|
Strange Antenna in old 73 magazine ?
Hi,
Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV |
Was it in the April issue? A lot of "fools" fell for such articles in
73 Magazine, Hi. One such antenna was to be buried under ground then the "polarity" of the radiated wave would be "inverted". ;-) There are a few who experiment with "EH" antennas, where a coil is placed in coffee cans, spaced at different intervals for the band the antenna is to be used. http://www.qsl.net/w0kph/can.html JJJHS Jeff wrote: Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV |
Was it in the April issue? A lot of "fools" fell for such articles in
73 Magazine, Hi. One such antenna was to be buried under ground then the "polarity" of the radiated wave would be "inverted". ;-) There are a few who experiment with "EH" antennas, where a coil is placed in coffee cans, spaced at different intervals for the band the antenna is to be used. http://www.qsl.net/w0kph/can.html JJJHS Jeff wrote: Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV |
"Jeff" wrote in message ... Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's I recall one in a publication (S9) aimed at CB'ers back in the 60's. It used printed circuit boards as you mentioned but also incorporated a nice husky resistor that turned the critter into a dummy load. The article didn't fess up that it was an April fool joke until the next issue. Wonder how many fell for it? RM~ |
"Groom Lake" wrote in message news:40e9cf82.1579216@chupacabra... In posted on Mon, 5 I believe it might have been one of Kneitel's humor pieces. Your memory is better than mine on the details but you've got it. If I recall their were a lot of disgruntled readers. RM~ |
"Groom Lake" wrote in message news:40e9e5f1.7323874@chupacabra... In Message-ID:9i4Gc.1747$%w5.1570@okepread05 posted on Sun, 4 Jul 2004 Latter when the Browning labs introducedtheir "Eagle" series, I often wondered why the TR switch they used was configured to produce that feedback ping, Ok, I'll fess up; I had the eagles but mine refused to ping after I built a Wayne Green circuit (I think he nick named it the "Mule Box") which was a clamp tube circuit that ran the Brownies double sideband reduced carrier. It drove the locals nuts watching their s meters going nuts. I wasn't much into gab but enjoyed tinkering with the equipment more than gabbing on them so soon sold out except for a CB I used in the truck. I drove an 18 for a living and retired in 84 and haven't keyed anything since. RM~ |
JJJHS,
"EH Antennas" eGroup on YAHOO ! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eh-antenna/ "EH Antenna Users" eGroup on YAHOO ! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eh_antenna_users/ "E-H Antenna Builders & Users" eGroup on YAHOO ! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ehantennausers/ "WTAL Fans" eGroup on YAHOO ! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WTALfans/ The EH antenna has exceptional promise. It is about 10' in diameter, requires no extensive underground radials, uses approximately 75% less energy and is more efficient. WebSite with Tools and Tips to Assist "EH" Antenna Design & Building http://www.eh-antenna.com/EH_Antenna_Tools_and_Tips.htm http://www.geocities.com/ke0vh/eh http://www.qsl.net/vk5br/EHAntennaTheory.htm http://www.eh-antenna.se/ That's My Name Too ~ RHF LYRICS= http://www.walkthroughlife.com/midis...jjhschmidt.htm MUSIC= http://www.walkthroughlife.com/midis...idis/jjjhs.mid SONGS= http://www.walkthroughlife.com/midis/kidsmidis/ http://www.backyardgardener.com/loowit/song/song48.html http://www.backyardgardener.com/loowit/janeellen.html http://www.scoutsongs.com/lyrics/johnjacob.html NIH= http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/john.htm NIEHS-INDEX= http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/music.htm#index .. .. = = = JohnJacobJingleHimerSchmidt wrote in message ... Was it in the April issue? A lot of "fools" fell for such articles in 73 Magazine, Hi. One such antenna was to be buried under ground then the "polarity" of the radiated wave would be "inverted". ;-) There are a few who experiment with "EH" antennas, where a coil is placed in coffee cans, spaced at different intervals for the band the antenna is to be used. http://www.qsl.net/w0kph/can.html JJJHS Jeff wrote: Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV .. |
= = = "Jeff" wrote in message
= = = ... Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV .. JEFF [ZL3TNV] You may wish to try posting this same question 'separately' on the: "Rec.Radio.Amateur.Antenna" NewsGroup. RRAA= http://tinyurl.com/2hlw7 http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=rec.radio.amateur.antenna hth ~ RHF .. |
|
Groom Lake wrote: In Message-ID:Kl6Gc.1758$%w5.429@okepread05 posted on Mon, 5 Jul 2004 01:15:08 -0500, Rob Mills wrote: I wasn't much into gab but enjoyed tinkering with the equipment more than gabbing on them so soon sold out except for a CB I used in the truck. I drove an 18 for a living and retired in 84 and haven't keyed anything since. RM~ Back in '66 I put one of those (pre-bucket brigade) delay boxes* with a spring and two transducers in line with my audio and some of the locals thought the echo was due to the enormous power level, similar to 15 meter multipath, rather than just a precursor to today's echo-mike. *note - those delay boxes were more commonly used in conjunction with automotive 8-track players, and would make that distinctive boing effect whenever you hit a pothole or crossed the tracks too fast. ;-) Well, since the topic is shifting, can anyone tell me what the echo is supposed to do? in my travels, with my CB on, I can "hear" people with echo mic's and I'll be darned if I can hear them well at all. Now echo AND way overmodulated, now there's the ticket to complete unintelligibility! (is that a word?) - Mike - |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Groom Lake wrote: In Message-ID:Kl6Gc.1758$%w5.429@okepread05 posted on Mon, 5 Jul 2004 01:15:08 -0500, Rob Mills wrote: I wasn't much into gab but enjoyed tinkering with the equipment more than gabbing on them so soon sold out except for a CB I used in the truck. I drove an 18 for a living and retired in 84 and haven't keyed anything since. RM~ Back in '66 I put one of those (pre-bucket brigade) delay boxes* with a spring and two transducers in line with my audio and some of the locals thought the echo was due to the enormous power level, similar to 15 meter multipath, rather than just a precursor to today's echo-mike. *note - those delay boxes were more commonly used in conjunction with automotive 8-track players, and would make that distinctive boing effect whenever you hit a pothole or crossed the tracks too fast. ;-) Well, since the topic is shifting, can anyone tell me what the echo is supposed to do? in my travels, with my CB on, I can "hear" people with echo mic's and I'll be darned if I can hear them well at all. Now echo AND way overmodulated, now there's the ticket to complete unintelligibility! (is that a word?) - Mike - They "think" it makes them sound better or more cool, not sure which. Problem is, most are turned up TOO far. Some isn't so objectionable and doesn't sound bad, even though they're not supposed to be permitted per part 95. I've heard so many that sounded like they were talking either underwater or with a mouth full of something. REALLY SUCKED. Being both a ham and Cber, I can't see what their sense of existence is. Then too, you got everyone and his brother cranking up the RF out, and if they go channel hopping, that bleeds like hell. I had to take a double take one time when I and a friend of mine were in another CB shop, and actually heard two CBers swear off the extra garbage and go back to stock TO HEAR! WOW. I asked my friend if I heard right, and he agreed. I don't do any mods to CBs or other radios unless permitted by law or needed to get the thing working, when a unit comes to my shop. Many don't like my approach, but so be it. Lou |
Audio enhancement
All modern ham rigs incorporate compression in the audio chain; this effective pushes up the room sound a bit without the echo/reverb being overpowering. It is puzzling why hams have not commonly adapted well-known psychoacoustic observables to increase intelligibility. These include: a 50 ms delay on transmit; and binaural (delay and phase invert) synthesis on received. The latter has had some exposure in recent years. I recall using both the of these circa 1985 at Field Day with pro audio outboard boxes. The problem--on transmit--is isolating them from the RF so they don't overload. CB has always had an over the top approach to audio--which rather defeats the purpose of said synthesis. Anyway, old stuff, well-known to music producers and some audio engineers. 73, Chip N1IR |
RC,
Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post. Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt to answer his question. First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ? Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ? Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ? - - - - - The Original Question - - - - - Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It's much nicer and rewarding to be honestly helpful .. . . then simply hateful. A 'noted' Yahoo ~ RHF .. .. = = = Richard Clark wrote in message = = = . .. On 5 Jul 2004 01:26:17 -0700, (RHF) wrote: The EH antenna has exceptional promise. It is about 10' in diameter, requires no extensive underground radials, uses approximately 75% less energy and is more efficient. Hi OM, More efficient that what, a resistor? 75% less energy than what, a resistor? The eh antenna is one of several of a class that take more effort for less return than simply putting up as much wire as you have room for - even if it is the same size as any of these "amazing!" antennas. The absurd claims that attend the cfa/eh/fractal crowing societies is matched by their inability to prove them except through their own special math (never mind the S-Meter). However, there are those who argue SWLers need poor antennas and I suppose these fit the bill nicely. The technical equivalent of cell phones VS string-and-dixie cups tho'. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC .. |
|
RHF wrote:
RC, Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post. Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt to answer his question. First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ? A Dummy Load Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ? Makes a pretty good Dummy load Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ? Acts like a Dummy load. - - - - - The Original Question - - - - - Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It's much nicer and rewarding to be honestly helpful . . . then simply hateful. Oh Gee, Richard isn't being hateful, just responding to your post responding to the original posters msg. The world of engineering is like this - gotta have a tough skin, yaknow? rule 1 is extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If your antenna works, no amount of his scorn will stop it. rest snipped - mike KB3EIA - |
RC,
The prior post to mine in this thread was a reference to the EH Antenna. Yes I have an 'ego' and apparently your have an "EGO" too. Hey, I try to be helpful and keep things positive. I did not play Twenty Questions : I posted three. I then provided Eight Links to more EH Antenna Information. [ Not Six Links. ] I also posted Eight Links related to the prior poster's Screen Name: "JohnJacobJingleHimerSchmidt" {JJJHS} [ It's called relating to people / a side-bar. ] You have the tendency to state you opinions as facts; and thereby discount all other opinions. For some the EH Antenna may be a matter of 'faith' and to the extent that it "Works" in some form or fashion: Hey It WORKS ! Your technical details valid or not, have very little relevance to them and 'their' EH Antenna. So Say I - My Opinions Stated as Facts ~ RHF .. .. = = = Richard Clark wrote in message = = = . .. On 5 Jul 2004 18:12:09 -0700, (RHF) wrote: RC, Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post. Your ego is showing. Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt to answer his question. Like you? ;-) Instead of playing twenty questions: First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ? Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ? Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ? Let's all note that it was your introduction of 6 off-topic links to an antenna who I have already responded to against these same three preceding questions. Hi OM, The eh and their ilk are on every sucker list on the web. It is a simple matter to NOT cross post your responses if they don't shine under examination. It is also a simply matter to either stay on-topic, or to at least follow your own side-thread. Respond to the technical issue, or learn to unlink your posts. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
|
On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 16:40:20 -0400, william ewald
wrote: On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 20:11:47 GMT, Richard Clark wrote: Rabbit ears for AM reception WORK for the faithful too. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC AM reception? I've never tried that. Did you mean FM? Hi Bill, AM. You've never tried it when your car antenna works every time? I bet you have rabbit ears embedded in your windshield. O Ye of little Faith! Yahoo's very limited experience will probably miss this simple observation of an antenna that WORKS. He would also probably miss the common sense suggestion that AM DXers use automobile radios for their listening - on long antennas. I keep praying for the "whole house wiring" antenna to work with my TV. Won't work because the BPL is resonating with the fractal topology? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
= = = Richard Clark wrote in message
= = = . .. On 6 Jul 2004 11:02:19 -0700, (RHF) wrote: Yes I have an 'ego' and apparently your have an "EGO" too. Certainly, mine is earned. RC - I am 'certain' that you "Believe" that. .. .. Hey, I try to be helpful and keep things positive. Posting as a substitute for Prozac, or is it Lithium? RC - You again seem to be the 'expert' in his area of endeavor. .. .. I did not play Twenty Questions : I posted three. Hmm, a matter of degree not substance. As for substance I note you have no interest in engaging the outcome of your questions' answers nor in pursuing the technical claims of your submitted eh antennas. RC - The topic became EH Antennas, and I posted "Links" for the original poster to go to and explore that subject; if that was his continued interest. I am sure that a YAHOO eGroup with over 600 Members and more than 4600 Messages posted; will provide more information then I could. "EH Antennas" eGroup on YAHOO ! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eh-antenna/ .. .. So I will respond to your style and expose your weakness in that regard too. ;-) RC - What Ever Winds Your Clock. .. .. For some the EH Antenna may be a matter of 'faith' and to the extent that it "Works" in some form or fashion: Hey It WORKS ! Your technical details valid or not, have very little relevance to them and 'their' EH Antenna. Rabbit ears for AM reception WORK for the faithful too. RC - When all you have is a single short WHIP Antenna built into your 'portable' AM/F/Shortwave Radio. A pair of "TV Rabbit Ears" properly connected to the radio; may indeed function better as an Antenna. Hey What Works, WORKS ! .. .. Such a recommendation! It's like short-changing the blind to teach them self sufficiency. RC - If the Motive and Goal is "To Teach" and not to 'steal'; and if the Lesson is Learned. Then dealing with the realities of the world is part of 'being' Self Sufficient. .. .. So Say I - My Opinions Stated as Facts ~ RHF Actually "so write you." RC - That is True. .. .. No one can hear you scream on the internet. RC - That is true, but they may see you SCREAM :-[] .. .. For others following the poor quality of discussion surrounding the eh antenna; this design has been field tested, studied and analyzed quite thoroughly on rec.radio.amateur.antenna. RC - They may wish to also seek an 'alternative' view point from the EH Antennas eGroup on YAHOO; with it's 600+ Members and more than 4600 Messages posted. "EH Antennas" eGroup on YAHOO ! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eh-antenna/ .. .. It is quite an education to simply look at the field data offered by the proponents themselves (who are just as incapable in reading engineering reports as any Yahoo). RC - Yes as you have 'noted' I am Yahoo. .. .. For the sheer bulk and complexity of the eh design, their own reports shows it to be fully 0.1% to 1% efficient compared to a simple design. Of course, few of you may be capable of erecting this simple design. RC - For those who wish to seek an 'alternative' view point from from yours. I would suggest that they check-out the "EH Antennas" eGroup on YAHOO; with it's 600+ Members and more than 4600 Messages posted about the EH Antenna by actual users of the EH Antenna. "EH Antennas" eGroup on YAHOO ! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eh-antenna/ .. .. However, going to the trouble with the eh when you could as easily use rabbit ears purchased at Radio Shack must bring with it what Yahoo cites as the misty-eyed boon of faith (which accounts for easily 20 over S9 signals in an S1 field of noise where the faithless only hear static). RC - When all you have is a single short WHIP Antenna built into your 'portable' AM/F/Shortwave Radio. A pair of "TV Rabbit Ears" properly connected to the radio; may indeed function better as an Antenna. Hey What Works, WORKS ! .. .. Henceforth we can call these designs Faith-Gain Antennas. RC - Considering the amount of Religious Programming on the Shortwave Bands. A "Faith-Gain" Antenna just may be the type of Marketing Buzz Word that will sell an Aerial type Product at a Heavenly Price. Faith-Gain Antennas - How They Work... God Only Knows ? ? ? .. .. It means that if you discard tuners, preselectors, tuned antennas, and simply use a wire coat hanger; that if you squeeze your eyes hard enough and fall to your knees with folded hands held slightly above brow level, then you too can enjoy the melodious tongues from other lands communicating to your inner heart RC - Ah the Things that Dreams are made of . . . .. .. - don't forget to turn on the radio. RC - Thank You I Won't. .. .. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC ~ RHF .. |
MC,
"If your antenna works, no amount of his scorn will stop it." If Your Antenna Works... Your Will Hear and Be Heard [.] Hey, What Works... WORKS ! ~ RHF .. .. = = = Mike Coslo wrote in message = = = ... RHF wrote: RC, Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post. Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt to answer his question. First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ? A Dummy Load Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ? Makes a pretty good Dummy load Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ? Acts like a Dummy load. - - - - - The Original Question - - - - - Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It's much nicer and rewarding to be honestly helpful . . . then simply hateful. Oh Gee, Richard isn't being hateful, just responding to your post responding to the original posters msg. The world of engineering is like this - gotta have a tough skin, yaknow? rule 1 is extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If your antenna works, no amount of his scorn will stop it. rest snipped - mike KB3EIA - .. |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 11:12:37 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote: All can probably also agree that you seem more interested in your correspondent than in antennas. Feeling left out Jim? What you say is true and I could become interested in you as well as you don't have much to say about antennas either. But not very interested, so don't get any false hopes up. Instead, pick a topic and avoid this soap opera. ;-) 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Jim Kelly wrote,
All can probably also agree that you seem more interested in your correspondent than in antennas. jk That's a cheap shot, but it's a cheap shot worth thinking about. Sometimes the users's expectations and expertise - or lack thereof - are the deciding factors in whether something "works" or not. The EH antenna may work for some people in the way that homeopathy, brightly colored sugar pills, and other quack remedies work in medicine, but Richard is right, the technical qualities of antennas can't be revealed by testimonials or protestations of faith. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
Richard Clark wrote: On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 11:12:37 -0700, Jim Kelley wrote: All can probably also agree that you seem more interested in your correspondent than in antennas. Feeling left out Jim? I'm feeling out left......here in SoCal. :-) What you say is true and I could become interested in you as well as you don't have much to say about antennas either. I'll wager I have less to say than you do on just about any subject. :-) But not very interested, so don't get any false hopes up. Instead, pick a topic and avoid this soap opera. ;-) Roger. In fact, I was trying to encourage you to avoid them! 73, jk |
On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 13:54:41 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote: Roger. In fact, I was trying to encourage you to avoid them! Hi Jim, Good advice. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Tdonaly wrote:
Jim Kelly wrote, All can probably also agree that you seem more interested in your correspondent than in antennas. jk That's a cheap shot, but it's a cheap shot worth thinking about. Sometimes the users's expectations and expertise - or lack thereof - are the deciding factors in whether something "works" or not. The EH antenna may work for some people in the way that homeopathy, brightly colored sugar pills, and other quack remedies work in medicine, but Richard is right, the technical qualities of antennas can't be revealed by testimonials or protestations of faith. I read a couple pdf's on the things where a couple hams tested 20 meter backpacker against a dipole. When the test signals were coupled with a very short length of coax to the antenna, the EH didn't perform well at all. When coupled with a 1 wave length of coax, the feedline radiated, but not very efficiently, around 1% as efficiently as the dipole, IIRC. Forgive the numerical blunders, it was late, and I might have slipped a number or two! 8^) A long coax version fared better against a vertical in a second test, but in all fairness, the vertical had a pretty lousy ground. But okay, the thing worked. The authors concluded that what they had was a tuned circuit on the end of some coax, and the coax radiated more so than the antenna. This sounds almost like aa halfwave antenna with it's tuned circuit. Any relation there? All in all, it sure seems like a lot of trouble for a so-so antenna, and since I don't particularly like RF burns and radiating coax, I think I'll pass! 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
But okay, the thing worked. The authors concluded that what they had
was a tuned circuit on the end of some coax, and the coax radiated more so than the antenna. This sounds almost like aa halfwave antenna with it's tuned circuit. The problem with the EH and CFA as has been pointed out many times is the claim to provide Electromagnetic radiation through Poynting Vector Synthesis. They produce the E and H field seperately and combine the two in the antenna to produce EM radiation. The claim is with this Synthesis, high radiation efficiency is produced from a very small antenna, the Holy Grail, a small efficient antenna. If someone gets results from one of these antennas, it is due to feedline radiation, so they will proclaim "it works". But it does not work because of Poynting Vector Synthesis as claimed. There are a number of ways to get your feedline to radiate, the EH antenna could be one of the better ones, along with the commercial Bilal Isotron. 73 Gary N4AST |
JGBOYLES wrote: But okay, the thing worked. The authors concluded that what they had was a tuned circuit on the end of some coax, and the coax radiated more so than the antenna. This sounds almost like aa halfwave antenna with it's tuned circuit. The problem with the EH and CFA as has been pointed out many times is the claim to provide Electromagnetic radiation through Poynting Vector Synthesis. They produce the E and H field seperately and combine the two in the antenna to produce EM radiation. The claim is with this Synthesis, high radiation efficiency is produced from a very small antenna, the Holy Grail, a small efficient antenna. Hmm, maybe Occam's razor should be invoked? If someone gets results from one of these antennas, it is due to feedline radiation, so they will proclaim "it works". But it does not work because of Poynting Vector Synthesis as claimed. There are a number of ways to get your feedline to radiate, the EH antenna could be one of the better ones, along with the commercial Bilal Isotron. At least the Isotrons are kinda cool looking... 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post.
Your ego is showing. Uh oh -- worlds are colliding. Remember, rec.radio.shortwave is not a radio newsgroup, the people there are not knowledgeable about, or interested in, the technical aspects of radio. If it doesn't involve nasty name-calling or wild-eyed, mouth-foaming political looniness, then it doesn't belong in rec.radio.shortwave. |
"Jeff" wrote in message ... Hi, Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax? Does anyone know more details of this? JEFF ZL3TNV Wouldn't be a patch antenna by any chance? |
Sounds like a dummy load, although I did work a friend 3 miles away with a 6
inch wire end loaded with a soda can on 80 m once ... jw k9rzz |
J999w wrote:
Sounds like a dummy load, although I did work a friend 3 miles away with a 6 inch wire end loaded with a soda can on 80 m once ... Empty or full? - Mike KB3EIA - |
Sounds like a dummy load, although I did work a friend 3 miles away with a
6 inch wire end loaded with a soda can on 80 m once ... Empty or full? - Mike KB3EIA - Empty. Interesting concept though. Don't ask me about the time I stuck my microphone in the hose of a vacuum cleaner and keyed up ... same friend, different experiment. Sort of an expansion of the game "name this sound". jw k9rzz |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:56 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com