Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 7 Apr 2011 17:54:49 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
<001301cbf56e$6b0330d0$41099270$@net> |
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
<10.88.03313.A1D2E9D4@louvi-msg> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I am using a loop that is cut at 270 feet and it works great on 80 through 6
meters.
Junior Lolley KG4itd
Liberty County Emergency Coordinator
-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Ron Yearns
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 5:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: antenna lengths
For some reason I remember reading, listening , to a few months old QST
where they were saying the 468 didn't hold in all cases. I also took 80
meters times 39 and then divided by 12 and got within decimal points of the
same numbers. I know 39 inches isn't exactly the number of inches in a
meter but amazing how close it came out.
Man using 1005 calls for 279 feet that's 19 feet longer than the other way.
Almost a ten percent difference.
Maybe it's going to come down to cut and try with the antenna analyzer.
Ron
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walt Sebastian" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: antenna lengths
> Hi Ron,
> For some reason or another the formula for the loop is 1005 divided by
> frequency. I hope this helps.
>
>
>
> Walt
> WA4QXT
> Groton CT
> [log in to unmask]
|
|
|