[Antennas] Antennas Digest, Vol 126, Issue 5
John
johnmb at nc.rr.com
Fri Feb 27 21:40:16 EST 2015
antennas-request at mailman.qth.net wrote:
>Send Antennas mailing list submissions to
> antennas at mailman.qth.net
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> antennas-request at mailman.qth.net
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> antennas-owner at mailman.qth.net
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Antennas digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Small Triband Beam (David C. Hallam)
> 2. Re: Small Triband Beam (n8de at thepoint.net)
> 3. Re: Small Triband Beam (Ross Primrose)
> 4. Re: Small Triband Beam (Stan, KB6RQZ via Antennas)
> 5. Re: Small Triband Beam (n8de at thepoint.net)
> 6. Re: Small Triband Beam (Ross Primrose)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:39:28 -0500
>From: "David C. Hallam" <dhallam at knology.net>
>To: antennas at mailman.qth.net
>Subject: [Antennas] Small Triband Beam
>Message-ID: <54F0ABD0.6060806 at knology.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
>I am looking for ideas about what would be a good small triband beam.
>About 20 ft. would be about as high up as I could get it. Ideally the
>turning radius would not more than 10 ft but maybe could go to 12 ft.
>My rig runs 900-1000W DC input.
>
>I am on a 1/4 acre lot with 8 Oak trees so I am limited as to where I
>could locate a tower as well as how high up I can go.
>
>Does anyone have reasonable suggestions?
>
>David
>KW4DH
>
>--
>There are two possible outcomes: if the result confirms the hypothesis, then you've made a measurement.
>If the result is contrary to the hypothesis, then you've made a discovery.
>Enrico Fermi
>
>
>
>-----
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2015.0.5751 / Virus Database: 4299/9192 - Release Date: 02/27/15
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:17:08 -0500
>From: n8de at thepoint.net
>To: "David C. Hallam" <dhallam at knology.net>
>Cc: antennas at mailman.qth.net
>Subject: Re: [Antennas] Small Triband Beam
>Message-ID: <20150227131708.s2bqj9n6okggk8c0 at webmail.win.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
> format="flowed"
>
>Cushcraft A3S is a well-performing tri-bander.
>Have on up here at 34' and have worked over 300 DXCC with it the past
>three years.
>73
>Don
>N8DE
>
>
>Quoting "David C. Hallam" <dhallam at knology.net>:
>
>> I am looking for ideas about what would be a good small triband beam.
>> About 20 ft. would be about as high up as I could get it. Ideally the
>> turning radius would not more than 10 ft but maybe could go to 12 ft.
>> My rig runs 900-1000W DC input.
>>
>> I am on a 1/4 acre lot with 8 Oak trees so I am limited as to where I
>> could locate a tower as well as how high up I can go.
>>
>> Does anyone have reasonable suggestions?
>>
>> David
>> KW4DH
>>
>> --
>> There are two possible outcomes: if the result confirms the hypothesis,
>> then you've made a measurement.
>> If the result is contrary to the hypothesis, then you've made a discovery.
>> Enrico Fermi
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2015.0.5751 / Virus Database: 4299/9192 - Release Date: 02/27/15
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Antennas mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Antennas at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:57:21 -0500
>From: Ross Primrose <n4rp at n4rp.com>
>To: n8de at thepoint.net, "David C. Hallam" <dhallam at knology.net>
>Cc: antennas at mailman.qth.net
>Subject: Re: [Antennas] Small Triband Beam
>Message-ID: <54F0BE11.8090002 at n4rp.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
>That's well over his turning radius limit. The Cushcraft MA5B might be
>a better fit...
>
>73, Ross N4RP
>
>On 2/27/2015 1:17 PM, n8de at thepoint.net wrote:
>> Cushcraft A3S is a well-performing tri-bander.
>> Have on up here at 34' and have worked over 300 DXCC with it the past
>> three years.
>> 73
>> Don
>> N8DE
>>
>>
>> Quoting "David C. Hallam" <dhallam at knology.net>:
>>
>>> I am looking for ideas about what would be a good small triband beam.
>>> About 20 ft. would be about as high up as I could get it. Ideally the
>>> turning radius would not more than 10 ft but maybe could go to 12 ft.
>>> My rig runs 900-1000W DC input. lp support this email list:
>>> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>--
>FCC Section 97.313(a) ?At all times, an amateur station must use the minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired communications.?
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 15:27:18 -0500
>From: "Stan, KB6RQZ via Antennas" <antennas at mailman.qth.net>
>To: dhallam at knology.net, antennas at mailman.qth.net
>Subject: Re: [Antennas] Small Triband Beam
>Message-ID: <2ce45.dd8a50d.42222d25 at aol.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>David,
>
>Steppir makes a 3 element (DB-11) that tunes from 20 through 6 meters,
>turning radius is 10.5 feet. I have the regular 3 element which is at ~ 25 feet
> and have worked well over 300 countries.
>
>http://www.steppir.com/db11-yagi-antenna
>
>73,
>
>Stan KK3KK
>
>
>In a message dated 2/27/2015 9:44:34 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
>dhallam at knology.net writes:
>
>I am looking for ideas about what would be a good small triband beam.
>About 20 ft. would be about as high up as I could get it. Ideally the
>turning radius would not more than 10 ft but maybe could go to 12 ft.
>My rig runs 900-1000W DC input.
>
>I am on a 1/4 acre lot with 8 Oak trees so I am limited as to where I
>could locate a tower as well as how high up I can go.
>
>Does anyone have reasonable suggestions?
>
>David
>KW4DH
>
>--
>There are two possible outcomes: if the result confirms the hypothesis,
>then you've made a measurement.
>If the result is contrary to the hypothesis, then you've made a discovery.
>Enrico Fermi
>
>
>
>-----
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2015.0.5751 / Virus Database: 4299/9192 - Release Date: 02/27/15
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Antennas mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Antennas at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:38:45 -0500
>From: n8de at thepoint.net
>To: Ross Primrose <n4rp at n4rp.com>
>Cc: antennas at mailman.qth.net
>Subject: Re: [Antennas] Small Triband Beam
>Message-ID: <20150227143845.ehxhhmo4ggcw4sws at webmail.win.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
> format="flowed"
>
>He said 12' turning RADIUS .. not diameter.
>
>73
>Don
>N8DE
>
>
>Quoting Ross Primrose <n4rp at n4rp.com>:
>
>> That's well over his turning radius limit. The Cushcraft MA5B might be
>> a better fit...
>>
>> 73, Ross N4RP
>>
>> On 2/27/2015 1:17 PM, n8de at thepoint.net wrote:
>>> Cushcraft A3S is a well-performing tri-bander.
>>> Have on up here at 34' and have worked over 300 DXCC with it the
>>> past three years.
>>> 73
>>> Don
>>> N8DE
>>>
>>>
>>> Quoting "David C. Hallam" <dhallam at knology.net>:
>>>
>>>> I am looking for ideas about what would be a good small triband beam.
>>>> About 20 ft. would be about as high up as I could get it. Ideally the
>>>> turning radius would not more than 10 ft but maybe could go to 12 ft.
>>>> My rig runs 900-1000W DC input. lp support this email list:
>>>> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>> --
>> FCC Section 97.313(a) "At all times, an amateur station must use the
>> minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired
>> communications."
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Antennas mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Antennas at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 15:40:05 -0500
>From: Ross Primrose <n4rp at n4rp.com>
>To: n8de at thepoint.net
>Cc: antennas at mailman.qth.net
>Subject: Re: [Antennas] Small Triband Beam
>Message-ID: <54F0D625.9020404 at n4rp.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
>On 2/27/2015 2:38 PM, n8de at thepoint.net wrote:
>> He said 12' turning RADIUS .. not diameter.
>
>The A3S has a 15.5' turning radius. Last time I checked, that was well
>over 12'...
>
>73, Ross N4RP
>
>>
>> 73
>> Don
>> N8DE
>>
>>
>> Quoting Ross Primrose <n4rp at n4rp.com>:
>>
>>> That's well over his turning radius limit. The Cushcraft MA5B might be
>>> a better fit...
>>>
>>> 73, Ross N4RP
>>>
>>> On 2/27/2015 1:17 PM, n8de at thepoint.net wrote:
>>>> Cushcraft A3S is a well-performing tri-bander.
>>>> Have on up here at 34' and have worked over 300 DXCC with it the
>>>> past three years.
>>>> 73
>>>> Don
>>>> N8DE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Quoting "David C. Hallam" <dhallam at knology.net>:
>>>>
>>>>> I am looking for ideas about what would be a good small triband beam.
>>>>> About 20 ft. would be about as high up as I could get it. Ideally the
>>>>> turning radius would not more than 10 ft but maybe could go to 12 ft.
>>>>> My rig runs 900-1000W DC input. lp support this email list:
>>>>> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> FCC Section 97.313(a) "At all times, an amateur station must use the
>>> minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired
>>> communications."
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Antennas mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Antennas at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>FCC Section 97.313(a) ?At all times, an amateur station must use the minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired communications.?
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Subject: Digest Footer
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Antennas mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>Post: mailto:Antennas at mailman.qth.net
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of Antennas Digest, Vol 126, Issue 5
>****************************************
More information about the Antennas
mailing list