de W3FPR


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:25 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!nntp-sc.barrnet.net!hal.COM!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.scruz.net!cruzio!davew
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Where to get a Winch and Prices
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Cruzio Community Networking System, Santa Cruz, CA
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 03:22:02 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (David Wells)
Lines: 21

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:
> Kenneth Florence ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a winch
> : that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48? It is hinged at the base, and
> : rests on a septic mound. This gives it about a 15 degree angle from the
> : ground. Rohn wants 1400 bucks for their 2000 pound capacity one. By the
> : way, this should be a winch that that is capable of braking - don't want
> : the tower to free fall. So, recomendations from any one on where to buy
> : and what the price might be? Thanks.
>
>
You might also try a marine store such as West Marine for a boat trailer type
of winch. They will also have steel cable and other hardware items.

.

--
Dave Wells KD6TO INTERNET: [e-mail]
Packet:KD6TO@K6LY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM;  COMPUSERVE:74067,1755
(WA4UQQ Worldwide Amateur Radio Directory III KD6TO)
.


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
Distribution: world
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where to get a Winch
From: [e-mail] (Forrest Gehrke)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3uiv1i$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 10:35:00 -0500
Organization: Central Core BBS   201.575.8991
Lines: 24

References: <3uiv1i$[e-mail]>

GM> and 4-el beam installed) was tilted into up into position.  No winch
GM> was used, I pulled it up using my small pickup truck.

GM> A line was anchored on the second story of my house.  It led down to
GM> the tower, thru a turning block shackled half way up, then back up
GM> to the second story, thru two guide blocks fastened along the
GM> upstairs balcony, then down to the bumper of the truck, out at the
GM> street.

GM> In my case, the side thrust during the erection did cause a minor
GM> bending of the base mounting bolts. They only protruding the
GM> recommended distance from the concrete (1 or 2 inches), but bent
GM> enought that they had to be straightened out so that the third leg
GM> would align properly.

Man, you live dangerously!  You were extremely lucky.  I hope
you never have to do that again!  But if you do try it, avoid
side thrust, those bolts have been weakened.

--k2bt

 * RM 1.3 02583 * ... I can't be overdrawn, I still have more checks!


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!its.hooked.net!also.hooked.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Gary York)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where to place Vertical
Date: 20 Jul 1995 05:45:13 -0700
Organization: hooked
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <3ulj4p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: also.hooked.net

I am new to the group & I am quite glad to have found you guys here on the
Internet. Here I have been trading sports cards and it hadnt even occurred
to me that there would be ham newsgroups (which was an unimaginative and
naive assumption on my part) Anyway I havce enjoyed reading the antenna
notes more than any other.   Thanks to a couple of you who I have talked to
already.

I was last on the air in June of 1990 when I lost all of my equipment and
have been off ever since. Things have taken a turn for the better--I am
doing ok now--working for a PC manufacturer & starting to save a little
again.  (AND OF COURSE, I am thinking of new equipment and antennas.  I
CANT WAIT to get back on the air, both CW and voice.!!  :-)  :-)  :-) )

Anyway, I used a Butternut HF6VX at my last QTH and it did a heck of a job
from a roof of a house closely surrounded by a few big trees.   The last
few weeks I realize,  after reading all of these notes in this newsgroup,
that I am better off with another Butternut than to buy a Cushcraft R7,
which I had my eyes on for a while.

NOW HERES MY QUESTION.........
I live in San Francisco, 1 block from the ocean (we call it Ocean Beach) It
is about 8 blocks south of the Cliff House-for those of you familiar with
San Francisco.  I have no front yard--But a very sandy back yard and of
course, there is the option of the  roof of the two story I live in.

Am I better off putting it 20 feet higher on the roof, or is it better on
the ground, near that sandy soil.  I read my vertical antenna handbook
where it was suggested that verticals do great near the ocean  (DEPENDING
ON THE GROUND aBSORPTION LEVEL)
 I looked at a chart that said this particular area had a high absorption
of 30 which could be undesirable.  Does anyone have any further evidence or
feedback about this?

I appreciate your help and time.-Thanks
Gary
--
N6UGJ


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us!pbfreenet!p001471b
From: [e-mail] (Marvin Kaskawits)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 15 Jul 1995 23:30:20 GMT
Organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Broward
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pbfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Your dipole is probably horizontally polarized and CB is Vertically
polarized.
73,
Marvin KD2CK


--

Marvin Kaskawits
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cc.iu.net!news
From: [e-mail]   (Bill Newkirk)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 18 Jul 1995 10:46:04 GMT
Organization: Space Coast Amateur Technical Group
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3ug3dc$[e-mail]>
References: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Newkirk)
NNTP-Posting-Host: netport-21.iu.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.09

In <3u9j2c$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marvin Kaskawits) writes:
>Your dipole is probably horizontally polarized and CB is Vertically
>polarized.
>73,
>Marvin KD2CK
>Marvin Kaskawits
>[e-mail]

ok then, how do people with verticals on 20 m talk to folks with beams?

Bill Newkirk WB9IVR                  The Space Coast Amateur Technical Group
Melbourne, FL                       duty now for the future of amateur radio



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!newsmaster
From: Jorma Saloranta <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 18 Jul 1995 12:09:55 GMT
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <3ug8aj$[e-mail]>
References: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]> <3ug3dc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: olay12.espoo.orion.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Bill: I am with you - polarisation means very little...on HF. OH2KI



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!Lehigh.EDU!Lehigh.EDU!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 18 Jul 1995 10:52:31 -0400
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3ughrf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ns2-1.cc.lehigh.edu

>Your dipole is probably horizontally polarized and CB is Vertically
>polarized.
>73,
>Marvin KD2CK

i never knew that CB was only Vert. Pol.???

i've ran a horizonal dipole for a few years....never had problems!

DAvid
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|         David Roseman       |          [e-mail]       OUTTA ORDER!
|                             |                                  |      |
|      SysOp of NODE 3 BBS    |          The Flying HAm - BBS    |      |
|     Running OBV/2 Software  |          TechnoMage - BBS        |      |
|                             |          N3SQE/SVARC - Ham       V      |
|         HAmmy in IRC        |  [e-mail] - Packet  |


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!unixg.ubc.ca!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 18 Jul 1995 19:44:50 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3uh2vj$[e-mail]>
References: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]> <3ug3dc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

[e-mail]   (Bill Newkirk) writes:

[regarding the HF cross-polarization question]

>ok then, how do people with verticals on 20 m talk to folks with beams?

They wait for the guy with the beam to swing it around onto the heading
for their QTH ;).

regards,
Ross ve6pdq
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!DIALix!melbourne.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Martin Deeley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 19 Jul 1995 10:00:40 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Melbourne, Australia.
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3uhhv8$c9d$[e-mail]>
References: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]> <3ug3dc$[e-mail]> <3uh2vj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

Ross Alexander ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail]   (Bill Newkirk) writes:

: [regarding the HF cross-polarization question]

: >ok then, how do people with verticals on 20 m talk to folks with beams?

: They wait for the guy with the beam to swing it around onto the heading
: for their QTH ;).

Iterestingly, some beams that I know (Vee-quads and quads especially)
have a vertical polarised lobe ar right angles to their main horizontal lobe.
de G0OQC


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!genmagic!bug.rahul.net!a2i!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Scott H. Reed)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 18 Jul 1995 23:15:28 -0500
Organization: MCS Net
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3ui0t0$[e-mail]>
References: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: venus.mcs.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2 (KSD)]

Marvin Kaskawits, [e-mail] writes:

> Your dipole is probably horizontally polarized and CB is Vertically
> polarized.
> 73,
> Marvin KD2CK

Maybe vertical polarization matters on legal, 4-W AM short-range CB (but
talk to Chicago cab drivers about the meaning of the word 'legal').

It doesn't mean a thing on 12-W PEP SSB or even AM when skip's in.

And keep in mind that on 11 m you must not 'communicate with, or attempt
to communicate with, any CB station more than 250 km (155.3 [US statute]
miles away' 47 CFR 95.413(a)(9).

Well, jeez, right next door, radio amateurs on 28 MHz are taking the
polarization every which way.  Sometimes they can even make QSO at 155.4
miles.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Reed KF9QK                  [e-mail]                  Chicago


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!bobw
From: [e-mail] (Bob Witte)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 19 Jul 1995 02:33:50 GMT
Organization: HP Electronic Measurements Division
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3uhque$[e-mail]>
References: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]> <3ug3dc$[e-mail]> <3ug8aj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: la.col.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Jorma Saloranta ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Bill: I am with you - polarisation means very little...on HF. OH2KI


  Assuming that the propagation is via the ionosphere.


Bob Witte / [e-mail] / HP / EMD / [phone] / KB0CY / 7J1AUE


From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news1.digital.com!pa.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 19 Jul 1995 16:13:49 GMT
Organization: Objectbroker/COM
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3ujavt$[e-mail]>
References: <3u9j2c$[e-mail]> <3ug3dc$[e-mail]> <3ug8aj$[e-mail]> <3uhque$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: oopsla.chi.dec.com
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-68

In article <3uhque$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Bob Witte) wrote:

> Jorma Saloranta ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : Bill: I am with you - polarisation means very little...on HF. OH2KI

>   Assuming that the propagation is via the ionosphere.

It also means little for non-ionospheric propagation if the link margin
is sufficient, i.e., the signal strength is great enough to handle a 20-30 dB
signal loss.  That's only 3-5 S units, not necessarily a big deal for strong
signals.

---
73,        Member of AMSAT, ARRL, Palatine RACES, and the Arlington
Todd       Communications League. Weather spotter and sponsor of the Hunting
N9MWB      Ridge Elementary School Radio Club.  See you on 160-1296 and OSCAR.



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why Dipole won't work on CB
Date: 20 Jul 1995 05:52:47 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <3ukqvf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


On twenty meters most communication is by "sky wave".  Once a ray
has been refracted by the ioniosphere its polarization is more or
less circular and bears little relationship to original polarization.
CB is primarily porp//// propagated by ground wave and vertical
polarization has less attenuation than that of horizontal .  That's
why CB uses verticals.
Charlie,  W7XC
--



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Worldradio on re-reflection
Date: 19 Jul 1995 01:38:58 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3uhnni$[e-mail]>
References: <3ua1pk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger513.nando.net

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Here's a quote from Worldradio: "This rereflection of power takes
> place at vacuum tube and FET sources... Unfortunately, though,
> bipolar transistors do absorb the reflected power and can be
> damaged by it."

HUH... end result may be correct if SWR is high enough, but the
cause is wrong, the transistors get zapped by their own power
supply, and the cause is incorrect output impedance.. the "reflected"
power is not the thing that does the deed.

73, W3FPR

 >other stuff deleted



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!pacifier!news.alpha.net!earth!bbrock
From: [e-mail] (Bob Brock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WT: Cushcraft AP8A Info
Date: 20 Jul 1995 19:51:42 GMT
Organization: Exec-PC
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3umc4e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: earth.execpc.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I am considering on buying a Cushcraft AP8A vertical antenna for my city
lot.  My installation would be ground mounted.  Any information on
performance versus radials (number, spacing and length) would be appreciated.

Bob, K9OSC




From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!convex!cnn.exu.ericsson.se!news
From: [e-mail] (Mike Groves)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB: 440 MHz Yagi
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 01:05:45 GMT
Organization: Ericsson North America, Inc.
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <3uf1c5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc125011.exu.ericsson.se
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

Looking for UHF Yagi in the range of 13 - 18 dBD gain.  Please E-Mail
me with a description of what you can part with and asking price.
Thanks, Mike  KD6PKJ



From [e-mail] Fri Jul 21 16:37:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!top.MTS.Net!worldlinx.com!wchat.on.ca!news
From: [e-mail]
Subject: XeBA 1414 xv-r
X-To: [e-mail]
Organization: World Chat Burlington On Ca
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 10:43:28 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: SlipStream Jet v1.025S (Special)
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: barb.wchat.on.ca
X-Registration: AWMHHAMJ
Sender: [e-mail] (News Owner)
Lines: 21

TO: [e-mail]

        I recently purchased XEBA 1414 xv-r modem. When connecting, I get nothing
returned from the remote modem. Self test light is on constantly -- does
this make a diffference? I have searched for initialization strings in the
manual, but cannot find them -- do i have to configure my own?

        For info am using on a Mac Quadra 605 with * Meg Ram, Connected to Serial
Port.

        Any and all ideas would be appreciated.

Rod:    Phone [phone]

[e-mail]
Burlington, ON
~~~
 * VbReader 2.22 #574 * A mainframe: The biggest PC peripheral available.

>> Slipstream Jet - The QWK solution for Usenets #AWMHHAMJ



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ** GAMTOZ.EXE HAS A VIRUS!! **
Date: 21 Jul 1995 18:50:53 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3uosud$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx1-08.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

Rod Kreuter just sent me a message saying that the GAMTOZ file I posted is infected with virus
Tai-Pan.666. THERE DEFINITELY IS A VIRUS IN GAMTOZ.EXE AND IT SHOULD BE DESTROYED IMMEDIATELY.
GAMTOZ.ZIP should also be destroyed, since it produces an infected GAMTOZ.EXE.

The immediate symptom I've seen is that when I run a freshly-compiled version of the program, the
file size grows by 666 bytes. I've seen no other symptoms - yet. The file I posted was run on my
apparently infected computer before I zipped it. The source file, GAMTOZ.BAS, is o.k.

Some experiments I ran shows that the virus is only attaching itself to relatively small programs
-- the limit seems to be 64k. All ELNEC and EZNEC executables are above this size and I've
confirmed that the virus doesn't attach itself to them. I've also checked production versions of
the programs against ones which were freshly compiled. (And my disk duplicator runs a virus check
before duplicating disks.) Again, ALL VERSIONS OF ELNEC AND EZNEC ARE FREE OF THE VIRUS.

Rod says that he successfully removed the virus with F-Prot. (I'm not familiar with this
application.) I didn't spot the virus with any of the virus checkers I have on my computer -
Central Point, Norton, and Microsoft - although they may be a bit out of date.

I feel terribly badly about posting the infected program! I apologize profusely!

It was pointed out to me that posting binary files of this length aren't good netiquette. In the
future I'll post the availability of the program and send by email to individuals.

If anyone would like a freshly-compiled, virus-free version of GAMTOZ.EXE, please email me and
I'll send one.

Roy Lewallen
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ** GAMTOZ.EXE HAS A VIRUS!! **
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 05:34:57 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uq35b$[e-mail]>
References: <3uosud$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <3uosud$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:
>Rod says that he successfully removed the virus with F-Prot. (I'm not
>familiar with this application.) I didn't spot the virus with any of the
virus checkers I have on my computer - Central Point, Norton, and Microsoft
> - although they may be a bit out of date.

For anyone who wants a free and very effective virus checker, F-Protect is
available at:
                risc.ua.edu/pub/ibm-antivirus/

This is a great program that is updated often.  The current version is
FP-218A.ZIP.  In the same directory you will also find a large number of
other anti-virus-related programs.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!usenet
From: John Barnett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ** GAMTOZ.EXE HAS A VIRUS!! **
Date: 22 Jul 1995 18:03:03 GMT
Organization: Wireless Communication Systems
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3uregn$[e-mail]>
References: <3uosud$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal54.onramp.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b3 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Roy please send me a clean copy.

--
John Barnett   K5GYU       Wireless Communication Systems
E- Mail address:<"mailto:[e-mail]">
My Home Page: <"http://rampages.onramp.net/~jbarnett">




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!goris
From: [e-mail] (Andy Goris)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2M T-match question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 21:22:13 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <3uuei5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: conan.fc.hp.com
Keywords: T-match
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1.4]

I have a few questions for a 2M antenna I'm designing.  First, some background.
This is a 7-element yagi with vertical and horizontal elements.  It is
designed for portable use on mountains.  I also want to do some experimenting
with it, and eventualy also use it as a portable SAREX antenna.  I want
to use the antenna for horizontal, vertical, and circular polarization
(obviously only one at a time :-).

I've noticed that the hard core types (EME, etc.) always use a T-match, and
a 1/2-wave coaxial balun - so this is what I was planning to use:

xmtr
==========coax=============*=-*---- to left half of T-match
                           |  |
                ||=========*=-|
                ||         |
                ||=========*=------ to right half of T-match
           1/2 wave

    All the shields are connected together at the antenna



Here's what the antenna will look like:


                                           |
                                           |
                                       ----+----    director 5
                                         / |
                                    |  /   |
                                    |/
                               -----+-----   director 4
                                 /  |
                              ...   |
                              /
                         |  /
                         |/
                   ------+------    driven elements
                       / |
                  |  /   |
                  |/
            ------+------   reflector
                  |
                  |

Here's my matching and phasing questions:

Q1: Is the coaxial balun/T all that much better than a gamma match (which
    I've used many times before, with excellent results?  (By better, I mean
    in terms of antenna pattern symmetry, gain, etc..I'm not concerned
    with cost or complexity)

Q2: THIS IS THE IMPORTANT QUESTION:  Should the shields of the coaxes,
    which are all tied together, also be tied to the center of the
    driven element?  Will the answer be different if the boom is conducting
    vs. non-conducting?

Q3: To achieve a good circular pattern with circular polarization, is it
    OK to use an electrical 1/4-wave piece of coax, in lieu of mounting
    the vertical elements 1/4 wave ahead of the horizontal ones on the
    boom.  I've noticed that the commercial circular antennas use the
    latter technique, and the ARRL antenna book says that it is more
    difficult to get a good circular pattern with the former technique.

Q4: I know that, in theory, the centers of the elements can be connected
    to a conducting boom.  Is there any advantage to insulating them from
    the boom?  (I'm thinking in terms of wanting a very clean
    pattern from both the vertical and horizontal elements so that when
    I hook it up for CP, it will produce a reasonably circular pattern.)
    I've noticed on higher frequency, higher gain yagis, some people
    insulate the elements (put them on stand-offs).  I didn't know if this
    was because there was some inherent advantage, or if it was because the
    boom diameter was no longer a trivial percentage of the wavelength.

Q5: When used in linear mode (only vertical or horizontal elements used),
    will the unused elements (which are obviously at right angles) have
    any effect on the antenna?  Do I need to adjust the element
    lengths, spacing, in the design to compensate for this, or can I
    treat the vertical and horizontal elements are independant variables?

Here's some other info:

 * The coax will come of the rear of the antenna.
 * The mast is 12-ft high, all non-conducting material (wood, PVC,
   polypropylene ropes for guys, etc.)
 * I made a vertical-polarization only 7-element, much lighter, much less
   sturdy version of this antenna a few years, using Yagimax to optimize it,
   and got incredible results - 12dbd.

Thanks (just for reading all this!)

Andy Goris
[e-mail]
AA0CM







From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2M T-match question
Date: 24 Jul 1995 16:03:41 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <3v0g8t$[e-mail]>
References: <3uuei5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Andy Goris) wrote:
>Q4: I know that, in theory, the centers of the elements can be connected
>    to a conducting boom.  Is there any advantage to insulating them from
>    the boom?  (I'm thinking in terms of wanting a very clean
>    pattern from both the vertical and horizontal elements so that when
>    I hook it up for CP, it will produce a reasonably circular pattern.)
>    I've noticed on higher frequency, higher gain yagis, some people
>    insulate the elements (put them on stand-offs).  I didn't know if this
>    was because there was some inherent advantage, or if it was because the
>    boom diameter was no longer a trivial percentage of the wavelength.

Its done to take advantage of the strength/ruggedness of
an aluminum boom, while not running into the problems of
the elements becoming loose and making intermittant electrical
contact.

I wrote an RF column on VHF+ Yagis in the May 1995 issue of QEX
that I consider worth reading :-).  Sorry, no actual designs,
maybe next time..

Zack [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2M T-match question
Date: 24 Jul 1995 16:04:07 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <3v0g9n$[e-mail]>
References: <3uuei5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Andy Goris) wrote:
>Q4: I know that, in theory, the centers of the elements can be connected
>    to a conducting boom.  Is there any advantage to insulating them from
>    the boom?  (I'm thinking in terms of wanting a very clean
>    pattern from both the vertical and horizontal elements so that when
>    I hook it up for CP, it will produce a reasonably circular pattern.)
>    I've noticed on higher frequency, higher gain yagis, some people
>    insulate the elements (put them on stand-offs).  I didn't know if this
>    was because there was some inherent advantage, or if it was because the
>    boom diameter was no longer a trivial percentage of the wavelength.

Its done to take advantage of the strength/ruggedness of
an aluminum boom, while not running into the problems of
the elements becoming loose and making intermittant electrical
contact.

I wrote an RF column on VHF+ Yagis in the May 1995 issue of QEX
that I consider worth reading :-).  Sorry, no actual designs,
maybe next time..

Zack [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2M T-match question
Date: 24 Jul 1995 16:28:53 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <3v0ho5$[e-mail]>
References: <3uuei5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Andy Goris) wrote:
>Q4: I know that, in theory, the centers of the elements can be connected
>    to a conducting boom.  Is there any advantage to insulating them from
>    the boom?  (I'm thinking in terms of wanting a very clean
>    pattern from both the vertical and horizontal elements so that when
>    I hook it up for CP, it will produce a reasonably circular pattern.)
>    I've noticed on higher frequency, higher gain yagis, some people
>    insulate the elements (put them on stand-offs).  I didn't know if this
>    was because there was some inherent advantage, or if it was because the
>    boom diameter was no longer a trivial percentage of the wavelength.

Its done to take advantage of the strength/ruggedness of
an aluminum boom, while not running into the problems of
the elements becoming loose and making intermittant electrical
contact.

I wrote an RF column on VHF+ Yagis in the May 1995 issue of QEX
that I consider worth reading :-).  Sorry, no actual designs,
maybe next time..

Zack [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!newsfeed.acns.nwu.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!kgkmac.repoc.nwu.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Kalan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m/70cm Antenna for Camping
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 12:33:17 -0500
Organization: Northwestern University
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kgkmac.repoc.nwu.edu

Need help in choosing an antenna for Oshkosh.  I would like it to be a
dual band 2 meter / 70 cm for use with a popup camper.  The base of the
antenna would be about 20 - 25 feet above the ground.  The radio is a
Radio Shack HTX 202 running on 12 v, about 7 Watts out.

Goals:  Would like to communicate with the camper via ht's for a 1 - 2
mile radius.  I would also like to communicate with the camper while
driving to and from Greenlake (apprx 30 mi.) daily or as close to it as I
can.  Car has a 50 w mobile unit.

I am having trouble finding a good vertical (reasonable size and price)
and have thought of a yagi.

Cushcraft has a couple of nice dual band yagi's which are reasonable in
both size and price and have been thinking of this route. (A270-10S &
A270-6S)

With the yagi fixed toward Greenlake (West) for the drive to and from,
whould there be enough sensitivity on the back and side lobes of the
antenna to pick us up using hand helds within a 2 mile radius?

Would there be too much interference comming form the front of the yagi to
make reception from back and sides unuseable, especially when connected to
the HTX 202?

Any comments or other ideas would be appreciated.

Thanks

Ken

-------------------------------------------------------- _----
Kenneth Kalan     PP ASEL                    ===_      /  |
Northwestern University               | ___/[__ ] \___/__ |
Prosthetics Research Laboratory       |\__ _|___|_____===/
Rehabilitation Engineering Program      |    \/
[e-mail]       N9YIR                 o     O
Civil Air Patrol, 2LT,1st Lyons Composite Squadron - Red Fox 407
Melrose Park RACES  1M67    Skywarn Weather Spotter

If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will
not bite you.  This is the principal difference between a dog
and a man.      -- Mark Twain
--------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:04:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.micron.net!news
From: Rod Greene <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Address for yagiu109.zip
Date: 21 Jul 1995 13:55:31 GMT
Organization: Micron Internet Services
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <3uobkj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs002p20.micron.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Dave, my provider's name server cannot resolve medphys.ucl.ac.uk

Can you give us the IP address?  Thanks, Rod [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.micron.net!news
From: Rod Greene <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Address for yagiu109.zip
Date: 21 Jul 1995 13:56:55 GMT
Organization: Micron Internet Services
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <3uobn7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs002p20.micron.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Dave, my provider's name server cannot resolve medphys.ucl.ac.uk

Can you give us the IP address?  Thanks, Rod [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!fu-berlin.de!jacobi.agnld.uni-potsdam.DE!not-for-mail
From: Jan-Martin Hertzsch <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Al foil slot antenna (Re: Alarm tape antenna ?)
Date: 24 Jul 1995 16:09:59 GMT
Organization: Max-Planck-Arbeitsgruppe "Nichtlineare Dynamik"
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3v0gkn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3u586h$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3uq3n2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jacobi.agnld.uni-potsdam.de (141.89.176.25)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Access: 16 51 959 960
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; OSF1 V3.2 alpha)
X-URL: news:3uq3n2$[e-mail]

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
>Many years ago, CQ (I think) published a construction article about a slot
>antenna made from aluminum foil.  I built one and taped it to a door in my
>house.  I then aimed the antenna by opening and closing the door.
>
>Despite the proximity of the door and other objects, directivity was very
>good.  I used that antenna successfully for nearly a year, until I moved.
>Turned out to be the best $0.15 I ever spent.  :)
>
Does anybody remember this article? When and where did it appear?
It would be nice if somebody could post the essential information into this
newsgroup, because American ham magazines are found only rarely in (probably
not only) German libraries.

Many thanks in advance and vy 73 de DG0LFH
Jan-Martin



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Alarm tape antenna ?
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 05:44:24 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 15
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uq3n2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3u586h$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

>> >>Gee, you could tape a Yagi beam on your window using that stuff.
>
>> >How would you go about rotating this sucker?  ;-)

Many years ago, CQ (I think) published a construction article about a slot
antenna made from aluminum foil.  I built one and taped it to a door in my
house.  I then aimed the antenna by opening and closing the door.

Despite the proximity of the door and other objects, directivity was very
good.  I used that antenna successfully for nearly a year, until I moved.
Turned out to be the best $0.15 I ever spent.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:04 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3undve$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 08:47:44 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <3undve$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Drew Loker) writes:
>
>>I know two hams who suffered DIRECT HITS last year.  BOTH lost
>EVERTHING that was PLUGGED IN (despite the fact that their antennas
>had been disconnected or grounded.
><
>
>DOes this mean that the diskcone antenna that I just errected (standing
>at about 25') is actually going to increase the chance that I will have
>a lightening strike? There are many, many much taller trees around, and
>I really had not even thought about this as a problem. As a precaution,'
>I have been unplugging the antenna to the radio, but why do I need to
>unplug everything in the house? If I have never had a lightening strike
>anywhere near, do I need to be concerned?

It probably won't increase the chances you'll have a lightning strike,
but it does increase the chance that when you do have a strike it will
be to the antenna rather than some other object in the neighborhood.
That's because the antenna offers a lower impedance path to Earth than
the other objects.

That's OK, it actually simplifies your protective system design somewhat.
You can't *prevent* strikes, but you can channel and control the strike
currents so that they do no harm.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 95 16:34:25 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3utu5s$[e-mail]>
References: <3undve$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>You can't *prevent* strikes, but you can channel and control the strike
>currents so that they do no harm.

Gary, your posts on preventive measures have been a great help and I will
eventually make use of the methods myself.  Nevertheless, neither you nor
anyone else can guarantee that a lightning strike will "do no harm",
regardless of the protective devices and techniques employed.

Despite the inconvenience, absolute safety to the rig and operator requires
disconnecting the equipment from the AC line and antenna system during a
storm, and staying off the air.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:06 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.lth.se!news.lu.se!news
From: [e-mail] (Peter Rojsel)
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: pr.maxlab.lu.se
Organization: MAX-lab
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
References: <3undve$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 12:33:46 GMT
Lines: 22

Hello there!

Lightning can be a strange thing. I have read some of Gary's very interesting
articles with great interest, but please explain this:

A few years ago this happened close to where I work.
The scene is a 6 meter high tree standing 10 meters from a 20 meter high 5
floor building with lightning protecting (copper wires of 1 cm thick) on all
corners and along the roof edges and grounded. The lightning hits the tree so
that it becomes splinters. This can only have been by a direct hit to the
tree. Why did the lighning not choose the lower impedance path to ground that
was offered by the lighning protective system of the building? The buildings
protection probably worked since it houses the computer centre of the universe
and the computers survived (they were running during the storm).

The only explanation I can think of is that a flash can have the upper
'connecting point' in a very low cloud.

Peter Rojsel SM7LEK
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!kaleka.seanet.com!sclausen.seanet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Scott Clausen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Needs
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 11:57:03 -0700
Organization: Seanet Online Services, Seattle WA
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sclausen.seanet.com

I'm looking for an antenna to mount on my roof or attach to the side of
the house. The primary purpose is to pick up FM radio and monitor aviation
broadcasts. Could someone point me to some resources? Thanks in advance
for the help. If this is the wrong group to post this to I apologize.

Scott


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!gatech!udel!news.udel.edu!chopin.udel.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Brad Cain)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Anttron phone number needed
Date: 24 Jul 1995 15:12:09 -0400
Organization: University of Delaware
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3v0ra9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: chopin.udel.edu

Does anyone have the number for Anttron (Ohio) ?  I have broken a piece of
my antenna and am in need of a replacement part.

thanks,
brad




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Garth Klatt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Backfire, Normal Mode Helical ?
Date: 24 Jul 1995 04:12:03 GMT
Organization: via CompuServe Information Service
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3uv6ij$j30$[e-mail]>
References: <3uo1ta$[e-mail]>

Ron,

Harsh requirements, it would seem. There is a variation to the
helical described by Dr. John Kraus himself in IEEE "Antennas and
Propagation" a couple of months ago that elminiates the
groundplane while providing performance on a par with
conventional deisngs. I built one and it works. If you need more
info than this, E-mail me or post in the Newsgroup.

GK.

Rivendell Technologies Ltd.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!uw-beaver!uw-coco!nwfocus.wa.com!islander.whidbey.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news.halcyon.com!blv-pm1-ip24.halcyon.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Richard D. Vincent)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Balloon for backpacking HT antenna ???
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 24 Jul 1995 01:26:33 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blv-pm1-ip24.halcyon.com

I have been looking for a small lightweight antenna that could be used for
backpacking for years and all of the ideas left a little to be desired.Let
me throw this idea on to the net and see if I get any feedback
            There are quite a few very nice qrp rigs and small rigs for hf
on the market that adapt themselves well to the backpacker.Traditionally
the power supply and antenna have been problems that presented great
difficulty to the hiker who wanted to be able to ciommunicate for an
extended period of time.Things are looking better.The powerstation which is
advertized in one of the ham magazines has inputs for 3,6,9 and 12 volts
and powers my ICOMT-21A  for weeks at a time and the manufacturee told me
the other day he is developing one that will deliver twice the amperage.
            Antennas are not so easily disposed with.What about the ideea
of finding the equipment or having it made that would enable one to at a
moment's notice inflate a balloon and send up a very light weight metalline
that would
function as a vertical antenna?Since the amount of gas needed,and the size
of balloon required to send up a half wave hf line would seemingly be small
consequently the container for gas and balloon itself could also be
small.Does anyone have any ideas where one could contact the appropriate
people to see about putting a package like this together?
Any help would be appreciated.
          Yours truly
          Richard Vincent
          KR7R


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Balloon for backpacking HT antenna ???
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 95 08:22:49 GMT
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Richard D. Vincent) wrote:
>What about the ideea of finding the equipment or having it made that would
>enable one to at a moment's notice inflate a balloon and send up a very
>light weight metal line       <snip>

A friend of mine in Houston did exactly this about seven years ago.  He
lived in a restricted townhouse, so the idea was to launch the baloon from
his balcony after sundown, then retrieve it when he was finished operating
for the night.

He located what appeared to be a suitable baloon (about 6 foot diameter) at
a novelty company.  They also sold the mini-blimps you occasionally see
floating outside Pizza Inns and TGIF's.  After several attempts which
failed due to excessive line weight, he finally attached an extremely small
gauge wire and let 'er rip.

What he ended up with was a nice vertical antenna, but only in extreme
calm.  Even the slightest breeze would cause the whole affair to blow over,
and the baloon would often come to rest on neighboring rooftops.  In
fact, he couldn't even retrieve the baloon (safely) unless the wind
stopped completely.

Perhaps someone else has had better success with this, but I wouldn't
recommend spending the money to try it unless they can provide very
specific descriptions of all materials.  After seeing my friend's hard
work go for naught, I have concluded that this approach is neither simple
nor inexpensive.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!simtel!fu-berlin.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Balloon for backpacking HT antenna ???
Date: 24 Jul 1995 09:56:50 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3uvqp2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

Hi Richard,

I think the Idea does not work.

1) any baloon antenna will be *increadibily* sensitive to wind.

2) a lightweight container will normally only support 10 bars
   of internal pressure, now with even a small baloon to lift a lightweight
   line requiring 20 to 50 litres...

Think about a fibreglass pole for fishing rods of rely upon trees.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:15 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!insignia!dylan.isltd.insignia.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (David Tock)
Subject: Re: Balloon for backpacking HT antenna ???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: dylan.isltd.insignia.com
Organization: Insignia Solutions Ltd, UK
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 12:35:56 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard D. Vincent) writes:
>
>            Antennas are not so easily disposed with.What about the ideea
>of finding the equipment or having it made that would enable one to at a
>moment's notice inflate a balloon and send up a very light weight metalline
>that would function as a vertical antenna?

There have been a couple of articles in RSGB Radcoms recently, about this
kind of thing. They seemed to work well, but at a price, especially if you
want to keep inflating/deflating them. To combat the wind problem, I believe
some balloons also act as kites, giving even more lifting power. It can
certainly be done

David


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!igate2.cyanamid.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Remote PC using ppp)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Balloon for backpacking HT antenna ???
Date: 24 Jul 1995 14:30:47 GMT
Organization: American Cyanamid Company
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <3v0aqn$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pd_sun1.cyanamid.com


Unless you're backpacking in the desert or above the timberline, I'd reccommend
light gauge wire (#26 or less), nylon string, a sling-shot and some fishing weights.
I've launched many a wire into the trees while camping.  If you put string up in
two separate trees, you can hoist a dipole, but I've found just a straight longwire
works fine for HF.  For 2 meters, you want to consider a J-pole.  Launch some
string over a branch and haul it up!  Simple and cheap.
                73
                        Dale

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dale H. Chidester, PhD           N3HAL      "Against stupidity, even the
American Cyanamid Company                    Gods in vain doth contend."
Agricultural Products Research Divison                          Schiller
PO Box 400,  Clarksville Rd.           Phone: [phone] x2430
Princeton, NJ  08543-0400              Email: [e-mail]
------------------------------------------------------------------------




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:18 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Balloon for backpacking HT antenna ???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <3uvqp2$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 15:45:07 GMT
Lines: 44

In article <3uvqp2$[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
>Hi Richard,
>
>I think the Idea does not work.
>
>1) any baloon antenna will be *increadibily* sensitive to wind.

A normal round balloon lofting an antenna wire will lay over toward
the ground in *any* wind. This just isn't workable. However, there
is an answer (two actually). The first answer is to get a *zepplin*
style balloon. These torpedo shaped balloons with adjustable fins
can actually be set to *lift* into a wind. You can find them at
places that do aerial advertising. The other option is to combine
a round balloon with a *kite*. This can work pretty well if there
is some wind about, but not quite as efficiently as the zepplin
style balloons.

>2) a lightweight container will normally only support 10 bars
>   of internal pressure, now with even a small baloon to lift a lightweight
>   line requiring 20 to 50 litres...

A 10 bar container would be shaving can thin. The inflate-a-spare cans
that come in some cars are under half a liter, yet can inflate an auto
tire to 2 bar. Similar cans can inflate life rafts. These aluminum
containers can tolerate 100 bar. So carrying 50 liters (STP) isn't
out of the question at all.

>Think about a fibreglass pole for fishing rods of rely upon trees.

A slingshot, a large nut (for a weight), and a coil of light antenna
wire *is* a practical and cheap way to put an antenna in a handy
tree. Doesn't weigh much either, or become a stowage problem (have
you ever tried to repack a deflated balloon in its case?). I don't
think the balloon is a good idea unless you're in a treeless place
(far from power lines too). If you're on water, though, a balloon
borne antenna can be great (so can just a kite since there's often
plenty of wind at the seashore).

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!news.bc.net!unixg.ubc.ca!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Balloon for backpacking HT antenna ???
Date: 24 Jul 1995 18:15:36 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3v0o08$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3uvqp2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

[e-mail] () writes:

>1) any baloon antenna will be *increadibily* sensitive to wind.

Has anyone else noticed that the dirigible advertising balloons so
beloved of car dealerships maintain quite an impressively steep tether
angle during high winds?  I've observed this repeatedly and wouldn't
mind knowing where they come from and the price.

regards,
Ross ve6pdq
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!erinacht.demon.co.uk!Tommy
From: Thomas Plunkett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Best auto/portable CB antenna ??
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 23:20:51 GMT
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: erinacht.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12156 rec.radio.cb:21405

In article <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1>
           [e-mail] "Daniel J. Dechant" writes:

> Hi:
>
> I have a hand held CB with an 8 inch "rubber duck" antenna.
> While driving in my car this setup is virtually useless.
>
> Does anyone have experience with making something like this
> work without having to mount an external antenna? My preferences
> would be:
>    1.   Buy a longer antenna that would work
>    2.   Use a magnetic mount as temporary antenna
> I would also consider a telescoping antenna that I stick out the
> window for short durations.
>
> Any advice on getting this unit to work would be appreciated.
>
> TIA, Dan
>

--
Thomas Plunkett


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!erinacht.demon.co.uk!Tommy
From: Thomas Plunkett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Best auto/portable CB antenna ??
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 95 01:17:40 GMT
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: erinacht.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12160 rec.radio.cb:21407

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Thomas" writes:

> In article <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1>
>            [e-mail] "Daniel J. Dechant" writes:
>
> > Hi:
> >
> > I have a hand held CB with an 8 inch "rubber duck" antenna.
> > While driving in my car this setup is virtually useless.
> >
> > Does anyone have experience with making something like this
> > work without having to mount an external antenna? My preferences
> > would be:
> >    1.   Buy a longer antenna that would work
> >    2.   Use a magnetic mount as temporary antenna
> > I would also consider a telescoping antenna that I stick out the
> > window for short durations.
> >
> > Any advice on getting this unit to work would be appreciated.
> >
> > TIA, Dan
> >
>
> --
> Thomas Plunkett
>


Sorry Dan.  A tech glitch I think.  Hope my reply prints this time.

        You cannot transmit within a metal body car.  This is due to the
Faraday Cage effect (the same one that says you cant being zapped by lightning
inside a metal cage), which prevents all RF signals being transmitted - or
received for that matter.
The only answer, I'm afraid to say, is an external mounting.  Though if you
dont want the hastle of drilling bits out of your car and mounting
a fixed antenna, then a magnetic mount will work just fine.  As for the
telescoping antenna, it should work, though you may have to tune it to 11m
(and watch your VSWR).
        Hope this helps.

Cheers and beers.

--
Thomas


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:23 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.cb
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!dorite!ts00-ind-25.iquest.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Eric D. Cosens)
Subject: Re: Best auto/portable CB antenna ??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Admin)
Organization: DowElanco
References: <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 19:23:14 GMT
Lines: 65
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12227 rec.radio.cb:21441

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>
>            [e-mail] "Thomas" writes:
>
> > In article <dechant-1607950838580001@192.0.2.1>
> >            [e-mail] "Daniel J. Dechant" writes:
> >
> > > Hi:
> > >
> > > I have a hand held CB with an 8 inch "rubber duck" antenna.
> > > While driving in my car this setup is virtually useless.
> > >
> > > Does anyone have experience with making something like this
> > > work without having to mount an external antenna? My preferences
> > > would be:
> > >    1.   Buy a longer antenna that would work
> > >    2.   Use a magnetic mount as temporary antenna
> > > I would also consider a telescoping antenna that I stick out the
> > > window for short durations.
> > >
> > > Any advice on getting this unit to work would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > TIA, Dan
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Plunkett
> >
>
>
> Sorry Dan.  A tech glitch I think.  Hope my reply prints this time.
>
>         You cannot transmit within a metal body car.  This is due to the
> Faraday Cage effect (the same one that says you cant being zapped by lightning
> inside a metal cage), which prevents all RF signals being transmitted - or
> received for that matter.
> The only answer, I'm afraid to say, is an external mounting.  Though if you
> dont want the hastle of drilling bits out of your car and mounting
> a fixed antenna, then a magnetic mount will work just fine.  As for the
> telescoping antenna, it should work, though you may have to tune it to 11m
> (and watch your VSWR).
>         Hope this helps.
>
> Cheers and beers.
>
> --
> Thomas


I've transmitted (and more importantly, actually been received!) plenty of
times from an HT w/a rubber duck from inside my car.  It's an '86 Ford
Crown Victoria so there's plenty of steel here.  Yes, you *can* transmit
within a metal body car.  It just soaks up quite a bit of signal.

Regards,
Eric
'73

--
********************************************
* The opinions expressed in this note are  *
* mine, not those of my employer.          *
********************************************


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:24 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!noc.near.net!news3.near.net!monk.proteon.com!jfw
From: [e-mail] (John Woods)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: kerplop.proteon.com
Organization: Proteon, Inc., Westborough, Ma.
References: <3uks4t$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 18:47:46 GMT
Lines: 13

[e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS) writes:
>I once saw CC&R that forbade ANY DEVICE THAT GENERATES RADIO
>FREQUENCIES!  Wonder how they got along without microwave ovens.
>Charlie,  W7XC

Or televisions.  Or radios.  Or CD players.  Or computers.

Gee, I wouldn't mind having that development as a neighbor; nice low
local RF noise floor.   :-)

(If it said, literally, "ANY DEVICE THAT GENERATES RADIO FREQUENCIES", it
ought to be relatively easy to have a court agree that they have failed to
enforce it for the requisite amount of time...)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Ron Klein)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 22 Jul 1995 14:03:14 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 57
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3ur0f2$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-ftc-co1-04.ix.netcom.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83426 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28657 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12147

In <3uba16$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (CRONIN) writes:

>
>In article <3u5u5r$[e-mail]>,
>Roger J. Buffington <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>Make sure that your place doesn't have any CC&Rs or deed restrictions.
>>Those are even tougher to fight than ordinances.  PRB-1 doesn't apply at
>>all.
>
>Would it be possible to place a deed restriction restriction on your
>house to prevent future owners from placing any antenna restrictions
>on it?  After all, if you can make all future owners agree not to put
>up antennas it you should also be able to make all future owners
>agree not to place antenna restrictions on the house.
>
>Could you also add a convenant directing future owners not to enforce
>existing antenna restrictions?  Seems a little more shakey, but probably
>worth a try.  Or maybe direct future owners not to hassle antenna-owning
>neighbors.
>
>Just think of the pro-ham restrictions you could add to your deed.  How
>many houses have you owned in the last few years?  Has anybody published
>a do-it-yourself guide to writing CCR's?  Or do you need a lawyer?
>
>73...Jim  N2VNO
>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Roger J. Buffington
>>[e-mail]
>>AB6WR
>

I am not an attorney, but I do have some experience with covenants due to
living in a rural subdivision with unusually tight covenants - except for
antennas, fortunately.

The concept of putting restrictions on your own property is an interesting one.
However, covenants normally apply to multiple properties in a subdivsion or
other entity and require approval by the applicable parties to modify them.

It would seem to me that it would be extremely difficult to just put a
restriction on your own individual lot without going through some form of
review/approval process by those others who may be affected by that
restriction.


Sounds like a good question set for an experienced real estate attorney.
--
Ron Klein - W0OSK
-----------------
[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!netcomsv!uucp3.netcom.com!loretta!red-eft!ibbs!js
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger)
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger)
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 13:16:56 GMT
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Lines: 99
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83557 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28696 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12222


In article <3ur0f2$[e-mail]>, Ron Klein ([e-mail]) writes:
>In <3uba16$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (CRONIN) writes:
>
>>
>>In article <3u5u5r$[e-mail]>,
>>Roger J. Buffington <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>Make sure that your place doesn't have any CC&Rs or deed restrictions.
>>>Those are even tougher to fight than ordinances.  PRB-1 doesn't apply at
>>>all.
>>
>>Would it be possible to place a deed restriction restriction on your
>>house to prevent future owners from placing any antenna restrictions
>>on it?  After all, if you can make all future owners agree not to put
>>up antennas it you should also be able to make all future owners
>>agree not to place antenna restrictions on the house.
>>
>>Could you also add a convenant directing future owners not to enforce
>>existing antenna restrictions?  Seems a little more shakey, but probably
>>worth a try.  Or maybe direct future owners not to hassle antenna-owning
>>neighbors.
>>
>>Just think of the pro-ham restrictions you could add to your deed.  How
>>many houses have you owned in the last few years?  Has anybody published
>>a do-it-yourself guide to writing CCR's?  Or do you need a lawyer?
>>
>>73...Jim  N2VNO
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Roger J. Buffington
>>>[e-mail]
>>>AB6WR
>>
>
>I am not an attorney, but I do have some experience with covenants due to
>living in a rural subdivision with unusually tight covenants - except for
>antennas, fortunately.
>
>The concept of putting restrictions on your own property is an interesting one.
>However, covenants normally apply to multiple properties in a subdivsion or
>other entity and require approval by the applicable parties to modify them.
>
>It would seem to me that it would be extremely difficult to just put a
>restriction on your own individual lot without going through some form of
>review/approval process by those others who may be affected by that
>restriction.
>
>
>Sounds like a good question set for an experienced real estate attorney.
>--
>Ron Klein - W0OSK
>-----------------
>[e-mail]
>
>
>
>


I have lived in Mission Viejo, CA, an area with really tight restrictions.  I
have also been a ham for about 10 years.  I found that the restrictions on
ham radio where not that restrictive if I was creative.  I worked a ton of
DX on a ground mounted vertical.  It could not be seen from the street but
the two story house next to me could see it from upstairs.  I worked out a
deal, and it stayed.  CC&R's are enforced by your neighbors, so it is a good
idea to get along with them.  They may not try to "get" you on a antenna
that is well hidden.  They may go after more enforcable items, such as your
grass, or color of house, or where you park your car.

I am not really the nices guy to talk to about this issue.  I am pro CC&R's
and I feel every neighborhood should have them.  I don't like the idea of my
neighbors effecting my property value and safty of my neighborhood.  Most
areas that have them are to expensive for the rif raf to move in.  However
one dose see lazy home owners, hams being the worse.  Hams talk on the radio
and forget to mow the lawn.  Seen it many times.

The safty issue is really big with me.  For example in Mission Viejo one is
not to park cars on the street or in the driveway.  Visibility is very good,
keeping one from running over kids on a bikes.  Seen that one too.  Also by
not haveing oil dripping on the street, taxes are kept down and streets are
in good repair.

I could type for hours on all the advantages that CC&R's have.  When one has
studied and sat on home owners boards such as myself, one can really see how
small of a issue ham radio really is.  We never went after someone that took
measures to keep antennas under control.  In short the tower thing had to
go.  A well placed ground mounted vertical was not really a big deal.  All I
had to do was build and sign a paper that said I would keep my veritcal in
good repair so that it would not blow apart in the wind and hurt someone or
something.

I hate to brag but the area I lived in was a perfect example of hams and
neighbors living in a upper middle class area together.  Anyone can do it,
it all rests on ones attitude.



--
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Stillinger - KB6IBB                              [e-mail]
PSC Box 3429                                          [e-mail]
Edwards AFB, CA  93524                                [phone]N1
         KB6IBB Repeater sometimes heard in Los Angeles 449.6250
                    No air power without ground power!


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!news.dseg.ti.com!news!hubanks
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Hubanks)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 95 18:53:44 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: iwpowerbook.dseg.ti.com
X-Newsreader: VersaTerm Link v1.1.1
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83565 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28697 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12225

In Article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger)
wrote:
>I have lived in Mission Viejo, CA, an area with really tight restrictions.  I
>have also been a ham for about 10 years.  I found that the restrictions on
>ham radio where not that restrictive if I was creative.  I worked a ton of
>DX on a ground mounted vertical.  It could not be seen from the street but
>the two story house next to me could see it from upstairs.  I worked out a
>deal, and it stayed.  CC&R's are enforced by your neighbors, so it is a good
>idea to get along with them.  They may not try to "get" you on a antenna
>that is well hidden.  They may go after more enforcable items, such as your
>grass, or color of house, or where you park your car.
>
>I am not really the nices guy to talk to about this issue.  I am pro CC&R's
>and I feel every neighborhood should have them.  I don't like the idea of my
>neighbors effecting my property value and safty of my neighborhood.  Most

Interesting point on property values.  It seems this is the key to the
issue.  Well I have one example.  A local ham listed his house in a number
of ham publications.  With in two weeks of the ad coming out he sold the
house for the asking price which was $3K above the normal asking price.
Since your property value is tied to the comps for property around you this
ment there was a net increase in property value due to the existence of a
tower and antenna. I realize this is only one case but a may indicate that a
tower and antenna have either a null or plus affect on property value.

>areas that have them are to expensive for the rif raf to move in.  However
>one dose see lazy home owners, hams being the worse.  Hams talk on the radio
>and forget to mow the lawn.  Seen it many times.
> .... etc.


Bruce Hubanks
Texas Instruments
voice: 214-575-4058
fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!america.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coil loaded delta loop
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 00:56:42 EDT
Organization: PSS InterNet Services, InterNet in Fl 904 253 7100
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3ulvag$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.170.102.59
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


 Subject: Coil loaded delta loop
> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 16:12:16 GMT
 To shorten the loop one needs an air-core coil (model 3022)
> manufactured by Barker & Williamson, Bristol, PA.
> Would anyone know it this coil is still available, and if so, where I
> could obtain it?
>
> Regards,
> Hermod Pedersen
> Malmo, Sweden


Hermod you canbuild your own coils. Just find the specs and wrap the wire around
a piece of large dia PVC. Put hot melt glue or epoxy resin in strips down
90degree angles and you have a coil. If you are worried about the pvc you can
check it in a Microwave to see if rf affects it. or you can simply wax the pipe
and then slide the coil off. I once made a statement on here that you could get
pvc plain or even threaded 6-8in in dia.  Sorry to the plumbers out there who
new I was wrong. You can get pvc in dia up to 3ft or 1 meter at least not
counting special orders for larger. :)  I wonder if I can suspend a 3 footer at
90 ft for the 160 contest HIHI.
73 dray AD4RR



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Dan and Carol Clark )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Comments on GAP Antennas, Anyone?
Date: 21 Jul 1995 14:29:41 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 6
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uodkl$[e-mail]>
References: <3s5bh5$[e-mail]> <3t971h$[e-mail]> <3tkn04$[e-mail]> <3tkrd8$[e-mail]> <3u3abv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-ont4-24.ix.netcom.com

Greetings,

I have a Gap "Titan", a no radial antenna. It works just as advertized.
It is not a four element yagi, but it works great. It was easy to put
up, and is is also very tall. It's on my patio cover in a city.
                                  Dan.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.cerf.net!ni1.ni.net!xband.ni.net!user
From: [e-mail] (J. L. Blanton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dish-cone HF
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 23:27:48 -0800
Organization: Network Intensive
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <dragonsl-1507950828050001@192.0.2.1> <3ugehf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xband.ni.net

In article <3ugehf$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
wrote:

> It will absolutely matter. The open end of the cone has voltage on it. It
> MUST be insulated from everything else. It particulary matters when the
> cone is 1/4 wl. If one end of a 1/4 wl section is grounded the other end
> will have a very high impedance. That means if you ground the cone, and it
> is 1/4 wl long, the feedpoint becomes un-terminated at the coax shield!


Some food for thought:

1. The discone is not a resonant antenna.  The cone length should always
be longer than 1/4 wavelength.

2. The feedpoint is between the disk and the cone, not between the cone
and ground.

3. The radiated wave originates as an E-field between the disk and the cone.

If the operating frequency is well above the low frequency cutoff of the
discone I don't think it should matter how the radials are terminated.

Regards,

Lee Blanton, WA8YBT/6


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!dunix.drake.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (John Stroppel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dish-cone HF
Date: 24 Jul 1995 14:24:17 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3v0aeh$[e-mail]>
References: <dragonsl-1507950828050001@192.0.2.1> <3ugehf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: franklin.uhl.uiowa.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950515BETA PL0]


The last statement about skirt termination not mattering above lower cutoff
is wrong.  Seems that at about 14 mhz the swr goes up and stays there.
dimentions of antenna- dish 20' shirt about 29'. With skirt bottom grounded.
This looks to me to be about 1/2 or something of the skirt. The antenna
tunes up good on 7 mhz. Haven't had time to dig the skirt ground up yet.


John WA0VYZ
--
 John Stroppel                         | Internet: [e-mail]
 The University of Iowa - Hygienic Lab | Amateur Radio: WA0VYZ
 Oakdale Research Campus, OH-M7A       | Voice:    [phone]
 Iowa City, IA   52242                 | Fax:      [phone]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:40 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!torn!nott!cunews!hydra.carleton.ca!im
From: [e-mail] (Ian McEachern VE3PFH)
Subject: Re: Egg beater antennas for sat work?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: hydra.carleton.ca
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: Carleton University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3tsl2v$[e-mail]> <3uf2n8$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 13:19:45 GMT
Lines: 64
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12208 rec.radio.amateur.space:4470

Bruce M. Marshall ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Kory:

: Your questions are typical of those that everyone asks as they think
: through setting up a LEO (low earth orbit) ground station. You are
: asking the right questions, so you are on the right track. I have not
: tried an eggbeater however I would like to. I would like to find the
: perfect LEO, non-az-el-rotor ground station combination. Most "omni"
: antennas are not omni in 3 dimensions but in 2. This is fine for
: signals coming from the direction of the horison. Of course satellites
: don't always come from the direction of the horizon. However their
: signal is most attenuated when they are near the horizon. Therefore an
: antenna with some more gain on the horizon is benificial. An "omni"
: antenna with 8 to 11 db gain will do very well for passes of low
: elevation and the low elevation portions of higher passes but will
: loose the signal above 40 to 60 degrees even though the satellite has
: the strongest signal at this point in the pass. I suppose the egbeater
: will perform better at these higher elevations than a gain omni which
: will have a gain of less than 1 at high elevations. The eggbeater will
: perform poorly at low angles. When setting up a ground station an
: important question is "how much of the horizon can I see?". Here in
: eastern Tennessee the mountains and high trees can result in much or
: little very little view of the horizon. In this case an antenna such
: as a quadrifilar helix with a high gain at higher elevations would bea
: good choice. In Kansas, or on a mountain top the choice would be
: different.

I just had a thought - how about using two antennas. One higher gain
for the lower elevations, the second with 0 to some gain at the
higher elevations.

The antennas could be either be combined (phased appropriately to give
the pattern and coverate you are looking for), or using some
simple logic and a pin diode swith at the receiver, switch between
the antenna with the "best" signal.

Problem of course is that the antennas need to be circularly
polarized ... and combining two circularly polarized antennas
would probably look pretty weird;-) (I'm thinking of a
quadrafilar stuck on top of two 3 element circular polarized
yagis, that are mounted at 90 degrees:-)

im
: As for preamps, a mast mounted preamp is a must for 70cm. At 70cm the
: attenuation even in very good coax is unacceptable if you have more
: than a short run of coax. Get a copy of the satellite experimenters
: handbook and work some of the antenna/preamp/coax equasions. They are
: tedious but very educational.

: I have more ideas on the perfect LEO groundstation however I have been
: summoned for dinner (and it looks and smells exceptionel) so will
: write more if coaxed.

: Bruce.
: N4USH
: --
: Bruce M. Marshall  [e-mail]  voice 615 481 0990  fax [phone]

--
Ian A. McEachern, VE3PFH             | Try our new www server:
Packet Working Group, Ottawa A.R.C.  | http://hydra.carleton.ca/
[e-mail]                 | Interesting stuff about packet
http://hydra.carleton.ca/~im/im.html | radio & our 56kbps radio LAN



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: end-fed longwire design
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 05:53:13 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uq47j$[e-mail]>
References: <3uhkgn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (glenn v. jensen esq) wrote:
>I can install an end-fed longwire at my new qth without
>much concern from my neighbors.

Unless you have a specific use for the characteristics of a true
longwire, you will probably get better results with a balanced antenna.  I
would recommend a full-size multiband dipole or Carolina windom.  You
might want to check out the models available from The Radio Works in
Portsmouth, VA [phone].

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!freud.inst.com!usenet
From: "Mark J. Acierno" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FAQ antenna's for condos
Date: 23 Jul 1995 19:10:18 GMT
Organization: InterSys Technologies
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3uu6qq$[e-mail]>
References: <3uisdc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp22.inst.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; PPC)
To: [e-mail]
X-URL: news:3uisdc$[e-mail]

I too am looking for info on this topic..... if you get a reply
to your post could you please foward a copy to me?

thanx
mark
n2uem




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
Date: 22 Jul 1995 01:27:31 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3uq283$[e-mail]>
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

-----
>I have a very restrictive homeowners association, so decided the most
>performance with the least visability might be the G5RV. The problem is I

>can only put the center at about 6 feet above the roof. One end is
>attached to a roof corner at about 10 feet above ground, and the other
>end is attached to the corner of a 6 foot block fence.
------

I use a dipole with the same approx length as a G5RV has (102 Ft) but I
operate it with 450 ohm ladder-line all the way to the tuner.. tuner is a
MFJ989C  3KW type.

For info I use my dipole at a height of  12 feet off the ground. works
great for 40 and 80 meters out to about a 1000 miles with no problem ...

I have also played with dipoles as close to the ground as 10-1/2 inches on
plastic tent stakes, and at 6 feet off the ground ...

compared to a 40 meter dipole at 1/4 wave off the ground:
at 6 foot height you loose about 6 dB of performance .
at 10-1/2 inches off the ground you loose about 20 Db of performance ..

73 - trish
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!convex!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: ground question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 05:00:09 GMT
Lines: 21

In article <[e-mail]> Steve Roys <[e-mail]> writes:
>This isn't exactly an antenna question, but...
>
>I am having an in-ground pool put in, and I was wondering if I could use
>the pool structure as a hefty RF ground.  The metal pool walls, rebar,
>lights, and pump will all be tied to my house ground, so I don't want to do
>this if I'm going to fry any of my consumer electronics in my house.

Absolutely. Your in-ground pool will make an excellent Ufer Earth terminal.
This does not free you from proper facilities layout concerns, of course.
You still need to practice single point ground window technique, and you
need to be wary of ground loops, just as you would if you were to use
driven ground rods. A haphazard facility layout, no matter how good the
Earth terminal, can still lead to equipment damage.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ground question
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 05:58:53 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uq4i7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Steve Roys <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I am having an in-ground pool put in, and I was wondering if I could use
>the pool structure as a hefty RF ground.

If an antenna is balanced, the station doesn't need an RF ground.  Also, if
the pool structure is more than a few feet from the rig, it would be very
difficult to use it as an RF ground, particularly on the higher bands.

My advice is to forget the pool and balance the antenna.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!ddi2.digital.net!ddi.digital.net!progrock
From: [e-mail] (Mike Whaley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,git.radio.amateur
Subject: Help the Astronauts Memorial Foundation
Date: 24 Jul 1995 01:45:23 GMT
Organization: FLORIDA ONLINE, Florida's Premier Internet Provider
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <3uutvj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]
Keywords: SAREX, satellite, education
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12193 rec.radio.amateur.misc:83506 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28674

Hello all!!

My name is Mike Whaley KD4UGI, and I would like to ask for help from the
readers of this group with a worthy cause. I am a Technical Specialist
with the Astronauts Memorial Foundation at the Center for Space Education
at the visitor's center at the Kennedy Space Center. AMF is a non-profit
independent organization that was originally set up a month after the
Challenger tragedy to honor all U.S. Astronauts who have given their
lives in the line of duty. As a living memorial to them, AMF operates the
Center for Space Education. We basically take the latest in Instructional
Technology (IT)... computers, software, etc... and teach educators how to
incorporate it into today's classrooms. It is quite a comprehensive
program, after an educator goes through a workshop they have been
instructed in everything from basic computer troubleshooting and
repair (hardware and software), the use of software of all descriptions,
and how to use this technology effectively so that really improves the
education of their students rather than sitting unexploited as often happens
at many schools who don't know how to use it. We typically teach three
teachers from every school in a district, right now we focus mostly on
Florida but work in conjunction with NASA education programs and others
so that we see quite a cross-section of teachers from all grade levels,
subjects, and locations. I work on the Instructional Technology
Evaluation Center, which is a large computer lab with 10 Macintosh and 7
PC platforms that allows us to both do training and to allow educators to
"test-drive" all sorts of educationally-related software and determine
its suitability to their needs before spending shrinking budget money on it.
This is a free service open to teachers, and is supported by the
donations of many software and hardware vendors. If you are a teacher and
want more info about any of this, please call AMF at the number below and
we can tell you more details!

I think it is important to point out that even as comprehensive as our
programs are, there is NO COST to the participants, other than the costs
they incur in travel, lodging, and for substitutes at their home schools.
AMF is supported by the funds from the Florida Challenger license plate
program and from private donations. We are not a government agency, we
are entirely independent although we have working partnerships with many
organizations and businesses.

I am posting this to r.r.a.space because I now have a unique opportunity
to start a Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment (SAREX) station there.  I am
sure that most of you are familiar with SAREX contacts where students get
to ask questions of Shuttle crew members, but in my view it would be even
more useful and lasting to get the teachers fired up about amateur radio,
space, and technology because they can then pass it along to hundreds or
thousands of students. I have approval from the powers that be to do this
project, however, with all the other educational projects that are ongoing
I need to get as many donations of equipment and help as I can before we
think about spending a lot of money. (Ie, only buy things that we can't
get donated or permanently loaned.) As the only ham currently working at
AMF, I am far more familiar with this than my co-workers, although myu
boss does know about it and has seen a videotape of a SAREX school
contact, and is supportive of this project. Basically, I would like to
get a good start (by getting not only equipment but volunteers to assist
with this project) before I push for significant sums of money. I believe
that once we have the capability of making contacts, not just SAREX but
Mir, satellite, and terrestrial, then it will become obvious how valuable
a tool this can be to get teachers interested.

For anyone out there who may be considering donating, remember that this
will be in a very high-visibility location... the KSC visitor's center is
the third most-visited attraction in the state of Florida. So of course,
the publicity value for companies is significant. (We will be sure to
publically acknowledge any assistance given us.) This is in the
formaticve stages right now, I have some ideas about specific equipment I
would like to use but I will consider anything. At minimum, right now we
need a 2-meter radio, a satellite antenna and the associated rotators and
mast, coaxial cable, and an amplifier to put out 150 watts or so if the
radio won't do that. Of course, I envision having a much more
complete/capable station than that, eventually we would like to have a
special event station to commemorate the return-to-flight after
Challenger so a full-blown station is something to look forward to. But
for now, my main goal is showing that this can work, and that should open
up doors and allow it to expand.

Thank you, and please feel free to either e-mail, call, snail-mail, or
visit!

Mike Whaley KD4UGI
The Astronauts Memorial Foundation
Mail Code AMF
Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899
[phone]

73 de KD4UGI

| Mike Whaley    [e-mail]   [e-mail] |
|     P.O. Box 510717, Melbourne Beach FL 32951-0717     [phone]    |
|       World Wide Web: http://w4aql.gatech.edu/~kd4ugi/mikepage.html      |
|              And you and I climb over the sea to the valley,             |
|            And you and I reach out for reasons to call. - Yes            |





From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: 24 Jul 1995 10:07:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3v09fd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


jbmitch <[e-mail]> writes:

>I am building an HF mobile installation and would appreciate input
>from hams who have been down this road.  The antennas I am considering
>include the Bugcatcher, Screwdriver, and Outbacker.  Does anyone
>have any experience with using these on HF mobile?  What about ease
>of tuning, reliability, and mounting position?  Any input would be


John,

I use a top loaded antenna on 160 m mobile with a three foot hat several
inches above the coil. I can work Europe and the west coast on 160 under
good condx with that setup. Remember that moving the loading from the base
to the top increases radation resistance four times (and efficiency
drastically), and that there is very little current in a whip past the
location of a large hat. If you use a large hat, don't waste time with a
long thin whip sticking out above it. Try to top load if you can, but if
you do use a hat. Walt Maxwell talks about mobile antennas in reflections,
and Jack (John) Belrose, VE2CV has written some good stuff. Other mobile
handbooks ignore ground losses and so come to erronious conclusions. 73
Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to view/change SWR's, varied conditions
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 06:23:33 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 30
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uq60e$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:
>1. 1.4-1.9 with meter reading taken between transmitter and antenna

Nothing unusual here - these are satisfactory readings.

>2. 1.8-2.6 with meter reading taken between transmitter and antenna
>   tuner

Does this mean that the tuner is unable to tune the antenna to 1:1?

>3. 1.6-2.5 with meter reading taken between transmitter and amp "on",

Again, nothing unusual here - you're reading the VSWR looking into the
input impedance of the amplifier.  Many amplifiers don't present a 50 ohm
non-reactive load, particularly those without input matching networks.

>4. 2.3-1.9 with meter reading taken between transmitter and amp
>   ("off"), no tuner in circuit.  Note the switch in
>   where the higher SWR is, compared to the preceding case.

Assuming that the amplifier's internal bypass circuitry is essentially a
thru connection, this might indicate that your readings change with
transmission line length.  If so, it is likely that you have RF flowing on
the shield of the feedline.  This could be the result of a number of
things.  Perhaps you could describe the feedline and antenna in greater
detail?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to view/change SWR's, varied conditions
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 06:49:57 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uq7hu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3ujpdv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Todd Little) wrote:
>The type of amplifier is needed to determine what's going on, i.e., does
>the amplifier assume and require a 50 ohm match, or does it contain some
>matching circuitry as most tube style amplifiers do?

I just wanted to point out that the output circuitry of the amplifier will
not have a bearing on this.  VSWR measured at (or past) the amplifier's
output solely indicates the mismatch between the line and its load.  Any
mismatch between the amplifier's output circuitry and the line will cause
VSWR only within the amplifier proper.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wem.org!wb3u
From: [e-mail] (Wb3u)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to view/change SWR's, varied conditions
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 06:49:57 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: World Evangelist Ministry
Distribution: world
Lines: 22

From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Subject: Re: How to view/change SWR's, varied conditions

   [e-mail] (Todd Little) wrote:
>The type of amplifier is needed to determine what's going on, i.e., does
>the amplifier assume and require a 50 ohm match, or does it contain some
>matching circuitry as most tube style amplifiers do?

I just wanted to point out that the output circuitry of the amplifier will
not have a bearing on this.  VSWR measured at (or past) the amplifier's
output solely indicates the mismatch between the line and its load.  Any
mismatch between the amplifier's output circuitry and the line will cause
VSWR only within the amplifier proper.

73,

Jack  WB3U

---------------------------------------------
*     ChristNET Global Christian Network    *
*     Christ Connection [phone]      *
---------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to view/change SWR's, varied conditions
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 19:05:05 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 15
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3urik9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Path: nuclear.microserve.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!
colossus.holonet.net!wem.org!wb3u

From: [e-mail] (Wb3u)

>---------------------------------------------
>*     ChristNET Global Christian Network    *
>*     Christ Connection [phone]      *
>---------------------------------------------

Does anyone know what or where colossus.holonet.net is?

Thanks & 73,

WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: How to view/change SWR's, varied conditions
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 08:43:33 GMT
Lines: 118

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]  writes:
>As a relative newcomer to ham radio, I'm stumped about something and
>would appreciate any wisdom you can contribute.
>
>Let's assume a transmitter, a SWR meter, an amplifier, and an antenna
>tuner (in the HF case), all seemingly in good working order. Also
>assume the antenna has been tuned with neither amp nor tuner in the
>circuit (case 1 below). Finally, assume all connections ("VHF") are
>good.
>
>Depending on the transmitter-to-antenna circuit, I find surprisingly
>varying SWR ranges in these cases ... (in each case, the SWR readings
>are for low-high band ends)
>1. 1.4-1.9 with meter reading taken between transmitter and antenna
>   (no other components involved)

This trend line, assuming no dip in the middle, indicates the antenna
is resonant *below* the ham band, IE cut too long. For a typical dipole
or a monopole whip, VSWR will dip to a minimum at the frequency where
the antenna is resonant. Thus when you run a VSWR curve across the
band, you can see by the dip in the curve where the antenna resonant
frequency occurs. (This behavior may not hold true for all types of
antennas.)

>2. 1.8-2.6 with meter reading taken between transmitter and antenna
>   tuner (no amp in circuit) ...with the antenna still in the
>   circuit, of course ... as true in all these cases

This indicates the antenna tuner is not being adjusted properly.
The tuner should be able to present a pure 50+j0 load to the
transmitter when properly adjusted, IE a 1:1 VSWR. Note: of
course the tuner has to be adjusted at each frequency since
the antenna reactance changes at every frequency, and so do
the LC components in the tuner. You can't expect to set the
tuner once for a whole band.

>3. 1.6-2.5 with meter reading taken between transmitter and amp "on",
>   no tuner in circuit

This is the impedance presented by the amplifier input network.
This is a complex of the tube input impedance and the feedback
impedance. Assuming no heavy swamping is being used, the impedance
seen at the amplifier output will also significantly reflect back
to its input in one form or another, IE the amplifier's load can
affect its input impedance too.

>4. 2.3-1.9 with meter reading taken between transmitter and amp
>   ("off"), no tuner in circuit.  Note the switch in
>   where the higher SWR is, compared to the preceding case.

This indicates that the amplifier bypass circuit is reactive,
in this case capacitively reactive. This is somewhat to be
expected if open frame TR relays are used.

>I don't remember the actual SWR numbers are, and believe that they
>probably don't qualitatively change the answer(s) to my questions,
>which are:
>   - why such substantial variances?

See above. You're looking at different loads, so the VSWR is going
to be different.

>   - do such variances indicate that the amp or tuner are somehow
>     misbehaving?

Well, it looks to me like there's a tuner problem. That problem
*may* be operator error if you aren't adjusting the tuner properly
as you change frequencies.

>   - which measurement point(s) should be used when tuning the
>     antenna?

Ok, VSWR only tells you something about tuning and matching when
the reading is taken with the thing you're trying to tune terminating
the line, and with nothing in between. IE to tune the *antenna*,
the VSWR bridge needs to be connected at the point where the feedline
goes to the antenna. To tune the tuner+antenna, the VSWR bridge needs to
have the tuner between it and the antenna. Similarly, to tune the
amplifier+tuner+antenna, the VSWR bridge needs to be looking into the
amp's input. A drawing may help.

TX---1---AMP---2---Tuner---3----------------ANT

Ok, to prune the antenna onto frequency, the VSWR bridge needs to
be at 3. To adjust the tuner, the bridge needs to be at 2. And to
adjust the input tuning of the amp, the bridge needs to be at 1.
Adjustments should be made in this sequence, since any change you
make toward the antenna end will reflect back though the other
networks toward the transmitter and alter the values you see
there. As you tune each load subsystem, the black box gets bigger,
IE everything to the right of the meter is considered the load.

The VSWR at any point is the result of mismatches in the line
segment containing the meter to the black box load formed by
everything to the right of that line segment. IE the only
way you get VSWR is if the termination for the line segment
is a mismatch to the characteristic impedance of that line
segment. Nothing you do on the input end of the line can
change VSWR on the line to the right of that point.

Let me try to put that more clearly. The only thing that can
change the VSWR on the line segment between 3 and the ANT is
the antenna impedance. The only thing that can change the
VSWR at 2 is the tuner transformation ratio (IE it's adjustment)
and the antenna impedance. The only thing that can change
the VSWR at 1 is the amplifier tuning and the tuner tuning
and the antenna impedance. Any adjustments made to the left
of the meter position will not alter the VSWR indicated at
that position. Anything done to the right of the meter will
alter the VSWR seen at that position. Only loads can alter
VSWR.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!rainier.nds.com!brian
From: [e-mail] (Brian Dockter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: J-Pole for 2m
Date: 24 Jul 1995 19:34:13 GMT
Organization: Northwest Digital Systems
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3v0sjl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rainier.nds.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I have recently (is April still considered recent?) received my license
and I have decided on my first project as a Ham: a J-Pole to increase
the range of my 2m HT (I currently use the rubber duck). I have one plan
for a J-Pole that's helical wound on a wooden dowel and I was wondering
if there were other plans I should consider (such as one constructed
from copper pipe). Are there other suggestions that might make a better
"first project?"



Thanks,


Brian
--
Brian Dockter   (KC7JZL)         | Email: [e-mail]
Sr. Software Engineer            | Voice: 206-524-0014
Northwest Digital Systems        | FAX: [phone]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:05:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!america.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Larsen KG-2/70 - anyone else killed one?
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 01:06:23 EDT
Organization: PSS InterNet Services, InterNet in Fl 904 253 7100
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3ul0e5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.170.102.59
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


 Subject: Larsen KG-2/70 - anyone else killed one?
> Date: 20 Jul 1995 07:25:57 GMT
> Well, I killed my Larsen dual-band thru-glass again.  This time it's an
> internal connection broken.  Anybody know what size the Torx bit is I
> need to get it apart, before I go buy one?

> More to the point - what are the other collective experiences here?  Should
> I bother reinstalling it if I fix it?  Is it not rugges enough for normal use,
> or am I just too damn hard on my antennae?

> Dale - N0XAS


Dale before you try fixing it your self give Larson a call. They will ship you a
new one as a replacement and bill you then they will cancel the bill upon the
return of your old one

Dont forget larson has a three year warrenty. They will many times make good on
it even if your antenna is older than that.

This is not written down and dont hold them or me to it but it is from
experince. I know they have done this before.

By the way they will ship to you on your word alone that you are honest. I just
hope people in this day and age do not abuse their trust.

73 dray AD4RR




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: "James A. Storm" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Larsen KG-2/70 - anyone else killed one?
Date: 22 Jul 1995 06:51:48 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uq764$[e-mail]>
References: <3ul0e5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sf4-16.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1PE (Windows; I; 16bit)

You must be pretty tough on antennas. I've forgotten to remove the whip
on mine on half dozen or more occasions when putting my truck in the
garage. That means it has to literally fold in two, yet it's still in
good shape. Worth fixing? Yeah!

                          Jim WB6LWS Pacifica, [e-mail] (Dale
Botkin) wrote:
>Well, I killed my Larsen dual-band thru-glass again.  This time it's an
>internal connection broken.  Anybody know what size the Torx bit is I
>need to get it apart, before I go buy one?
>
>More to the point - what are the other collective experiences here?  Should
>I bother reinstalling it if I fix it?  Is it not rugges enough for normal use,
>or am I just too damn hard on my antennae?
>
>Dale - N0XAS




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!grape.epix.net!gmfoster
From: Garry Foster <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Larsen KG-2/70 - anyone else killed one?
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 13:07:58 -0400
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3ul0e5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grape.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <3ul0e5$[e-mail]>

I've used the set of Torax that has 5about 9 bits and folds up like a
pocket knife. They are cheap and give you most sizes. I've had mine for
several years and bought it to change headlamps on  newer Fords. Was on
the road and bought it gor one time use, however it has held up well and
has been used many times for many purposes.

                                                Garry WB0NNO


On 20 Jul 1995, Dale Botkin wrote:

: Well, I killed my Larsen dual-band thru-glass again.  This time it's an
: internal connection broken.  Anybody know what size the Torx bit is I
: need to get it apart, before I go buy one?
:
: More to the point - what are the other collective experiences here?  Should
: I bother reinstalling it if I fix it?  Is it not rugges enough for
normal use, > or am I just too damn hard on my antennae?
:
: Dale - N0XAS
:



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:03 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!convex!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: lightning models
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <3u5hjf$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 04:54:34 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <3u5hjf$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Herbert Rodehaver) writes:
>
> As soon as you find something that can deter a 4 foot jump to my garage
>door from a coax line please let me know. I took a lightning hit just a
>week ago and my grounding and surge surpression no longer exist. I don't
>know of anything that can stop a direct hit please don't stop trying.

The idea isn't to stop a direct hit, the idea is to direct the current
in a controlled and safe manner to Earth. There's nothing magic about
lightning. It has to follow the same electrical laws as any other
current. To stop side flashes, all you need to do is to offer a path
which is enough lower in impedance than the side path that flashover
potentials can't develop.

Since you say your grounding and surge suppression are now gone, it
is safe to assume that they were inadequately sized to handle a normal
surge current. Peak surge currents are typically on the order of 8,000
amperes. Your down conductors have to be sized to handle that with
minimum voltage drop, IE #12 isn't going to hack it. And of course
lightning is RF, so the reactance of the path has to be considered
as well.

Laying out a facility to tolerate direct strikes isn't hard, just
tedious. Every path has to be analyzed, and properly engineered.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Garth Klatt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Locating Dave Ingram (K4TWJ)
Date: 24 Jul 1995 16:23:35 GMT
Organization: via CompuServe Information Service
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3v0he7$sfd$[e-mail]>

Dave writes for CQ and has also produced some books. I need to
get in touch with him re a technical question that has to do with
one of his antenna designs. Does anyone know if he can be reached
on the 'Net?

Regards,
GK.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!news-le0.UU.NET!in1.uu.net!news.micron.net!news
From: thammond <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Math help needed for folded dipole
Date: 23 Jul 1995 05:11:28 GMT
Organization: Micron Internet Services
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3uslm0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs002p25.micron.net

Hi,

I need information about short folded dipoles.  I know (if my theory is correct) that as a dipole is made shorter and shorter, both the center impedance a
OK, so here's what I'd like to do.  I want to build an extremely compact two-element beam to operate at 7.125 MHz. I want to use 3-wire folded dipoles for
Is there anything obvious that I've overlooked or missed?  If you've got some possible answers, I would *really* appreciate it if you would pass along any
Thanks in advance for the help.

Best 73's,

Tommy
KI7KH


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Math help needed for folded dipole
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 95 08:41:22 GMT
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3uslm0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   thammond <[e-mail]> wrote:
>It follows that I should be able to take a folded 2-wire dipole and
>shorten it to the point that the center impedance is about 50 ohms, and I
>get a match to standard coax.

When you shorten the dipole, it is no longer resonant.  Whatever the
impedance at the center, it will be highly reactive and will generate
considerable SWR on the transmission line.  This reactance can be
eliminated by installing loading coils in the legs of the dipole, but then
the efficiency suffers.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!fu-berlin.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Math help needed for folded dipole
Date: 24 Jul 1995 09:50:24 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3uvqd0$[e-mail]>
References: <3uslm0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>Is there anything obvious that I've overlooked or missed?  If you've got some possible answers, I would *really* appreciate it if you would pass along an
>Thanks in advance for the help.

Hi Tommy,

You have simply overlooked the very basic detail, that the impedance
is complex. A two of three wire dipole will stay resistive, whereas
a shortened dipole needs coils to compensate it's reactance.

73, Moritz DL5UH



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Math help needed for folded dipole
Date: 24 Jul 1995 10:13:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3v09qh$[e-mail]>
References: <3uvqd0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Folding the wires will NOT increase efficiency. The result (that still
requires loading coils) is simply a higher feedpoint impedance but the
same losses as if the antenna was a single wire the effective diameter of
the multiwire folded element. Lunch is not free, sorry! ;-)
 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!kev17815
From: [e-mail] (David Schack)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Mods needed for Pro-2006
Date: 23 Jul 1995 18:37:25 GMT
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <3uu4t5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mango.epix.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:13 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Proper ground for antenna?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3uni51$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 09:18:05 GMT
Lines: 68

In article <3uni51$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Drew Loker) writes:
>
>My antenna (the discone antenna I referred to in my previous note) mast is
>stuck into the ground with a stake that goes down about 2 feet. Is it still
>necessary to stick another stake inthe ground and run a copper wire to it to
>ground it? From the instructions, I get the impression that the grounding
>is for mast that are attached to the side of the house. SO do I really need
>to do this since it sticks on top of this stake that is driven into the ground??

A two foot stake isn't much of an Earth terminal. Its impedance to
Earth will still be rather high, and that in turn can leave the base
of the mast elevated in potential by quite a lot during a strike.

Lightning is, of course, RF, so reactances matter. You must minimize
and equalize any reactive paths so that potential differences can't
arise between them, or anything connected between them will see damaging
current flows. If the main path for lightning current flow has substantial
impedance, potentials can become high enough for destructive flashovers
to other conductors in the vicinity, so it's important to offer as low
an impedance path as possible for the lightning currents to follow.
(Typical surge currents are 8,000 amperes, so size conductors accordingly.)

To terminate the lightning surge current, you need a very low impedance
Earth terminal. Since Earth itself is a rather poor conductor, you need
to connect to a large volume of it, the resistors in parallel idea. So
you need longer rods, and several of them, spaced so that their saturation
zones don't overlap (space ordinary ground rods by twice their length to
avoid overlapping the saturation zone), and you need to connect all of
them in a star configuration to the mast base. This will reduce the impedance
of that point, and hence reduce the elevation in potential that can occur
there during a strike.

Now the entire strike potential will express itself from the mast tip
to the mast base. If you tap off of that somewhere up from the base,
you'll see a rather high potential, and that can force damaging currents
through equipment connected to that tap. What this means is that you
shouldn't swing cables off the mast toward the shack at an elevated
point. Rather, you should bring any cables down to the mast base,
clamp them to the base via a suppressor, and then run them into the
shack.

Alternately (or in addition to the above), you'll establish a ground
window at the shack entrance through which *all* cables connecting
to shack equipment must pass. At the ground window, you'll use
appropriate suppressors to clamp the potentials of all the cables
to the same value. No potential difference, no damaging currents
can flow. This ground window should be tied back to the Earth terminal
by a heavy strap conductor. Now the ground window will become elevated
in potential during a strike due to the finite impedance of the strap
to the Earth terminal, but that doesn't matter since all the cables
will rise to the same value and your equipment won't see any potential
differences from the strike currents. This is the best single protective
measure you can take.

It is *absolutely* essential that *all* cables entering the shack
pass through the ground window *first*. That means power and telco
as well as cables coming from the antenna system, or any alternate
Earth terminal connections. If just *one* cable enters by an alternate
means, the protection offered by the ground window is voided. This
is often the greatest critical failure of protection in most hams'
stations. They'll forget *one* cable, and that's all it takes.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!darwin.sura.net!bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us!bcfreenet!w4ovu
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Phegley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Quad Antenna parts
Date: 21 Jul 1995 19:09:32 GMT
Organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Broward
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3uou1c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Quad
I want to build 2,  4 element 6 mtr quads, need spreaders , parts and ideas
need surplus parts.

--

Bruce Phegley  [\]
[e-mail]
w4ovu@n4hhp.#hwdfl.fl.usa.noam (packet)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-le0.UU.NET!in2.uu.net!news.iadfw.net!usenet
From: Gene Mason <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quad Antenna parts
Date: 23 Jul 1995 02:59:22 GMT
Organization: Internet America
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <3usdua$[e-mail]>
References: <3uou1c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal05-12.ppp.iadfw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]

Howdy...I have some quad parts and design info please E-MAIL me if
interested. More later- Gene KZ5V



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:16 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!convex!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3unhhd$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 05:39:00 GMT
Lines: 41

In article <3unhhd$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Drew Loker) writes:
>
>About a month ago, I bought a discone antenna from radio shack. I bought
>thinking that I would eventually get into HAM, but got it specifically
>for the Pro39 scanner I have. Well, in the interim, I have learned that the
>R58 is not very good for long runs. I bought 70'of the R58, 15of which is
>coiled and hung at the antenna so that the antenna can be lifted down by one
>person. THe antenna is 25'. In the RS catalog, is says that the "loss in dB/100ft
>at 100mhz/400MHz is 4.5/10. vs 1.9/4.1 for the R8.
>
>What exactly does this boild down to? ANd now that I am just about to get my
>HAM license and received my dual band FT-51r today, how will it affect me on
>xmitting that it would not really have mattered for just casual scanning?
>Would it really be worth the $48 to replace the cable?

What it means is that using RG-58 on 70 cm will cost you 90% of your
signal power in cable losses. That's significant, especially when you
don't have much power to spare to begin with thanks to the use of a
HT, and the use of a discone which has no gain. You should use good
cable, not Radio Shack RG-8. Something on the order of Belden 9913
would be better. It'll have about half the loss of RG-8 at 70 cm,
and normally sells for around $0.62/ft.

Now even with RG-58 feed, the higher antenna may perform better than
the rubber dummy load that comes with the HT, but you spent several
hundred dollars on a radio, don't scrimp by using cheap coax that will
negate much of its performance.

However, you've got another problem. You're going to be using a
wideband antenna, and the radio has a wideband front end. With
the additional height gain of the outside antenna, you're likely
to have intolerable intermod problems if you don't use a cavity
filter in the line to restrict the signals reaching your radio
to just the amateur bands. Such is life with wideband HTs.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Date: 22 Jul 1995 12:48:46 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <3uqs3e$[e-mail]>
References: <3unhhd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>What it means is that using RG-58 on 70 cm will cost you 90% of your
>signal power in cable losses. That's significant, especially when you
>don't have much power to spare to begin with thanks to the use of a
>HT, and the use of a discone which has no gain. You should use good
>cable, not Radio Shack RG-8. Something on the order of Belden 9913
>would be better. It'll have about half the loss of RG-8 at 70 cm,
>and normally sells for around $0.62/ft.

What does tossing away 90 % of your power really mean?
  On line of sight paths--not much.  I've talked someone 83
  miles away with a stock 1.5 watt Icom 2AT/rubber duck.
  Fact is, losses are really low till you try and go through
  Earth.  Then you get a better signal scattering off the
  troposphere. Page 23-10 of the ARRL antenna book has useful
  graphs on path loss vs. distance.

However, why not make an investment and conduct an experiment.
  Get a short length of RG-58 to simulate the expensive cable
  and see if the improvement is worthwhile.  Chances are, you
  can stand outside with your HT and see if how well it works.

Unfortunately, I think I've found a problem with the coax cable
charts in the ARRL Books--they are based on manufacturer's
specifications.  They are fond of the word nominal.  I think
this means that there is *no* consistency to the specifications,
even from the same manufacturer.

Look at it this way--they make three classes of cables:
  1) Cables that meet mil-specs like RG-213/U.  I don't
     think they get to advertise that their 213/U has lower
     loss than someone elses.
   2) Cables built to a customer's specs that prove to be popular.




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Date: 22 Jul 1995 16:29:20 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3ur910$[e-mail]>
References: <3unhhd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3uqs3e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Sorry about that--learning to use a Netscape...

Zack Lau <[e-mail]> wrote:


>Unfortunately, I think I've found a problem with the coax cable
>charts in the ARRL Books--they are based on manufacturer's
>specifications.  They are fond of the word nominal.  I think
>this means that there is *no* consistency to the specifications,
>even from the same manufacturer.
>
>Look at it this way--they make three classes of cables:
>  1) Cables that meet mil-specs like RG-213/U.  I don't
>     think they get to advertise that their 213/U has lower
>     loss than someone elses.
>   2) Cables built to a customer's specs that prove to be popular.
    3) Cables the marketing people think will be popular.

I wouldn't be surprised category 1 cables consistently did better
than specifications, while category 3 cables barely met the specs,
even from a reputable company. After all, they said "nominal"

Zack [e-mail]

Planning to operate the ARRL UHF
Contest from Mt Equinox FN33 Aug 5/6
222 MHz through 24 GHz.



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:21 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3unhhd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3uqs3e$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 09:50:18 GMT
Lines: 81

In article <3uqs3e$[e-mail]> Zack Lau <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>
>>What it means is that using RG-58 on 70 cm will cost you 90% of your
>>signal power in cable losses. That's significant, especially when you
>>don't have much power to spare to begin with thanks to the use of a
>>HT, and the use of a discone which has no gain. You should use good
>>cable, not Radio Shack RG-8. Something on the order of Belden 9913
>>would be better. It'll have about half the loss of RG-8 at 70 cm,
>>and normally sells for around $0.62/ft.
>
>What does tossing away 90 % of your power really mean?

Very often the difference between a full quieting signal and
one that won't bring up the repeater. When you are near the
threshold, a 3 dB signal strength change can be the difference
between being in the noise floor and having a 20 dB quieting
signal. Using a HT power level in urban clutter means you very
often *will* be near the threshold.

>  On line of sight paths--not much.  I've talked someone 83
>  miles away with a stock 1.5 watt Icom 2AT/rubber duck.

And, on the other hand, I've failed to make contact with stations
less than 6 miles away using a rubber dummy load. It's a rather
exceptional path in urban clutter that will offer a surface to
surface LOS of 83 miles. That's why high antennas help so much,
if the signal losses of obtaining that height don't overcome the
advantage of increased LOS the height offers.

For example, assuming an antenna with 8.5 db of gain over a rubber
dummy load, 10 dB of cable loss equates to using an antenna with
1.5 dB *loss* compared to the rubber ducky. Offsetting that is the
height gain obtained, which may be minor or major depending on
whether it brings the path into LOS. Now if we use a cable with
2 dB loss instead, we now have an antenna with 6.5 dB of gain
over the rubber ducky, *and* any height gain we may have obtained.
Clearly a win even if the extra height doesn't bring the path
into LOS.

>Unfortunately, I think I've found a problem with the coax cable
>charts in the ARRL Books--they are based on manufacturer's
>specifications.  They are fond of the word nominal.  I think
>this means that there is *no* consistency to the specifications,
>even from the same manufacturer.
>
>Look at it this way--they make three classes of cables:
>  1) Cables that meet mil-specs like RG-213/U.  I don't
>     think they get to advertise that their 213/U has lower
>     loss than someone elses.
>   2) Cables built to a customer's specs that prove to be popular.


Where's number 3?

I'll suggest it is cables made to a manufacturer's internal specs. Now
a *reputable* manufacturer will adhere rather closely to his published
specification, IE the nominal value, but shlock manufacturers just
make wire, and individual pieces of cable can vary widely from their
nominal published specification. If they don't even publish a proper
specification, as is true with some suppliers of RG-8 and RG-58 *type*
cable (they're no longer milspec), then you don't know what you're getting,
or whether the next piece you buy will even vaguely resemble the first.
Thus it is important to get your cables from a reputable manufacturer,
such as Belden or Times Microwave, and not just buy cables based on
generic charts in amateur publications.

For example, some manufacturers produce cables in the RG-58 form
factor that offer lower losses than some other manufacturers'
cables in the RG-8 form factor. So it's worthwhile to read those
manufacturers' published specifications carefully, and to learn
which manufacturers have their published specifications written
by the engineering departments, and which have them written by
their advertising departments.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Date: 23 Jul 1995 16:21:53 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <3utsv1$[e-mail]>
References: <3unhhd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3uqs3e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>Very often the difference between a full quieting signal and
>one that won't bring up the repeater. When you are near the
>threshold, a 3 dB signal strength change can be the difference
>between being in the noise floor and having a 20 dB quieting
>signal. Using a HT power level in urban clutter means you very
>often *will* be near the threshold.

We actually measure this in the ARRL lab.  I think squelch
sensitivity can sometimes be used to conservatively estimate
the noise floor.

Kenwood TM-255A .07 uV/ .14 uV for 12 dB SINAD. Thus,
the ratio is in excess of 6 dB for this radio.

Alinco DJ-582T in excess of 4.8 dB for 12 dB SINAD

Standard C568A in excess of 7.3 dB for 12 dB SINAD

True, the Icom and Yaesu radios doen't show such high
ratios, but this is due to less sensitive squelch circuits,
in my opinion.

The reason the threshold isn't that significant is that
we are talking about narrow band FM.  It is much more
apparent with wideband signals, such as that used with
10 GHz Gunnplexers.

Yes, I agree that signals aren't very good in urban
clutter--you can lose 20 or 30 dB per doubling of distance,
as opposed to a mere 6 dB in the free space case.  But,
this is my point.  You may be losing so much signal so
fast that adding another 10 dB may have a negligible
effect on coverage as measured by the number of people
you can talk to.  So you go from 6 miles to 9 miles,
is the expense justified?  I'd argue that for some
people, this isn't quite the same as going from 60 miles
to 90 miles. Or better yet, 200 miles to 300 miles....

This is why it makes sense for people running SSB/CW
with big beams and power to make further improvements,
such as better cables and mast mounted preamps. Suppose
I'm in Northern VT and can just cover Southern CT.
Improvements that allow me to cover NYC and Philadelphia
might well be justified.  On the other hand, I might not
bother if it just got me into the next town, particularly
if the amateur there wasn't interested in VHF.


Zack [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:25 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3unhhd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3uqs3e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3utsv1$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 16:01:37 GMT
Lines: 53

In article <3utsv1$[e-mail]> Zack Lau <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>Yes, I agree that signals aren't very good in urban
>clutter--you can lose 20 or 30 dB per doubling of distance,
>as opposed to a mere 6 dB in the free space case.  But,
>this is my point.  You may be losing so much signal so
>fast that adding another 10 dB may have a negligible
>effect on coverage as measured by the number of people
>you can talk to.  So you go from 6 miles to 9 miles,
>is the expense justified?  I'd argue that for some
>people, this isn't quite the same as going from 60 miles
>to 90 miles. Or better yet, 200 miles to 300 miles....
>
>This is why it makes sense for people running SSB/CW
>with big beams and power to make further improvements,
>such as better cables and mast mounted preamps. Suppose
>I'm in Northern VT and can just cover Southern CT.
>Improvements that allow me to cover NYC and Philadelphia
>might well be justified.  On the other hand, I might not
>bother if it just got me into the next town, particularly
>if the amateur there wasn't interested in VHF.

Well, you're coming from a Dxer perspective. For most
HT users, the criteria is, can I hit the repeater I
want to use full quieting? That repeater may be 8.5
miles away, so increasing range in urban clutter from
6 to 9 miles is just what you need. Sure, there will
be cases where the cable loss won't matter, IE you've
already got 40 dB of excess signal to the repeater.
And there'll be cases where an extra 10 dB just won't
be enough. But there's a middle ground where it does
make the difference often enough that I think using
cheap cable is poor economy.

If you spend hundreds of dollars on a radio and antenna,
it seems foolish to try to save a few dollars on cable to
connect them. Look at it this way, 10 dB is the difference
between 100 watts and a kilowatt. People spend serious
money on kilowatt amplifiers, wouldn't it be better to
just use better cable? (I know, those with the VHF kilowatts
*also* use good cable, but the point still remains that
reducing loss is often a better economy than buying more
brute power.)

I can see "good enough" coming back to bite me on this one
already. :-)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:26 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!crash!nctamsep!pnet16!n6315
From: [e-mail] (Et2 Sheff)
Subject: Re: radome material
Organization: People-Net [pnet16], NCTAMS EASTPAC
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 02:16:11 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Superuser)
Lines: 18

You didn't tell us about the size, shape, and portability of your antenna.

Generally the fibreglass makes the better radomes for the cost, but I'm
not sure if that's still the case with the advances being made in composite
materials.

73,
Rich
(Navy EMC Tech)

****************************************************************************
*Unless otherwise stated, expressed view are my own.  They may not be the  *
*opinions of my superiors, the U.S. Navy, the DoD, nor the U.S. government.*
*                                                                          *
*Rich Sheff - KD6HWF\KH6    | [e-mail] (forwarded)        *
*ex- VK6JCA, ex- HL9RMT     | [e-mail]                       *
****************************************************************************



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Recomendation for an Antenna tuner needed
Date: 23 Jul 1995 16:50:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3uucnj$[e-mail]>
References: <3uuagg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Several years ago, I bit the bullet and purchased the MFJ-989C  3KW tuner,
it has a built-in 4:1 balun and built-in dummy load.

I have never regretted going the few extra dollars for this tuner as it is
high-quality, and because it is rated at 3KW, it has low insertion loss.

I use it with a Yaesu FT-70/G "manpack" radio that runs only 10 watts, and
I also use it with a 100 watt military 100 watt radio made by Sunair
Electronics.

Patricia Gibbons <[e-mail]>


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Recomendation for an Antenna tuner needed !
Date: 23 Jul 1995 16:13:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3uuagg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

I will be getting either a Kenwood TS-450 or a Yaesu FT-840 in a couple of
months.  I needed some recomendations for an antenna tuner.  I do NOT want
an automatic tuner(they seem to be too limited in what they can do).  Any
recomendations ?  I would be willing to spend a couple of hundred dollars.
  Please e-mail me !
Thanks !


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Recomendation for an Antenna tuner needed !
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 95 01:16:12 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3uuagg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <3uuagg$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (BUDDY10) wrote:
>I do NOT want an automatic tuner(they seem to be too limited in what they
>can do).

If you're looking for a tuner capable of matching random, non-resonant
antennas fed with ladder line, none of the commercial tuners I am aware of
will do a reliably good job.  The reason is that the balun should not feed
the transmission line directly under these conditions.

My suggestion is to take Wes' advice and improve your library.  Then, look
for the "Balanced QRP Tuner" article by Zack Lau.  Build a tuner using this
design, but substituting higher-power components where required.  The
result will be a truly versatile piece of equipment, unequaled by almost
anything you can buy.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Recomendation for an Antenna tuner needed !
Date: 24 Jul 1995 00:26:27 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3uupbj$[e-mail]>
References: <3uuagg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite45.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (BUDDY10) wrote:
>I will be getting either a Kenwood TS-450 or a Yaesu FT-840 in a couple of
>months.  I needed some recomendations for an antenna tuner.  I do NOT want
>an automatic tuner(they seem to be too limited in what they can do).  Any
>recomendations ?  I would be willing to spend a couple of hundred dollars.
>  Please e-mail me !
>Thanks !


My recommendation...

Step 1.  Take $30 of the $200 and buy a 1995 ARRL Handbook.

Step 2.  Check out the circuits in Chapters 19 and 22.

Step 1a. Take $30 out of the $200 and buy a 17th Edition of the ARRL Antenna Book.

Step 2a. Check out the circuits in Ch. 25.

You now have the start of an excellent library and I hope, the desire to build your own tuner.

Either way, download the latest version of the "TL" program from the ARRL BBS. THe one shipped
with the antenna book is, shall we say, outdated.

Remember, you can always ask for further help right here.

Good luck.

Wes, N7WS



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!news-le0.UU.NET!in1.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for AL tubing
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 18:24:55 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

Two convenient sources exist for aluminum and steel tubing:
 - Texas Towers  (see their ads in the ham mags)
 - The Dillsburg Aeroplane Works   This supplier is owned by a ham
(Charles T Vogelsong) and he supplies an incredibly broad variety of
aluminum and specialty steel tubing (e.g. chrome-moly) to the ham radio,
airplane, and automobile racing communities.  The increase in the United
Parcel Service weight and shipping dimension limits have made Dillsburg
Aeroplane Works a very attractive source for much of the USA.  Call for
their catalog:  717-432-4589     His prices are right!
73!
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Garth Klatt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Stacked TV antennas
Date: 24 Jul 1995 04:27:37 GMT
Organization: via CompuServe Information Service
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3uv7fp$j30$[e-mail]>
References: <3svgr3$[e-mail]>

The simple answer is "Yes". They can be stacked. The challenge is
how to extract maximum benefit from the arrangement. Ideally,
each Yagi should be spaced a distance from it's "partner" by the
diameter of the antenna's effective aperture. Beyond that you
start to get numerous side-lobes forming in the pattern and, less
than that, the gain is less than double that of a single antenna.

Combining the antenna outputs is another issue. You want a final
impedance of 50 Ohms unblanced (I expect). For 2 antennas this is
not difficult to achieve but will take a little research into
methods. I suggest ....

The ARRL Handbook and Antenna Book ... which contain much useful
information on this subject.

Regards,
GK.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: STEVE GOT HIS WENCH
Date: 22 Jul 1995 01:17:24 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3upjj4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3umstp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite30.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Mike Keitz) wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
>

[snip]
>>Worm gears are self breaking. The ratio is 40 to 1. Kinda slow
>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Hopefully this won't be true.  This is more funny than the original 'wench'
>slip-up.
                             ^^^^^^^^^^

I hope that this is even funnier;-)


Wes, N7WS



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.cerf.net!ni1.ni.net!xband.ni.net!user
From: [e-mail] (J. L. Blanton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWL antenna lightning protection
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 23:43:04 -0800
Organization: Network Intensive
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xband.ni.net

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
> >I just got my SW monitor back from the shop were they put in a new front
> >end.  It appears that static build up was the cause of the damage and not
> >a near strike.  I have an idea that I thought I would throw out to see if
> >others have done this.  I want to place two large power diode across the
> >antenna long wire and the ground circuit ...

The "large power diodes" may have enough capacitance to shunt a
significant portion of your signals to ground.  Small RF or switching
diodes might be a better choice.

73,

Lee, WA8YBT/6


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!vanbc.wimsey.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Peter Georgeu)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWL antenna lightning protection
Date: 23 Jul 1995 17:18:31 -0700
Organization: Online at Wimsey Information Services Inc - Vancouver, Canada
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <3uuosn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vanbc.wimsey.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
>>I just got my SW monitor back from the shop were they put in a new front
>>end.  It appears that static build up was the cause of the damage and not
>>a near strike.  I have an idea that I thought I would throw out to see if
>>others have done this.  I want to place two large power diode across the
>>antenna long wire and the ground circuit like below....
>>
>>
>>The idea being this would clamp any AC voltage above .7 volts and allow
>>the antenna system to discharge.  The idea is to prevent damage for the case
>>when it's not obvious that storms are in the area.  If there is a lightning
>>producing storm I would and do disconnect the antenna mechanically.
>>
>>Any thoughts?
>
>This can work fine, *but* if there are any strong signals present,
>the diodes will work as a mixer, and you'll get all sorts of signals
>popping up in places they don't belong. This is particularly bad if
>a strong AM station is nearby.
>


I would suggest that you look at the "Transitrap" RF Protector which was
installed after-market by Gilfer with respect to the JRC NRD 515. The 515
uses 4 arrester diodes for RF (static) protection and these caused in some
instances cross modulation in high signal areas.

Gilfer disabled the RF protective diodes and included the Transitrap
as protection. The Transitrap utilises a replaceable gas cartridge and in
tests I heard it worked very well, not having the problem of
cross-modulation and succeeding in discharging a number of static surges
brought about by inductive current from nearby lightning strips. The
Transitrap also discharge antenna static commonly built up during local
snowstorms and sandstorms.

I am getting this information all from the 1981 review of the 515 done in
the World Radio TV Handbook. I would contact Gilfer and find out who are
the manufacturers of this unit and if they are still available.

Peter




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:37 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!convex!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 05:24:18 GMT
Lines: 27

In article <3um88e$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Newkirk) writes:
>[e-mail] (Dan Hughes) wrote:
>
>>I have heard conflicting opinions on tuning a 2-meter mobile antenna with
>>an SWR meter that was sold as a CB SWR.  Will it or will it not do the
>>job?  Thanks!     ---Dan
>
>No. It will not usefully or accurately indicate forward and reflected
>power, even relatively, because its *directional coupler*, an internal
>network that can tell the difference between energy going to the
>antenna and energy coming from the antenna, will not have sufficient
>*directivity* at 144 MHz.

This isn't always true. Some of the reflectometers sold for CB
use are usable as relative indicators at 2 meters. It depends
on the design used whether there will be enough directivity at
2 meters to be useful. It's unlikely that an inexpensive CB
reflectometer will be useful for absolute measurements, but
that's often not required.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 22 Jul 1995 16:40:43 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>This isn't always true. Some of the reflectometers sold for CB
>use are usable as relative indicators at 2 meters. It depends
>on the design used whether there will be enough directivity at
>2 meters to be useful. It's unlikely that an inexpensive CB
>reflectometer will be useful for absolute measurements, but
>that's often not required.
>

I don't understand this.  What relative measurement is being
made?  Either you can measure SWR or you can't.

If you try to use an SWR meter with poor directivity and tune
it for a minimum reading, you will be mismatching your system,
not matching it.  I suppose you could try tuning it for the
same reading as with your standard load, but since you don't
know the phase, you probably won't be doing anything useful.

I wouldn't bother unless the SWR meter has at least 20 dB of
directivity--reverse the wattmeter while using a known good
load and find that the reflected power is at least 20 dB
down.(30/0.3 watts, for instance).

Zack [e-mail]

I'll be at the Central States VHF Conference
in Colorado Springs to meet fellow VHF/UHF types...
July 28-29




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 19:36:02 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3urkel$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>, Zack Lau <[e-mail]> wrote:
>If you try to use an SWR meter with poor directivity and tune
>it for a minimum reading, you will be mismatching your system,
>not matching it.

I have always assumed that poor directivity causes the null to be
incomplete, but that it doesn't cause the impedance at which the null
occurs to shift.  Have I misundertstood what you meant by the previous
statement?  If my assumption is incorrect, could you explain in a little
more detail why the null point shifts?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 22 Jul 1995 23:00:23 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <3urvu7$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite39.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>In article <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>, Zack Lau <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>If you try to use an SWR meter with poor directivity and tune
>>it for a minimum reading, you will be mismatching your system,
>>not matching it.
>
>I have always assumed that poor directivity causes the null to be
>incomplete, but that it doesn't cause the impedance at which the null
>occurs to shift.  Have I misundertstood what you meant by the previous
>statement?  If my assumption is incorrect, could you explain in a little
>more detail why the null point shifts?
>


Jack, Zack, et. al.

I posted on the accuracy of SWR measurements some time ago and got beat up some for trying to
bring lab accuracy considerations to ham radio.  Here we go again...

Assume that the bridge directivity is 20 dB.  This means that with a perfect load, the
detector (what ever it is) measures a signal (leakage or directivity vector) component that is
20 dB below the applied (incident) power. Because, the detector is sensitive to magnitude
only, it doesn't know the signal phase.

Now we connect a non-ideal load to the bridge output. Assume the VSWR is 1.22.  The return
loss of this load is 20 dB, i.e. the reflected component is 20 dB below the incident. The
phase of this reflected component is also unknown.

Now let's examine what happens at the detector.  If the leakage and the reflected signal are
exactly in phase, the detector measures a signal TWICE the correct amplitude. The error is 6
dB, making the apparent return loss (RL) equal 20 - 6 or 14 dB.  This equals a VSWR of ~1.5.

If the leakage component and the reflected component are exactly out of phase, there is total
cancellation and the apparent return loss is infinite, for a VSWR of 1.00. Note that the
RL uncertainty of the measurement of a 1.22 VSWR with a bridge directivity of 20 dB, extends
from +6 to -infinity!  The results of the measurement are completely uncertain. A perfect load
measures 1.22 and a 1.22 can measure a perfect 1.00.

At in-between phase conditions, the error is less, but still uncertain. Under laboratory
conditions, the directivity error vector can be determined and removed from the measurement.
These techniques usually use components unavailable to the average ham such as precision
air-lines, offset terminations, and frequency swept measurements, etc.

Back to the original question, will the null indicate the actual point of minimum SWR.
Clearly, it does not. If an adjustment to the load (antenna) is made which makes it perfect,
the SWR reads 1.22.  If the adjustment makes the SWR = 1.22 at the right phase, the null is
perfect; an apparent 1:1.   This is backwards!  If Joe ham measures at several frequencies
across the band, the reflection coefficient phase varies due to the changing phase shift
through the transmission line as well as the phase change in the antenna. He can get pretty
confused.

He can get more confused if he puts the SWR meter somewhere else in the line. He gets a
different answer!  Conventional (ham) wisdom says that the SWR reading changes because there
is current on the outside of the line.  I have never understood the rational of this answer.
How does this current on the outside of the line get into that shielded box and upset the
measurement going on inside?  Somebody help me here.

As in many electrical measurements, it is assumed that if the test equipment accuracy is ten
times better that what is being measured, the error is insignificant.  Following this
guideline, if you want to accurately measure a 20 dB return loss (1.22 VSWR) the directivity
should be >30 dB.  If you want to accurately measure a VSWR of 1.1 (RL=26.5 dB) you need a 36
dB bridge.  This is pushing it for most amateur and much commercial construction. It is
certainly out of the question for a CB meter working at two meters.

73, Wes, N7WS



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!mango.epix.net!gmfoster
From: Garry Foster <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 20:48:42 -0400
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mango.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>



On 22 Jul 1995, Zack Lau wrote:
: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
:
: >This isn't always true. Some of the reflectometers sold for CB
: >use are usable as relative indicators at 2 meters. It depends
: >on the design used whether there will be enough directivity at
: >2 meters to be useful. It's unlikely that an inexpensive CB
: >reflectometer will be useful for absolute measurements, but
: >that's often not required.
: >
:
: I don't understand this.  What relative measurement is being
: made?  Either you can measure SWR or you can't.
>
: If you try to use an SWR meter with poor directivity and tune
: it for a minimum reading, you will be mismatching your system,
: not matching it.  I suppose you could try tuning it for the

Actually tunning for minimun usually works very well in real world
conditions. And you need to show me that you can get a lower indicated
reflected than a good load will give you. And yes I am refering to using
a coupler with poor directivity. If you have any directivity at all then
the forward will always be rising faster than the reflected. Therefore
minimum will still be minimum. Your method of using a load is a good
simple way to determine directivity. However as what is being refered to
here are the CB type swr indicators usually choising the other coupler is
a better choice. Almost all these devices are an attempt at a dual
directional coupler.You could always reverse the indicator to see if the
directivity of both couplers track. As far as needing to know the SWR i
must ask "why".. More errors probably come from the sensitivity changing
and running into poor parts of the diodes than from the directivity. If
you can reduce the power many of the CB or HF type indicators work quit
well at 2 meters. Even with a good coupler such as a narda and a HP diode
detector all you really need to do is tune the ant for minimun detected.
I don't really care if its 1.2:1 or 1.6:1.



: same reading as with your standard load, but since you don't
: know the phase, you probably won't be doing anything useful.
>:
:I wouldn't bother unless the SWR meter has at least 20 dB of
; directivity--reverse the wattmeter while using a known good
: load and find that the reflected power is at least 20 dB
: down.(30/0.3 watts, for instance).

so with a 50 ohm load the indicated swr would be 1.22222

rho =SQR(power ratio)

SWR=(1+rho)/(1-rho)

rho=SQR(.01)=>.1

Swr=(1+.1)/(1-.1)=1.1/.9=1.2222

Or am I missing something here...

Actually I've found that most of them I have checked have been nearly
this good. However most of them need to be used at less than than 30
watts on two meters, much less. I usually used the low power of a HT. 100 mw
or so was plenty to tune an antenna.

                                                Garry WB0NNO

:
: Zack [e-mail]
:
: I'll be at the Central States VHF Conference
: in Colorado Springs to meet fellow VHF/UHF types...
: July 28-29
:
:
:
:


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 01:47:16 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3us9n4$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>In article <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>, Zack Lau <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>If you try to use an SWR meter with poor directivity and tune
>>it for a minimum reading, you will be mismatching your system,
>>not matching it.
>
>I have always assumed that poor directivity causes the null to be
>incomplete, but that it doesn't cause the impedance at which the null
>occurs to shift.  Have I misundertstood what you meant by the previous
>statement?  If my assumption is incorrect, could you explain in a little
>more detail why the null point shifts?

How about this simple example.  You have a bridge and for
simplicity, the only thing wrong is the reference--its 50+j40 ohms.
Naturally, when you hook up a 50 ohm load you don't get a null.
But, you can certainly hook up a transmatch and get a null.
Problem is, when you get a null your SWR is 2.2:1 on that 50 ohm
cable.

Suppose you tried adjusting that transmatch to get the same reading
as your 50 ohm dummy load.  Unfortunately, there are many combinations
of impedances that will get you that same reading, just like there
are many impedances that will give you a 2:1 SWR.

Zack [e-mail]
11 grids and 8 states on 10 GHz




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 95 02:22:40 GMT
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <[e-mail]>,
   Garry Foster <[e-mail]> wrote:
>If you can reduce the power many of the CB or HF type indicators work quit
>well at 2 meters.

Garry, most circuits I have seen for SWR meters include a resistor or R/C
network to calibrate the device to 50 ohms.  Isn't there a concern that the
effects of stray capacitance and component characteristics may be very
different at 2 meters?  Have you checked the HF meters against a known
accurate instrument, just to be sure the null still occurs at 50 ohms?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 95 02:11:38 GMT
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <3urvu7$[e-mail]>,
   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I posted on the accuracy of SWR measurements some time ago and got beat up
>some for trying to bring lab accuracy considerations to ham radio.  Here
>we go again...

Wes, thank you very much for this excellent post.  Zack has also replied
via e-mail with an example that agrees with your explanation.

BTW, I have used a dual-meter CB-type SWR bridge for many years to adjust
my tuner.  Internal circuitry uses "Monimatch" style coupling.  Now I have
to think about the actual directivity of this instrument, and am also
wondering if certain problems I've had in the past are the result of an
inaccurate null.  Sheesh, you guys have just ruined my day.  <g>

Anyone know what the directivity of slug-type Bird wattmeters is, or how to
measure it?  Can it be checked by simply connecting it to a dummy load
and measuring forward VS reflected voltage pickup?  I acquired one of these
a few years ago, but I tend to use it only for power measurements because
the dual-meter bridge is so convenient for quick tuneup.

Incidentally, I didn't see the previous posts on this subject, but I for
one am glad to have the benefit of your (and Zack's) expertise.  Given some
time to mull it all over, I might even post a few followup questions.  <g>

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:52 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 10:42:19 GMT
Lines: 91

In article <3urvu7$[e-mail]> Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>>In article <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>, Zack Lau <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>If you try to use an SWR meter with poor directivity and tune
>>>it for a minimum reading, you will be mismatching your system,
>>>not matching it.
>>
>>I have always assumed that poor directivity causes the null to be
>>incomplete, but that it doesn't cause the impedance at which the null
>>occurs to shift.  Have I misundertstood what you meant by the previous
>>statement?  If my assumption is incorrect, could you explain in a little
>>more detail why the null point shifts?
>>
>Jack, Zack, et. al.
>
>I posted on the accuracy of SWR measurements some time ago and got beat up some for trying to
>bring lab accuracy considerations to ham radio.  Here we go again...

Yep. :-)

>Assume that the bridge directivity is 20 dB.  This means that with a perfect load, the
>detector (what ever it is) measures a signal (leakage or directivity vector) component that is
>20 dB below the applied (incident) power. Because, the detector is sensitive to magnitude
>only, it doesn't know the signal phase.
>
>Now we connect a non-ideal load to the bridge output. Assume the VSWR is 1.22.  The return
>loss of this load is 20 dB, i.e. the reflected component is 20 dB below the incident. The
>phase of this reflected component is also unknown.
>
>Now let's examine what happens at the detector.  If the leakage and the reflected signal are
>exactly in phase, the detector measures a signal TWICE the correct amplitude. The error is 6
>dB, making the apparent return loss (RL) equal 20 - 6 or 14 dB.  This equals a VSWR of ~1.5.
>
>If the leakage component and the reflected component are exactly out of phase, there is total
>cancellation and the apparent return loss is infinite, for a VSWR of 1.00. Note that the
>RL uncertainty of the measurement of a 1.22 VSWR with a bridge directivity of 20 dB, extends
>from +6 to -infinity!  The results of the measurement are completely uncertain

Well, not *completely* uncertain. If we see a 1.22:1 reading on the meter,
we know that the actual VSWR is somewhere between 1.5:1 and 1.0:1, which
is often *good enough* for our purposes, which usually are to keep the
VSWR below the 2:1 point where the protection circuitry of the rig starts
to foldback power. A 2:1 VSWR is a 9.54 dB return loss, a truly horrible
figure that most reflectometers sold to CBers easily exceed at VHF.


>Back to the original question, will the null indicate the actual point of minimum SWR.
>Clearly, it does not. If an adjustment to the load (antenna) is made which makes it perfect,
>the SWR reads 1.22.  If the adjustment makes the SWR = 1.22 at the right phase, the null is
>perfect; an apparent 1:1.   This is backwards!  If Joe ham measures at several frequencies
>across the band, the reflection coefficient phase varies due to the changing phase shift
>through the transmission line as well as the phase change in the antenna. He can get pretty
>confused.

This is true. And is the source of the idea to put an additional 1/2-wave
(electrical) of cable in the line and retake the measurements. That flips
the sense of the phase induced error and allows you to calculate a corrected
value. The actual resonance dip will be approximately halfway between the
dips in the VSWR curves found with and without the additional halfwave cable.
Since those responses are typically fairly broad, a bit of slop can be
tolerated, and often rerunning the curves with the extra 1/2-wave doesn't
make a significant difference for antenna trimming purposes.

>As in many electrical measurements, it is assumed that if the test equipment accuracy is ten
>times better that what is being measured, the error is insignificant.  Following this
>guideline, if you want to accurately measure a 20 dB return loss (1.22 VSWR) the directivity
>should be >30 dB.  If you want to accurately measure a VSWR of 1.1 (RL=26.5 dB) you need a 36
>dB bridge.  This is pushing it for most amateur and much commercial construction. It is
>certainly out of the question for a CB meter working at two meters.

That's *still* an unwarranted assumption. Some of the reflectometers
sold to CBers are actually still quite good enough at VHF. The Philmore
units, for example, show little error (<10%) when compared to using a
Bird and a chart at 2 meters, and they're about 10x cheaper. That same
micromatch design is used from HF to VHF in comercial installations all
over the world where its performance is judged "good enough". Just because
the instruments are sold to CBers doesn't *necessarily* mean that they're
worthless junk for other purposes.

This was my main point in my previous post. Apparently I didn't make
it strongly enough. Consider for example that the meter sold to a
CBer might say "Bird 43" on the front. Would you still condemn it
for use at 144 MHz? Just because CBers buy it, doesn't mean the
instrument is only useful at 27 MHz.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 15:03:11 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 93
Message-ID: <3utobf$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jack asked, why the null point shifts?
  With a monimatch circuit, there is specific impedance that
  will reflect power in just the right way to cancel the
  leakage reflected power--resulting in a nearly perfect null.



[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:




>>>
>>Jack, Zack, et. al.
>>
>>I posted on the accuracy of SWR measurements some time ago and got beat up some for trying to
>>bring lab accuracy considerations to ham radio.  Here we go again...
>
>Yep. :-)
>
>>Assume that the bridge directivity is 20 dB.  This means that with a perfect load, the
>>detector (what ever it is) measures a signal (leakage or directivity vector) component that is
>>20 dB below the applied (incident) power. Because, the detector is sensitive to magnitude
>>only, it doesn't know the signal phase.
>>
>>Now we connect a non-ideal load to the bridge output. Assume the VSWR is 1.22.  The return
>>loss of this load is 20 dB, i.e. the reflected component is 20 dB below the incident. The
>>phase of this reflected component is also unknown.
>>
>>Now let's examine what happens at the detector.  If the leakage and the reflected signal are
>>exactly in phase, the detector measures a signal TWICE the correct amplitude. The error is 6
>>dB, making the apparent return loss (RL) equal 20 - 6 or 14 dB.  This equals a VSWR of ~1.5.
>>
>>If the leakage component and the reflected component are exactly out of phase, there is total
>>cancellation and the apparent return loss is infinite, for a VSWR of 1.00. Note that the
>>RL uncertainty of the measurement of a 1.22 VSWR with a bridge directivity of 20 dB, extends
>>from +6 to -infinity!  The results of the measurement are completely uncertain
>
>Well, not *completely* uncertain. If we see a 1.22:1 reading on the meter,
>we know that the actual VSWR is somewhere between 1.5:1 and 1.0:1, which
>is often *good enough* for our purposes, which usually are to keep the
>VSWR below the 2:1 point where the protection circuitry of the rig starts
>to foldback power. A 2:1 VSWR is a 9.54 dB return loss, a truly horrible
>figure that most reflectometers sold to CBers easily exceed at VHF.
>
>
>>Back to the original question, will the null indicate the actual point of minimum SWR.
>>Clearly, it does not. If an adjustment to the load (antenna) is made which makes it perfect,
>>the SWR reads 1.22.  If the adjustment makes the SWR = 1.22 at the right phase, the null is
>>perfect; an apparent 1:1.   This is backwards!  If Joe ham measures at several frequencies
>>across the band, the reflection coefficient phase varies due to the changing phase shift
>>through the transmission line as well as the phase change in the antenna. He can get pretty
>>confused.
>
>This is true. And is the source of the idea to put an additional 1/2-wave
>(electrical) of cable in the line and retake the measurements. That flips
>the sense of the phase induced error and allows you to calculate a corrected
>value. The actual resonance dip will be approximately halfway between the
>dips in the VSWR curves found with and without the additional halfwave cable.
>Since those responses are typically fairly broad, a bit of slop can be
>tolerated, and often rerunning the curves with the extra 1/2-wave doesn't
>make a significant difference for antenna trimming purposes.
>
>>As in many electrical measurements, it is assumed that if the test equipment accuracy is ten
>>times better that what is being measured, the error is insignificant.  Following this
>>guideline, if you want to accurately measure a 20 dB return loss (1.22 VSWR) the directivity
>>should be >30 dB.  If you want to accurately measure a VSWR of 1.1 (RL=26.5 dB) you need a 36
>>dB bridge.  This is pushing it for most amateur and much commercial construction. It is
>>certainly out of the question for a CB meter working at two meters.
>
>That's *still* an unwarranted assumption. Some of the reflectometers
>sold to CBers are actually still quite good enough at VHF. The Philmore
>units, for example, show little error (<10%) when compared to using a
>Bird and a chart at 2 meters, and they're about 10x cheaper. That same
>micromatch design is used from HF to VHF in comercial installations all
>over the world where its performance is judged "good enough". Just because
>the instruments are sold to CBers doesn't *necessarily* mean that they're
>worthless junk for other purposes.
>
>This was my main point in my previous post. Apparently I didn't make
>it strongly enough. Consider for example that the meter sold to a
>CBer might say "Bird 43" on the front. Would you still condemn it
>for use at 144 MHz? Just because CBers buy it, doesn't mean the
>instrument is only useful at 27 MHz.
>
>Gary
>--
>Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
>Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
>534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
>Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:06:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 15:03:12 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 93
Message-ID: <3utobg$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jack asked, why the null point shifts?
  With a monimatch circuit, there is specific impedance that
  will reflect power in just the right way to cancel the
  leakage reflected power--resulting in a nearly perfect null.



[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:




>>>
>>Jack, Zack, et. al.
>>
>>I posted on the accuracy of SWR measurements some time ago and got beat up some for trying to
>>bring lab accuracy considerations to ham radio.  Here we go again...
>
>Yep. :-)
>
>>Assume that the bridge directivity is 20 dB.  This means that with a perfect load, the
>>detector (what ever it is) measures a signal (leakage or directivity vector) component that is
>>20 dB below the applied (incident) power. Because, the detector is sensitive to magnitude
>>only, it doesn't know the signal phase.
>>
>>Now we connect a non-ideal load to the bridge output. Assume the VSWR is 1.22.  The return
>>loss of this load is 20 dB, i.e. the reflected component is 20 dB below the incident. The
>>phase of this reflected component is also unknown.
>>
>>Now let's examine what happens at the detector.  If the leakage and the reflected signal are
>>exactly in phase, the detector measures a signal TWICE the correct amplitude. The error is 6
>>dB, making the apparent return loss (RL) equal 20 - 6 or 14 dB.  This equals a VSWR of ~1.5.
>>
>>If the leakage component and the reflected component are exactly out of phase, there is total
>>cancellation and the apparent return loss is infinite, for a VSWR of 1.00. Note that the
>>RL uncertainty of the measurement of a 1.22 VSWR with a bridge directivity of 20 dB, extends
>>from +6 to -infinity!  The results of the measurement are completely uncertain
>
>Well, not *completely* uncertain. If we see a 1.22:1 reading on the meter,
>we know that the actual VSWR is somewhere between 1.5:1 and 1.0:1, which
>is often *good enough* for our purposes, which usually are to keep the
>VSWR below the 2:1 point where the protection circuitry of the rig starts
>to foldback power. A 2:1 VSWR is a 9.54 dB return loss, a truly horrible
>figure that most reflectometers sold to CBers easily exceed at VHF.
>
>
>>Back to the original question, will the null indicate the actual point of minimum SWR.
>>Clearly, it does not. If an adjustment to the load (antenna) is made which makes it perfect,
>>the SWR reads 1.22.  If the adjustment makes the SWR = 1.22 at the right phase, the null is
>>perfect; an apparent 1:1.   This is backwards!  If Joe ham measures at several frequencies
>>across the band, the reflection coefficient phase varies due to the changing phase shift
>>through the transmission line as well as the phase change in the antenna. He can get pretty
>>confused.
>
>This is true. And is the source of the idea to put an additional 1/2-wave
>(electrical) of cable in the line and retake the measurements. That flips
>the sense of the phase induced error and allows you to calculate a corrected
>value. The actual resonance dip will be approximately halfway between the
>dips in the VSWR curves found with and without the additional halfwave cable.
>Since those responses are typically fairly broad, a bit of slop can be
>tolerated, and often rerunning the curves with the extra 1/2-wave doesn't
>make a significant difference for antenna trimming purposes.
>
>>As in many electrical measurements, it is assumed that if the test equipment accuracy is ten
>>times better that what is being measured, the error is insignificant.  Following this
>>guideline, if you want to accurately measure a 20 dB return loss (1.22 VSWR) the directivity
>>should be >30 dB.  If you want to accurately measure a VSWR of 1.1 (RL=26.5 dB) you need a 36
>>dB bridge.  This is pushing it for most amateur and much commercial construction. It is
>>certainly out of the question for a CB meter working at two meters.
>
>That's *still* an unwarranted assumption. Some of the reflectometers
>sold to CBers are actually still quite good enough at VHF. The Philmore
>units, for example, show little error (<10%) when compared to using a
>Bird and a chart at 2 meters, and they're about 10x cheaper. That same
>micromatch design is used from HF to VHF in comercial installations all
>over the world where its performance is judged "good enough". Just because
>the instruments are sold to CBers doesn't *necessarily* mean that they're
>worthless junk for other purposes.
>
>This was my main point in my previous post. Apparently I didn't make
>it strongly enough. Consider for example that the meter sold to a
>CBer might say "Bird 43" on the front. Would you still condemn it
>for use at 144 MHz? Just because CBers buy it, doesn't mean the
>instrument is only useful at 27 MHz.
>
>Gary
>--
>Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
>Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
>534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
>Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.tcd.net!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 15:44:46 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <3utqpe$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
Gary wrote:
>Well, not *completely* uncertain. If we see a 1.22:1 reading on the meter,
>we know that the actual VSWR is somewhere between 1.5:1 and 1.0:1, which
>is often *good enough* for our purposes, which usually are to keep the
>VSWR below the 2:1 point where the protection circuitry of the rig starts
>to foldback power. A 2:1 VSWR is a 9.54 dB return loss, a truly horrible
>figure that most reflectometers sold to CBers easily exceed at VHF.
>

Problem is, the protection circuitry is often set much lower.
In fact, its probably set so low that many people set it off
when their instrumentation says everything is just fine. To
really complicate matters, the foldback detector isn't perfect
either.


>That's *still* an unwarranted assumption. Some of the reflectometers
>sold to CBers are actually still quite good enough at VHF. The Philmore
>units, for example, show little error (<10%) when compared to using a
>Bird and a chart at 2 meters, and they're about 10x cheaper. That same
>micromatch design is used from HF to VHF in comercial installations all
>over the world where its performance is judged "good enough". Just because
>the instruments are sold to CBers doesn't *necessarily* mean that they're
>worthless junk for other purposes.

I'll agree with Gary here--if you test the unit and it shows an
acceptable directivity and you use it properly, you will be able
to get useful results.  But, this transmission line stuff is
nebulous enough for even long time amateurs that they can get
confused and draw really bad conclusions.

For instance, someone concluded that the dip corresponds to resonance.
I just did a Microwave Harmonica simulation on a 6 meter coupler at
300 MHz--it shows a nice dip at 46,5 + j 10.7 ohms, not exactly
resonance. Too bad the simulator costs as much as a new car....
I think the simulator works--I used it to make a 6M 29 dB
directivity microstrip coupler that I'll be publishing shortly
in QEX.  A 2 meter version would make a great QST project for
someone who can figure out the design...

If you count your time, it might not be worth using a cheap
instrument.  True, you could use a 20 dB directivity coupler
and adjust the antenna precisely to a null, you will get a
20 dB return loss, assuming no other errors.  How long does it
take to get that precise adjustment?  Problem is, people stop
short and wonder why it doesn't work. Or they wonder why
a better null results in worse performance.

An accurate meter might be a wise investment for a club.
People could tune up their stuff just before/after club
meetings and share notes about how the installation went....

Zack [e-mail]






From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 18:05:28 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <3uu318$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite31.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>In article <3urvu7$[e-mail]>,
>   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I posted on the accuracy of SWR measurements some time ago and got beat up
>>some for trying to bring lab accuracy considerations to ham radio.  Here
>>we go again...
>
>Wes, thank you very much for this excellent post.  Zack has also replied
>via e-mail with an example that agrees with your explanation.
>
>BTW, I have used a dual-meter CB-type SWR bridge for many years to adjust
>my tuner.  Internal circuitry uses "Monimatch" style coupling.  Now I have
>to think about the actual directivity of this instrument, and am also
>wondering if certain problems I've had in the past are the result of an
>inaccurate null.  Sheesh, you guys have just ruined my day.  <g>


Sorry to have ruined your day Jack.  As to the directivity of the Monimatch, I suppose it's
like most things, it depends... The dual type is basically two back-to-back directional
couplers where the wires are seconday, coupled transmission lines. To get good directivity
these secondary lines must be terminated in their characteristic impedance which varies as the
coupling changes, which varies as the spacing varies, and as the strays vary and ----- you get
the picture.


>
>Anyone know what the directivity of slug-type Bird wattmeters is, or how to
>measure it?  Can it be checked by simply connecting it to a dummy load
>and measuring forward VS reflected voltage pickup?

Bird specifies a directivity of 30 dB minimum.  One problem measuring very low SWRs with the
Bird is the necessity of having two elements. You just can't estimate the actual reflected
power at the low end of the scale.  For instance our 1.22 VSWR example: with a 100 W slug and
100 W of RF, the reflected component is down 20 dB (20 dB RL). This is a power of 1 W. Reading
1 W on the 100 scale is a wild guess!  You really need a 10 W slug which they don't make for
HF or a couple of 8877s and a 2500 W slug for the forward measurement <g>.

>a few years ago, but I tend to use it only for power measurements because
>the dual-meter bridge is so convenient for quick tuneup.
>

This is true.


>Incidentally, I didn't see the previous posts on this subject, but I for
>one am glad to have the benefit of your (and Zack's) expertise.  Given some
>time to mull it all over, I might even post a few followup questions.  <g>
>
>73,
>
>Jack  WB3U


Regards, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 19:19:19 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3uu7bn$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3utqpe$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

I wrote:
>An accurate meter might be a wise investment for a club.
>People could tune up their stuff just before/after club
>meetings and share notes about how the installation went....

I have to admit that while playing (?) with this new software
I forgot about the *fundamental* question--I don't have a
VHF SWR meter, how do I tune my antenna?

Well, you might try adjusting the antenna for best reception--
maximize the quieting on weak signals.  Adjusting for best transmit
signal is probably better, but it might be harder to get the
appropriate feedback to do this. A wideband FM receiver works
quite well for this due to the threshold effect, while the
situation can get a bit confusing with an SSB/CW/AM receiver,
unless you pad down the input with a resistive attenuator.

I did this myself on 10 GHz, and worked 8 states and 10 grids
before finding a good directional coupler.  I'll probably do
this on 24 GHz and the higher bands as well.  I don't recall
ever seeing an SWR meter for light....

Incidentally, amateurs used to adjust their antennas with
RF ammeters.  Not surprisingly, they developed antennas that
maximize the RF current.

Zack [e-mail]





From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 23 Jul 1995 19:02:52 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <3uu6cs$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite31.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>In article <3urvu7$[e-mail]> Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:
>>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>>>In article <3ur9mb$[e-mail]>, Zack Lau <[e-mail]> wrote:

[stuff deleted]

>>cancellation and the apparent return loss is infinite, for a VSWR of 1.00. Note that the
>>RL uncertainty of the measurement of a 1.22 VSWR with a bridge directivity of 20 dB, extends
>>from +6 to -infinity!  The results of the measurement are completely uncertain
>
>Well, not *completely* uncertain. If we see a 1.22:1 reading on the meter,
>we know that the actual VSWR is somewhere between 1.5:1 and 1.0:1, which
>is often *good enough* for our purposes, which usually are to keep the
>VSWR below the 2:1 point where the protection circuitry of the rig starts
>to foldback power. A 2:1 VSWR is a 9.54 dB return loss, a truly horrible
>figure that most reflectometers sold to CBers easily exceed at VHF.
>


Well, it depends on what you consider "uncertainty". If we mean, "The estimated amount by
which an observed or calculated value may differ from the true value" (American Heritage
Dictionary, Third Edition) then as I said, it's completly uncertain. A true value of 20 dB can
read infinity, that's a big error <g>. You are correct though that it may not matter
operationally.



>>Back to the original question, will the null indicate the actual point of minimum SWR.
>>Clearly, it does not. If an adjustment to the load (antenna) is made which makes it perfect,
>>the SWR reads 1.22.  If the adjustment makes the SWR = 1.22 at the right phase, the null is
>>perfect; an apparent 1:1.   This is backwards!  If Joe ham measures at several frequencies
>>across the band, the reflection coefficient phase varies due to the changing phase shift
>>through the transmission line as well as the phase change in the antenna. He can get pretty
>>confused.
>
>This is true. And is the source of the idea to put an additional 1/2-wave
>(electrical) of cable in the line and retake the measurements. That flips
>the sense of the phase induced error and allows you to calculate a corrected
>value. The actual resonance dip will be approximately halfway between the
>dips in the VSWR curves found with and without the additional halfwave cable.
>Since those responses are typically fairly broad, a bit of slop can be
>tolerated, and often rerunning the curves with the extra 1/2-wave doesn't
>make a significant difference for antenna trimming purposes.


This is what I alluded to when I mentioned air-lines and swept measurments. You're basically
using a sliding load with two positions.  In a laboratory situation using vector measurements,
as you may know, measurements of a sliding load are used to determine the origin of the
directivity vector so that it may be removed from the measured data.



>> This is pushing it for most amateur and much commercial construction. It is
>>certainly out of the question for a CB meter working at two meters.
>
>That's *still* an unwarranted assumption. Some of the reflectometers
>sold to CBers are actually still quite good enough at VHF. The Philmore
>units, for example, show little error (<10%) when compared to using a
>Bird and a chart at 2 meters, and they're about 10x cheaper. That same
>micromatch design is used from HF to VHF in comercial installations all
>over the world where its performance is judged "good enough". Just because
>the instruments are sold to CBers doesn't *necessarily* mean that they're
>worthless junk for other purposes.

>This was my main point in my previous post. Apparently I didn't make
>it strongly enough. Consider for example that the meter sold to a
>CBer might say "Bird 43" on the front. Would you still condemn it
>for use at 144 MHz? Just because CBers buy it, doesn't mean the
>instrument is only useful at 27 MHz.


Points well taken.  Blanket statements such as mine are usually asking for trouble:-) I should
not disparage CB equipment outright. After all, the last time I was on 11 meters, it was a ham
band.


That said, the probabilities are that what I said is the case. As to the Bird, I have one, but
I don't consider it a precision instrument. Is it "good enough" for most use, certainly.

Regards, Wes -- N7WS






From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!mango.epix.net!gmfoster
From: Garry Foster <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 21:31:22 -0400
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mango.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

Yes I have had that concern. However as I said I haven't found it to be
much of a problem in tuning an antenna.  What I have found is that the
coupling increases greatly at two meters and causes problems so that I
have to use very low power. I trust most of the meters as much as I have
to. I mean what else is the average ham going to use. (what is an average
ham?)

I mean every onte thinks the"Bird" is the Word but if its 5 % with a 50
watt elementhow acurate are you going to be able to check VSWR at a 30
watt forward level when the VSWR is 1.2:1. Not very good but then many
repeater cavities have been set up with them.


The real question is how acurate are most of these bridges at say 10
meters. If you have followed this group(and I know you have) you have
seen all the questions about how come the Vswr changes between 10 watts
and 100 watts. Also using low levels of power closr transmitting sites
can be picked up in the reflected position causing errors.

All this aside way to much emphos is placed on whether the antenna VSWR
is 1.105:1 or 1.3:1 or even 1.5:1 when tuning an antenna. In most if not
all cases on two meters and below if you have an "Indicated" Vswr of
1.5:1 or less you have no problems. Also by checking across the wave you
can visualise the curve and see if it is following the expected trends.


On Sun, 23 Jul 1995, WB3U wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
>    Garry Foster <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >If you can reduce the power many of the CB or HF type indicators work quit
> >well at 2 meters.
>
> Garry, most circuits I have seen for SWR meters include a resistor or R/C
> network to calibrate the device to 50 ohms.  Isn't there a concern that the
> effects of stray capacitance and component characteristics may be very
> different at 2 meters?  Have you checked the HF meters against a known
> accurate instrument, just to be sure the null still occurs at 50 ohms?
>
> 73,
>
> Jack  WB3U
>
>


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3utqpe$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 15:14:08 GMT
Lines: 28

In article <3utqpe$[e-mail]> Zack Lau <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>If you count your time, it might not be worth using a cheap
>instrument.  True, you could use a 20 dB directivity coupler
>and adjust the antenna precisely to a null, you will get a
>20 dB return loss, assuming no other errors.  How long does it
>take to get that precise adjustment?  Problem is, people stop
>short and wonder why it doesn't work. Or they wonder why
>a better null results in worse performance.

OTOH, it makes little sense to measure with a micrometer if
you're going to cut with an axe. For pruning an antenna,
tweaking for a second decimal place is usually a huge waste
of time and effort.

If you're doing precision work, then by all means use precision
tools. But if you're just trying to prune a 2 meter whip into the
band, simple cheap tools are *good enough*. (Actually, I'd rather
use a relative indicating field strength meter than a VSWR meter
for pruning a mobile whip anyway. The objective is to get RF in
the air, not search for the holy grail of 1:1.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dbisna.com!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR meter question
Date: 24 Jul 1995 17:02:40 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3v0jng$[e-mail]>
References: <3udbbu$[e-mail]> <3um88e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3ur9mb$[e-mail]> <3urkel$[e-mail]> <3urvu7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3utqpe$[e-mail]> <3uu7bn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Instead of shelling out big bucks for a meter that might
not work, why not build something that will do the job?

A resistive brige like that on page 152 of Solid State
Design uses such basic parts that you can probably
make a version out of stuff you get at Radio Shack...
Substitute 47 ohm resistors for the 50 ohm, or get
real fancy and parallel 100 ohm resistors.  The diode
can be a 1N34A and 0.001 uF disk ceramics probably are
the choice for 2 meters.

Instead of the 100 uA meter, I'd substitute a meter
that reads 1 volt DC.

Run your HT at low power for a transmit source--as a bonus
the resistive bridge will present a decent load for the
transmitter--even if you havent tuned the antenna yet.

The February 1995 QEX has a nice design that covers 4 GHz
by using chip components and microstrip.  I know a couple
of EME types who use them to adjust their antennas, but
don't know why nobody seems to manufacture commercial
versions.



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!noc.tor.hookup.net!nic.wat.hookup.net!rgbcan!scott.smith
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT SMITH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Telrex TB6EM info wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 16:29:00 -0500
Distribution: world
Organization: RGB Computing  Guelph.ON.CA  BBS 519 767-1954
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SCOTT SMITH)
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.21
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.10
Lines: 13



I have acquired a Telrex Monarch TB6EM triband beam.  It has six
elements on a 25'9" boom that is 3" in diameter.  I have been told that
this beam was made in the '60's, or early '70's.  Is this correct?  I
have the assembly instructions, but no information about the gain or
f/b.  If anyone has information on this beam, or Telrex that they would
like to share, please post or e-mail to: [e-mail].

tnx es 73

Scott
VA3SWS


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:12 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!interlog.com!io.org!torfree!freenet.toronto.on.ca!ai657
From: [e-mail] (Paul Egan)
Subject: TNX for QRP Camping antenna info.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Paul Egan)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Paul Egan)
Organization: Toronto Free-Net Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 16:04:52 GMT
Lines: 12


Thanks to all who posted or sent me e-mail information to help
me choose between the Hustler whip and a low elevation dipole
for my upcoming camping trip to Cape Cod in August.
I think I will use a dipole but design it in such a way
that it can be taken down and converted to a 1/4 wave vert.
with 3 or 4 1/4 wave radials. After all isn't experimentation
half the fun of this hobby?
Thanks again for all of your help.
See you on 40 CW
Paul VE3GFY



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fore.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Ed Bathgate)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: toroid cores, testable?
Date: 24 Jul 1995 14:47:23 -0400
Organization: FORE Systems, Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <3v0prr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: baleen.fore.com
X-newsreader: xrn 7.03



I have a switching power supply that I am scrapping for parts,
it has several quite large toroid coils, is there a way I can
test and measure these in order to use for baluns, or transmatch
coils?

Test methods and formulas for winding/permeability/freq are desired.
It'll be an interesting learning experience for me.

73

Ed N3SDO   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!er7.rutgers.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (A. Victor Coonin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tower for Sale
Date: 21 Jul 1995 19:19:36 -0400
Organization: Rutgers University
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3upcm8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: er7.rutgers.edu

I hope this is the right group--sorry if not.

I have an Easy-Way 40 ft Crank up
and tilt over tower with ground post.
I'm moving & will sell to best offer.  It is in
Miami & would love for someone to cart it waway!

Resond to
[e-mail]

Thanks,
Victor



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:15 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!darwin.sura.net!fconvx.ncifcrf.gov!mack
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mack)
Subject: Re: Tower Math Problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center
References: <[e-mail]> <3ucd75$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 20:18:20 GMT
Lines: 29

In article <3ucd75$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeffrey Maass) writes:
>Steve Ellington ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: I have a 60ft tower on a hinged base. The tower weights 176 pounds.
>: On top, I have a 22ft vertical that weights 20 pounds. It is
>: mounted against the house. In my attic I wish to install a wench and
>                                                             ^^^^^
>I doubt if she'll do it.
>
>
>: run a cable out to the tower to pull it up. The height of the cable
>: will be 12ft. Thus, it will attach 12ft up the tower from the ground.
>
>: Question. How many pounds will there be on the cable?
>
>--
>Jeff Maass                     NW of Columbus Ohio      Amateur Radio K8ND
>USPSA/IPSC # L-1192   NROI/CRO

At the moment of lifting the tower off the ground you have the center of
mass of the tower (176) 30' from the fulcrum, the vertical (20) at 70'
from the fulcrum, giving a moment of 176x30+20x70=6600ft-lbs.
The lifting force coming from the attic 12' off the ground running
down at 45deg to a point 12' from the fulcrum = F, the momemt then
is Fsin(45)x12. At equilibrium then F=795lbs. THe qeustion then is not
what the tension on the cable is , but to what part of the house are you
going to attach it.

        Joe NA3T



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!news-le0.UU.NET!in2.uu.net!pdn.eng.paradyne.com!usenet
From: Ken Balough <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: tri-bander fed w/twinlead?
Date: 21 Jul 1995 17:55:04 GMT
Organization: AT&T Paradyne
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3uoplo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 135.90.32.19

I have an old hy-gain tri-bander fixed NW position halfway up my tower
at about 45 feet. I am considering removing the old coax feedline and
balun at the beam and feeding it with 450 ohm twinline to a 4:1 balun
at the bottom of the tower through about 3 feet of RG8 coax to my
Drake MN-2000 antenna tuner. My thought is that I will be able to tune
the twinline 0n 40 and 80 meters and still have NW directional on 10,15,
and 20 meters. If anybody can shed some light on this idea, please
E-Mail me at <[e-mail]>  Thanx, Ken KK4TZ.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!news-le0.UU.NET!in2.uu.net!pdn.eng.paradyne.com!usenet
From: Ken Balough <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: tri-bander fed w/twinlead?
Date: 21 Jul 1995 17:55:23 GMT
Organization: AT&T Paradyne
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3uopmb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 135.90.32.19

I have an old hy-gain tri-bander fixed NW position halfway up my tower
at about 45 feet. I am considering removing the old coax feedline and
balun at the beam and feeding it with 450 ohm twinline to a 4:1 balun
at the bottom of the tower through about 3 feet of RG8 coax to my
Drake MN-2000 antenna tuner. My thought is that I will be able to tune
the twinline 0n 40 and 80 meters and still have NW directional on 10,15,
and 20 meters. If anybody can shed some light on this idea, please
E-Mail me at <[e-mail]>  Thanx, Ken KK4TZ.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Web-Site for Low-Profile Antennas
Date: 23 Jul 1995 16:25:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3uub8b$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Try the Web-Site listed below for interesting articles on antenna
installations
that do not attract attention.

Also, Adam is adding the additional Topic of: NVIS Techniques shortly!!

>>>http://www.libertynet.org/~adam/low-pro.html<<<

73 - de  Trish <[e-mail]>  "The Vertical Skywave Girl"


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: what does A/U mean in RG58A/U
Date: 23 Jul 1995 05:59:27 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <3usog0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx6-30.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

In article <3uk2ts$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Daniel Taylor) writes:
> I went coax shopping this week, only to find some vendors
> selling RG58, others offering RG58U, RG58A/U, RG58C/U.
>
> Anyone know what the various specifications actually mean ?

At one time they were military specifications, but I'm quite sure they aren't any more, so each
manufacturer is pretty free to make them mean about anything they want. Originally, the
differences had to do with the type of center conductor (solid or stranded, plain or tin-plated)
and jacket material. There may have been other minor differences such as impedance tolerance. The
RG-58A/U I've seen has a tin-plated center conductor, and has consistently measured as having
more loss than RG-58/U whenever I've measured it. This is to be expected. But according to an old
Alpha cable catalog I have, their RG-58/U has a solid, plain copper center conductor, RG-58A/U
has a stranded plain copper center conductor, and RG-58C/U has a stranded tin-plated center
conductor. The Belden RG-58/U is the same, but their RG-58A/U has a stranded tin-plated center
conductor. The meanings of the letters aren't necessarily the same for other cable types.

There may be some small attenuation advantage to a solid conductor, but not that I've ever seen
in measurements. Cable with a stranded center conductor is more flexible. A tin-plated center
conductor makes the cable noticeably lossier.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ingr.com!inn23b.b23b.ingr.com!monty.b23b.ingr.com!gjmontll
From: [e-mail] (Greg Montllor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Where to get a Winch
Date: 21 Jul 1995 13:50:18 GMT
Organization: Intergraph Electronics, Huntsville, AL
Lines: 43
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uobar$[e-mail]>
References: <3uiv1i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: monty.b23b.ingr.com

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Forrest Gehrke) writes:
|> References: <3uiv1i$[e-mail]>
|>
|> GM> and 4-el beam installed) was tilted into up into position.  No winch
|> GM> was used, I pulled it up using my small pickup truck.
|>
|> GM> A line was anchored on the second story of my house.  It led down to
|> GM> the tower, thru a turning block shackled half way up, then back up
|> GM> to the second story, thru two guide blocks fastened along the
|> GM> upstairs balcony, then down to the bumper of the truck, out at the
|> GM> street.
|>
|> GM> In my case, the side thrust during the erection did cause a minor
|> GM> bending of the base mounting bolts. They only protruding the
|> GM> recommended distance from the concrete (1 or 2 inches), but bent
|> GM> enought that they had to be straightened out so that the third leg
|> GM> would align properly.
|>
|> Man, you live dangerously!  You were extremely lucky.  I hope
|> you never have to do that again!  But if you do try it, avoid
|> side thrust, those bolts have been weakened.
|>
|> --k2bt

I agree, luck was a factor.  But I do not plan to lower the tower without
using a gin pole - the side thrust at the hinge point is unavoidable
since the hoisting force will inevitably put a compression load on the
lower part (below the attachment point) of the tower.

Lowering the attachment point would decrease the compression load on the
tower, but greatly increase the the tension on the hoisting line and the
load on turning blocks and the attic floor joists to which they attach.

I agree with you, Forrest.  After doing it once, I now agree with Rohn's
warning.  I don't know how the originator of this thread plans to use his
winch, but as I said, you don't need to invest in a winch for what is likely
to be a rare, or even one-time evolution.

Greg AC4WF
--
 Gregory Montllor   GIS Projects / Geo Systems / Solution Engineering Div
 mailstop LR23B3   Intergraph Corp.  Huntsville, Alabama USA  35894
 email: [e-mail]    phone: [phone]     fax: [phone]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!sanjuan.amtsgi.bc.ca!salmon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where to get a Winch and Prices
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 12:27:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
References: <3uf6gu$[e-mail]>
Lines: 12


Q>Ok, so since it was brought up, where is the best place to buy a winch
Q>that will raise my 450 Lb Rohn HDBX48? It is hinged at the base, and
Q>rests on a septic mound. This gives it about a 15 degree angle from the
Q>ground. Rohn wants 1400 bucks for their 2000 pound capacity one. By the

Why not go to a automotive store (4x4 store) and price out a 2000lb
Super Winch, or Ramsey winch.  Most have power out as well as in, so
that will take care of the breaking problem.  Or, go pick up a 4x4
magazine and check out the ads.
---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous..


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-salem1-11
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WNTD: Dual Band Linear Amp - ampadd.txt [01/01]
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 95 17:09:31 GMT
Organization: Personal Hobbiest
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3uua93$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-salem1-11.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

***********WANTED*************

Looking for a 2 and .70 meter dual band linear
amplifier for a hand held.  Specifically looking for
anyone interested in selling an

RF Concepts 2-70 or 2-70(G) with the preamp.

This is for a handheld unit so power input is
between .3 and 5 watts.  As far as the output
goes, who cares, right???

Email responses to "[e-mail]"

Thanks and 73's,

Brian
Salem, Oregon
KC7LWZ

******************************


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 24 22:07:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Worldradio on re-reflection
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 15:50:16 GMT
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3ua1pk$[e-mail]> <3uhnni$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>>
>> Here's a quote from Worldradio: "This rereflection of power takes
>> place at vacuum tube and FET sources... Unfortunately, though,
>> bipolar transistors do absorb the reflected power and can be
>> damaged by it."
>
>HUH... end result may be correct if SWR is high enough, but the
>cause is wrong, the transistors get zapped by their own power
>supply, and the cause is incorrect output impedance.. the "reflected"
>power is not the thing that does the deed.

The explanation offered in the Worldradio quote is nonsense.  Solid-state
RF amplifiers can be damaged by either too high or too low a load
impedance, and with or without standing waves on the transmission line to
which they're connected.

The reason tubes seem immune to the same type damage is that A) their tuned
output components provide an impedance transformation between the plate and
less than perfect loads, and B) actual voltage and current breakdown is
(usually) much higher than the tube's normal operating conditions.

BTW, reflected power *is* one of the reasons that solid-state devices
"pop".  When the voltage of the reflected wave adds to the voltage at the
output terminal of the active device, overvoltage can result.  If a
particular FET circuit seems less vulnerable to VSWR than its bipolar
cousin, it is only the result of the junctions being able to withstand
higher voltages and/or current.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!news.corp.sgi.com!inn
From: [e-mail] (Larry Autry)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need wire antenna ideas....
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 17:40:49 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., St. Louis
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <3vjc14$[e-mail]>
References: <3uu35v$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pendragon.stlouis.sgi.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Robert Penneys) wrote:


> I just cut down my tower and want to put up some kind(s) of wire antenna,
> such as a loop, to put me back on HF. All ideas welcomed. Tnx, Bob


> --
> Bob Penneys, WN3K           Internet:  [e-mail]
>       Frankford Radio Club    N.E.R.D.S.
There is a web page that has a wire antenna pointer:
http://www.libertynet.org/~adam/wwwlist.html

One of the ideas that is pointed to is actually a rain gutter antenna.
The rain gutter MUST be isolated from ground.

Regards,
Larry Autry                         North American Technical Assistance
[e-mail]               Silicon Graphics Inc., St. Louis, MO
Regional Services Engineer          (In the HEART of North America)



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!msunews!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!fang.dsto.defence.gov.au!vail.levels.unisa.edu.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Stanley Lim Hock Hin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need reference for VHF/UHF yagi book
Date: 25 Jul 1995 01:32:57 GMT
Organization: The Digital Comms Group, Uni of SA
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <3v1hk9$[e-mail]>
References: <3u15qu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: amx.levels.unisa.edu.au

>David wrote:
>......
>BTW, is there a good FTP site for antenna design programs.  I keep hearing
>about NEC and the like, but I have no idea if these are commercial or PD
>nor how about getting them.  If anyone could help me out, I would appreciate
>it.
>......

There are a few ftp sites on electromagnetic modelling codes. As far as I know, it
is public domain shareware. These sites are:-

ftp.emclab.umr.edu/pub/aces
microwave.jpl.nasa.gov
ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC

Have fun with it.


Regards,
Stanley
-------




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!internetMCI!news-admin
From: [e-mail] (Bob Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Date: 26 Jul 1995 17:47:36 GMT
Organization: InternetMCI
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3v5v3o$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3ev6$[e-mail]> <3v3n1o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr13-dialup21.atlanta.mci.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Coolness on the ground rods - I am now motivated to upgrade my
meager 4ft rod to multiple 8ft rods!

Where can I get 1-3" copper braid locally???

--
Bob Smith, Atlanta, GA
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
TAPR 5412  ARRL  AARL



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!crash!hale!system
From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.pirate,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radio Shack's FM antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 95 22:32:12 PDT
References: <3v2rpn$[e-mail]>
Organization: Hale Telecommunications Inc.
Lines: 41
Xref: grape.epix.net alt.radio.pirate:9348 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12401

[e-mail] (Mark Manuelian ) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (blackie)
> writes:
> >
> >    I've heard about some people using Radio Shack's omni-directional
> >FM antenna (#15-2164) with their Ramsey fm10's.  How well does this
> >antenna work?  Are there any modifications needed to use it on the
> >FM band?  What is the best way to hook it up?  Any info would be
> >appreciated.
> >
> >blackie
>
>
> The antenna should be great...but my Ramsey puts out less than 10 mw.
> Have experimented with getting the power up to something more
> reasonable?
>
> Did you know that the FCC has significantly relaxed enforcement of
> "prirate" radio after the FCC lost in a Berkeley CA court case
> concerning this issue.  An infamous prirate broadcaster sued the FCC

They are under a injunction by the court.  That is not the same as winning,
and the injunction is valid for the defendant.

Also, since it's operation with some amount of sanction, he's not a pirate.

> for fining him for illegally operating a station.  The key to the case
> they could not show he caused any harm to anyone.

Maybe not for transmitting anyway.

>
> mark  ke1ar


---   ---   ---   --- Soft Judges Make Hardened Criminals ---   ---   ---  ---
[e-mail]           I believed what I was told, I thought it was a
Hale Telecommunications Inc.  good life, I thought I was happy.  Then I found
619/280-7775 V.32bis          something that changed it all.  (Anonymous, 2112)



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!christ!system.administrator
From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.pirate,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radio Shack's FM antenna
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 05:32:12 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: World Evangelist Ministry [phone]
Distribution: world
References: <3v2rpn$[e-mail]>
Lines: 52
Xref: grape.epix.net alt.radio.pirate:9375 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12419

Path: holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news.sprintlink.net!crash!hale!system
From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.pirate,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radio Shack's FM antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 95 22:32:12 PDT
References: <3v2rpn$[e-mail]>
Organization: Hale Telecommunications Inc.

[e-mail] (Mark Manuelian ) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (blackie)
> writes:
> >
> >    I've heard about some people using Radio Shack's omni-directional
> >FM antenna (#15-2164) with their Ramsey fm10's.  How well does this
> >antenna work?  Are there any modifications needed to use it on the
> >FM band?  What is the best way to hook it up?  Any info would be
> >appreciated.
> >
> >blackie
>
>
> The antenna should be great...but my Ramsey puts out less than 10 mw.
> Have experimented with getting the power up to something more
> reasonable?
>
> Did you know that the FCC has significantly relaxed enforcement of
> "prirate" radio after the FCC lost in a Berkeley CA court case
> concerning this issue.  An infamous prirate broadcaster sued the FCC

They are under a injunction by the court.  That is not the same as winning,
and the injunction is valid for the defendant.

Also, since it's operation with some amount of sanction, he's not a pirate.

> for fining him for illegally operating a station.  The key to the case
> they could not show he caused any harm to anyone.

Maybe not for transmitting anyway.

>
> mark  ke1ar


---   ---   ---   --- Soft Judges Make Hardened Criminals ---   ---   ---
---
[e-mail]           I believed what I was told, I thought it was a
Hale Telecommunications Inc.  good life, I thought I was happy.  Then I found
619/280-7775 V.32bis          something that changed it all.  (Anonymous,
2112)



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!christ!system.administrator
From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.pirate,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radio Shack's FM antenna
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 05:32:12 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: World Evangelist Ministry [phone]
Distribution: world
References: <3v2rpn$[e-mail]>
Lines: 52
Xref: grape.epix.net alt.radio.pirate:9376 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12420

Path: holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news.sprintlink.net!crash!hale!system
From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.pirate,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radio Shack's FM antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 95 22:32:12 PDT
References: <3v2rpn$[e-mail]>
Organization: Hale Telecommunications Inc.

[e-mail] (Mark Manuelian ) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (blackie)
> writes:
> >
> >    I've heard about some people using Radio Shack's omni-directional
> >FM antenna (#15-2164) with their Ramsey fm10's.  How well does this
> >antenna work?  Are there any modifications needed to use it on the
> >FM band?  What is the best way to hook it up?  Any info would be
> >appreciated.
> >
> >blackie
>
>
> The antenna should be great...but my Ramsey puts out less than 10 mw.
> Have experimented with getting the power up to something more
> reasonable?
>
> Did you know that the FCC has significantly relaxed enforcement of
> "prirate" radio after the FCC lost in a Berkeley CA court case
> concerning this issue.  An infamous prirate broadcaster sued the FCC

They are under a injunction by the court.  That is not the same as winning,
and the injunction is valid for the defendant.

Also, since it's operation with some amount of sanction, he's not a pirate.

> for fining him for illegally operating a station.  The key to the case
> they could not show he caused any harm to anyone.

Maybe not for transmitting anyway.

>
> mark  ke1ar


---   ---   ---   --- Soft Judges Make Hardened Criminals ---   ---   ---
---
[e-mail]           I believed what I was told, I thought it was a
Hale Telecommunications Inc.  good life, I thought I was happy.  Then I found
619/280-7775 V.32bis          something that changed it all.  (Anonymous,
2112)



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:37 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!olivea!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!csusac!csus.edu!netcom.com!stevew
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 19:16:02 GMT
Lines: 94
Sender: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83883 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28775 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12371

Jeff Stillinger ([e-mail]) wrote:
: The issue that I wanted to point out that in order to live in areas that have
: populations in the millions we MUST be willing to compromise.  Steve, what
: you seem to not realize is that ham radio is just that a hobby.  I could see

Hey!  Don't cuss like that ;-)

Seriously...yes it is a hobby...but it tends to be a dominating influence
on many of our lives.  I know alot of folks that define themselves
interms of this hobby. Thus...many of the decisions about how we
live our lives and the compromises we make are influenced by it.
It aint just a hobby...it's a way of life ;-)

: a unbending non-compromising attitude if ham radio was money in the bank.  It
: is not.  What hams fail to understand is that when they are looking for a
: house, it is up to them to research what, if any CC&R's would effect them.
: If they found CC&R's to be more than what they could handle, then DON'T BUY
: THE HOUSE!  Use your freedom of choice, and choose a neighborhood that will
: allow antennas and towers.  Let others use their right to choose a
: neighborhood free of towers.  The shoe is on both feet.  This is hard to
: understand, I hope that I can express myself typing.

I don't have a problem with what you say up to this point.

: As much as you as a
: ham has a right to construct a tower and beam, your neighbors have the right
: not to have towers in the neighborhood.

I do have a problem with this.  First...technically we don't have
a RIGHT as amateurs to put up towers(see Howard Vs. Burlingame for
a good discussion of this one.. ;-) On the other hand, we ARE
federally licensed.  This, plus PRB-1 forces local government to give
us special consideration.  As has also been stated many times, PRB-1, et al,
excludes CC&R's.  So for the time being...it does indeed mean buyer
beware.

On the other hand, I tend to be one of those that thinks a person's house
is their castle.  If I want to put up something on my roof(and it is legal
to do so...) then by-cracky...I'm gonna do it.  I like keeping good
relations with my neighbors...but at the same time, I  have my own
interests and pursuits...and that is a balancing act.  So, assuming
I'm not physically hurting my neighbor(sans RFI issues ;-) then
I DO have the moral ability in my own mind to put up the tower
regardless of the neighbors' opinion of same.

: Now point two. Towers,
: trashy front yards, bad paint, junkers in the
: driveway, and just plain dirty neighborhoods.  All of these effect property
: value, some more than others.  Simple fact, and any real estate agent will
: tell you this.

Well, no this isn't a simple fact.  I'll certainly go along with the
statement that unkempt, poorly maintained properties detract from the
value of a given house in a given neighborhood.  I've personally been
out with a real-estate appraiser many hundreds of times...so I know this
is taken into consideration.  I also know that real estate appraisers
don't take towers next door to a property into consideration when
determining the value of said property! So...if a real estate agent
told me that a tower does detract from the house value. I'd know said
real estate agent didn't know what they were talking about.

: Point three.  Safty.  I can provide pictures of towers and antennas that are
: falling down.  I beleive that the city of Orange made someone clean up the
: roof, as parts of the antennas where falling onto the freeway.  This ham more
: than likly NEVER did any periodic inspections on these antennas.  CC is the
: most important thing that hams can do.  As the posts above indicate, a short
: sighted pattern of thought can lead to disaster.  Wind is not the only enemy
: to antennas.  I will not go into detail about all of the bad things that can
: happen due to bad CC practice.

First. What does CC mean?

Secondly, I don't have any problems with safety requirements.  None at all.
In fact, I think it is appropriate and proper for cities to have building
code requirements that force some level of safety to be considered when
puting up structures.   On the other hand, I also think that this safety
review should be limited to the support structure, not the antenna that
goes on top of it.  (There is the logical exception that the city should
require that during the active lifetime of the structure, that it's
design limits may not be exceeded)  If I were in the act of putting
up a major tower, i.e. spending many thousands of dollars for same,
I don't want it to fall down either!  I should also protect against
access to the structure by children, etc.  These are all reasonable
concerns.

: I don't live there anymore, I live in a dorm at Edwards AFB in California.  I
: can't have antennas, but I feed my ham radio habbit with lots of 1200 Mhz DX
: accross the desert.  Thanks to everyone for expressing ideas, showing how
: diverse ham radio really is.  Good job!

: 73
: Jeff Stillinger - KB6IBB                              [e-mail]

73's de Steve KA6S


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: Outbacker Mobile Antenna from Terlin Aerials
Date: 28 Jul 1995 19:26:41 -0700
Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3vc691$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3vbbig$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: safety.ics.uci.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12384 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:15115

In <3vbbig$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Larry Menzel) writes:

>>Is there anybody out there in net land that is using, or has had any
>>experience with the Outbacker Mobile Antenna from Terlin Aerials in Australia?

>Without question, it is the very best antenna if you don't want to screw
>around with resonators or switch whips.

Well, the Texas bugcatcher has no resonators or whips to swich.  The DK 3
doesn't either.  They are both far better radiators than the Outbacker
according to all the research I have seen, including field strength
tests.

>Performance is as good as or better than single band (i.e. Hustler, Telex,
>HiGAin, or ?)  and you only have to move one plug to make it work.  If you

Not true according to all the research I have seen.  The single band,
and very cheap, hamstick radiates better (field strength), I believe
even the hustler does. I forget where I saw the data, but it was in two
places.  The Outbacker is about the least efficient mobile antenna
out there - but it IS very convenient and VERY strong.

Anyone have the cite to the field strength tests I recall seeing?  It
compared the Hustler, the Texas Bugcatcher, the Hamsticks, the Outbacker
and a few others.

Clark
WA3JPG


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 95 22:45:15 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

Cecil: SGC makes the following claim (quote) " You can get more than 20 dB
of gain by simply using an SGC compared with any other 1.8 to 30 MHz system."
   The most interesting point here are : 1.8-, which includes 75M and the with
ANY other system. ANY other! They also say "will typically yield 20 dB of
gain over a conventional 1.8 to 30 MHz mobile installation."
   These claims are either: (1.) verifiable, (2.) absurd, (3.) comical,
(4.) disgusting, (5.) buffoonish. Please select your choice.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 95 22:52:04 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vb2d3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>and 40m mobile. Would you object to a shootout on 15m and if so, why?

No, I would not object to a shoouout on 15 myself at all. I think the reason
they pick 75 is because that is
the most reliable mobile HF band. There are times that 15 and 40 would be dead
and 75 would be workable. Also, I think they are looking for local area
work..road conditions, weather, restaurants, hotel info and chatting with
friends, etc. Do you believe that on 15, the SGC claims of 20 dB gain over
ANY other system would be valid?


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!ames!news.hawaii.edu!uhunix3.its.Hawaii.Edu!dholmes
From: Daniel J Holmes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
In-Reply-To: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: uhunix3.its.hawaii.edu
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Hawaii
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 22:59:22 GMT
Lines: 73

Aloha Lance.
I am sure you have gotten several unuseful replys to your request for
help.  I would like to offer you some of my own advise.  Get the book "HF
Antennas for all Locations" which is available from the Radio Society of
Great Britian (RSGB).  I am not sure if CQ may also have it available.
It cuts through all the neo-know-it-all bull and will help you understand
why some antennas work better than others.
Now for your own situation.  I am uncertain what makes you choose the
G5RV in the first place, but your bioggest problem is going to be that it
is much too close to your roof/and the ground.  The typical dipole, which
the G5RV is a variant of radiates equally well in all directions parallel
to the length of the antenna.  That is why you want to place it broadside
to where most of your contacts will be.  The problem you are experiencing
is some of the radiation is reflecting from the nearby roof and ground,
which is true with all horizontal antennas, and is mixing with the
radiation coming out of the antenna at that moment.  This mixing is
increasing the SWR in the antenna and distorting rour radiation pattern.
For more on patterns see the ARRL Antenna Hand-Book.  I read it
constantly and am surprised at how often I keep on learning new things.
There are some advantages to the "low dipole" (or your G5RV) which
includes low visibility and good local communications.  I am not going to
discourage you from choosing that antenna, but realize that at that
height, you will be lucky to get consistantly good DX reports.
If you want to keep using it, try this: Bring the parallel feeders right
into the shack and buy a decent tuner, not MFJ (Made From Junk). NYE had
at one time the best "Ham" tuner.  If you can find an old Heathkit one or
the best ever made - a Johnson matchbox - sell your wife and car to get it.
These have a balanced output that does more than reduce SWR.  They get
the maximun amount of RF energy into the antenna and radiates it.
By having the parallel lines at the tuner, you can forget the technical
problems of having to cut the coax and parallel lines to the exact right
length.  You can then make it 1.1 to 1 SWR on all bands ( I know this is
your goal).  It still will not have good consistant DX, but at least it
will work.
I would like to add that in your position, a vertical might be better and
easier to hide.  The ARRL Antenna Handbook has some flagpole type
antennas which hides the antenna in PVC pipe or something making it look
like a flagpole.  Being a vertical, it's radiation travels outward from
the antenna and unless you have placed it next to a metal building has a
better chance of reaching my QTH here in Hawaii or any other DX-land.  A
pair of flagpoles (one for your state flag, one for the USA flag, can
also be used for some considerable gain.  Generally any neighborhood
complaints can be ignored as no one would be so unpatriotic as to demand
you removing the flagpoles now would they.....?
Enough for now.  I wish you well, and if you have any further questions
as to what I said or why, please reply. See ya on 40 Meters.
Aloha de NH6EU
Dan

On 18 Jul 1995, Lance Halle wrote:

> I have a very restrictive homeowners association, so decided the most
> performance with the least visability might be the G5RV. The problem is I
> can only put the center at about 6 feet above the roof. One end is
> attached to a roof corner at about 10 feet above ground, and the other
> end is attached to the corner of a 6 foot block fence.
>
> In this configuration, VSWR does "dip" on each band as it is supposed to,
> but only drops to around 2.5:1.  Since all bands do exibit a null, it
> would seem to me that I should be able to "tweek" something so I don't have
> to use a tuner.  Since the G5RV is a 102 ft dipole with a tuned 31 foot
> 300 ohm feedline going into a balun and then to the 50 ohm coax, I don't
> know where to start.  I have been told that if I prune one part, it will
> require changing the feedline length, and possibly the balun......
>
> Any G5RV experts out here ?????
>
> Lance Halle   KC7FVX  in Phoenix Az.
>
>
>
>
>


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!mack.rt66.com!abq-ros.com!rweaver8
Subject: Need help stacking 2m Yagis
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 95 23:51:35 EST
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Associated Information Services
Lines: 9


       For the pipe go to a chain link fence contractor. They have top
rail in 21 ft lengths that is made to slip together.

Ralph


--
The Albuquerque ROS - [phone]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.iadfw.net!usenet
From: Gene Mason <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: toroid cores, testable?
Date: 28 Jul 1995 23:56:50 GMT
Organization: Internet America
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3vbtg2$[e-mail]>
References: <3v0prr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal06-11.ppp.iadfw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]

Howdy...You can try to make a 1:1 or some other simple xfmr at whatever
freq you are interested in. Also some are marked with a part number. You
are not likely to be able to use the ones you mentioned as it will have the
wrong permeability (E material). When you find the right combination you
will never build another coaxial balun. Several good sources are listed in
the Amateur magazines...In most cases torroids are inexpensive, especailly
if you wind them yourself. Gene KZ5V



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for AL tubing
Date: 29 Jul 1995 00:18:58 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3vbupi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v8bst$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip152.ft.worth.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)


>: On Wed, 19 Jul 1995, Ted Kell wrote:
>
>: > In QST last fall  (November, I think)  there was a description of a
>: > walking stick antenna.  This was a bunch of nested aluminum tubing that
>: > could be extended to a full size 1/4 wave vertical antenna.  My question,
>: > where can one get the tubing?  My local sources want a $500 minimun order
>: > which seems a little steep.

Texas Towers in Plano, TX carries a full range of aluminum for antenna
work in a variety of lengths.  No minimum order as far as I know.  Don't
be surprised if it isn't cheap -- the price of quality aluminum if high.

Grant/NQ5T




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 29 Jul 1995 00:30:48 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3vbvfo$[e-mail]>
References: <3vb7vd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip152.ft.worth.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Danny Stone NT) wrote:
>A New House, A New Yard...
>
>IT'S ANTENNA HANGIN' TIME!
>
>What are your experiences with Flexi-Weave antenna wire?
>
The "Silky" antenna wire sold by The Wireman, Inc.(19 strand - not quite
as flexible as the Flexi-Weave) seems like a better product.  Its
stronger, less subject to stretching, and closer to solid copper
steel as for as RF performance is concerned.

Grant/NQ5T



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 95 01:54:26 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vc51n$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83899 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28779 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12378

The bottom line to this discussion is that CCR's are private, legal
agreements between buyer and seller.  Regardless of any other fact,
property values, location, curb appeal, etc., etc., the agreement is
voluntary on the part of the buyer and he can walk away at any time.

The only complaint anyone should have with this is that the CCR's are not
conveniently available when house-hunting, and that the need to review the
documents can slow the process considerably.  Realtors seldom appreciate
the need to do this and certainly prefer not to deal with such complication
if it can be avoided.

As a final note, those who think the restrictions are unreasonable should
ask themselves why the developers do it?  Personally, I think it's a small
leap of faith to accept the concept that large metal structures and other
oddities in the subdivision *can* slow sales and place the investors at
risk.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help g5mh (?) minibeam"
Date: 29 Jul 95 02:08:25 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "g5mh" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 95 02:27:28 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vch53$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>believe it when I see it with my own eyes. How about FET finals re-

Heading your way in the mail. It is THEIR LITERATURE that says it....What
are you going to say after your read with your own eyes?????? Do you have a FAX,
I'll send it to you you will read in really big lettering these two phrases:
 "SGC's 20 dB Advantaghe with QMS" and "20 dB GAIN USING QMS!"


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Reflecting UHF TV signals. Possible?
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 95 02:33:59 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v6kdu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: Scott Kelly <[e-mail]>

Here is something to try, with results not guaranteed. At one location aim
a UHF TV antenna at the TV transmitter.......run a lowest loss feedline (open-
wire) from that antenna to another UHF antenna that is aimed at where you
want to see the signal. Yes, the feedline connects at the terminals of
both antennas. You are re-transmitting the signal received by the first antenna.
It has been done, but every situation is different.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:49 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.telalink.net!uro!jackatak!root
From: [e-mail] (Jack GF Hill)
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Organization: Jack's Amazing CockRoach Capitalist Ventures
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 02:44:08 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Superuser)
Lines: 29

[e-mail] writes:
> Garry Foster <[e-mail]> writes:
> >> I am under the impression that the Shoot Out was on 75m, a band that
> >> Mother Nature never intended to be used mobile. :-)
>
> Then why do you suppose that 75 is the most popular mobile HF band. Why did
> they choose this band??????

Simple. Because, on 75M, there are folks with OK signals for short
work with friends who will listen up for them, and there are some
silly people who think the challenge of making a VERY short antenna
perform well and shot for the long ones...

It is the band where the antenna makes the difference...

And, it is the band where there are loads of people with home
stations... 160M is too sparesely populated and loads more difficult
still... my system is NOT yet good enough on 160 to yak much, but on
75, I do fairly well!  ;^)
--
73,
Jack, W4PPT/M (75M SSB 2-letter WAS #1657/#1789 -- both from the mobile! ;^)

+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
| Jack GF Hill        |Voice: [phone] -             Ham Call: W4PPT |
| P. O. Box 1685      |Modem: [phone] -  Bicycling and SCUBA Diving |
| Brentwood, TN  37024|Fax:   [phone] -          Life Member - ARRL |
| [e-mail]  - "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose" |
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 29 Jul 1995 02:49:04 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3vc7j0$[e-mail]>
References: <3vb7vd$[e-mail]> <3vbvfo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip156.ft.worth.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]> wrote:

>solid copper
>steel as for as RF performance is concerned.

Oops --  meant to say "solid copper PLATED steel"

Grant



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.millcomm.com!mill2.MillComm.COM!pugrad
From: [e-mail] (The Great Pumpkin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Portable 2 meter yagi antenna
Date: 29 Jul 1995 02:49:12 GMT
Organization: MillComm Internet Services
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <3vc7j8$[e-mail]>
References: <3v1c41$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mill2.millcomm.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Stu,

You might want to make the "2 meter portable 3-element beam" described on
page 20.62 of the 1995 ARRL Handbook (borrowed a copy from my local
library for the project... this is a $30 book).

Made mine this past week from PVC pipe and #10 solid copper wire with 50
ohm coax feed.

Works great!!

73   KB0TEG

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Stu Schlachet ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Would someone please provide me with a source where I could build a
: portable 3-4 element Yagi antenna for 2 meters. I think that would be
: a good starter project for my son and me. Please either reply to the
: post or e-mail to: [e-mail].
: Thanks,
: Stu


--
                ###################################
       ##########       [e-mail]       ############
                ###################################


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 29 Jul 1995 03:07:42 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <3vc8lu$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vc51n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip156.ft.worth.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83876 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28773 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12368

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
Regardless of any other fact,
>property values, location, curb appeal, etc., etc., the agreement is
>voluntary on the part of the buyer and he can walk away at any time.

I've missed most of this discussion, but there was an interesting piece
on National Public Radio the other morning on the subject.

The premise was that basically Homeowners Associations are a powerful
"local government", with the ability to tax (association dues),
regulate behavior (no Pick'em trucks -- oh, heavens, ruin the
neighborhood) ... well, you guys know the drill.  In many ways they
have more power than your local government does.  Paint your door?
Some little biddy doesn't like the color?  Refuse to change the color?
Heck, many of these groups have the right to sell your house out from
under you to pay the cost of repainting the door themselves.

There's a growing movement among a host of "interest groups" to
attempt to control everyone else's behavior and rights.  It ranges
from CCR issues, to religious groups, environmental groups, anti-smoking
coalitions, on and on and on and on.  There seems to be some perverse
gratification from being able to control everyone else -- to force them
to do or not do whatever YOU think the other guy shouldn't do or
should do.  Its getting to the point of absurdity.  There are plenty
of examples right here in our own (great) hobby

(I've always found it a bit humorous that the members of the anti-smoking
movement in the LA basin feel good about not having someone
smoke a cigarette on their sidewalk anywhere near THEM.  Then they
think nothing of walking out onto that sidewalk and actually BREATHING
THE AIR.  There's a real problem of priority here somewhere ......  )
{ducking and running  :-) }

And so it goes.  And it just keeps getting worse.

Grant/NQ5T



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!miwok!infoway!don.phelps
From: [e-mail] (Don Phelps)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole for 2m
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 03:31:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: The Infoway BBS [phone] 14,400 8-N-1
Distribution: world
References: <3v0sjl$[e-mail]>
Lines: 34

Brian,

Congratulations on your license, I received my first back in '57.
My advice, start out with easier antenna.
To me, easier means direct feed without matching section.
I like dipoles myself.  Take a piece of coax of convenient length
with connector on one end for your HT.  Connect other end to
each half of a dipole.  Cut to length by formula you just got tested
on. :-)
Another way, is to peal back the outer jacket (cut off) and outer
braided conductor back onto the coax for 1/4 wave.  Trim the
explosed center conductor to 1/4 wave and afix a hook device with
which to suspend your vertical 1/4 wave.  Very portable.

Personnally, I make a 4 element quad using direct feed of pumbler's
delight construction using 1/2" copper pipe.  Worked great.
Next, I am about to do that old plumber's delight verticle colinear
for 2 meters out of the old ARRL's antenna book.

To each their own.  Have fun.

Don
N6MCE.

 BD> I have recently (is April still considered recent?) received my
 BD> license and I have decided on my first project as a Ham: a J-Pole to
 BD> increase the range of my 2m HT (I currently use the rubber duck). I
 BD> have one plan for a J-Pole that's helical wound on a wooden dowel and I
 BD> was wondering if there were other plans I should consider (such as one
 BD> constructed from copper pipe). Are there other suggestions that might
 BD> make a better "first project?"

... [e-mail] POB9739 SAN RAFAEL CA 94912-9739
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!usenet
From: Gary McClellan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 29 Jul 1995 04:25:47 GMT
Organization: KD7E
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <3vcd8b$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v7sb1$[e-mail]> <3v8cgd$[e-mail]> <3vaig7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip125.phx.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83893 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28777 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12376

[e-mail] (David R Tucker) wrote:
>Curtis Wheeler ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>: Regardless of the "scientific" evidence Steve claims to have saying
>: that towers do not effect property value - towers effect the "curb
>: appeal" of home.  The appearance or condition of one home CAN effect
>: the value of the house next door - ask a realtor.  This is especially
>: true of condos and townhomes where you may have your own yard but the
>: units are attached.
>
>Wait a minute ... you, your neighbors, and your real estate agent all
>"know" towers (not "appearance or condition" in general) affect values
>(not "curb appeal" but sale prices) of neighboring properties -
>*regardless* of any scientific evidence?  Wow.
>
>I'm sorry, but I find evidence more convincing than I find the "it
>fits our prejudices, so it must be true" sort of argument"

Sorry Dave - you're living in dreamland.. I have gotten active
in "Block Watch" recently, and none of my fellow neighbors
found my 40 ft. tower and tri-bander to be "attractive"...
I personally LOVE to go out and just stand there admiring it,
but for some odd reason they don't have the same appreciation
of alunimium I do.  I suspect this is a universal trait!

73/Regards
Gary


-----------------------------------------------------------------
--- Gary McClellan ** Amateur Radio KD7E ** Phoenix, Arizona  ---
--- Internet:[e-mail] Packet:[e-mail]  ---
-----------------------------------------------------------------




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!pa.dec.com!nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 29 Jul 1995 04:43:06 GMT
Organization: ObjectBroker/COM
Lines: 47
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vce8q$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: imapc.chi.dec.com
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-68
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83910 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28780 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12382

In article <3vaub2$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Frank Adrian) wrote:

> Todd Little ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : Those codes ensure the safety based upon sound
> : engineering practices as opposed to aesthetically motivated nonsense.
>
> Since you believe that aesthetics are nonsense, I hereby sentence you
> to either (a) building a new house next door to a waste transfer station,
> (b) watching Madonna videos continuously for the next year or
> (c) eating at a McDonalds for the rest of your life.

Why stop at a waste transfer station?  Why not make it a nuclear waste
disposal station?

> In the final analysis, it is aesthetics which determine the quality of
> our lives.

The problem with using aesthetics to determine "rights" is what
principals do you apply to determine the extent to which aesthetics
can be imposed?  I find bell bottom jeans unaesthetic.  Does that
mean it is reasonable to write a CC&R that prohibits bell bottoms?

> Aesthetics are NOT nonsense.  The aesthetic sensibility is probably the
> only thing that is uniquely human.  In denying aesthetics, you are denying
> your own humanity.  Go back to the jungle and live with your ape cousins,
> Monkey-Boy - they won't care if you build a tower.

The only thing that is uniquely human?  What a stretch.  For someone that
claims to do object analysis and design, you have an amazing ability to
exclude relevent domains from your analysis.  If aesthetics were so unique
and important, why didn't our founding fathers feel the need to protect
them in the Constitution?  Because aesthetic arguments subject one to
the whims of those in power.  Perhaps that's why they felt the need to
explicitly spell out a long list of rights that are inalieable.  They defined and
used a set of principles to make those decisions instead of popular fashion
which is generally all aesthetic arguments often amount to.

73,
Todd
N9MWB

PS      "Monkey-Boy"?  How cute.  Would you like to insult my mother while
        you're at it?  Or perhaps you'd like to have your father beat up
        my father?  Good grief!  I find your aesthetically displeasing, perhaps
        you should be tried for that and executed.  ;-)



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 29 Jul 1995 05:32:19 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vch53$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Cecil: SGC makes the following claim (quote) " You can get more than 20 dB
>of gain by simply using an SGC compared with any other 1.8 to 30 MHz system."

If they really said that, it is, of course, absurd. I have said it before,
I have almost everything they have published and I am unable to verify
the above quote. The closest thing I can find in what they sent me is
the statement that their system will perform better than a conventional
nine ft. whip. Worldradio has stretched the truth so often that I will
believe it when I see it with my own eyes. How about FET finals re-
reflecting all the reflected power but bipolar finals being destroyed?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!genmagic!bug.rahul.net!a2i!rahul.net!a2i!ccnet.com!usenet
From: Curtis Wheeler <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 29 Jul 1995 05:48:03 GMT
Organization: CCnet Communications
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <3vci2j$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vc51n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: h98-165.ccnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b3 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83921 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28783 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12386

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>The only complaint anyone should have with this is that the CCR's are not
>conveniently available when house-hunting, and that the need to review the
>documents can slow the process considerably.  Realtors seldom appreciate
>the need to do this and certainly prefer not to deal with such complication
>if it can be avoided.

Any realtor or seller that doesn't ensure you are aware of CC&Rs and
provide them to you is irresponsible.  I was told of the CC&Rs on my
property and had to reveiw them.  The seller's agent had me initial each of
all 30 pages of them.  If there was anything I couldn't live with, I had
the right to call it off.

They are not a petty item.  Sellers can be sued for not dislosing them.

A buyer that doesn't ask about them is ignorant.  If the buyer's, or
potential buyer's agent doesn't get them, he is incompetent.

--
Curtis Wheeler - Pleasanton, CA




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:57 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.swap
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!alfa02.medio.net!guysmiley.blarg.com!eskimo!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Hanson)
Subject: New software release:Cwave(c) for Windows.
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Pika Systems
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.10
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 06:28:01 GMT
Lines: 12
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12391 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:9770 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:15118 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8599 rec.radio.amateur.misc:83925 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28785 rec.radio.amateur.space:4495


        If you have a shortwave radio and a Windows(tm) compatible
sound-card, Cwave will filter and convert Morse code signals into text
for you in real-time. No special hardware is required.

        Cwave is shareware, and available for FTP.  The FTP server is
'ftp.eskimo.com' or '204.122.16.4'.  The directory is /u/p/pika/cwave.

-Pika Software





From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 29 Jul 1995 06:34:43 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vckq3$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vb2d3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Also, I think they are looking for local area
>work..road conditions, weather, restaurants, hotel info and chatting with
>friends, etc.

In AZ and CA 2m works best for this type stuff. One will radiate more
RF from a 40w 2m mobile that from a 100w 75m mobile. If we could get
all the mobiles off 75m and onto the more efficient 2m, the universe
would not run down quite as fast. :-)

>Do you believe that on 15, the SGC claims of 20 dB gain over
>ANY other system would be valid?

What I believe is that SGC never made that claim. Fortunately,
Mother Nature doesn't care what I believe, what you believe that SGC
has claimed, or what SGC has actually claimed. My 13 ft whip fed with
the SGC-230 outperformed an 8 ft bugcatcher on 12m and it doesn't matter
what your alleged omniscient writer for Worldradio thinks. (Remember,
you said he never makes mistakes).

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:00:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 95 07:29:36 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 46
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vcom1$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vc51n$[e-mail]> <3vci2j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:83877 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28774 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12369

   Curtis Wheeler <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Any realtor or seller that doesn't ensure you are aware of CC&Rs and
>provide them to you is irresponsible.  I was told of the CC&Rs on my
>property and had to reveiw them.  The seller's agent had me initial each
>of all 30 pages of them.  If there was anything I couldn't live with, I
>had the right to call it off.

This must vary considerably from one area of the country to another.  I've
looked at property in both Texas and Pennsylvania, and the "standard" sale
contracts used to make a binding offer have no accomodations for
unacceptable CC&R's.  If the Buyer makes an offer and the Seller accepts,
both are (generally speaking) obligated to complete the sale.

>They are not a petty item.  Sellers can be sued for not dislosing them.

I don't know if that's true in PA and TX or not.  I do know that such
disclosure isn't required to be made before the potential Buyer tenders an
offer, and that's the point at which most people get "stuck".

>A buyer that doesn't ask about them is ignorant.  If the buyer's, or
>potential buyer's agent doesn't get them, he is incompetent.

In the States I'm familiar with, it is routine for the Buyer to make use of
the Seller's agent, rather than hiring an agent of his own.  This means
that the Buyer's interests may not be properly addressed until Closing, if
even then.

The agents who have helped me have *never* brought up the need or
desirability of inspecting CC&R's before tendering an offer.  In fact,
several agents effectively stopped working with me when they realized that
I wouldn't make a binding offer without seeing a copy of the restrictions
first.

I can also tell you that I have read several self-help books on purchasing
residential property, and not a single one even *mentioned* restrictive
covenants.  The only reason I ever thought to be concerned was my knowledge
beforehand (from other hams) that certain subdivisions don't allow
outside antennas and/or supporting structures.

Sounds like your State is better than most when it comes to real estate
purchases.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 95 07:42:41 mdt
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <3vdec2$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: transitory4.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


Cecil,

Re: SGC's absurd claims. Read any of their "Learn to love the look"
ads. If you want more send me a fax number they indeed make all of
the claims attributed to them in the literature. When Kurt N Sternba
took them to task he quoted their claims accurately.

When they sent me a fax it had a copy write note and a non disclosure
statement on it. When have you ever seen such nonsense. SGC makes a
good tuner but other than that they are a bullshit outfit. Remember
this is the outfit that brings you the $490 tin box.

As to using 75 as a shoot out band it makes sense to me. To compare
systems pick the most difficult problem. Radiating on 10 12 15 is
no challenge as any truck driver. Seventy five separates the claims
from the SE units.

73 de Jerry


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip108.phx.primenet.com!nx7u
From: [e-mail] (Scott Townley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,sci.physics.electromag
Subject: PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT:  NEC-Graph / Windows
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 14:32:29 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 91
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip108.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.swap:40365 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12399 sci.physics.electromag:4668

PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT:  NECGraph-Windows (by Scott Townley, NX7U)

NECGraph-Windows is a Windows-based program for producing publication-quality graphical
 output from your NEC (Numerical Electromagnetics Code) program.

NECGraph was originally written for my own personal use after having suffered through many
 years of hand-plotting tables of text or importing hand-modified output files
into popular spreadsheets with almost no true scientific graphics capabilities.

NECGraph isn't NEC bundled into the Windows environment.  You will need to use your
 own NEC executable to generate the output files that  NECGraph utilizes.
  This approach does have advantages:  (1) You can  continue to use your
customized/modified NEC sources and executables, (2) You don't need to spend
money on an executable that you may already have or can download for free, and
(3) I can spend all my time on the graphical aspects of the program.

NECGraph will automatically parse the text-based output files from all openly-available
versions of NEC (including NEC-2, NEC-NEEDS version from ACES, the
PC-compatible NECs on /pub/ra/rander/NEC at netcom.com, and NEC-4 from LLNL)
and generates almost any plot of interest.  Features include:

*NEC Outputs Plotted*

...Far Field Patterns
...Near Electric and Magnetic Field Patterns
...Impedance and Admittance versus Frequency
...Derived Impedance quantities (Return Loss, VSWR) versus Frequency

*Types of Plots Available*

...X-Y (rectilinear)
...Polar
...Smith Chart (impedance and admittance coordinates)

*Features*

...Multiple-frequency plots of all radiation patterns; pick and choose which frequencies to plot.
...Plot Impedance or Admittance versus Frequency on either rectilinear or Smith coordinates.
 Plot impedances of antenna systems with multiple inputs on one chart (useful
for array antennas)...User-definable VSWR circles overlaid on Smith chart plots
...User-definable plot scaling (dynamic range, size of divisions, log axes), as well as
normalized plots
...Automatic Legend generation showing frequency, constant parameters (like angles,
 distances, etc.), and antenna environment.  A plot has *all* the information
needed to interpret your results...Cut and paste plots to any Windows-based
application...Print plots to any Windows printer/plotter.
...Save plots to disk in .WMF (Windows Metafile) format

*Some Upcoming Features*

...Three-dimensional plots for higher-directivity antenna designs
...Plots available for Receiving Antenna Patterns, Ground Wave Patterns (RP1 card),
 and Maximum Coupling Impedances (CP card).

...Additionally, NECGraph can be modified to parse your custom program output
 (e.g., NEC-BSC, etc.).  Contact the author for arrangements.

Here's the deal:

NECGraph-Windows is available *only* directly from the author for $40 U.S.
(international will be higher depending on duties and postage--contact the
author for final pricing).  Cashier's Check/Personal Check/Money Order all
acceptable; please no Credit Card orders.  Note that AZ Sales Tax will be
collected for shipments to Arizona addresses.  Quantity discounts and site
licensing is available; contact the author for details.

For your money you get:

1. NECGraph-Windows with on-disk documentation
2. Unlimited support and bug-fixes
3. Program upgrades, as they become available, for $10 (domestic).  Plus, if you suggest
 an improvement that's incorporated in an official release, you get that
upgrade for FREE.

For answers to questions, ordering, etc., contact the author using any of the following
methods:

Scott Townley NX7U

e-mail (fastest method):
[e-mail]

fax (next fastest):
[phone]

snail mail (slowest):
1101 N. Gilbert Rd. #308
Gilbert, AZ  85234





From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 29 Jul 1995 14:41:16 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <3vdhac$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vb2d3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

[e-mail] writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Then why do you suppose that 75 is the most popular mobile HF band. Why did
>>they choose this band??????

> [...] IMO, it is illogical to deliberately choose a band for mobile
>operation where the ground-loss resistance is ten times the radiation
>resistance. IMO, the higher bands are better candidates for mobile
>operation. For me, 75m mobile is a last resort [...]

The reason 75m is an interesting mobile band is that it's a tough one
to do right.  One pleasant part of the ham experience is to
deliberately accept a handicap, such as this problem of radiation
efficiency, and to overcome or work around it.  I've worked 75m
mobiles (on phone) over ~4000 km paths and in doing so I felt both a
sense of accomplishment and of admiration for the other fellow's skill
in building such a excellent mobile rig; my hearing him was no special
trick (500' beverage) but him hearing me was most remarkable.

regards,
Ross ve6pdq

ps: oh, and I picked up a new state (Florida) as a bonus.
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Engine mounted antenna...bad for RF in face??
Date: 29 Jul 1995 16:21:50 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3vdn6u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


I finally decided on a descent antenna (lenght vs gain). I noticed
on another truck that had the trunk lip on the engine comparment. This
gives the extra room I need to have the longer antenna, and nothave too
go thru a window. I have two questions though.

1) Is it going toe bad that the midpoint of the antenna is basically just
above eye level? SInce it is going toe just in front of the front windshield?

2) I am planning on putting it on the pasenger side, right next to the radio
antenna? Is this going to be okay? WIll the radio antenna mess up the dual band
2/70 antenna for reception or xmiting?

BTW, the antenna I decided on was a COmment B-20 wiht a Larson trunk lip mount.

Thanks for any replies!!
Drew
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:06 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!emory!darwin.sura.net!fconvx.ncifcrf.gov!mack
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mack)
Subject: Re: Need help stacking 2m Yagis
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center
References: <3uphn4$[e-mail]> <3v4prj$[e-mail]> <3v6hj0$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 17:03:59 GMT
Lines: 14

In article <3v6hj0$[e-mail]> Ken Mason <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] () wrote:
>>
>> >I have recently purchased (on separate occasions) two used Cushcraft
>> >14B-214FB Jr. Boomer 2 meter Yagis.  I would like to stack them, but I
>> >have no harness.

        A combiner ( see VHF DX book ) is a convenient way of doing this.
It keeps all the cables 50ohm and the lengths of cable to the yagis
only have to be electrically identical (same length is OK, if off the same
spool).

        Joe NA3T
        [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 29 Jul 1995 17:33:37 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 47
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vdrdh$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <3vdec2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3vdec2$[e-mail]>,
Gerald Schmitt  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Re: SGC's absurd claims. Read any of their "Learn to love the look"
>ads. If you want more send me a fax number they indeed make all of
>the claims attributed to them in the literature. When Kurt N Sternba
>took them to task he quoted their claims accurately.

Hi Gerald, it is a typical ploy of Kurt N Sterba to twist what one
says to fit his purposes. If you will look back at the original
postings, I did not defend SGC's claims and said that their claims
were marketing hype. What I objected to was the statement by Kurt
that a mobile antenna never has an SWR higher than 4:1. At the
time he said it, my CB whip on 20m was running 20:1. That statement
about mobile antennas was what I took exception to, not the SGC
claims. I can't find the particular issue so let me repeat what I
remember. Kurt said something to the effect that a base-mounted
antenna tuner was unnecessary since the typical mobile antenna never
has an SWR higher than 4:1. My point was, who said anything about
typical mobile antennas? A base-mounted antenna tuner allows
atypical mobile antennas with some pretty neat characteristics.
The subject was changed by someone leading us down a primrose path
to divert attention from Kurt's original mistake which concerned
generic base-mounted antenna tuners, not SGC. This thread is way
off the original subject and IMO, it's not by accident.

Kurt, here's a simple yes/no question for you. Can a mobile antenna
have an SWR higher than  4:1? If you say no, you have repeated
the mistake you made in your column. If you say yes, you need to
correct the mistake you made in your column. The mistake you made
had little to do with SGC. IMO, you changed the subject to cover up
your mistake and hoped we would forget the original subject.

Again, I am not defending SGC's marketing hype. My objection was
that some hams will believe Kurt's poppycock that mobile antennas
cannot have SWRs higher than 4:1 and may pass up a base-mounted
antenna tuner that would be ideal for their mobile applications.

IMO, Kurt (through his one friend :-) twisted the subject of conversation
away from the mistake he made so he could continue to appear omniscient.
I appologize for allowing his ploy to work but he is a master at it.

Kurt, have you ever made a mistake in your column? If you answer no,
we will know you are an omniscient being. If you answer yes, did you
admit it and correct it?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:08 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!ub!freenet.buffalo.edu!au298
From: [e-mail] (David L. Kushman)
Subject: UHF/VHF test gear ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: freenet.buffalo.edu
Organization: Buffalo Free-Net
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 17:43:10 GMT
Lines: 6


Looking for some antenna test gear.  Anyone have some laying around?
Please reply via e-mail.
Thanks
Dave
KB8KH


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!gatech!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 95 20:48:57 mdt
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3vesft$[e-mail]>
References: <3vdrdh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: transitory5.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


Cecil,

I must have missed some of the thread. I still think 75 was a
good test because of the problems faced. I will have to read the
KNS column again about the SGC hype.

An interesting thing gleaned from the SGC fax was that they are
going to Japan for a show and to a boat show but have given a
pass to the two major hamfests in Oregon and Washington during
the past few months. I don't think SGC can tolerate too much
technical scrutiny.

As an exercise for the student, and because I have the antennas
available, I am planning on mounting the SGC, a bug catcher style,
and a Don Johnson screwdriver on the same vehicle with a coax
switch. This should be enlightening.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!christ!scott.townley
From: [e-mail] (Scott Townley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,sci.physics.electromag
Subject: PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT:  NEC-Graph / Windows
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 21:32:29 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: World Evangelist Ministry [phone]
Distribution: world
Lines: 117
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.swap:40449 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12417 sci.physics.electromag:4690

Path: holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip10
      8.phx.primenet.com!nx7u
From: [e-mail] (Scott Townley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,sci.physics.electromag
Subject: PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT:  NEC-Graph / Windows
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 14:32:29 MST
Organization: Primenet
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT:  NECGraph-Windows (by Scott Townley, NX7U)

NECGraph-Windows is a Windows-based program for producing
publication-quality graphical
 output from your NEC (Numerical Electromagnetics Code) program.

NECGraph was originally written for my own personal use after having
suffered through many
 years of hand-plotting tables of text or importing hand-modified output
files
into popular spreadsheets with almost no true scientific graphics
capabilities.

NECGraph isn't NEC bundled into the Windows environment.  You will need to
use your
 own NEC executable to generate the output files that  NECGraph utilizes.
  This approach does have advantages:  (1) You can  continue to use your
customized/modified NEC sources and executables, (2) You don't need to spend
money on an executable that you may already have or can download for free,
and
(3) I can spend all my time on the graphical aspects of the program.

NECGraph will automatically parse the text-based output files from all
openly-available
versions of NEC (including NEC-2, NEC-NEEDS version from ACES, the
PC-compatible NECs on /pub/ra/rander/NEC at netcom.com, and NEC-4 from LLNL)
and generates almost any plot of interest.  Features include:

*NEC Outputs Plotted*

...Far Field Patterns
...Near Electric and Magnetic Field Patterns
...Impedance and Admittance versus Frequency
...Derived Impedance quantities (Return Loss, VSWR) versus Frequency

*Types of Plots Available*

...X-Y (rectilinear)
...Polar
...Smith Chart (impedance and admittance coordinates)

*Features*

...Multiple-frequency plots of all radiation patterns; pick and choose
which frequencies to plot.
...Plot Impedance or Admittance versus Frequency on either rectilinear or
Smith coordinates.
 Plot impedances of antenna systems with multiple inputs on one chart
(useful
for array antennas)...User-definable VSWR circles overlaid on Smith chart
plots
...User-definable plot scaling (dynamic range, size of divisions, log
axes), as well as
normalized plots
...Automatic Legend generation showing frequency, constant parameters (like
angles,
 distances, etc.), and antenna environment.  A plot has *all* the
information
needed to interpret your results...Cut and paste plots to any Windows-based
application...Print plots to any Windows printer/plotter.
...Save plots to disk in .WMF (Windows Metafile) format

*Some Upcoming Features*

...Three-dimensional plots for higher-directivity antenna designs
...Plots available for Receiving Antenna Patterns, Ground Wave Patterns
(RP1 card),
 and Maximum Coupling Impedances (CP card).

...Additionally, NECGraph can be modified to parse your custom program output
 (e.g., NEC-BSC, etc.).  Contact the author for arrangements.

Here's the deal:

NECGraph-Windows is available *only* directly from the author for $40 U.S.
(international will be higher depending on duties and postage--contact the
author for final pricing).  Cashier's Check/Personal Check/Money Order all
acceptable; please no Credit Card orders.  Note that AZ Sales Tax will be
collected for shipments to Arizona addresses.  Quantity discounts and site
licensing is available; contact the author for details.

For your money you get:

1. NECGraph-Windows with on-disk documentation
2. Unlimited support and bug-fixes
3. Program upgrades, as they become available, for $10 (domestic).  Plus,
if you suggest
 an improvement that's incorporated in an official release, you get that
upgrade for FREE.

For answers to questions, ordering, etc., contact the author using any of
the following
methods:

Scott Townley NX7U

e-mail (fastest method):
[e-mail]

fax (next fastest):
[phone]

snail mail (slowest):
1101 N. Gilbert Rd. #308
Gilbert, AZ  85234





From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (jbmitch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: 29 Jul 1995 21:49:13 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech/Blacksburg Electronic Village
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <3veacp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jbmitch.beva.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) says:
>->   The screwdriver antenna is more efficient and has a much higher Q t
>-> the Hustler (note I had the regular resonators and not the super...

>Is the screwdriver as tough as the Hustler
>antennas?  Do you think they would take a bunch of knocking around in
>a 4x4?
>Jim

Hi Jim, I saw a screwdriver type antenna (Broadbander BB3 - there are several commercial
variants) today at a local dealer, and am second guessing my decision to
go with the Bugcatcher.  Herewith a few points:
The BB3 indeed looks very rugged (outer surface is tough), it's heavy,
and looks like a quality product.
It's not cheap (280.00) but offers full power handling, and the ability
to tune remotely.
It needs a 102 inch whip to cover 80M, which makes it taller than my
bugcatcher. (May not matter if you don't work this band.)
I think if I were going to operate a lot of bands, the screwdriver design
makes more sense.  My Bugcatcher requires some fiddling with two different
matching coils, although you can mark positions for reference.  I would
not consider a Hustler or Outbacker, because of their inferior performance
on the low bands. For 40-10M and ruggedness, you can't beat the Outbacker.
I would be interested to see how the Screwdriver compares with the
Bugcatcher on 80M.  Because the BC can use the Hi Q 6 inch coil, capacitive
hat, and has shunt load system for 1:1 feedpoint impedence, I wouldn't
be surprised to see it win out, but it may not be a big difference.
For 4WD offroad, the Screwdriver may win out for ruggedness ( the coil is
not exposed as on the BC, heavy duty construction throughout, etc.) I do
wonder how reliable the mechanical tuning components have proven to be
over the long haul, though.  Anyone with experience, please comment.
Regards, John WD4MUR.



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!christ!jbmitch
From: [e-mail] (Jbmitch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 21:49:13 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: World Evangelist Ministry [phone]
Distribution: world
References: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 45

Path: holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!
      solaris.cc.vt.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (jbmitch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: 29 Jul 1995 21:49:13 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech/Blacksburg Electronic Village
Message-ID: <3veacp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Jim Wooddell) says:
>->   The screwdriver antenna is more efficient and has a much higher Q t
>-> the Hustler (note I had the regular resonators and not the super...

>Is the screwdriver as tough as the Hustler
>antennas?  Do you think they would take a bunch of knocking around in
>a 4x4?
>Jim

Hi Jim, I saw a screwdriver type antenna (Broadbander BB3 - there are
several commercial
variants) today at a local dealer, and am second guessing my decision to
go with the Bugcatcher.  Herewith a few points:
The BB3 indeed looks very rugged (outer surface is tough), it's heavy,
and looks like a quality product.
It's not cheap (280.00) but offers full power handling, and the ability
to tune remotely.
It needs a 102 inch whip to cover 80M, which makes it taller than my
bugcatcher. (May not matter if you don't work this band.)
I think if I were going to operate a lot of bands, the screwdriver design
makes more sense.  My Bugcatcher requires some fiddling with two different
matching coils, although you can mark positions for reference.  I would
not consider a Hustler or Outbacker, because of their inferior performance
on the low bands. For 40-10M and ruggedness, you can't beat the Outbacker.
I would be interested to see how the Screwdriver compares with the
Bugcatcher on 80M.  Because the BC can use the Hi Q 6 inch coil, capacitive
hat, and has shunt load system for 1:1 feedpoint impedence, I wouldn't
be surprised to see it win out, but it may not be a big difference.
For 4WD offroad, the Screwdriver may win out for ruggedness ( the coil is
not exposed as on the BC, heavy duty construction throughout, etc.) I do
wonder how reliable the mechanical tuning components have proven to be
over the long haul, though.  Anyone with experience, please comment.
Regards, John WD4MUR.



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Steve6920)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: 29 Jul 1995 22:42:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3veril$[e-mail]>
References: <3veacp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve6920)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi John,
  I have the screwdriver and have had no problem with the coil contacts
thus far.  I have the High Sierra version and it has a cover over the coil
assembly and have run it through several heavy rain/dust situations and
the coil is still shiney and there have been no contact problems to date
(I dont anticipate any)
  I did do something a little different.  If you look in radio shack and
several of the commercial antenna catalogs, you will see a slim line
spring.  It is not as stiff and the regular springs but still accepts the
3/8-24 thread.  I put this spring at the top of the coil where the whip
mounts.  This was should the whip strike something in motion, the spring
will take care of some of the shock.
  Only one change I would make to the High Sierra screwdriver design.  I
would add a few more turns on the coil.  This would permit the antenna to
be resonated on the high end of 10M when the coil is fully nestled, and
then able to tune into the 80M band when the coil was fully exposed.
  High Sierra recommends a whip length of about 67" to operate down to
3700 or 80" or longer to get down to 3500.  I have a slightly shorter whip
which takes me down to just inside the 75M band.  Again, I wished they
would have added a few more turns to allow full band tuning.  They do say
you can find two points at which the antenna will resonate on 10 meters,
but that at these settings the whip is effectively disconnected and you
are radiating only from the lower mast and coil.  Would rather see an
overall length of about 102" with coil fully retracted and then resonate
on about 3500 with it fully exposed.
  Anyway, if can answer any more questions drop me a note.
                     73's
                       Steve


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 95 03:39:03 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vch53$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>nine ft. whip. Worldradio has stretched the truth so often that I will

I remember you now. You were the one that was goi g on about a 10 Meter
antenna used on 20 or some such stuff that was never said in the article. I
tried to pin you down about it and your answer was that you didn't have the
article but that's what you think it said. I would examine that statement of
yours about "Worldradio has stretched the truth so often". You had best have
some actual data to back that up. I have printed out your dispute on the FETs
and
will contact the author for clarification. That may be a technical mistake
but does not fall in the area of "stretching the truth" you are being asked
tyo defend  your use of the statement "SO OFTEN"...Say, didn't you end up
having to apologize to Maxwell, too? Is this some sport that you enjoy?


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!satisfied.apocalypse.org!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 95 03:46:52 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <3vdec2$[e-mail]> <3vdrdh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>were marketing hype. What I objected to was the statement by Kurt
>that a mobile antenna never has an SWR higher than 4:1. At the

Kindly type on to the screen for all concerned when and where Sturba ever
said "A mobile antenna never has an SWR higher than 4:1" You have repeatedly
made that statement on this forum. It is now time for you to PROVE IT. Since
I went and found the column you talk about it, and have it in front of me,
all I can say is you are going to feel very sheepish when you have to
apologize to all concerned. I have tried to save you the embarrasment on
several occasions by telling you that what you state was never said.No one
else thinks that article says that, except YOU!


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in1.uu.net!ankh.iia.org!news
From: [e-mail] (R. Krigsman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Super StationMaster omni
Date: 30 Jul 1995 04:02:16 GMT
Organization: Internet Online Services
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3vf088$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-nyc-2-35.ios.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Does anyone know the design or suggested repair of a Phillps Dodge 2
>meter repeater Super Station Master fiberglass antenna? I have an
>intermittent between the center pin of the coax connector and the end of
>the 1 1/2 copper first section where the matching device is located.  I
>was warned not to take it apart.  Thanks,  Gary  K2UQ

Go ahead and take it apart. This kind of problem is common in shipping
damage. I have not repaired on myself but guys I have worked with have
received antennas like this and taken them apart and fixed them easily. I
suggest that you solder the broken componant (you may need a hot iron or
gun). Good luck!



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!ledge!darryl.linkow
From: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6 Meter antennas WANTED
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 95 10:39:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Organization: The Ledge PCBoard: Lake View Terrace, CA: USA: 818-896-2007
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.21
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.10
Lines: 17


7/30/95

Hello all and thanks for reading this message.  I am looking to buy
a couple of 6 Meter antennas.  First, I am looking to buy a 6 Meter
beam in good to excellent condition.  Tell me what you have.  Next,
I am looking to buy a Saturn 6 or similar type halo antenna.  If
you have something like what I am looking for, please leave me
Email with descriptions and pricing.
          73, Darryl KE6IHA

    Internet:  [e-mail]
                      OR
               [e-mail]

---
 * OLX 2.2 * Darryl Linkow [phone]  9 am - 5 pm PDT


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.funet.fi!news.tele.fi!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Osmo Vuorio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Address for yagiu109.zip
Date: 30 Jul 1995 11:03:27 GMT
Organization: TELECOM FINLAND, Engineering
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3vfotv$[e-mail]>
References: <3uobn7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vuorios1.dial.tele.fi
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

In article <3uobn7$[e-mail]>, Rod Greene <[e-mail]> says:
>
>Dave, my provider's name server cannot resolve medphys.ucl.ac.uk
..
I got it as 128.40.233.1

OV - OH2EU


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (V31RY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is best propagation prediction SW??
Date: 30 Jul 1995 13:00:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vgdsa$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (V31RY)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I'll vote for MiniProp Plus, too..  It's location atlas is easy to update,
and the program is a great tool for learning about propagation..

  But make sure you have a Co-processor if using a 386, and a 486sx will
be pretty slow without one, too..  Waiting 5 or 6 seconds isn't bad, but
any prediction program will seem like a chore if you have to wait 2
minutes!!


Glenn   AE0Q/V31RY   ex: WA0VPK, ZB2WZ, SV0WY



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (V31RY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Engine mounted antenna...bad for RF in face??
Date: 30 Jul 1995 13:08:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vgeb1$[e-mail]>
References: <3vdn6u$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (V31RY)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Stick with Larson antennas, the Comet and Diamond brand may have a tiny
bit more gain, but a Larson is commercial-quality, and will outlast those
others for sure!!

  I've got mine mounted out on the far corner of the hood of a Chevy
truck, but only because that's the only flat metal place left..  My camper
is fiberglass!
  I use low power as much as possible on 2m and UHF, why take chances..
50w is a lot of rf when only 10 feet away from your head.

Good luck and have fun!

Glenn   AE0Q/V31RY   ex: WA0VPK, ZB2WZ, SV0WY



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.eden.com!matrix.eden.com!n5kzw
From: "Edwin J. Bailen" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Reflecting UHF TV signals. Possible?
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 1995 15:08:11 -0500
Organization: Adhesive Media, Inc.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <Pine.BSD/[e-mail]>
References: <3v6kdu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: matrix.eden.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <3v6kdu$[e-mail]>



On 26 Jul 1995, Scott Kelly wrote:

> Is it possible to reflect UHF television signals? Our local UHF
> transmitter is below a crest along the line of sight from our house.
> It would be somewhat difficult to erect a tower tall enough to
> overcome this. However, the transmitter and the house are both
> visible from several other points of our property. Is it possible
> to erect a "mirror" to reflect the signal from the transmitter
> towards an antenna at the house? If so, through what angle can
> this be done? How big should the reflector be? What should the
> reflector be made of?
>
> If anyone has any answers to these questions or a suggestion as
> to where the answers may be found I would be grateful to hear
> from them. Thankyou.
>
> Scotto   Q:-)
>
> [e-mail]
>
You might try two single-channel antennae on the same mast, and connected
together electrically.  Point the upper one at the xmitter, and the lower
one at your house.

73 de n5kzw


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 30 Jul 1995 17:10:40 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vgeeg$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <3vdec2$[e-mail]> <3vdrdh$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Kindly type on to the screen for all concerned when and where Sturba ever
>said "A mobile antenna never has an SWR higher than 4:1"

I waded through back issues of Worldradio at Ft. Tuthill and I couldn't
find the article. I admitted I was doing this from memory and asked for
your help in resolving the argument. So far, you have refused. How about
you tell me what issue it was in so I can order a replacement and either
defend my position or admit I was wrong?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 30 Jul 1995 18:17:59 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 31
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vgicn$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
><[e-mail]> writes:

>That may be a technical mistake
>but does not fall in the area of "stretching the truth"

We appear to be from different planets. A "technical mistake" is much
worse than "stretching the truth". If I pour through *any* hamradio
magazine, I can find multiple examples of statements that are not 100%
true. If a statement is completely wrong, it is a mistake. If it is 1%
wrong, it is "stretching the truth" and it happens multiple times every
month in every hamradio publication. A simple statement like, "For ALL
intents and purposes, this (the impedance of free space) is equivalent
to ... 377-ohms." should have been "For MOST intents and purposes..."
Using the word "All" in that context is likely "stretching the truth".

>Say, didn't you end up
>having to apologize to Maxwell, too? Is this some sport that you enjoy?

You are just proving my point. Mr. Maxwell apologized for any statements
in "Reflections" that might have mislead anyone to believe that he implied
that reflected power is 100% re-reflected in a non-conjugately-matched
system. I apologized for using his name in the thread title which, by
the way, was not a statement but the rhetorical question, "Was Maxwell
Wrong?" I didn't believe he was wrong, and it turns out, he wasn't
wrong. Some people had wrongly interpreted what he had written.

In attempting to shine the light of truth, anyone (excluding omniscient
antenna experts) may make mistakes, including me.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:24 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!news
From: [e-mail] (Coen Waasdorp)
Subject: Re: G5RV tuning ?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ldn99-0.leiden.nl.net
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News at news)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: NLnet
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99.82
References: <3ugkhg$[e-mail]>  <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 1995 18:42:45 GMT
Lines: 39

Daniel J Holmes <[e-mail]> wrote:


>I would like to add that in your position, a vertical might be better and
>easier to hide.  The ARRL Antenna Handbook has some flagpole type
>antennas which hides the antenna in PVC pipe or something making it look
>like a flagpole.  Being a vertical, it's radiation travels outward from
>the antenna and unless you have placed it next to a metal building has a
>better chance of reaching my QTH here in Hawaii or any other DX-land.

Hi Daniel,

Read your message with great interest. As a matter of fact you seemed
to have put your finger on the very real problem I have.

Presently I am considering to pick up Hamradioing again (after some
odd 28 years or so). In my old ham-day I just had some home brew
stuff, with an arial from the window on a 2nd floor appartment, to the
nearest lamp post. However every one I talked to lately advised such
solution is not possible any more due to the state-of-art all
transistor transceivers. (end of Intro).

I am living in The Netherlands, I have no immediate access to the
handbook you referred to, so here two questions on the "flag-pole)
idea (really love it).

What length of flagpole would I need if I want to work on 80, 40, 20
and 10 meters.

The rig (if it comes to that) will be on the 2nd floor of residential
building, so how to I feed the antenna. Are those transceivers with
auto-antenne tuners any good for such a project?

Brgds,

Coen
Coen Waasdorp
Near Amsterdam - Netherlands



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R58 vs R8??? Is it worth it???
Date: 30 Jul 1995 19:58:32 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3vgo98$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


>only about 15% of your RF will ever make it out onto the air!
 Unless you have power to throw away like that, replacing the cable is
something that you should be considering. With a 70 foot length of feedline,
I would even consider going to one of the more expensive low-loss cable types
instead of the simple RG-8.
<

Well, you certainly have me convinced. Unfortunately, I already ordered the
RG-8 (I was actually convinced last weak!!). THe cable run is exactly 56'. And
I will be transmitting at 5w. Will I still be loosing a great deal of power
even with the RG-8 at 56'??

Thanks,
Drew Loker,  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.iii.net!iii1.iii.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (David R Tucker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 30 Jul 1995 20:00:19 -0400
Organization: KG2S
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <3vh6f6$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v7sb1$[e-mail]> <3v8cgd$[e-mail]> <3vaig7$[e-mail]> <3vcd8b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: iii1.iii.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84002 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28812 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12415

Gary McClellan ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (David R Tucker) wrote:
: >Wait a minute ... you, your neighbors, and your real estate agent all
: >"know" towers (not "appearance or condition" in general) affect values
: >(not "curb appeal" but sale prices) of neighboring properties -
: >*regardless* of any scientific evidence?  Wow.
: >
: >I'm sorry, but I find evidence more convincing than I find the "it
: >fits our prejudices, so it must be true" sort of argument"

: Sorry Dave - you're living in dreamland.. I have gotten active
: in "Block Watch" recently, and none of my fellow neighbors
: found my 40 ft. tower and tri-bander to be "attractive"...
: I personally LOVE to go out and just stand there admiring it,
: but for some odd reason they don't have the same appreciation
: of alunimium I do.  I suspect this is a universal trait!

I'm with you!  But how does that prove damage to property values?  How
much really comes off your neighbors' selling prices because of the
tower?  "I don't particularly like your tower" is not necessarily the
same thing as "I don't particularly like your toxic waste dump."
Failure to satisfy mere whims won't do much harm to property values.
My claim, remember, is that polls can't tell you the story.  Only
(well-done) studies can.

(OTOH, my *opinion* is that if - *if* - towers don't damage property
values, they're too trivial to restrict, and neighbors should mind
their own damn business.  The problem is the neighbors can outvote
hams.  Who said politics was fair?  Our only hope is to outlobby them.
Clamorous minorities frequently get their way, but not if people whink
damages is being caused when it isn't.)

-drt

========================================================================
|David R. Tucker                 KG2S                       [e-mail]|
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| PGP fingerprint: D4 17 D6 86 CC 8E 52 66   22 EF 11 34 9D 46 33 35   |
========================================================================


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.iii.net!iii1.iii.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (David R Tucker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 30 Jul 1995 20:03:25 -0400
Organization: KG2S
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <3vh6l0$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vc51n$[e-mail]> <3vci2j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: iii1.iii.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84003 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28813 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12416

Curtis Wheeler ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Any realtor or seller that doesn't ensure you are aware of CC&Rs and
: provide them to you is irresponsible.  I was told of the CC&Rs on my
: property and had to reveiw them.  The seller's agent had me initial each of
: all 30 pages of them.  If there was anything I couldn't live with, I had
: the right to call it off.

Good for the agent!  It's nice to hear.

: They are not a petty item.  Sellers can be sued for not dislosing them.

Well, that may not be true in all states, but it probably should be.

-drt

========================================================================
|David R. Tucker                 KG2S                       [e-mail]|
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| PGP fingerprint: D4 17 D6 86 CC 8E 52 66   22 EF 11 34 9D 46 33 35   |
========================================================================


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip247.phx.primenet.com!w5gyj
From: [e-mail] (Jim Bromley, W5GYJ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Where to Find Rubber Washers for Mobile Antennas?
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 1995 20:45:42 MST
Organization: None
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip247.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84022 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12423

In article <[e-mail]>
 [e-mail] (Ben Klausner) writes:

>I just unstalled a couple of Larsen roof mounts on my new truck. To my
>dismay, they no longer include a large rubber washer to seal the gap between
>the bottom of the antenna and the roof of the vehicle.

>I suppose that this might not _really_ be needed, but I find the gap left
>exposed disturbing. Tried several hardware stores, and an auto parts store,
>looking for a rubber washer, and they looked at me like I was from Mars (and
>I don't mean MARS).

>Any ideas on where to get a ~1" inner diameter rubber washer?

I faced this exact problem and found several solutions.  The best is
to go to a hardware store (for me, Home Depot and Ace Hardware) and get
a number of the large neoprene washers used to seal the bolts of toilet
bowls.  The largest I found were 2" in diameter.  They come in the thickness
you need, but only have 3/8" inner diameters.  I happen to have a
Greenlee punch for octal tube sockets left over from a previous life
in the vacuum-tube era and used it to make the hole large enough
for the Larsen mounts (I have LMO's, not NMO's).  Lacking this tool,
you will have to do some skillful trimming on the inside of the washer
to get it to fit.  I did this too, originally, with a pair of small,
sharp diagonal cutters with reasonably good results.  The bottom
skirt of the antenna loading coil will cover minor mistakes.

The other thing you need to know is that Larsen dealers carry these
washers as a separate item costing maybe a buck.  HRO here in
Phoenix had them last time I checked.  I prefer my "homemade"
versions, though.  The Neoprene is absolutely impervious to the
UV radiation that eats up the stock Larsen rubber washers.  And
the larger diameter (2") of my washers makes the antennas much
more water-resistant (hard to really tell here in AZ, though).

Finally, it is possible that you will find these washers but they will
be too thin.  I had this problem with Ace, they just didn't have the
1/8-inch thick washers.  The solution is to glue two of the thin washers
together with RTV and then ream out the center as above.

I'm happy to see that I am not the only person that has been
bugged by Larsen washers. ;-)

73,

Jim Bromley, W5GYJ




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 31 Jul 1995 00:07:23 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 37
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vh6rr$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <3vdec2$[e-mail]> <3vdrdh$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Kindly type on to the screen for all concerned when and where Sturba ever
>said "A mobile antenna never has an SWR higher than 4:1"

-start of letter written in mid-Sept, 1994_

Subject: Oct. '94 Aerials
I, too, saw the $900 mobile antenna tuner plus vertical. It appears to
me that there is no loading coil so it makes no sense to talk about a
maximum SWR of 4:1 - try 400:1. Assuming the vertical is an 8-ft whip,
ELNEC says the impedance on 20m is about 5-j500 plus about 5 ohms ground
loss yielding a calculated SWR of around 500:1 with 50-ohm coax. Assuming
10 ft of RG-213, the losses in the coax calculate out to be over 7 db,
not the neglible value that Kurt would have us believe. The antenna tuner
at the base of the antenna instead of 10 ft away has given us about an
'S' unit better performance, not neglible in my opinion.

In an earlier article, Kurt said that a square antenna is always better
than a dipole. I challenged him to come up with a square that will
outperform my 88ft dipole on 20m *and* 17m (2 lobes@9dbi and 4 lobes@
8dbi respectively). I haven't heard anything from him.

-end of letter-

If I had received a response in my SASEs, I would not have posted here.

I am ordering a copy of the Oct. 94 issue and will appologize if Kurt
didn't make misleading statements that prompted the above letter.
He lampooned me in 3 inches of a later column. He didn't mention the
technical topic. He simply attacked my choice of words and the fact that
I'm not a member of the IEEE. I think that qualifies as ad hominem.

In the meantime, since Kurt is such a nice fellow, how about if you post
the date of the issue in which he apologized for a single mistake.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is best propagation prediction SW??
Date: 31 Jul 95 01:20:33 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

In a message dated 95-07-28 16:42:00 EDT, [e-mail] (Herb Rosenberg)
writes:

>)

Check out VOACAP.  Its in the public domain and is probably the most
extensive propagation program out there. It's an enhanced version of IONCAP,
or atleat its based on IONCAP, and was designed specifically for the VOA
point-topoint short-wave services.  Its a bit large, however.  Chews up about
15M of disk space and runs rather slowly on a 386DX/33.  Thats why I took it
off my meager machine.

                                             73 de Walt - K2WK


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 95 01:34:54 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v71eh$[e-mail]> <3v89pm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>

Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]> writes:

>Could you post some info on the autotuner. The lack of automatic
>tuning is the only thing that keeps me away from the screwdriver

I've heard that one of the companies does have a "screwdriver" that
automatically
tunes....In about the time it takes you to say two words, i;ve been told.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Remote L-Network info wanted
Date: 31 Jul 1995 01:45:08 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

I have just finished building a vertical for 40m, 80m, and 160m. It is a
quarter wave vertical on 40m,80m and is a quarter wave inverted-L on 160m. I
would like to build a remotely tuned L-network that I can install at the base
of the antenna and tune from the operating position. Or if possible I would
like to have the tuner monitor the antenna SWR and tune the antenna
automatically. Has anyone done this successfully? Does anyone remember seeing
anything like this in print? I don't have an electrical engineering background
so I am looking for some "understandable" information that will lead me to the
completion of the project. All comments are welcome. The tuner should be rated
at the legal limit.
Thanks,
Joe AA6WG


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!sonnet1.sonnet.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Wyatt Earp)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 02:36:47 GMT
Organization: SONNET Networking - Modesto Sonora Stockton (800)50-ONLINE
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <3vhfhi$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]> <3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp16.moa.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84015 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28815 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12422

[e-mail] (David Tock) wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger) writes:
><...much stuff deleted...>
>>The safty issue is really big with me.  For example in Mission Viejo one is
>>not to park cars on the street or in the driveway.  Visibility is very good,
>>keeping one from running over kids on a bikes.  Seen that one too.  Also by
>>not haveing oil dripping on the street, taxes are kept down and streets are
>>in good repair.
>>
>I read through this group from time to time, and it really drives home some
>of the differences between the USA and the UK. We generally do not have these
>restrictive coveneants, but the common sense approach of staying friendly with
>the neighbours, and keeping things safe works most of the time. OF couse, for
>larger constructions, we need proper planning permission.

>What really impressed me about this last posting was that Jeff can not park
>his car on the street _or_ in his own driveway. Sheesh, I'd have to leave
>mine in a car park in the town, and take a bus home!

You have to understand that Mission Viejo is an extreme case.  Only
001% of the US has laws forbidding parking on the street.  Most of
the US is covered with cars, and they have to sit for 10-30 days
before they can be towed off.

Judging the US by the customs of Mission Viejo is like watching the OJ
trial and thinking we all have Kato type dudes with bitchin' hair
living in the guest house.  It's true for a few people and that's why
we watch then on TV.  Much more exciting than our own boring lives.

Wyatt




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Herb Rosenberg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is best propagation prediction SW??
Date: 31 Jul 95 05:57:27 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9507302220.A25445-0100000@netcom12>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Walt,

Any idea on where this program might be found.  I have checked a few of
the ham ftp sits, but can't seem to find it anywhere.

Thanks.


[e-mail]

On Sun, 30 Jul 1995 [e-mail] wrote:

> In a message dated 95-07-28 16:42:00 EDT, [e-mail] (Herb Rosenberg)
> writes:
>
> >)
>
> Check out VOACAP.  Its in the public domain and is probably the most
> extensive propagation program out there. It's an enhanced version of IONCAP,
> or atleat its based on IONCAP, and was designed specifically for the VOA
> point-topoint short-wave services.  Its a bit large, however.  Chews up about
> 15M of disk space and runs rather slowly on a 386DX/33.  Thats why I took it
> off my meager machine.
>
>                                              73 de Walt - K2WK
>


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!pulm1.accessone.com!usenet
From: jwillott <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 31 Jul 1995 06:05:47 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3vhrrr$[e-mail]>
References: <3vb7vd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jwillott.accessone.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Re: Flexi-weave antenna wire.  Just today I climbed up on my riding arena
roof and re-soldered the Flexi-weave back to the center connector on my
160 meter dipole.  The original solder joint lasted for over two years and
finally broke in a windstorm.  I am not disappointed in that at all.
Flexi-weave is very easy to work with and even when it tangles it is easy
to un-tangle.  If it were not for the Flexi-weave product I would not have
installed such a large antenna in the first place.  Working with copper
clad wire is almost impossible.  Using copper clad for really long lengths
would be horrible.  I vote you buy 500 feet from "radioware" catalog along
with their new dacron UV resistant cord and have a blast making antennas.
 The dacron line is as good today as it was over two years ago.

73  John KI7JG



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!crash!pzcc.bitenet!news
From: [e-mail] (Bruce W. Forsberg)
Subject: New Ham TV Web page!
Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET), San Diego, CA
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 06:47:28 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Sender: [e-mail] (news subsystem)
Nntp-Posting-Host: forsberg.cts.com
Lines: 15
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12428 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:15212 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8622 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84033

To all,

   There is a new WWW page that contains information regarding Amateur
TeleVision (ATV). It is for the ATN (Amateur Television Network) club
in southern California courtesy of KB6MMF. If you have always wanted
to know what goes on in ATV then come and check out what is happening.
Also drop us a line to the email addresses list on the page about what
is happening with your ATV club. If there are any other ATV home pages
let us know so that we can add a link. Come and find out about the
least known and most excitting part of Ham radio. The address is:

http://www.realm.net/~jpawluk/KB6MMF.html

73's and See Ya on the air.   Bruce  WB6IZG



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Joanne Dow)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 31 Jul 1995 08:59:51 GMT
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <3vi627$[e-mail]>
References: <3vesft$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Joanne Dow)
NNTP-Posting-Host: bix.com
X-Newsreader: NetBix 1.140
X-Newsreader-Author: [e-mail] (Loren Wilton)
    This message has been posted with development version software.
    If there are any problems with the message format, send me mail.

In article <3vesft$[e-mail]>,
   Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Cecil,
>
>I must have missed some of the thread. I still think 75 was a
>good test because of the problems faced. I will have to read the
>KNS column again about the SGC hype.
>
>An interesting thing gleaned from the SGC fax was that they are
>going to Japan for a show and to a boat show but have given a
>pass to the two major hamfests in Oregon and Washington during
>the past few months. I don't think SGC can tolerate too much
>technical scrutiny.
>
>As an exercise for the student, and because I have the antennas
>available, I am planning on mounting the SGC, a bug catcher style,
>and a Don Johnson screwdriver on the same vehicle with a coax
>switch. This should be enlightening.

Just to throw some interesting monkeywrenches into the discussion I remember
back in 'bout '72 I ran across an study at Rockwell (either from the Collins
plant in Cedar or Bendix in Ma) analysing base matching a vertical whip antenna
for backpacks.  With componentry available at that time they concluded that for
a whip resonant at about 80MHz you could get just about as good VSWR and
radiation over the 30MHz to 80MHz range by tossing a 50 ohm dummy load at the
base of the antenna as compared to any reasonably pack mountable tuning
apparatus.  The coils of such size as to fit in even a BIG pack radio simply had
such a great loss that base loading a whip introduced so much loss you might as
well feed a dummy load with a pigtail on it.  I suspect the conclusion applies
to a 9' whip on a car bumper with any matching unit about the size of the SGC.
It'd be interesting to find out.

Of course anybody with any good sense and a desire to only work one band uses a
center loaded antenna with as big a top hat as manageable. The base tuner would
be used only to fine tune the VSWR as you change frequencies.

It's such fun to toss out these little pearls you run across over a 30 year
career.

{^_-}     Joanne Dow     The Wizardess



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hplextra!hplb!hpwin055.uksr!hpqmoea!dstock
From: [e-mail] (David Stockton)
Subject: Re: Help G5MH (?) Minibeam
Sender: [e-mail] (SQF News Admin)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 09:35:57 GMT
References: <3v8f7c$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpqmocc.sqf.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard LTD, South Queensferry, Scotland
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8.8]
Lines: 28

[e-mail] wrote:

: I have an old HF-minibeam according to - I think - G5MH.
: This design uses capacitance hats in the form of spokes.
: Unfortunately these are missing. Can anybody give me the
: length of them. Or point me in the right direction for the
: original design?


    The Originator was Jim Fish  G4MH

   He's still in business:

     The Amateur Radio Shop
         Cross Church Street,
            Huddersfield
               West Yorkshire
                 UK

     I've known Jim for well over 30 years, he's a very decent bloke and
should be happy to help you.

   I grew up in Huddersfield, so the above address is sufficient to
reach him, but I don't have post codes or phone numbers in my head.

    Cheers
           David  GM4ZNX



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.sunbelt.net!skm.engr.rhtelco.com!morris
From: [e-mail] (Stephen Morris)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole for 2m
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 10:44:10 UNDEFINED
Organization: SunBelt.Net
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v0sjl$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: skm.engr.rhtelco.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #1]

Don,

Is there a reference I can look up on how to make one of these?

Thank you,

Stephen N4ZUX

>Personnally, I make a 4 element quad using direct feed of pumbler's
>delight construction using 1/2" copper pipe.  Worked great.
>Next, I am about to do that old plumber's delight verticle colinear
>for 2 meters out of the old ARRL's antenna book.

>To each their own.  Have fun.

>Don
>N6MCE.



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:40 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!uknet!bcc.ac.uk!news
From: [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby)
Subject: position of first null
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News System)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 10:50:36 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UCL Dept of Medical Physics
Lines: 26

Is there a simple way of estimating the position of the first null in an antenna
pattern, prefereably from the gain ?????

I need this for a computer program. I can caclulate it by finding the gain at small
increments of angle from the front to the back of the antenna. This is a bit time
consuming though, as I need to do it thousands of times. I know the forward gain
. Can I use this as an estimate????

I've look in the book Numerica Recipes in C for routines that use some intelligence
to save testing at very small increments of angle, but most need you to have some idea
where the null is - ie you must bracket beween to values. Obviously I know its
between 0 and 180 deg for a Yagi, but there may well be more than one null, in
which case the program probably wont converge to the one I want (the first null).


Any ideas?????


dave kirkby









From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 31 Jul 1995 10:50:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3viqk7$[e-mail]>
References: <3vhrrr$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I would be sceptical of woven antenna wire. It is a documented fact that
brading has over three times the RF resistance of the same width smooth
copper. So if the wire is really "woven" the resistance could be even
higher at RF. Lot's of stuff enters the selection, such as the radiation
resistance at the current peaks, but I don't know that it is that
necessary to use a super flexable wire in a permanent antenna.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT:  NEC-Graph / Wind
Date: 31 Jul 1995 12:15:18 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

Thank you for not posting the UUEncoded executables to this list!
Kevin, WB5RUE
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Coleman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 12:23:31 -0600
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3ev6$[e-mail]> <3v3n1o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v5v3o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu

In article <3v5v3o$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob
Smith) wrote:

> Coolness on the ground rods - I am now motivated to upgrade my
> meager 4ft rod to multiple 8ft rods!
>
> Where can I get 1-3" copper braid locally???
>
Unless the flexibility of braid is absolutely necessary, you can use
copper water tubing as a ground connection. It's available in various
sizes at all home supply stores. I use it on my tower legs. You flatten
one end and make a good mechanical connection (like a bolt through a
drilled hole). Then you follow it up with silver solder and a propane
torch. Easy to do and has maintained its integrity for more than 8
years...

--
Jim
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!ieunet!news.tcd.ie!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What is best propagation prediction SW??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (TCD News System )
Organization: Teltec, MEE, Trinity College Dublin
X-Newsreader: <WinQVT/Net v3.9>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 14:11:11 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In a message dated 95-07-28 16:42:00 EDT, [e-mail] (Herb Rosenberg)
>writes:
>
>>)
>
>Check out VOACAP.  Its in the public domain and is probably the most
>extensive propagation program out there. It's an enhanced version of IONCAP,
>or atleat its based on IONCAP, and was designed specifically for the VOA
>point-topoint short-wave services.  Its a bit large, however.  Chews up about
>15M of disk space and runs rather slowly on a 386DX/33.  Thats why I took it
>off my meager machine.
>
>                                             73 de Walt - K2WK

Any idea where this software is on the net.


Dr. Gerry Butler,  CEng. MIEE. [[e-mail]]
TELTEC-TCD (Radio Propagation Planning)
Dept. of Electronic and Electrical Engineering,
Trinity College,Dublin,Ireland
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dublin+Wicklow Mountain Rescue / EI0CH / EMT-D


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dg-rtp!teton!mead
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Mead)
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: mead@teton (Glenn Mead)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 95 15:11:46 GMT
References: <3undve$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Data General Corp.
Lines: 64

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
|> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter Rojsel) writes:
|> >Lightning can be a strange thing. I have read some of Gary's very interesting
|> >articles with great interest, but please explain this:
|> >
|> >A few years ago this happened close to where I work.
|> >The scene is a 6 meter high tree standing 10 meters from a 20 meter high 5
|> >floor building with lightning protecting (copper wires of 1 cm thick) on all
|> >corners and along the roof edges and grounded. The lightning hits the tree so
|> >that it becomes splinters. This can only have been by a direct hit to the
|> >tree. Why did the lighning not choose the lower impedance path to ground that
|> >was offered by the lighning protective system of the building? The buildings
|> >protection probably worked since it houses the computer centre of the universe
|> >and the computers survived (they were running during the storm).
|> >
|> >The only explanation I can think of is that a flash can have the upper
|> >'connecting point' in a very low cloud.
|>
|> You're on the right track, Peter. As you know, it takes about 4kV to
|> arc across 1 cm of air, but the potential between cloud and ground is
|> typically only on the order of 300 V/m. So how can the lightning bolt
|> jump all that air? The way it does that is by streamers forming from
|> objects on the ground, and by step leaders forming in the cloud. When
|> a streamer finds a step leader, an ionized channel exists between Earth
|> and cloud, and the main bolt current courses up the channel, heating it
|> and ionizing more air so that it becomes a still better conductor, which
|> causes more current to flow, etc. It's a runaway effect that quickly forms
|> a low impedance channel between Earth and cloud.
|>
|> Ok, now the meeting of a particular streamer with a particular step
|> leader is pretty much a chaotic event. There are lots of streamers
|> coming up from objects on the ground, and lots of step leaders coming
|> down from clouds. Their paths are somewhat of a random walk. Now
|> whichever streamer and step leader first meet, that's where the bolt
|> is going to go.
|>
|> A bolt is only going to "sidestep" to a lower impedance conductor
|> if the flashover distance plus the impedance of the better path
|> add up to less than the impedance of the original chaotic random
|> walk path. Sometimes that's true, sometimes it isn't. If streamers
|> or step leaders become tangled, which often happens, you may see
|> a forked bolt, or the vast majority of the bolt current may divert
|> to the lower impedance channel, again depending on the ratio of
|> the impedances involved. So there's no *guarantee* that a tall
|> low impedance object will offer a cone of protection to shorter
|> objects in the area, but it *usually* happens that way. Which is
|> why lightning rods mostly work.
|>
|> Gary
|> --
|> Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
|> Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
|> 534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
|> Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

I am confused. I was told that the grounding of antennas, towers, and
and buildings was not to give the lightening a path to ground, but to avoid
the strike all together. It was explained to me that the grounds were
there to attempt to equalize any electrical differences between the
structure trying to be protected and the earth around it. The grounding
systems were supposed to allow a slow, natural balancing of electrical
potential in an effort to avoid the strike. I guess I found this easy
to believe as it made more sense to try and avoid the strike than to believe
that a little wire would do much in the case of an actual strike.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!ornews.intel.com!chnews!scorpion.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 31 Jul 1995 15:25:58 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 19
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vism6$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scorpion.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I would examine that statement of
>yours about "Worldradio has stretched the truth so often". You had best have
>some actual data to back that up.

Since you insist  :-)  Kurt N. Sterba said that a square antenna is
always better than a dipole. That was great news to me. I run a 5/4
wavelength dipole on 20m. It gives me 9dbi lobes into Africa and
Australia on 20m over real ground according to ELNEC. It also gives
me 8dbi lobes into Europe, South America, New Zealand, and the Pacific
Rim on 17m. Try as I might, I could not model a square antenna better
than that. I wrote to Kurt to find out the details on such a square
antenna. I received no answer so here is a public request to prove that
his statement was not BS. Please ask him what the design details are on
a square antenna that has better than 9dbi gain on 20m *and* better than
8dbi gain on 17m with world wide coverage on two bands without rotating.

Thanks very much, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC,  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:48 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3vhrrr$[e-mail]> <3viqk7$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 15:27:46 GMT
Lines: 26

Interesting! I like the idea of woven flexible wire. I use a horizontal
loop and the wire must slide around sharp corners. I've tried various
insulators including pvc curved pipe elbows. The least little hump or
kink in the wire hangs it up. The wire needs to feed through easily and I
think flex weave would help. Right now I'm using #17 aluminum electric
fence wire. The loop is 560ft around and up 60 feet. This is the best
stuff I have found thus far. I don't think the RF resistance is much
higher than copper but what you are saying about woven wire does concern
me.



W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I would be sceptical of woven antenna wire. It is a documented fact that
: brading has over three times the RF resistance of the same width smooth
: copper. So if the wire is really "woven" the resistance could be even
: higher at RF. Lot's of stuff enters the selection, such as the radiation
: resistance at the current peaks, but I don't know that it is that
: necessary to use a super flexable wire in a permanent antenna.

: 73 Tom
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!jobone!eccdb1.pms.ford.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bernie Wirtz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: notch filter
Date: 31 Jul 1995 15:48:53 GMT
Organization: Ford Motor Company
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <3viu15$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 19.57.73.67
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6

does anyone know where i may obtain a 1270KHz notch filter?

thanks in advance
b.


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!pacifier!rainrgnews0!europa.com!thetics.europa.com!franka
From: [e-mail] (Frank Adrian)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 31 Jul 1995 18:15:32 GMT
Organization: Europa |||| Portland, OR
Lines: 69
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vj6k4$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vce8q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: thetics.europa.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84065 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28822 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12443

Todd Little ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <3vaub2$[e-mail]>
: [e-mail] (Frank Adrian) wrote:
: > In the final analysis, it is aesthetics which determine the quality of
: > our lives.

: The problem with using aesthetics to determine "rights" is what
: principals do you apply to determine the extent to which aesthetics
: can be imposed?
I didn't say that aesthetics should be used to determine "rights".  In
fact, I believe that the constitution is very clear on what determines
rights.  And there is no right (as enumerated by the constitution and
upheld by many levels of courts) to build a radio tower in your backyard.

: I find bell bottom jeans unaesthetic.  Does that
: mean it is reasonable to write a CC&R that prohibits bell bottoms?

Absolutely.  And I'd vote for it (the bell-bottom prohibition) at your
local neighborhood association meeting (if I lived there)! :-).

: > Aesthetics are NOT nonsense.  The aesthetic sensibility is probably the
: > only thing that is uniquely human.  In denying aesthetics, you are denying
: > your own humanity.  Go back to the jungle and live with your ape cousins,
: > Monkey-Boy - they won't care if you build a tower.

: The only thing that is uniquely human?  What a stretch.  For someone that
: claims to do object analysis and design, you have an amazing ability to
: exclude relevent domains from your analysis.  If aesthetics were so unique
: and important, why didn't our founding fathers feel the need to protect
: them in the Constitution?  Because aesthetic arguments subject one to
: the whims of those in power.  Perhaps that's why they felt the need to
: explicitly spell out a long list of rights that are inalieable.  They defined and
: used a set of principles to make those decisions instead of popular fashion
: which is generally all aesthetic arguments often amount to.

Again, seem to think the issue is rights, which I have not commented on.  I
do believe that people have rights (I just don't think that the erection of
huge metal structures is one of them).  I am referring to humanity which is
a completely orthogonal issue.  A dog which you own has a right by law not
to be maltreated by you, nonetheless, it is not a human.  What would you
regard as a milestone for humanity, if not aesthetic sensibility?  In the
past, people have plausited language (probably not true as shown by teaching
apes to use ASL), intelligence (obvious disproven by entities such as Con-
gressmen and the average Usenet poster :-), tool use (probably not true as
primitive tool use in chimps has been proven in behavioral experiments), a
soul (an interesting concept, but hardly one which can be proven), and so
forth...

: PS    "Monkey-Boy"?  How cute.  Would you like to insult my mother while
:       you're at it?
OOOH!!! Can I, can I???

: Or perhaps you'd like to have your father beat up
:       my father?
Nah, I'd rather have my mother beat up your mother!

: Good grief!  I find your aesthetically displeasing, perhaps
:       you should be tried for that and executed.  ;-)
Even though I do believe that people have the right to prevent major
aesthetic offenses, I do not believe that it should be a capital crime
(else I would have been deceased long ago :-).  On the other hand,
public taunting is usually a good enough penalty...
___________________________________________________________________________
Frank A. Adrian           ancar technology            Object Analysis,
[e-mail]         PO Box 1624                   Design,
                          Portland, OR 97207              Implementation,
                          Voice: [phone]             and Training...
                          FAX: [phone]



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:51 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uop!csus.edu!netcom.com!stevew
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vc51n$[e-mail]> <3vci2j$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 19:28:26 GMT
Lines: 41
Sender: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84084 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28826 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12449

Curtis Wheeler ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

: >The only complaint anyone should have with this is that the CCR's are not
: >conveniently available when house-hunting, and that the need to review the
: >documents can slow the process considerably.  Realtors seldom appreciate
: >the need to do this and certainly prefer not to deal with such complication
: >if it can be avoided.

: Any realtor or seller that doesn't ensure you are aware of CC&Rs and
: provide them to you is irresponsible.  I was told of the CC&Rs on my
: property and had to reveiw them.  The seller's agent had me initial each of
: all 30 pages of them.  If there was anything I couldn't live with, I had
: the right to call it off.

: They are not a petty item.  Sellers can be sued for not dislosing them.

: A buyer that doesn't ask about them is ignorant.  If the buyer's, or
: potential buyer's agent doesn't get them, he is incompetent.

: --
: Curtis Wheeler - Pleasanton, CA

Curtis,

You are living in a dream land.  (or rather...California ;-)

California has a full disclosure law NOW.  They didn't 10 years or
so ago when I bought my house in the San Jose area!  This law
isn't universal either.  You won't necessarily get the same treatment
in other states.

The other simple fact that you are ignoring is that Real Estate
agents are of the same ilk as used-car salesmen! ( and me doing
this after yelling at Burt Fisher to stop painting all CA hams
active in RACES/ARES with the same brush ;-)

I'm afraid that you'll find that Jack's point of view comes
closer to representing reality in most states.

Steve KA6S


From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news0.cybernetics.net!central.bbt.com!bodie!jlm
From: [e-mail] (James L. McKiel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna for HT
Date: 31 Jul 1995 20:15:35 GMT
Organization: BroadBand Technologies, RTP NC
Lines: 11
Sender: jlm@bodie (James L. McKiel)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vjdl7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: bodie.bbt.com

I reciently bought a Kenwood TH-22AT HT. It works great unless I am
on my deck in back of the house (I live in the country). Does anyone
know what other antenna I can use to improve the output? I would like
suggestions for aftermarket antennas for the HT (like telescoping) and
ones that I could put on top of the house.

Thanks,

Jim
KD4IHG



From [e-mail] Mon Jul 31 20:01:53 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news
From: N6ND@
Subject: Re: What is best propagation prediction SW??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Network News)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: NRaD Code 848
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 20:19:49 GMT
Lines: 25

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>In a message dated 95-07-28 16:42:00 EDT, [e-mail] (Herb Rosenberg)
>>writes:
>>
>>>)
>>
>>Check out VOACAP.  Its in the public domain and is probably the most
>>extensive propagation program out there. It's an enhanced version of IONCAP,
>>or atleat its based on IONCAP, and was designed specifically for the VOA
>>point-topoint short-wave services.  Its a bit large, however.  Chews up about
>>15M of disk space and runs rather slowly on a 386DX/33.  Thats why I took it
>>off my meager machine.
>>
>>                                             73 de Walt - K2WK
>
>Any idea where this software is on the net.
>
>

The software can be found at ftp.voa.gov in pub\software\voacap.  It's a big
file, abt 3.6 MB.  Works quite well.  73

Rick Craig, N6ND
[e-mail]