| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#12
April 9th 05, 11:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 16:58:47 -0500, "H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H"
wrote: "Walter Maxwell" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:55:11 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote: H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H wrote: but any increase in the 1.5:1 SWR bandwidth is due to loss as Walt proved decades ago. If you want a really broad-banded Bazooka, use RG-174. :-) Advantages: light weight for easy back-packing, no tuner required, inexpensive coax, ... Hey, maybe I should keep it secret until I market it for $100. Egad, Cecil! It's evident I wasn't too bright years ago when I showed why the bazooka gets its meager increase in BW from resistive loss, not reactance cancellation. My scamming genes hadn't developed to the point where I even thought of marketing it instead of panning it. As you said, Cecil, with the higher loss available using RG-174 vs RG-17, think of how rich we could have become if we'd let the morons continue to believe what a great antenna it is, and sold em with 174. Walt, W2DU Face it Walt, you're just not a scam artist. 73 H. Thanks, H, I needed that. I'm thankful for what my Mom and Dad did for me in heading me in the right direction. Walt |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Double Bazooka question | Antenna | |||
| double double (bi)quad - feed impedance? | Antenna | |||
| FS: Connectors, Antennas, Meters, Mounts, etc. | Antenna | |||
| FS: Connectors/Adapters/Meters/Etc. | Equipment | |||
| FS: Connectors/Adapters/Meters/Etc. | Equipment | |||
Threaded Mode
