Well, I had some luck with a scanner antenna that wasx teliscopic, and
tuned down to 25 MHz, it wasn't what one would expect from a general
coverage receiver, but it was improved, and I'mjust wondering if anyone
has found anything else?
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Mike Freeman wrote:
> I contend that HF coverage in these HT's is a frill at best. While
> marginally useful at times, it seems to me that to expect really stellar
> performance from DC to Daylight in a HT is a pipe-dream.
>
> Mike Freeman < K 7 U I J >
> "All men tend to become that which they oppose." - Laurence van der Post
>
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, JEFFREY MICHAEL KENYON wrote:
>
> > What about the HF bands, what have you mostly done to make them better?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, John Miller wrote:
> >
> > > I have the comet one, sells for $47 about, a little expensive, but on 220
> > > and 440 it is a lot better and in some instances I notice an improvement on
> > > 2 meters and some other places too, I don't know the model number of it off
> > > hand but you can find it in the AES catalog on the web site, it's for 2,
> > > 220, and 440 it's the only one for those 3 bands. I hear there is another
> > > one too but I haven't tried that one yet and don't know who makes it.
> > > John Miller N1UMJ
> > > Owner: J E M Racing need sponsors and crew help
> > > to chat with me AOL instant messenger JEMracing3
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "JEFFREY MICHAEL KENYON" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 12:26 PM
> > > Subject: a better antenna forthe THF6A besides the rubber duck
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi everyone. I was just wondering what the best antenna is for the THF6A
> > > > besides the rubber uck, that is not out door? Any thoughts would be
> > > > appreciated, and thanks in advance.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
|