|
Baluns?
My take on CM chokes is that they are best on TV coax to keep energy on the
shield from bringing trouble to the TV chassis. On a transmitting antenna, the idea is to enforce a high impedance bump somewhere to set the resonant length other than what it wants to be. That might not contribute to efficiency even if it prevents the coax from being part of the antenna. If the antenna is in resonance, there won't be any coax radiation and no Choke is really needed. My point is, you are best not needing one, but if that is what you need to put the current out on the wire, or out of the shack. OK. Of course high gain antennas have a pattern to protect, but does it matter all that much for anything up to a 3 element yagi? High currents and voltages on the coax are to be avoided because that is where your loss will be. |
Baluns?
JB wrote:
My take on CM chokes is that they are best on TV coax to keep energy on the shield from bringing trouble to the TV chassis. On a transmitting antenna, the idea is to enforce a high impedance bump somewhere to set the resonant length other than what it wants to be. That might not contribute to efficiency even if it prevents the coax from being part of the antenna. If the antenna is in resonance, there won't be any coax radiation and no Choke is really needed. My point is, you are best not needing one, but if that is what you need to put the current out on the wire, or out of the shack. OK. Of course high gain antennas have a pattern to protect, but does it matter all that much for anything up to a 3 element yagi? High currents and voltages on the coax are to be avoided because that is where your loss will be. That is so bizarre; I just don't know where to begin in the description of how and how much! Regards, JS |
Baluns?
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 16:07:39 GMT, "JB" wrote:
How's this for testimony It isn't. Oh it's you again. You don't seem to do much other than poke the fire. There weren't even sparks left in those dead ashes. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Baluns?
JB wrote:
Just because God knows how everything will turn out, doesn't mean our choises are of no value. Actually, if God knows the future, the future is fixed, everything is predestined, and we do not have free will. If God already knew everything about this posting of mine before I made it, I had no choice but to make it using these exact words. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
JB wrote:
In the end you will have to be open to the Holy Spirit before anything can come of it. Please prove that the "Holy Spirit" exists outside of the human mind. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
wrote:
A common mode choke is used in RF applications, very true, but it serves a filtering purpose, not a conversion of unbalanced to balanced energy transfer or vice versa. A common mode choke that operates well will turn unwanted RF into heat or cause it to dissipate in its core or a resistor etc.. The common "W2DU balun" works well as both choke and balun function. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
Readers interested in baluns might take a look at "Baluns: What They Do
and How They Do It" in the _ARRL Antenna Compendium_, Vol. 1 or at http://eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Baluns?
Cecil Moore wrote:
... Actually, if God knows the future, the future is fixed, everything is predestined, and we do not have free will. If God already knew everything about this posting of mine before I made it, I had no choice but to make it using these exact words. Actually, I have heard this argument(s)/discussion(s) since a very early age. I see no conflict between me having complete free choice and the ability to control my destiny exactly as I see fit, or change my mind to fit me--right along side an all-knowing mind who has already seen every decision and change of heart I will have in my lifetime (the future is there for me to discover and make my decisions to influence--but he/she/it/the-aliens has/have already "been there, seen that!" ... ) What am I missing? Regards, JS |
Baluns?
Cecil Moore wrote:
JB wrote: In the end you will have to be open to the Holy Spirit before anything can come of it. Please prove that the "Holy Spirit" exists outside of the human mind. Well, "Grain Spirits" exist outside my mind (and body), until I drink them--then suddenly, I feel like I am "FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT!"--well, if I drink enough anyway ... ;-) Obviously, in the above, that "HOLY SPIRIT" was not originally there, so it had to be outside, somewhere! :-| Regards, JS |
Baluns?
Cecil Moore wrote:
... Please prove that the "Holy Spirit" exists outside of the human mind. Remember, "Holy" and "Grain" both have the same name. Most likely come from the same lineage; they might even be brothers! Some ancient text from the bible I once read, if I remember correctly, said something akin to, " ... take a little wine for the spirit ..." Obviously a toast to one, or both, of those brothers! Regards, JS |
Baluns?
John Smith wrote:
What am I missing? Even if an omnipotent being is not omniscient, he is.:-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
Cecil Moore wrote:
... Even if an omnipotent being is not omniscient, he is.:-) As soon as I "cement" what can happen in my mind, or the realm of possibilities, I also change what will happen ... How can I limit a God (aliens, etc.) I cannot even begin to fathom, indeed, how can anyone? Perhaps time is like an infinite building of rooms, the past is but a series of rooms in one direction from the "present room", the future an endless series of rooms stretching the other direction. And, perhaps God walks these rooms with the ease I do my own home ... I hate to even do this speculation, as I begin to place limits which may divert me away from envisioning other possibilities ... when we know more about time, we will finally be able to make far better guesstimates. When something is truly "unknown", it is truly unknown ... Regards, JS |
Baluns?
John Smith wrote:
When something is truly "unknown", it is truly unknown ... Unfortunately, with an omniscient God, the future is known and cannot be changed by your "free will". -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
On Sep 1, 3:31*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: A common mode choke is used in RF applications, very true, but it serves a filtering purpose, not a conversion of unbalanced to balanced energy transfer or vice versa. A common mode choke that operates well will turn unwanted RF into heat or cause it to dissipate in its core or a resistor etc.. The common "W2DU balun" works well as both choke and balun function. -- 73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com Yes and I have to partially take back what I said; a balun CAN double as a CM "choke" and a CM choke can double as a balun. If one wishes to balance an unbalanced line with a CM choke, then the impedance of the CM choke must match the source and the load, which makes the CM choke a balun and no longer a choke :-) |
Baluns?
On Sep 1, 3:25*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: I use an ugly balun with an attic GRrV and do not suffer significant back-RFI to my transceiver in the regular frequency ranges. I think that by chosing 1Kohm that may be a bit conservative. In (old) engineering school, we tended to use an order of magnitude (X10) as our highly arbitrary :) cut-off point for impedances that have a significant effect. You are doing that too but by using 1000 ohms, you are using (X10 times 2) as your arbitrary cutoff point. Since the filter is an exponential curve, if you chose 500 ohms instead of 1000 ohms, you might even get a 4 or 5 to 1 frequency range. In my case I use two different turns chokes so that is why I think I am covered pretty well. Your information is very interesting; good to see people are actually measuring things! Actually, 1000 ohms is pretty liberal. For instance, on 15m, the G5RV coax sees 36+j230 ohms or about 233 ohms. The balun needs to be 10x that value or 2330 ohms. -- 73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com Why not 500 ohms, assuming a 50 ohm source and transmission line? |
Baluns?
Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote: When something is truly "unknown", it is truly unknown ... Unfortunately, with an omniscient God, the future is known and cannot be changed by your "free will". Well, we are now focused on the crux of the matter, alright. However, I see him/her/it/the-aliens only being able to view the after effects of my free will ... in my speculation(s) of how-this-all-works, of course. I see the mind of God as having similarities to my own (man created in Gods' image--it is most difficult for me to see it any other way.) He would not conduct an "experiment" in which he controlled all action; the reason? Too boring. The variable is my freewill which provides the seed-of-chaos, however, one piece of equipment in "his laboratory" allows him to view the final outcome(s), and ahead of me experiencing the same. But then, I have nothing to argue against the way you would envision it .... can we agree to wonder until some point in the future offers a proof worth extrapolating from? Or, in other words, the only horse I have in the race is curiosity of "the truth." Regards, JS |
Baluns?
wrote:
... Yes and I have to partially take back what I said; a balun CAN double as a CM "choke" and a CM choke can double as a balun. If one wishes to balance an unbalanced line with a CM choke, then the impedance of the CM choke must match the source and the load, which makes the CM choke a balun and no longer a choke :-) Although this URL: http://www.radioelectronicschool.net.../ocfdipole.pdf deals with a Windom Antenna, his text on the design, construction, function and implementation of baluns is well worth the read. Regards, JS |
Baluns?
wrote in news:6f4f9e36-af26-4f1b-9244-383494f77b26
@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com: On Sep 1, 3:25*pm, Cecil Moore wrote: wrote: .... Actually, 1000 ohms is pretty liberal. For instance, on 15m, the G5RV coax sees 36+j230 ohms or about 233 ohms. The balun needs to be 10x that value or 2330 ohms. -- 73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com Why not 500 ohms, assuming a 50 ohm source and transmission line? The common mode impedance of the balun acts in the common mode transmission line (which is mutually coupled to the nominal radiator). How is the differential mode transmission line characteristic impedance relevant to the determination of common mode current in the antenna system scenario described? Owen |
Baluns?
"John Smith" wrote in message ... wrote: ... Yes and I have to partially take back what I said; a balun CAN double as a CM "choke" and a CM choke can double as a balun. If one wishes to balance an unbalanced line with a CM choke, then the impedance of the CM choke must match the source and the load, which makes the CM choke a balun and no longer a choke :-) Although this URL: http://www.radioelectronicschool.net.../ocfdipole.pdf deals with a Windom Antenna, his text on the design, construction, function and implementation of baluns is well worth the read. Regards, JS It's a trivial point, I agree, but there is one error in the url JS provided above that needs correcting. The VK author tells us that the Windom antenna was invented by Loren G. Windom. Tain't so. It was invented (developed) by William Everitt, then the Dean of the EE Dept at Ohio State U. Everitt was doing the grunt work and taking measurements along with another OSU professor. However. Loren Windom was a student of Everitt's, and was tagging along and observing. Then, later on he wrote up the experiment and had it published in QST sometime in 1929, and as well as I can remember, he failed to give Everitt any credit for having done the actual work. Consequently, readers of QST assumed it was Windom's invention, while it actually was not. Walt, W2DU |
Baluns?
Walter Maxwell wrote:
... It's a trivial point, I agree, but there is one error in the url JS provided above that needs correcting. The VK author tells us that the Windom antenna was invented by Loren G. Windom. Tain't so. It was invented (developed) by William Everitt, then the Dean of the EE Dept at Ohio State U. Everitt was doing the grunt work and taking measurements along with another OSU professor. However. Loren Windom was a student of Everitt's, and was tagging along and observing. Then, later on he wrote up the experiment and had it published in QST sometime in 1929, and as well as I can remember, he failed to give Everitt any credit for having done the actual work. Consequently, readers of QST assumed it was Windom's invention, while it actually was not. Walt, W2DU Walter: Thank you for that clarification, it was also interesting and enlightening--I was ignorant to that info. Warm regards, JS |
Baluns?
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Walter Maxwell wrote: ... It's a trivial point, I agree, but there is one error in the url JS provided above that needs correcting. The VK author tells us that the Windom antenna was invented by Loren G. Windom. Tain't so. It was invented (developed) by William Everitt, then the Dean of the EE Dept at Ohio State U. Everitt was doing the grunt work and taking measurements along with another OSU professor. However. Loren Windom was a student of Everitt's, and was tagging along and observing. Then, later on he wrote up the experiment and had it published in QST sometime in 1929, and as well as I can remember, he failed to give Everitt any credit for having done the actual work. Consequently, readers of QST assumed it was Windom's invention, while it actually was not. Walt, W2DU Walter: Thank you for that clarification, it was also interesting and enlightening--I was ignorant to that info. Warm regards, JS Hi John, glad I could make that microcontribution. Walt |
Baluns?
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: When something is truly "unknown", it is truly unknown ... Unfortunately, with an omniscient God, the future is known and cannot be changed by your "free will". -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Now I realize that some of you are non-believers, so for you this is an exercise. It's would be pretty arrogant to consider that you have the ability to screw up God's plan. We can't even be sure that Satan screwed up God's plan, but it appears that there is some contention that is/was/does exist in the heavenly realm. Now consider that he allowed your being to come into existence perhaps for a purpose. OK that is implied in scripture. Now consider that you don't know what your future is even if God pre-ordained it. If you did, what good would it do you and wouldn't that influence your choices? Only Jesus was in on His future from the beginning and knew how his life would play out and even tipped off the Disciples piece by piece throughout his ministry. Even told them in real time what was happening as it happened and how it was foretold in earlier scriptures by the profits. This shows him to be familiar with numerous events in time and how they play out together and the significance. It has been postulated in a regular radio series that the Bible is a sophisticated messaging system outside of our time domain planted by God to relay information about our past present and future to future generations. Now consider that Moses negotiated with God over who would do the talking to Pharaoh and God relented and let Arron do the talking while Moses did the signs. But God revealed to Moses how Pharaoh would respond and how the whole scene would play out. That's a real mind blower. This shows that some could actually have been doomed while some obstinate and sinful people could still negotiate some things with God and even make bad choices, although risking serious consequences for some of those choices. So were left with this: God's plan won't be usurped, but we can petition Him with prayer over some points. This leads us to another possible conclusion. Perhaps there are parts of his plan designed to allow for us to make a variety of choices despite his intention for us. So you DO have free will even if he already knows how you will choose. It has been stated by Jesus that He came so that none should perish but all could come to repentance, have life everlasting, have life abundantly and other statements to that effect given the shortcomings of language. This implies that we really DO have choices even though it doesn't quite make sense unless Jesus really did make a change where someone like Moses' Pharaoh could now have a choice. It also allows the possibility that if one missed an opportunity, there could be an infinite number of others that do his will anyway. I don't like to delve too deep into this because there is a lot to learn bit by bit and we run risks by jumping to conclusions beyond our understanding. I merely note some interesting points from Genesis, Exodus, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. I'm not much for citation of scripture and verse because I believe context is far more important than throwing one liners at people. |
Baluns?
"Walter Maxwell" wrote in
: "John Smith" wrote in message ... wrote: .... deals with a Windom Antenna, his text on the design, construction, function and implementation of baluns is well worth the read. Doesn't that article espouse the Guanella 4:1 current balun built on a single toroid? The extent to which such a construction works is due to flux leakage, rather than the principles described by Guanella. Owen |
Baluns?
Roy Lewallen wrote:
Readers interested in baluns might take a look at "Baluns: What They Do and How They Do It" in the _ARRL Antenna Compendium_, Vol. 1 or at http://eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf. Roy Lewallen, W7EL ================================== Thank you Roy , A treasured tutorial. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH |
Baluns?
wrote:
Yes and I have to partially take back what I said; a balun CAN double as a CM "choke" and a CM choke can double as a balun. If one wishes to balance an unbalanced line with a CM choke, then the impedance of the CM choke must match the source and the load, which makes the CM choke a balun and no longer a choke :-) Actually, a balun without a large choking impedance is not very useful for ham antenna system applications. The method that a W2DU balun uses to balance currents at a dipole feedpoint *IS* nothing more than a large choking impedance which discourages common-mode current from flowing through the higher-the-better impedance. I usually refer to the W2DU balun as a choke-balun. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
wrote:
On Sep 1, 3:25 pm, Cecil Moore wrote: Actually, 1000 ohms is pretty liberal. For instance, on 15m, the G5RV coax sees 36+j230 ohms or about 233 ohms. The balun needs to be 10x that value or 2330 ohms. Why not 500 ohms, assuming a 50 ohm source and transmission line? Be the current making a choice of paths at a junction. How much of you would flow through 500 ohms and how much would flow through 233 ohms? (If 500 ohms is the total impedance seen by the shield current looking back toward the source, about 1/3 of the current would flow back through the 500 ohms down the coax.) http://eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
John Smith wrote:
However, I see him/her/it/the-aliens only being able to view the after effects of my free will ... in my speculation(s) of how-this-all-works, of course. Then, by definition, he/she/it/the-aliens are not omniscient. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
JB wrote:
So you DO have free will even if he already knows how you will choose. "Not only does God play dice, He throws them where we cannot see them." Steven Hawkings -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Baluns?
Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote: However, I see him/her/it/the-aliens only being able to view the after effects of my free will ... in my speculation(s) of how-this-all-works, of course. Then, by definition, he/she/it/the-aliens are not omniscient. Cecil: Or, put simply, "The only think know for certain is, I (or, anyone for that matter) don't know for certain!" Regards, JS |
Baluns?
Owen Duffy wrote:
"Walter Maxwell" wrote in : "John Smith" wrote in message ... wrote: ... deals with a Windom Antenna, his text on the design, construction, function and implementation of baluns is well worth the read. Doesn't that article espouse the Guanella 4:1 current balun built on a single toroid? The extent to which such a construction works is due to flux leakage, rather than the principles described by Guanella. Owen Owen: You might have missed this part from the Windom URL: "As far as the forward power to the antenna is concerned there is no ferrite core. This is because we have transmission “through two transmission lines”. There is no external flux around transmission lines. However if the antenna is unbalanced there will be leakage or common mode current flow through the balun. These currents are not transmission line mode currents. These currents will see a choking reactance presented by the balun and be stopped or significantly reduced. These leakage currents if extremely excessive can cause heating of the balun (but you have probably got a serious problem that you need to fix). Very high SWR can cause voltage dielectric loss and even flashover between the windings. Again this would indicate a more serious problem with the antenna." I should think a single core would be superior in relation to the above stated phenomenon. Indeed, I suspect it to be preferable to two cores. However, if such "leakage" is occuring, the author indicates you have a problem with the antenna proper which needs a fix ... However, this URL: http://www.n0ss.net/qrp_4-1_guanella-type_balun.pdf in the include pick 4-1_schematic.jpg, in the URL, contains a "blurb" on how to move a single core design on to two cores. Regards, JS |
Baluns?
Dan wrote:
On Sep 1, 4:20*am, Ian White GM3SEK wrote: Dan wrote: On Aug 31, 3:07*pm, Ian White GM3SEK wrote: Dan wrote: On Aug 28, 2:26*am, Ian White GM3SEK wrote: In other words, people with limited antenna opportunities are often the ones who need a balun - or more accurately, a common-mode choke - the MOST. Technically I would have to disagree with calling even a 1:1 balun the same thing as a common mode choke. *A CM choke is an EMI prevention device intended to filter out RF components generated in a circuit, away from the feed of a power source, usually an electrical mains. That is too far narrow a definition *of a "common mode choke", especially the reference to electrical mains. The term is widely applied to transmission line for both digital data and analog RF signals. A common mode choke is used in RF applications, very true, but it serves a filtering purpose, not a conversion of unbalanced to balanced energy transfer or vice versa. A common mode choke that operates well will turn unwanted RF into heat or cause it to dissipate in its core or a resistor etc.. Common-mode chokes, and filters in general, do NOT aim to "turn unwanted RF into heat"! That is a total misunderstanding of the whole concept. A CM choke aims to present a high impedence to unintentional RF. Once "choked" by the high impedance, the enrgey must either reflect or be aborbed somewhere in the circuit or the core as real power. What is it that you cannot understand about the term "choke"? I'm slightly encouraged that the key word "reflected" has now crept into your description. It wasn't there in what you wrote previously. [Snip similar] In a perfect situation, with a balanced feedline, the only kind of current and voltage you have IS common mode! What??? You know that statement didn't come out right, so how much of the rest did you really mean? I give up! You need some education in this area. I give up too - at last, something we can agree about. My main worry is that anyone *else* might have tried to gain some education from your confused statements on this particular topic. -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek |
Baluns?
Owen Duffy wrote:
"Walter Maxwell" wrote in : "John Smith" wrote in message ... wrote: ... deals with a Windom Antenna, his text on the design, construction, function and implementation of baluns is well worth the read. Doesn't that article espouse the Guanella 4:1 current balun built on a single toroid? The extent to which such a construction works is due to flux leakage, rather than the principles described by Guanella. Owen Here is an article which includes text on the use of ferrite rods in place of toroids. Someone who has a couple of rods from some old am radios, etc. may already have the stuff in his junk box to throw together an introductory prototype? Regards, JS |
Baluns?
"John Smith" wrote in message ... JB wrote: My take on CM chokes is that they are best on TV coax to keep energy on the shield from bringing trouble to the TV chassis. On a transmitting antenna, the idea is to enforce a high impedance bump somewhere to set the resonant length other than what it wants to be. That might not contribute to efficiency even if it prevents the coax from being part of the antenna. If the antenna is in resonance, there won't be any coax radiation and no Choke is really needed. My point is, you are best not needing one, but if that is what you need to put the current out on the wire, or out of the shack. OK. Of course high gain antennas have a pattern to protect, but does it matter all that much for anything up to a 3 element yagi? High currents and voltages on the coax are to be avoided because that is where your loss will be. That is so bizarre; I just don't know where to begin in the description of how and how much! Regards, JS Ya I know, I didn't get into the how. How much is the first thing you need to be aware of. |
Baluns?
JB wrote:
... Ya I know, I didn't get into the how. How much is the first thing you need to be aware of. Then this work: http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdona...andards_93.pdf by Jerry Sevick, may be of significant interest to you ... Regards, JS |
Baluns?
JB wrote:
... Ya I know, I didn't get into the how. How much is the first thing you need to be aware of. You may also find this picture of a 1:1 guanella balun of interest. Notice the "crossover" which alters the direction of the common winding between sides of the core ... Regards, JS |
Baluns?
On Aug 28, 5:10*pm, John Smith danced
around naked pulling on his meat: snip a lot of John Smiths bull**** diatribe Now, I am off to watch my momma crawl about ... Momma still selling her pussy on the corner huh John? I bet she still has nightmares over your conception from the guy that donated her his half of your egg! I guess the old saying that you get what you pay for is true and its a shame your momma had to pay for the other half from some old whino in Bakersfield, living under the freeway ramp in a box! Regards, JS |
Baluns?
|
Baluns?
"John Smith" wrote in message ... JB wrote: ... Ya I know, I didn't get into the how. How much is the first thing you need to be aware of. You may also find this picture of a 1:1 guanella balun of interest. Notice the "crossover" which alters the direction of the common winding between sides of the core ... Regards, JS There ya go. One of the problems of breaking up the path to ground on the shield is that now static can build up. If you can provide a way to bleed off the charges that build up on both halves, while breaking up the shield currents, now you have made it worthwhile. But when you guys start discussing off center fed dipoles, I step aside. I have computers in the shack. I have better luck with fan dipoles. Also running a Butternut vertical. Works a lot better than a 4btv, but a pain to get it right on all bands. Thanks Also liked the other pdfs presented. I never have time to read them all because of constant interruption around here. Back to work. |
Baluns?
JB wrote:
... There ya go. One of the problems of breaking up the path to ground on the shield is that now static can build up. If you can provide a way to bleed off the charges that build up on both halves, while breaking up the shield currents, now you have made it worthwhile. But when you guys start discussing off center fed dipoles, I step aside. I have computers in the shack. I have better luck with fan dipoles. Also running a Butternut vertical. Works a lot better than a 4btv, but a pain to get it right on all bands. Thanks Also liked the other pdfs presented. I never have time to read them all because of constant interruption around here. Back to work. OCF antennas were not fully appreciated by me, a few of Cecils' helpful insights and encouragement and I built one and was rather surprised ... I do not have one right now but that is only due to neighbors/property constraints. Here is a URL for design/implementation of "non-standard" baluns/transformers, but of a highly useable and desirable nature--or, Dr. Sevick strikes again!: http://www.highfrequencyelectronics....104_Sevick.pdf Fig. 6(A) is very interesting. A 5-winding, 1:1.56 bootstrap transformer which provides 50/75 ohm connections/substitutions. Perfect for allowing one to use 75 ohm "junk" (or found in dumpsters) tv coax in place of more expensive 50 ohm coax. I have made good use of this since I have thousands of feet of NEW 75 ohm coax I purchased from a scrap dealer for next-to-nothing! A lot of large dia coax and hard-line mixed in! Regards, JS |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:18 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com