Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV antenna
Made me laugh. I guess Reg had other designs :) Martin, HS0ZED On 09/12/2018 23:44, CUTTER DAVID via Elecraft wrote: Sorry, I said Reg, should have said Louis David G3UNA On 09 December 2018 at 16:30 CUTTER DAVID via Elecraft wrote: In addition, Reg was designing in the era of valve output transmitters with built-in pi-tank matching system, so, it was possible to match on different bands. I'm sure mine worked across 80 to 10m in those days. For 80 to 10m these days I use a off-centre-fed dipole with hybrid choke/transformer at the feed point as designed by DJ0IP for minimum common mode current. David G3UNA On 08 December 2018 at 16:32 Ken G Kopp wrote: As I've already stated … I have a copy of the original Varney RSGB article that describes the G5RV and plainly states that it's a 20M only antenna. Remember, it requires an antenna tuner … Start with a dipole … Keep the "magic" 32' length of 300 ohm feedline. Delete the 68' of coax. What's left? A "normal" open wire fed dipole, better known as a Zepp. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to d.cut...@ntlworld.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to hs0...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV antenna
I kinda like my 160M coax fed half wave dipole. I can get something out of it on all bands with the K3 tuner, although 80M is very marginal. I have a couple of FT8 QSOs with Quebec on 6M using it, although the azimuth pattern looks like a porcupine. However, for most purposes, my 8 band trapped vertical is better on the high bands. 73 Bill AE6JV On 12/9/18 at 1:46 PM, d...@kj0f.com (Doug Person) wrote: As many have said before - the 132' wire-fed doublet is the best overall, must versatile antenna you can erect. --- Bill Frantz| "The only thing we have to | Periwinkle (408)356-8506 | fear is fear itself." - FDR | 16345 Englewood Ave www.pwpconsult.com | Inaugural address, 3/4/1933 | Los Gatos, CA 95032 __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV antenna
I experimented with a G5RV. I did not have worth while results. A simple dipole with a quality current balun easily outperformed it. I also tried the "Mystery Antenna" - a joke. Measurements were down to a millimeter. It was up for an hour then was scrapped. I did have "acceptable" results with the G5RV in that my Differential-T tuner could load it on 40 through 10 quite easily. My next test was a 132' doublet fed with 40' of good quality 300 ohm twin lead into an excellent 1:1 current balun with 10' of RG/213 into my tuner. Tunes 160 through 10 with my Diff-T tuner. Signal reports were outstanding on 40 and easily a match for the dipole on 20. Nothing surprising about these results. As many have said before - the 132' wire-fed doublet is the best overall, must versatile antenna you can erect. 73, Doug -- KJ0F On 12/9/2018 12:52 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote: From my experience, more folks should pay attention to the antenna and balun work done by DJ0IP. They would likely have better performing antennas. His work is proven on antennas and not text book or computer models, but indeed he provides real world results. 73 Bob, K4TAX On 12/9/2018 10:30 AM, CUTTER DAVID via Elecraft wrote: In addition, Reg was designing in the era of valve output transmitters with built-in pi-tank matching system, so, it was possible to match on different bands. I'm sure mine worked across 80 to 10m in those days. For 80 to 10m these days I use a off-centre-fed dipole with hybrid choke/transformer at the feed point as designed by DJ0IP for minimum common mode current. David G3UNA On 08 December 2018 at 16:32 Ken G Kopp wrote: As I've already stated … I have a copy of the original Varney RSGB article that describes the G5RV and plainly states that it's a 20M only antenna. Remember, it requires an antenna tuner … Start with a dipole … Keep the "magic" 32' length of 300 ohm feedline. Delete the 68' of coax. What's left? A "normal" open wire fed dipole, better known as a Zepp. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to rmcg...@blomand.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to d...@kj0f.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV antenna
From my experience, more folks should pay attention to the antenna and balun work done by DJ0IP. They would likely have better performing antennas. His work is proven on antennas and not text book or computer models, but indeed he provides real world results. 73 Bob, K4TAX On 12/9/2018 10:30 AM, CUTTER DAVID via Elecraft wrote: In addition, Reg was designing in the era of valve output transmitters with built-in pi-tank matching system, so, it was possible to match on different bands. I'm sure mine worked across 80 to 10m in those days. For 80 to 10m these days I use a off-centre-fed dipole with hybrid choke/transformer at the feed point as designed by DJ0IP for minimum common mode current. David G3UNA On 08 December 2018 at 16:32 Ken G Kopp wrote: As I've already stated … I have a copy of the original Varney RSGB article that describes the G5RV and plainly states that it's a 20M only antenna. Remember, it requires an antenna tuner … Start with a dipole … Keep the "magic" 32' length of 300 ohm feedline. Delete the 68' of coax. What's left? A "normal" open wire fed dipole, better known as a Zepp. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to rmcg...@blomand.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV antenna
Sorry, I said Reg, should have said Louis David G3UNA > On 09 December 2018 at 16:30 CUTTER DAVID via Elecraft > wrote: > > > In addition, Reg was designing in the era of valve output transmitters with > built-in pi-tank matching system, so, it was possible to match on different > bands. I'm sure mine worked across 80 to 10m in those days. For 80 to 10m > these days I use a off-centre-fed dipole with hybrid choke/transformer at the > feed point as designed by DJ0IP for minimum common mode current. > David G3UNA > > > On 08 December 2018 at 16:32 Ken G Kopp wrote: > > > > > > As I've already stated … I have a copy of the original Varney > > RSGB article that describes the G5RV and plainly states that > > it's a 20M only antenna. > > > > Remember, it requires an antenna tuner … > > > > Start with a dipole … > > > > Keep the "magic" 32' length of 300 ohm feedline. > > > > Delete the 68' of coax. > > > > What's left? A "normal" open wire fed dipole, better > > known as a Zepp. > > > > 73! > > > > Ken Kopp - K0PP > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to d.cut...@ntlworld.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV antenna
In addition, Reg was designing in the era of valve output transmitters with built-in pi-tank matching system, so, it was possible to match on different bands. I'm sure mine worked across 80 to 10m in those days. For 80 to 10m these days I use a off-centre-fed dipole with hybrid choke/transformer at the feed point as designed by DJ0IP for minimum common mode current. David G3UNA > On 08 December 2018 at 16:32 Ken G Kopp wrote: > > > As I've already stated … I have a copy of the original Varney > RSGB article that describes the G5RV and plainly states that > it's a 20M only antenna. > > Remember, it requires an antenna tuner … > > Start with a dipole … > > Keep the "magic" 32' length of 300 ohm feedline. > > Delete the 68' of coax. > > What's left? A "normal" open wire fed dipole, better > known as a Zepp. > > 73! > > Ken Kopp - K0PP __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV antenna
Ken and all, More correctly if the terminology of hams is to be deemed correct, it is a "Double Extended Zepp". The radiator each side of center is 5/8 wavelength long (at 20 meters). The 32' 300 ohm ladder line is for impedance transformation. It does provide some broadside gain on 20 meters. I hesitate to call anything other than the original Zepp antenna (so named because it was towed behind Zeppelin airships) a "Zepp", but hams have known to construe antenna names before. The original Zepp antenna is a half wave antenna fed with a 1/4 wave parallel feedline. Turn it vertically and what do you have but what is commonly called the J-pole in VHF circles. Who said there is new antenna technology? Much is just renamed antennas that have been around for 50 to 80 years in one form or another. Various methods of radiator to feedline matching may be newer stuff, but the behavior of radiators has been relatively unchanged over a long period of time. 73, Don W3FPR On 12/8/2018 11:32 AM, Ken G Kopp wrote: As I've already stated … I have a copy of the original Varney RSGB article that describes the G5RV and plainly states that it's a 20M only antenna. Remember, it requires an antenna tuner … Start with a dipole … Keep the "magic" 32' length of 300 ohm feedline. Delete the 68' of coax. What's left? A "normal" open wire fed dipole, better known as a Zepp. __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV
Given the rate at which rules changes progress, we should have good sunspots when the change is approved. Then Techs can have a lot of fun running any of the QRP kit radios, which are quite inexpensive. (Of course, it could take so long that it comes through in the next bottom, or not at all.) In a desperate attempt to make this on topic for this reflector, I will note that Wayne and Eric started in the QRP kit arena. 73 Bill AE6JV On 12/6/18 at 10:42 AM, k6...@foothill.net (Fred Jensen) wrote: ARRL has petitioned the FCC for expanded HF segments to encourage new [and younger] Technicians to upgrade. I'm pretty sure results will be disappointing unless it's accompanied by a robust campaign to teach them it can be easy and inexpensive. --- Bill Frantz| If you want total security, go to prison. There you're 408-356-8506 | fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only www.pwpconsult.com | thing lacking is freedom. - Dwight D. Eisenhower __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV
As K0PP pointed out, the physics of electromagnetic radiation and the radiators that create it have been known for many years. "New kids on the block" may be antenna and transmission line modeling software, various analyzers, antenna system tools like HFTA, and the like. Ironically, these sometimes complicate an otherwise simple task ... poke RF into a conductor ... and they may tell you way more than you really need to know, adding to the "if it's not perfect to 4 decimal places, it won't work" syndrome. A 4-stack of 6 element yagi's or an array of multiple rhombics a la W6AM is obviously going to propel you toward the Honor Role much faster than an OCF wire in your attic. However, it is not *required* to make Q's and to enjoy HF ham radio. I had the opportunity to help a new General put up a vertical. He was obsessing over getting it exactly 43 ft long and getting enough ground radials, when 42 ft would work about as well as 44 ft, and one radial will make a big difference over no radials and two will be better than one, but not twice as better. I did finally convince him to just put it up, he ran 2 on-ground radials with the intention of adding more, and began using it. I don't believe he's added any radials yet. [:-) ARRL has petitioned the FCC for expanded HF segments to encourage new [and younger] Technicians to upgrade. I'm pretty sure results will be disappointing unless it's accompanied by a robust campaign to teach them it can be easy and inexpensive. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 12/5/2018 7:07 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote: Yes it is amazing that many contacts can be made with a mediocre antenna. Many hams haven't been exposed to a really good performance antenna system. There is a big difference. Bob, K4TAX __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV
Yes it is amazing that many contacts can be made with a mediocre antenna. Many hams haven't been exposed to a really good performance antenna system. There is a big difference. Bob, K4TAX Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 5, 2018, at 8:25 PM, Rose wrote: > > I have a copy of the original article by Varney, G5RV. It was designed as > a 20M only antenna. > > 73 ! > > K0PP > >> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018, 18:53 Jim Ragsdale > >> What a great comment, Fred! We have a guy in our area that tells >> everyone (including newcomers to the hobby) that G5RV antennas don't >> work. Funny how I've sure worked a lot of folks that was using one. >> >> 73, Jim W5LA >> >>> On 12/05/18 6:42 PM, Fred Jensen wrote: >>> If we want younger people to try out HF, we need to assure them that >>> they don't have to spend a year's take-home pay to get on and have fun. >> >> __ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to elecraftcov...@gmail.com > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to rmcg...@blomand.net > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV trivia
You are making me relive history Ken, K0PP; for in 1963 Jim, 9M2DQ sent me the
1957*/RSGB Bulletin /*with the article. I republished it in theMalaysian Amateur
Radio Transmitter Society /NEWSLETTER/ in early 1964; while Editor and 9M2JJ. Many
of the Malayan hams put one up for use on 40 Meters; with 51'of wire each side of
center, then 32' tv-twin-lead and 68'of 72-Ohm coax for the feed-line. Never were
we concerned about the SWR ~ what, with the pie-networks, one simply tuned-up.
Along came Ken, HS1I (now retired,W8JVP) and he recommended we string the antenna
North & South. What a surprise; we all gained at least an S-unit between
stations between Singapore, Malaya and Thailand. {you'll have to ask W8JVP about
his*propagation* studies in Thailand}.
Lou Varney also suggested that one could use open-wire feeders all the way into the
shack, with an ATU. That I have done after returning from teaching in Malaysia as a
Peace Corps Volunteer, in 1965. What memory cells don't get "scratched" on
this reflector
Cheers, Jan K1ND
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV trivia
It seems like as of late, the G5RV has been surpassed as the most mentioned antenna on the airwaves. I now here more instances of the 'off-center fed dipole.' __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV trivia
Yes, the G5RV is a good antenna...that is until one uses a great antenna, which by the way, is not that difficult to build and put in the air. Bob, K4TAX Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 19, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Tom Francis, W1TEF wrote: > > LOL!! Yep > > Tom, W1TEF > >> On 9/18/2017 11:07 PM, Fred Jensen wrote: >> Such was also the "Cult of the Windom" for those of us teenagers who >> couldn't afford 75 ohm twinlead for CF 1/2 wave dipoles. >> >> 73, >> >> Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW >> Sparks NV DM09dn >> Washoe County >>> On 9/18/2017 4:31 PM, Ken G Kopp wrote: >>> I have the original article by Lou Varney, G5RV. He intended it to be a >>> 20M -only- antenna but it's taken up a life of it's own as a "cult" antenna. >>> >>> 73! >>> >>> K0PP >> >> __ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to kx2_...@swsports.org >> > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to rmcg...@blomand.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV trivia
LOL!! Yep Tom, W1TEF On 9/18/2017 11:07 PM, Fred Jensen wrote: Such was also the "Cult of the Windom" for those of us teenagers who couldn't afford 75 ohm twinlead for CF 1/2 wave dipoles. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 9/18/2017 4:31 PM, Ken G Kopp wrote: I have the original article by Lou Varney, G5RV. He intended it to be a 20M -only- antenna but it's taken up a life of it's own as a "cult" antenna. 73! K0PP __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to kx2_...@swsports.org __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT: G5RV trivia
Such was also the "Cult of the Windom" for those of us teenagers who couldn't afford 75 ohm twinlead for CF 1/2 wave dipoles. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 9/18/2017 4:31 PM, Ken G Kopp wrote: I have the original article by Lou Varney, G5RV. He intended it to be a 20M -only- antenna but it's taken up a life of it's own as a "cult" antenna. 73! K0PP __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
In an issue of Radcom published between 1999 and 2006, which I shall have to find, IIRC there is some comment on the the G5RV with references. If I remember correctly Captain Varney G5RV first published the design in the 1940s, could well have been in 1946, and the antenna was intended to be used on 20m only. The multiband application came later.Will report back ASAP unless somebody else comes up with the history of the G5RV in the meantime. 73, Geoff GM4ESD Ron D'Eau Claire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From what I can discover, Captain Varney, G5RV, published his antenna design in England in 1946. I was referencing the comments made about it by John D Heys, G3BDQ, in his book "Practical Wire Antennas". You are quite right! It seems like everyone who find an article by Captain Varney thought that was the "original" article! Actually Capt. Varney was a prolific author and active Ham before the war and that continued until the 1990's. His call is now held by the Mid Sussex Amateur Radio Society who writes of him, "Louis Varney was the president of M.S.A.R.S. for 37 years until his death in 2000. In later years he was still climbing trees trying to improve on his famous "G5RV" antanna! (sic)" Perhaps one of our friends from G-land can find the original article. It was published in 1946 according to Heys. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
Back in those days most of my friends did not even own an swr meter, we "tuned up" by dipping and loading and worked out the power input to the PA to meet the regulations. In later life LV preferred to speak of the ASTU Antenna System Matching Unit. I prefer to use MU for the box in the shack. David G3UNA ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
>From what I can discover, Captain Varney, G5RV, published his antenna design in England in 1946. I was referencing the comments made about it by John D Heys, G3BDQ, in his book "Practical Wire Antennas". You are quite right! It seems like everyone who find an article by Captain Varney thought that was the "original" article! Actually Capt. Varney was a prolific author and active Ham before the war and that continued until the 1990's. His call is now held by the Mid Sussex Amateur Radio Society who writes of him, "Louis Varney was the president of M.S.A.R.S. for 37 years until his death in 2000. In later years he was still climbing trees trying to improve on his famous "G5RV" antanna! (sic)" Perhaps one of our friends from G-land can find the original article. It was published in 1946 according to Heys. Ron AC7AC -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, now I'm confused. Some years back, I remember reading "the original G5RV article" on the internet - but now I can't find it anywhere on the 'net. I have found lots of references to "the original G5RV article", but not the article itself. Worse, the references don't agree with each other! Some say it was in the November 1966 issue of RSGB Bulletin, while others say it was July 1958. Both those dates seem too "new" to me, because coax certainly wasn't new even in 1958. My 4th edition RSGB Handbook (copyright 1968) doesn't have a thing on the G5RV, either. It does have the W3EDP end-fed, though - 84 foot wire and 17 foot counterpoise. Does anyone have a scan of the original G5RV article? ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
In a message dated 5/17/07 1:53:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Jim, the original G5RV is a 1-1/2 wave 20 meter *only* antenna that offered > a good match for the coaxial line by using an open-wire matching section. As > you know, such matching sections are frequency-dependent, like any fixed > tuned matching network. The G5RV allowed the use of the newly-available (at > affordable prices) coaxial lines that appeared at the end of WWII. Well, now I'm confused. Some years back, I remember reading "the original G5RV article" on the internet - but now I can't find it anywhere on the 'net. I have found lots of references to "the original G5RV article", but not the article itself. Worse, the references don't agree with each other! Some say it was in the November 1966 issue of RSGB Bulletin, while others say it was July 1958. Both those dates seem too "new" to me, because coax certainly wasn't new even in 1958. My 4th edition RSGB Handbook (copyright 1968) doesn't have a thing on the G5RV, either. It does have the W3EDP end-fed, though - 84 foot wire and 17 foot counterpoise. Does anyone have a scan of the original G5RV article? > > Louis Varney (G5RV) contributed to the discussion of using his 20-meter > "G5RV" on other bands. That's what causes a lot of confusion. > It's certainly true that the G5RV can be optimized to present a very low SWR on 20 meters. But if it was meant to be a 20-only antenna, why the 102 foot length? That's too long for a 20 meter extended-double-Zepp. > At the time Varney published his original design, many Hams operated on > only > one band. But when was that? I agree, though, that there was a time when it was not unusual for hams to operate on just a few frequencies on one band, and to use only one mode. > > That changed dramatically in the years after WWII, particularly in the > 1950's. The rapid availability of surplus parts and entire rigs, a rather > affluent post-war society here in the USA, and a large number of commercial > and kit rigs appearing on the market in the 50's made multi-band operation > "normal" for most Hams. > Yup. In fact, this happened more than once: in the 1930s, the bankruptcy of many early radio companies put a lot of parts (mostly receiving tubes and power transformers) originally meant for BC sets on the 'surplus' market at rather low prices. And then the sudden end of WW2 did it on a much larger scale. In fact, the first-generation Heathkits were largely based on surplus parts. That's why so many odd tube types were used in them. > Hams, always willing to "try anything" for an antenna -- even loading up > the > bedsprings (literally!), wanted to use Varney's G5RV design on more than 20 > meters. Of course, the G5RV is nothing more than a doublet fed with open > wire line, an efficient multi-band design that had been popular since the > 1920's. Varney's contribution was the use of a specific open wire line > section to match to coaxial line on 20 meters without the need for an > antenna tuner (ATU). Ignoring the matching section and simply using it as a > multi-band doublet worked fine, as long as one used a suitable matching > network (ATU) and avoided the coax section. > > The problem was that Hams wanted to use coaxial lines. Not only were they > easier to run into the shack, virtually all post-War rigs were designed for > coaxial feedlines for simpler bandswitching and TVI-proofing. So the battle > to find a suitable compromise between efficiency and the use of coax in a > multi-band "G5RV" started in earnest. > > Varney himself wrote about those attempts, emphasizing the need for a > matching network (ATU) on any but the 20 meter bands or if the dimensions of > the antenna or feeders were changed in any way. > All true - but as I read the article, he found a combination of lengths of antenna wire and balanced feeder that gave a reasonable match on "all HF bands". It sounded to me as if the antenna were meant for folks who had limited space, and could only have one antenna. However, it must be remembered that, in those days, "all HF bands" did not include 160, 30, 17 or 12 meters. And "reasonable match" could mean an SWR of 3 or so on the coax line on some bands - which wasn't a problem for most tube rigs, nor for short runs of coax. Plus, G-land, 80 meters was 3500 to 3800 kHz, and 40 meters 7000 to 7100 kHz. IOW, what was considered "low SWR" and "doesn't need a tuner" in those days might cause today's hams to thing something was awfully wrong. Does anybody have a link or scan to the original G5RV article? 73 de Jim, N2EY ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http:/
Re: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
In a message dated 5/17/07 11:47:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > The 5RV will only provide the correct match transformation at a specific > height and in a straight line. If the ends droop the impedances are > wrong and the match between the balanced line and the coax will be > wrong. > > That's true in theory. But how "wrong" it is in practice varies all over the place. And it's true for any dipole, not just a G5RV. Depending on how far from the ideal the system varies, the additional mismatch due to droop and such may not be worth worrying about. Any tuning unit should therefore be between the coax and the > > balanced line. Tuning the coax is the shack is bad practice and is > likely to be lossy. It's not that simple. If the SWR on the coax line is high, the coax is small, and the line is long, the result can be a lot of loss. But if the SWR is reasonable (say, less than 3:1) and the coax is relatively short and low-loss (say, 50 feet of good quality RG-213), the resulting overall system loss will probably not be worth worrying about. The trick is to calculate just how the system will *actually* work. With computer models like EZNEC and Reg Edwards' DIPOLE3, the effects of things like SWR on the coax can be found with a reasonable degree of accuracy. A much better alternative is the doublet fed with > > balanced line all the way back to the shack. That's only true *IF*: - the balanced line can be run into the shack without undue mechanical problems - the tuner used to match the balanced line is up to the job on all frequencies of interest - the overall resulting loss from all sources is kept low. Those "ifs" are not guaranteed in all cases. For example, consider a 130 foot dipole fed with 60 feet of open wire line. Compute the impedance at the shack end of the line on the various bands, and see how well the various common tuners can match it. Forget the 5RV and get as > > much wire as you can in the sky. All the G5RV amounts to is a way to feed a wire of about 31 meters so that the matching job is made easier. The same is true for OCF dipoles. Depending on the individual situation, a G5RV may be the best solution - or an OCF, or the classic dipole-fed-with-ladder-line. Trap dipoles are also lossy. Again, that's too general a statement. Yes, a trap dipole made with several traps that have low Q will be less efficient than a full size antenna. But a trap dipole with only a few traps of lowloss construction can be within a decibel of a full-size antenna - on multiple bands - and can often fit where a full-size antenna will not. In practice, less than a decibel of loss usually isn't worth worrying about. > A good read on antenna theory can be obtained from the RSGB bookshop and > HF Antennas for All Locations by Les Moxon G6XN > There's also W4RNL's excellent website. But most of all, do not simply dismiss whole classes of antenna because some versions can behave poorly. 73 de Jim, N2EY ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
Jim, the original G5RV is a 1-1/2 wave 20 meter *only* antenna that offered a good match for the coaxial line by using an open-wire matching section. As you know, such matching sections are frequency-dependent, like any fixed tuned matching network. The G5RV allowed the use of the newly-available (at affordable prices) coaxial lines that appeared at the end of WWII. Louis Varney (G5RV) contributed to the discussion of using his 20-meter "G5RV" on other bands. That's what causes a lot of confusion. At the time Varney published his original design, many Hams operated on only one band. That changed dramatically in the years after WWII, particularly in the 1950's. The rapid availability of surplus parts and entire rigs, a rather affluent post-war society here in the USA, and a large number of commercial and kit rigs appearing on the market in the 50's made multi-band operation "normal" for most Hams. Hams, always willing to "try anything" for an antenna -- even loading up the bedsprings (literally!), wanted to use Varney's G5RV design on more than 20 meters. Of course, the G5RV is nothing more than a doublet fed with open wire line, an efficient multi-band design that had been popular since the 1920's. Varney's contribution was the use of a specific open wire line section to match to coaxial line on 20 meters without the need for an antenna tuner (ATU). Ignoring the matching section and simply using it as a multi-band doublet worked fine, as long as one used a suitable matching network (ATU) and avoided the coax section. The problem was that Hams wanted to use coaxial lines. Not only were they easier to run into the shack, virtually all post-War rigs were designed for coaxial feedlines for simpler bandswitching and TVI-proofing. So the battle to find a suitable compromise between efficiency and the use of coax in a multi-band "G5RV" started in earnest. Varney himself wrote about those attempts, emphasizing the need for a matching network (ATU) on any but the 20 meter bands or if the dimensions of the antenna or feeders were changed in any way. One of those taking up this challenge was ZS6BKW who wrote a computer program to study and optimize the best combination of length and feeder for a G5RV-like antenna. His design provides a decent (<2:1 SWR) match on 7, 14, 18, 24 and 29 MHz but shows quite high SWRs on 3.5, 10, and 21 MHz.(see "Practical Wire Antennas" by John D Heys, G3BDQ, published by the RSGB, page 22). Ron AC7AC -Original Message- In all the G5RV articles I've read, including the original, it's a multiband antenna. It was specifically designed that way by G5RV. What's special about the G5RV is that if it is properly built and installed, it will present a low (but not 1:1) SWR and good efficiency on the non-WARC bands. And it's simple. > The same thing happened with the single-wire fed > Windom years ago. EVERYONE had them. > That antenna goes back to the 1920s. The "Windoms" we have today are really off-center-fed (OCF) dipoles. > Why would one want to clobber up an open-wire fed dipole? > The G5RV version requires a tuner when used on bands other > than 20M, so why not bring the open-wire to the tuner and > dispense with the open-wire-to-coax transition kludge hanging > outside in the sky? It's a simple application made difficult. No, it isn't. The reason for the popularity of G5RVs and OCFs is this: Properly made and installed, they are capable of low SWR (not unity) on multiple bands, and they wind up with a coax feeder of random length coming into the shack. While a tuner may be needed to get 1:1 SWR at the rig, the tuner need not be balanced, nor does it need to have a wide matching range. A simple, low cost tuner can do the job of tuning out the relatively-small mismatch. OTOH, if you simply put up the classic dipole-fed-with-ladder-line and don't concern yourself too much with lengths of dipole and feeder, the result can be a wide range of impedances at the shack end of the line. So you need a much more expensive tuner to get the system to work efficiently. All three systems will work well if done right. After all, they're all just dipoles with different feed systems. The question is, what resources are available? 73 de Jim, N2EY ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
A friend's coax-fed G5RV worked ok with his 990 (built-in matching unit). No external "tuner" needed. It worked all bands 160 to 10m: on 160 I made him a simple switch to short the coax and tune/match against ground. His needs were modest - no dx, just local chit chat. It was sensitive to coax length and I coiled up the first 10ft or so at the junction to the ladder line. He replaced it with an expensive Carolina Windom which worked just as well but not as reliable. David G3UNA - Original Message - From: "Brett gazdzinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Elecraft'" Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 1:27 PM Subject: RE: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns What many do is put up as much wire as possible, then take the feedline down to a remote balanced tuner in a dog house, then run coax or hardline to the shack. That is the best setup for high power AM multi band work I suspect. Running AM, you have to derate everything like baluns and traps to 1/4 power or less. I once had a B+W folded all band dipole rated at 1.5kw that B+W told me was only good for about 150 watts of AM! I used to have resonant 80 and 40 meter dipoles, but the 80 meter one was directly over the house lengthwise and got into everything. When the coax went bad, I took it and the 40 meter dipole down and put up various antenna's, and the best working thing I can fit was the home made G5RV. On high power, it works on 80 and 40 meters without anything getting hot (coax, tuner), and works great on 40, on 80 I have to watch the power as the tuner arcs on the upper frequencies. That took some experimenting with lengths to move the high voltage point away from the tuner some. There are lots more choices when running ssb or cw, traps, baluns, and auto antenna tuners can all handle those modes. Not sure about the digital stuff, but part of the AM problem is the very high short duration peaks that can sneak past any limiting, 3 or 4 kw in my case, which can be very high voltage at a high swr. The big advantage of the G5RV is that if done right, the swr is not real horrible on most bands, and loss is not real high in the coax if its short. A good trap dipole might be better if you run lower power, but the G5RV has nothing to wear out or get water/bugs into, is light and easy to put up, and easy to make. Brett N2DTS > I have G5RV's original article introducing the antenna. > He specifically states that it is a 20M antenna, and yet it's > now somehow become a do-all-bands wonder ... an almost > "cult" thing. In all the G5RV articles I've read, including the original, it's a multiband antenna. It was specifically designed that way by G5RV. What's special about the G5RV is that if it is properly built and installed, it will present a low (but not 1:1) SWR and good efficiency on the non-WARC bands. And it's simple. > The same thing happened with the single-wire fed > Windom years ago. EVERYONE had them. > That antenna goes back to the 1920s. The "Windoms" we have today are really off-center-fed (OCF) dipoles. > Why would one want to clobber up an open-wire fed dipole? > The G5RV version requires a tuner when used on bands other > than 20M, so why not bring the open-wire to the tuner and > dispense with the open-wire-to-coax transition kludge hanging > outside in the sky? It's a simple application made difficult. No, it isn't. The reason for the popularity of G5RVs and OCFs is this: Properly made and installed, they are capable of low SWR (not unity) on multiple bands, and they wind up with a coax feeder of random length coming into the shack. While a tuner may be needed to get 1:1 SWR at the rig, the tuner need not be balanced, nor does it need to have a wide matching range. A simple, low cost tuner can do the job of tuning out the relatively-small mismatch. OTOH, if you simply put up the classic dipole-fed-with-ladder-line and don't concern yourself too much with lengths of dipole and feeder, the result can be a wide range of impedances at the shack end of the line. So you need a much more expensive tuner to get the system to work efficiently. All three systems will work well if done right. After all, they're all just dipoles with different feed systems. The question is, what resources are available? 73 de Jim, N2EY ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@
RE: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
What many do is put up as much wire as possible, then take the feedline down to a remote balanced tuner in a dog house, then run coax or hardline to the shack. That is the best setup for high power AM multi band work I suspect. Running AM, you have to derate everything like baluns and traps to 1/4 power or less. I once had a B+W folded all band dipole rated at 1.5kw that B+W told me was only good for about 150 watts of AM! I used to have resonant 80 and 40 meter dipoles, but the 80 meter one was directly over the house lengthwise and got into everything. When the coax went bad, I took it and the 40 meter dipole down and put up various antenna's, and the best working thing I can fit was the home made G5RV. On high power, it works on 80 and 40 meters without anything getting hot (coax, tuner), and works great on 40, on 80 I have to watch the power as the tuner arcs on the upper frequencies. That took some experimenting with lengths to move the high voltage point away from the tuner some. There are lots more choices when running ssb or cw, traps, baluns, and auto antenna tuners can all handle those modes. Not sure about the digital stuff, but part of the AM problem is the very high short duration peaks that can sneak past any limiting, 3 or 4 kw in my case, which can be very high voltage at a high swr. The big advantage of the G5RV is that if done right, the swr is not real horrible on most bands, and loss is not real high in the coax if its short. A good trap dipole might be better if you run lower power, but the G5RV has nothing to wear out or get water/bugs into, is light and easy to put up, and easy to make. Brett N2DTS > > > I have G5RV's original article introducing the antenna. > > He specifically states that it is a 20M antenna, and yet it's > > now somehow become a do-all-bands wonder ... an almost > > "cult" thing. > > In all the G5RV articles I've read, including the original, > it's a multiband > antenna. It was specifically designed that way by G5RV. > > What's special about the G5RV is that if it is properly built > and installed, > it will present a low (but not 1:1) SWR and good efficiency > on the non-WARC > bands. > And it's simple. > > > > The same thing happened with the single-wire fed > > Windom years ago. EVERYONE had them. > > > > That antenna goes back to the 1920s. The "Windoms" we have > today are really > off-center-fed (OCF) dipoles. > > > > Why would one want to clobber up an open-wire fed dipole? > > The G5RV version requires a tuner when used on bands other > > than 20M, so why not bring the open-wire to the tuner and > > dispense with the open-wire-to-coax transition kludge hanging > > outside in the sky? It's a simple application made difficult. > > No, it isn't. > > The reason for the popularity of G5RVs and OCFs is this: > > Properly made and installed, they are capable of low SWR (not > unity) on > multiple bands, and they wind up with a coax feeder of random > length coming into > the shack. > > While a tuner may be needed to get 1:1 SWR at the rig, the > tuner need not be > balanced, nor does it need to have a wide matching range. A > simple, low cost > tuner can do the job of tuning out the relatively-small mismatch. > > OTOH, if you simply put up the classic > dipole-fed-with-ladder-line and don't > concern yourself too much with lengths of dipole and feeder, > the result can be > a wide range of impedances at the shack end of the line. So > you need a much > more expensive tuner to get the system to work efficiently. > > All three systems will work well if done right. After all, > they're all just > dipoles with different feed systems. The question is, what > resources are > available? > > 73 de Jim, N2EY > > > > > > ** > See what's free at http://www.aol.com. > ___ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
In a message dated 5/16/07 10:17:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I have G5RV's original article introducing the antenna. > He specifically states that it is a 20M antenna, and yet it's > now somehow become a do-all-bands wonder ... an almost > "cult" thing. In all the G5RV articles I've read, including the original, it's a multiband antenna. It was specifically designed that way by G5RV. What's special about the G5RV is that if it is properly built and installed, it will present a low (but not 1:1) SWR and good efficiency on the non-WARC bands. And it's simple. > The same thing happened with the single-wire fed > Windom years ago. EVERYONE had them. > That antenna goes back to the 1920s. The "Windoms" we have today are really off-center-fed (OCF) dipoles. > Why would one want to clobber up an open-wire fed dipole? > The G5RV version requires a tuner when used on bands other > than 20M, so why not bring the open-wire to the tuner and > dispense with the open-wire-to-coax transition kludge hanging > outside in the sky? It's a simple application made difficult. No, it isn't. The reason for the popularity of G5RVs and OCFs is this: Properly made and installed, they are capable of low SWR (not unity) on multiple bands, and they wind up with a coax feeder of random length coming into the shack. While a tuner may be needed to get 1:1 SWR at the rig, the tuner need not be balanced, nor does it need to have a wide matching range. A simple, low cost tuner can do the job of tuning out the relatively-small mismatch. OTOH, if you simply put up the classic dipole-fed-with-ladder-line and don't concern yourself too much with lengths of dipole and feeder, the result can be a wide range of impedances at the shack end of the line. So you need a much more expensive tuner to get the system to work efficiently. All three systems will work well if done right. After all, they're all just dipoles with different feed systems. The question is, what resources are available? 73 de Jim, N2EY ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns
In my case, a balanced antenna tuner that can handle the big rig is very limited, like a Johnson kilowatt match box MIGHT handle it. While I limit the pep to 1500 watts, the audio compressor is only so fast and peaks beyond 3kw likely get through. AM also demands a high duty cycle with its constant carrier. Getting the open wire line into the basement shack is also a problem, with all the metal pipes and ductwork around. The 20 feet of coax seems to not cause problems at all. Brett N2DTS > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Kopp > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:16 PM > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net > Subject: [Elecraft] OT - G5RV antenna & baluns > > K5KVH sums it up in his opening paragraph ... > > I have G5RV's original article introducing the antenna. > He specifically states that it is a 20M antenna, and yet it's > now somehow become a do-all-bands wonder ... an almost > "cult" thing. The same thing happened with the single-wire fed > Windom years ago. EVERYONE had them. > > Why would one want to clobber up an open-wire fed dipole? > The G5RV version requires a tuner when used on bands other > than 20M, so why not bring the open-wire to the tuner and > dispense with the open-wire-to-coax transition kludge hanging > outside in the sky? It's a simple application made difficult. > > 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ___ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
