KATxxx Remote Tuner
Locked
 
|
Eric/Wayne, Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna tuner? A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner via the coax. I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. Rich - N5ZC Sent from my iPad ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Hi Rich,
I totally agree with your last statement about the tuner placement. I can't answer for Eric and Wayne and I am sure they will chime in in due time. I haven't heard of any plans to introduce a weatherproofed version of any of their tuners. But the KAT500 is very easy to remote control and weatherproofing it with a suitable enclosure is not rocket science either. I have been doing this for about as long as the KAT500 has been in existence. My tuner is at the end of a 100' buried LMR400DB cable and the only other cable is 120V power. Communications is WiFI using a WiFi serial server from Lantronix. Then I just use the KAT500 utility for controlling it. There is a few pictures of the installation here: http://ab2tc.com/ I have more pictures and other information, screenshots etc, if you contact me via E-mail. My E-mail address is OK on qrz.com and it is easily guessable anyway, hi. You're mentioning controlling it via the coax. I am sure that using your coax for a MoCa link is possible but it may be more trouble than it is worth. I don't think MoCa bridges capable of withstanding 100's of watts of RF are commercially available. While MoCa doesn't intentionally use HF there might be lots of noise there interfering with your reception. AB2TC - Knut Richard Thorne-4 wrote > Eric/Wayne, > > Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna > tuner? > > A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps > power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN > on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner > via the coax. > > I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required > it needs to be at the feed point. > > Rich - N5ZC > Sent from my iPad > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto: > Elecraft@.qth > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to > lists+1215531472858-365791@.nabble -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/ ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Richard Thorne-4
Rich -
" I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point." While I prefer unmatched antennas fed with very low loss ladder line, I have always felt the tuner should be at the feedpoint of that line. When I added the KPA500, I switched to the KAT500, and it’s not really practical to locate that remotely. As a compromise, I am using a short (maybe 15 feet) length of coax from the KAT to a hybrid balun (1:1 / 4:1) in the attic which connects to the ladder line. I actually notice no difference in performance (everything else remains unchanged). That being said, a “remote” version of the KAT500 (or a KAT1500) would be of immense interest to me – so I will follow this thread closely. 73 Lyn, W0LEN -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Richard Thorne Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2020 7:40 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] KATxxx Remote Tuner Eric/Wayne, Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna tuner? A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner via the coax. I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. Rich - N5ZC Sent from my iPad ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by ab2tc
On 4/19/2020 8:51 AM, ab2tc wrote:
> I totally agree with your last statement about the tuner placement. The importance of a tuner being at the feedpoint depends entirely on the antenna, the frequency(ies), and the feedline. The lower the operating frequency, and lower the feedline loss characteristics, and the lower the mismatch, a tuner in the shack can work quite well at moderate power levels. AD5X, who does product reviews for ARRL, reviewed the "43 ft vertical," which is notoriously difficult to match. One solution he found was a 4:1 unun at the feedpoint and 1/2-in hardline to the shack. For high power on 160 and 80M, he used a tuner at the feedpoint. Some years ago, I successfully loaded a vertical on 80M that was resonant on 160M, hence a VERY high impedance at the feedpoint. The feedline was RG8 and only about 40 ft long, so I was able to load it quite successfully with a Ten Tec 238 tuner in the shack and a legal limit Ten Tec tube amp. On 60M, I'm currently loading a high 80M dipole fed with 160 ft of RG11 using the tuner in the KPA1500. The amp, of course, is throttled back to less than 100W. I'm not the loudest signal on the band, but I've worked into EU and SA in a few evenings on the band. 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Richard Thorne-4
I don't think that's actually true in most cases. For example, a load of 35 - j45 gives a 3:1 SWR at the load for 50 ohm coax, and the additional line loss at 14 MHz due to SWR over 200 feet of LMR-400 (moderate cost) is about 0.5 dB. In most cases with typical antennas and decent feedline, a tuner is more about making your rig or amplifier happy, and for that it can be in the shack. Unless of course you're talking about some random piece of wire with a 10:1 SWR, but even then the extra loss due to SWR for the 200 feet of LMR-400 is less than 2.5 dB at 14 MHz. The best reason I can think of for a tuner in that case is to keep the RF voltage from being excessive at high power. If you're obsessive about 50 ohm matched antennas I doubt that is the case for you, and if it was me I'd put the $1,000+ dollars it would probably cost for a stand alone high power remote tuner capable of handling a 10:1 SWR to better use on the antennas themselves. 73, Dave AB7E On 4/19/2020 5:40 AM, Richard Thorne wrote: > I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. > > Rich - N5ZC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Lyn WØLEN
Why? Specifically (numbers please), what would it gain you that would be cost effective versus other alternatives? 73, Dave AB7E On 4/19/2020 8:52 AM, Lyn Norstad wrote: > > That being said, a “remote” version of the KAT500 (or a KAT1500) would be of immense interest to me – so I will follow this thread closely. > > > > 73 > > Lyn, > > W0LEN > > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Richard Thorne-4
You can get an AT-615B from Array Solutions now and do this. I put 10 in a club station for our various wire arrays. They do everything you need.
BTW I disagree about this 50 Ohm antenna thing. In my world of commercial high powered broadcasting 30 MHz and under, there are almost never resonant, matched 50 ohm arrays. Sent from my iPad > On Apr 19, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Richard Thorne <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > Eric/Wayne, > > Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna tuner? > > A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner via the coax. > > I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. > > Rich - N5ZC > Sent from my iPad > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
I agree. Match the antenna, whatever the Z may be, to the feed line. This is most efficiently done at the antenna feed-point.
However with good loss coax on HF, matching at the transmitter end is easier and less complex and less expensive. Bob, K4TAX Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 19, 2020, at 4:13 PM, W2xj <[hidden email]> wrote: > > You can get an AT-615B from Array Solutions now and do this. I put 10 in a club station for our various wire arrays. They do everything you need. > > BTW I disagree about this 50 Ohm antenna thing. In my world of commercial high powered broadcasting 30 MHz and under, there are almost never resonant, matched 50 ohm arrays. > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Apr 19, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Richard Thorne <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> Eric/Wayne, >> >> Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna tuner? >> >> A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner via the coax. >> >> I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. >> >> Rich - N5ZC >> Sent from my iPad >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to [hidden email] > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by W2xj
At a “mere” $3K each, the AT-615B might be a great product, but is hardly what I would call a universally accessible solution …
Grant NQ5T > On Apr 19, 2020, at 5:13 PM, W2xj <[hidden email]> wrote: > > You can get an AT-615B from Array Solutions now and do this. I put 10 in a club station for our various wire arrays. They do everything you need. > > BTW I disagree about this 50 Ohm antenna thing. In my world of commercial high powered broadcasting 30 MHz and under, there are almost never resonant, matched 50 ohm arrays. > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Apr 19, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Richard Thorne <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> Eric/Wayne, >> >> Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna tuner? >> >> A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner via the coax. >> >> I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. >> >> Rich - N5ZC >> Sent from my iPad >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to [hidden email] > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
you get what you pay for.
Sent from my iPad > On Apr 19, 2020, at 5:58 PM, Grant Youngman <[hidden email]> wrote: > > At a “mere” $3K each, the AT-615B might be a great product, but is hardly what I would call a universally accessible solution … > > Grant NQ5T > >> On Apr 19, 2020, at 5:13 PM, W2xj <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> You can get an AT-615B from Array Solutions now and do this. I put 10 in a club station for our various wire arrays. They do everything you need. >> >> BTW I disagree about this 50 Ohm antenna thing. In my world of commercial high powered broadcasting 30 MHz and under, there are almost never resonant, matched 50 ohm arrays. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>>> On Apr 19, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Richard Thorne <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Eric/Wayne, >>> >>> Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna tuner? >>> >>> A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner via the coax. >>> >>> I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. >>> >>> Rich - N5ZC >>> Sent from my iPad >>> ______________________________________________________________ >>> Elecraft mailing list >>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >>> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >>> >>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >>> Message delivered to [hidden email] >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to [hidden email] > > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by David Gilbert
Dave -
Not as much for improved performance as to get the very annoying relay clatter out of the shack, and back up into the attic where I don't have to listen to it. 73 Lyn, W0LEN -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Gilbert Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2020 1:17 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KATxxx Remote Tuner Why? Specifically (numbers please), what would it gain you that would be cost effective versus other alternatives? 73, Dave AB7E On 4/19/2020 8:52 AM, Lyn Norstad wrote: > > That being said, a “remote” version of the KAT500 (or a KAT1500) would be of immense interest to me – so I will follow this thread closely. > > > > 73 > > Lyn, > > W0LEN > > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by W2xj
Hi,
I know nothing about BC transmitters and antennas but in our world of amateur radio solid state transmitters it is imperative that the transmission line presents a load close to 50 ohms resistive to the transmitter. The transmitter doesn't care how this is accomplished as long as it sees a good match to 50 ohms. The simplest, of course, it to have a resonant antenna (close to 50 ohms resistive - resonance is no guarantee of a 50 ohm load) and a good low loss 50 ohm coax transmission line. If the antenna is far from 50 ohm resistive, a tuner (more correctly called a matching network) is required somewhere between the antenna and the transmitter. If the actual loss of the transmission line under the mismatched condition is not too high, it's perfectly OK to have the tuner close to the transmitter. If these conditions are not satisfied, the tuner is best located close to the antenna feed point with the extra cost and effort that involves. AB2TC - Knut W2xj wrote > You can get an AT-615B from Array Solutions now and do this. I put 10 in a > club station for our various wire arrays. They do everything you need. > > BTW I disagree about this 50 Ohm antenna thing. In my world of commercial > high powered broadcasting 30 MHz and under, there are almost never > resonant, matched 50 ohm arrays. > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Apr 19, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Richard Thorne < > rthorne@ > > wrote: >> > <snip> -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/ ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Please don’t talk down to me or many other of us. I’ve been in this hobby for over 60 years and I know how things worked both then and now.
To answer your question about broadcast, many systems consist of series fed towers. In a practical world a tower presenting zero reactance is about 35 ohms and 50 ohm tower has reactance. Other heights have (generally) higher resistance and reactance. In all these cases an ATU at the tower. base is used to match both the coax and TX output. The other approach is a grounded tower with a unipole (or shunt feed) arrangement. Properly done the feed is tapped for zero reactance and the resistance is somewhere 250 ohms. Others tap for 50 ohms but the reactance is high. These arrangements also require an ATU at the tower base. On HF, the antenna is multiband and uses open wire feeder. Usually this goes straight to the TX which usually has a 300 ohm balanced output. These transmitters are still tube devices and their output networks accommodate the changing load. Sent from my iPad >> On Apr 19, 2020, at 7:39 PM, ab2tc <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi, > > I know nothing about BC transmitters and antennas but in our world of > amateur radio solid state transmitters it is imperative that the > transmission line presents a load close to 50 ohms resistive to the > transmitter. The transmitter doesn't care how this is accomplished as long > as it sees a good match to 50 ohms. The simplest, of course, it to have a > resonant antenna (close to 50 ohms resistive - resonance is no guarantee of > a 50 ohm load) and a good low loss 50 ohm coax transmission line. If the > antenna is far from 50 ohm resistive, a tuner (more correctly called a > matching network) is required somewhere between the antenna and the > transmitter. If the actual loss of the transmission line under the > mismatched condition is not too high, it's perfectly OK to have the tuner > close to the transmitter. If these conditions are not satisfied, the tuner > is best located close to the antenna feed point with the extra cost and > effort that involves. > > AB2TC - Knut > > > > W2xj wrote >> You can get an AT-615B from Array Solutions now and do this. I put 10 in a >> club station for our various wire arrays. They do everything you need. >> >> BTW I disagree about this 50 Ohm antenna thing. In my world of commercial >> high powered broadcasting 30 MHz and under, there are almost never >> resonant, matched 50 ohm arrays. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Apr 19, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Richard Thorne < > >> rthorne@ > >> > wrote: >> <snip> > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/ > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: KATxxx Remote Tuner
|
|
In reply to this post by W2xj
For those with antennas that are "nearly right," eg provide <1.5:1 in a sweet spot but not the entire band, like a beam or a dipole, a commercial matcher that covers a huge range is not justified. A simple multi-tapped transformer would satisfy those needs. A relay-switched unit should be relatively easy to put in an outdoor unit quite inexpensively. I've seen tuners built into plastic tool boxes, small plastic rubbish bins, food boxes. Take care to use appropriate drain holes and critter filter.
David G3UNA/G6CP > On 19 April 2020 at 23:06 W2xj <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > you get what you pay for. > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Apr 19, 2020, at 5:58 PM, Grant Youngman <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > At a “mere” $3K each, the AT-615B might be a great product, but is hardly what I would call a universally accessible solution … > > > > Grant NQ5T > > > >> On Apr 19, 2020, at 5:13 PM, W2xj <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> > >> You can get an AT-615B from Array Solutions now and do this. I put 10 in a club station for our various wire arrays. They do everything you need. > >> > >> BTW I disagree about this 50 Ohm antenna thing. In my world of commercial high powered broadcasting 30 MHz and under, there are almost never resonant, matched 50 ohm arrays. > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >>>> On Apr 19, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Richard Thorne <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Eric/Wayne, > >>> > >>> Has there been any work done for a potential dedicated remote antenna tuner? > >>> > >>> A remote tuner that could handle 500 or 1500 watts to match up with amps power wise (Or just a barefoot K3/K4). Maybe a black box between the LAN on the K4 or ACC on the K3 so control signals could be sent to the tuner via the coax. > >>> > >>> I’m a firm believer in 50 ohm matched antennas, but if a tuner is required it needs to be at the feed point. > >>> > >>> Rich - N5ZC > >>> Sent from my iPad > >>> ______________________________________________________________ > >>> Elecraft mailing list > >>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > >>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > >>> Post: mailto:[hidden email] > >>> > >>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > >>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > >>> Message delivered to [hidden email] > >> > >> ______________________________________________________________ > >> Elecraft mailing list > >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] > >> > >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > >> Message delivered to [hidden email] > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |