JB
Jim Bacher
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 1:47 AM
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
KB
KENT BRITAIN
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 2:23 AM
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find outwhere it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size ofa silver dollar.
IF this was true.You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribanderhave to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10 meteraperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find outwhere it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size ofa silver dollar.
IF this was true.You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribanderhave to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10 meteraperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
_______________________________________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
JB
Jim Bacher
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 1:05 PM
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" wa5vjb@flash.net wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
out
where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
a silver dollar.
IF this was true.
You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
meter
aperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" <wa5vjb@flash.net> wrote:
> That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
> out
> where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
>
> You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
> You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
> At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
> Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
> a silver dollar.
>
> *IF* this was true.
> You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
>
> And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
> have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
> meter
> aperture areas overlap!!!!
>
> We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
> interaction.
>
> Kent WA5VJB
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
> *To:* MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
> *Subject:* [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>
> See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
>
> If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
> the link at the bottom of the email.
>
> Jim
> wb8vsu@mvus.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
>
>
KB
KENT BRITAIN
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 1:59 PM
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
From: Jim Bacher <j.bacher@ieee.org>
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net
Cc: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter. Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment. I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432 antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144 antennas capture area.Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the other bands performances. I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of value to doing so. Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" wa5vjb@flash.net wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find outwhere it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size ofa silver dollar.
IF this was true.You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribanderhave to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10 meteraperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
From: Jim Bacher <j.bacher@ieee.org>
To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>
Cc: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter. Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment. I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432 antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144 antennas capture area.Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the other bands performances. I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of value to doing so. Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" <wa5vjb@flash.net> wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find outwhere it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size ofa silver dollar.
IF this was true.You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribanderhave to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10 meteraperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
______________________________ _________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
KB
KENT BRITAIN
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 2:03 PM
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net
Cc: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" wa5vjb@flash.net wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
out
where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
a silver dollar.
IF this was true.
You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
meter
aperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
- CC
-
- MVUS LIST
-
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>
Cc: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" <wa5vjb@flash.net> wrote:
> That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
> out
> where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
>
> You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
> You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
> At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
> Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
> a silver dollar.
>
> *IF* this was true.
> You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
>
> And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
> have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
> meter
> aperture areas overlap!!!!
>
> We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
> interaction.
>
> Kent WA5VJB
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
> *To:* MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
> *Subject:* [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>
> See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
>
> If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
> the link at the bottom of the email.
>
> Jim
> wb8vsu@mvus.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
DS
Dave Sublette
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 2:33 PM
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com wrote:
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net
Cc: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" wa5vjb@flash.net wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
out
where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
a silver dollar.
IF this was true.
You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
meter
aperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
> On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com> wrote:
>
>
> - CC
> -
> - MVUS LIST
>
> -
>
>
>
> Hi Jim
> This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
> It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
> You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
> And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
> We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
>
> From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
> To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>
> Cc: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>
> Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
> newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
> looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
> makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
> to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
>
> Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
> about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
>
> I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
> seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
> between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
> antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
> capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
> in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
> antennas capture area.
>
> Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
> way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
> second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
> other bands performances.
>
> I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
> tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
> value to doing so.
>
> Jim
> WB8VSU
>
> On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" <wa5vjb@flash.net> wrote:
>
>> That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
>> out
>> where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
>>
>> You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
>> You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
>> At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
>> Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
>> a silver dollar.
>>
>> *IF* this was true.
>> You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
>>
>> And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
>> have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
>> meter
>> aperture areas overlap!!!!
>>
>> We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
>> interaction.
>>
>> Kent WA5VJB
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *To:* MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
>> *Subject:* [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>>
>> See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
>>
>> If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
>> the link at the bottom of the email.
>>
>> Jim
>> wb8vsu@mvus.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mvus-list mailing list
>> mvus-list@febo.com
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
KB
KENT BRITAIN
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 3:39 PM
I did this as a paper in hte 2016 CSVHFS Proceedings.
If you have a Yagi and you bring another rod near the end of an element,the element is electrically longer. I will do this on the antenna range whentesting a new Yagi design. I have a stick with a few inches of element material on it.I get it close to the tip of each element. If gain goes up, that element is short,if the gain goes down, that element was too long. Then trim elements as needed.
When you start getting two Yagi's very close the elements start interacting andchanging their tuning. For a 2 Meter and a 222 MHz Yagi, this is about 6 inches.
If you really want to mount them a few inches apart, and always keep them at thesame spacing, then the element lengths can be retuned and gain/SWR back to normal.
When you have one of the new 10/12/15/17/20 Meter beams there is considerableinteraction, but you just make the elements slightly shorter and gain is back to normal.Lots of time on a computer, or lots of time on the antenna range and the element toelement interaction is compensated for.
Capture Area is important for good stacking of antenna arrays, but has little todo with mounting antennas for different bands.
(Guess this good notes for your next newsletter!)
73 Kent
From: Dave Sublette via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com wrote:
- CC
-
- MVUS LIST
-
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net
Cc: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" wa5vjb@flash.net wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
out
where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
a silver dollar.
IF this was true.
You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
meter
aperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
I did this as a paper in hte 2016 CSVHFS Proceedings.
If you have a Yagi and you bring another rod near the end of an element,the element is electrically longer. I will do this on the antenna range whentesting a new Yagi design. I have a stick with a few inches of element material on it.I get it close to the tip of each element. If gain goes up, that element is short,if the gain goes down, that element was too long. Then trim elements as needed.
When you start getting two Yagi's very close the elements start interacting andchanging their tuning. For a 2 Meter and a 222 MHz Yagi, this is about 6 inches.
If you really want to mount them a few inches apart, and always keep them at thesame spacing, then the element lengths can be retuned and gain/SWR back to normal.
When you have one of the new 10/12/15/17/20 Meter beams there is considerableinteraction, but you just make the elements slightly shorter and gain is back to normal.Lots of time on a computer, or lots of time on the antenna range and the element toelement interaction is compensated for.
Capture Area is important for good stacking of antenna arrays, but has little todo with mounting antennas for different bands.
(Guess this good notes for your next newsletter!)
73 Kent
From: Dave Sublette via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
> On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com> wrote:
>
>
> - CC
> -
> - MVUS LIST
>
> -
>
>
>
> Hi Jim
> This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
> It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
> You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
> And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
> We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
>
> From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
> To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>
> Cc: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>
> Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
> newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
> looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
> makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
> to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
>
> Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
> about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
>
> I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
> seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
> between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
> antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
> capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
> in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
> antennas capture area.
>
> Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
> way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
> second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
> other bands performances.
>
> I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
> tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
> value to doing so.
>
> Jim
> WB8VSU
>
> On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" <wa5vjb@flash.net> wrote:
>
>> That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
>> out
>> where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
>>
>> You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
>> You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
>> At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
>> Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
>> a silver dollar.
>>
>> *IF* this was true.
>> You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
>>
>> And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
>> have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
>> meter
>> aperture areas overlap!!!!
>>
>> We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
>> interaction.
>>
>> Kent WA5VJB
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *To:* MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
>> *Subject:* [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>>
>> See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
>>
>> If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
>> the link at the bottom of the email.
>>
>> Jim
>> wb8vsu@mvus.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mvus-list mailing list
>> mvus-list@febo.com
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
_______________________________________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
KB
KENT BRITAIN
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 3:47 PM
Interesting how the Email system reformats a sentence.When it reformats two lines into one line, there is no space between words.
From: KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: Dave Sublette k4to@arrl.net; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
I did this as a paper in hte 2016 CSVHFS Proceedings.
If you have a Yagi and you bring another rod near the end of an element,the element is electrically longer. I will do this on the antenna range whentesting a new Yagi design. I have a stick with a few inches of element material on it.I get it close to the tip of each element. If gain goes up, that element is short,if the gain goes down, that element was too long. Then trim elements as needed.
When you start getting two Yagi's very close the elements start interacting andchanging their tuning. For a 2 Meter and a 222 MHz Yagi, this is about 6 inches.
If you really want to mount them a few inches apart, and always keep them at thesame spacing, then the element lengths can be retuned and gain/SWR back to normal.
When you have one of the new 10/12/15/17/20 Meter beams there is considerableinteraction, but you just make the elements slightly shorter and gain is back to normal.Lots of time on a computer, or lots of time on the antenna range and the element toelement interaction is compensated for.
Capture Area is important for good stacking of antenna arrays, but has little todo with mounting antennas for different bands.
(Guess this good notes for your next newsletter!)
73 Kent
From: Dave Sublette via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com wrote:
- CC
-
- MVUS LIST
-
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net
Cc: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" wa5vjb@flash.net wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
out
where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
a silver dollar.
IF this was true.
You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
meter
aperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
Interesting how the Email system reformats a sentence.When it reformats two lines into one line, there is no space between words.
From: KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: Dave Sublette <k4to@arrl.net>; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
I did this as a paper in hte 2016 CSVHFS Proceedings.
If you have a Yagi and you bring another rod near the end of an element,the element is electrically longer. I will do this on the antenna range whentesting a new Yagi design. I have a stick with a few inches of element material on it.I get it close to the tip of each element. If gain goes up, that element is short,if the gain goes down, that element was too long. Then trim elements as needed.
When you start getting two Yagi's very close the elements start interacting andchanging their tuning. For a 2 Meter and a 222 MHz Yagi, this is about 6 inches.
If you really want to mount them a few inches apart, and always keep them at thesame spacing, then the element lengths can be retuned and gain/SWR back to normal.
When you have one of the new 10/12/15/17/20 Meter beams there is considerableinteraction, but you just make the elements slightly shorter and gain is back to normal.Lots of time on a computer, or lots of time on the antenna range and the element toelement interaction is compensated for.
Capture Area is important for good stacking of antenna arrays, but has little todo with mounting antennas for different bands.
(Guess this good notes for your next newsletter!)
73 Kent
From: Dave Sublette via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
> On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com> wrote:
>
>
> - CC
> -
> - MVUS LIST
>
> -
>
>
>
> Hi Jim
> This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
> It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
> You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
> And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
> We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
>
> From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
> To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>
> Cc: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>
> Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
> newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
> looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
> makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
> to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
>
> Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
> about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
>
> I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
> seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
> between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
> antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
> capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
> in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
> antennas capture area.
>
> Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
> way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
> second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
> other bands performances.
>
> I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
> tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
> value to doing so.
>
> Jim
> WB8VSU
>
> On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" <wa5vjb@flash.net> wrote:
>
>> That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
>> out
>> where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
>>
>> You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
>> You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
>> At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
>> Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
>> a silver dollar.
>>
>> *IF* this was true.
>> You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
>>
>> And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
>> have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
>> meter
>> aperture areas overlap!!!!
>>
>> We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
>> interaction.
>>
>> Kent WA5VJB
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *To:* MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
>> *Subject:* [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>>
>> See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
>>
>> If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
>> the link at the bottom of the email.
>>
>> Jim
>> wb8vsu@mvus.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mvus-list mailing list
>> mvus-list@febo.com
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
_______________________________________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
_______________________________________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
ZW
Zack Widup
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 4:10 PM
A lot of us who do portable or Rover operations use Yagis that are only
separated a couple feet or less and still work. I know it's not optimum,
but you gotta use what you have. Not all of us can afford 70 foot portable
crank-up towers on our vehicles. When I have the Yagis separated by 2 feet,
there is very little change in SWR on any of them and I still make a lot of
QSO's.
73, Zack W9SZ
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:23 PM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <
mvus-list@febo.com> wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
outwhere it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!You
must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.At
which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.Or 432
MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size ofa silver
dollar.
IF this was true.You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture
areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old
Tribanderhave to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15,
and 10 meteraperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
A lot of us who do portable or Rover operations use Yagis that are only
separated a couple feet or less and still work. I know it's not optimum,
but you gotta use what you have. Not all of us can afford 70 foot portable
crank-up towers on our vehicles. When I have the Yagis separated by 2 feet,
there is very little change in SWR on any of them and I still make a lot of
QSO's.
73, Zack W9SZ
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:23 PM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <
mvus-list@febo.com> wrote:
> That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
> outwhere it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
> You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!You
> must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.At
> which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.Or 432
> MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size ofa silver
> dollar.
> IF this was true.You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture
> areas overlap.
> And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old
> Tribanderhave to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15,
> and 10 meteraperture areas overlap!!!!
> We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
> interaction.
> Kent WA5VJB
>
> From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
> To: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
> Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>
> See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
>
> If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
> the link at the bottom of the email.
>
> Jim
> wb8vsu@mvus.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
RM
Randy Midkiff
Sat, Oct 22, 2016 4:34 PM
I believe the origin is from an old article from Dave Orleans K1WHS, or at least that is the only printed material I had found on the web. I believe it now resides on the Directive Systems server yet and maybe should be pointed out to Terry for modification or updating to known technical knowledge of the day. It was on stacking but dealt with different band spacing as well. I didn't include it as not sure it would have got thru the list server but should be still on DS server.
Randy WB8ART
-----Original Message-----
From: mvus-list [mailto:mvus-list-bounces@febo.com]On Behalf Of KENT
BRITAIN via mvus-list
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 11:40 AM
To: Dave Sublette; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
I did this as a paper in hte 2016 CSVHFS Proceedings.
If you have a Yagi and you bring another rod near the end of an element,the element is electrically longer. I will do this on the antenna range whentesting a new Yagi design. I have a stick with a few inches of element material on it.I get it close to the tip of each element. If gain goes up, that element is short,if the gain goes down, that element was too long. Then trim elements as needed.
When you start getting two Yagi's very close the elements start interacting andchanging their tuning. For a 2 Meter and a 222 MHz Yagi, this is about 6 inches.
If you really want to mount them a few inches apart, and always keep them at thesame spacing, then the element lengths can be retuned and gain/SWR back to normal.
When you have one of the new 10/12/15/17/20 Meter beams there is considerableinteraction, but you just make the elements slightly shorter and gain is back to normal.Lots of time on a computer, or lots of time on the antenna range and the element toelement interaction is compensated for.
Capture Area is important for good stacking of antenna arrays, but has little todo with mounting antennas for different bands.
(Guess this good notes for your next newsletter!)
73 Kent
From: Dave Sublette via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com wrote:
Hi Jim
This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN wa5vjb@flash.net
Cc: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
antennas capture area.
Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
other bands performances.
I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
value to doing so.
Jim
WB8VSU
On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" wa5vjb@flash.net wrote:
That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
out
where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
a silver dollar.
IF this was true.
You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
meter
aperture areas overlap!!!!
We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
interaction.
Kent WA5VJB
From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list mvus-list@febo.com
To: MVUS LIST mvus-list@febo.com
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
Subject: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
the link at the bottom of the email.
Jim
wb8vsu@mvus.org
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
I believe the origin is from an old article from Dave Orleans K1WHS, or at least that is the only printed material I had found on the web. I believe it now resides on the Directive Systems server yet and maybe should be pointed out to Terry for modification or updating to known technical knowledge of the day. It was on stacking but dealt with different band spacing as well. I didn't include it as not sure it would have got thru the list server but should be still on DS server.
Randy WB8ART
-----Original Message-----
From: mvus-list [mailto:mvus-list-bounces@febo.com]On Behalf Of KENT
BRITAIN via mvus-list
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 11:40 AM
To: Dave Sublette; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
I did this as a paper in hte 2016 CSVHFS Proceedings.
If you have a Yagi and you bring another rod near the end of an element,the element is electrically longer. I will do this on the antenna range whentesting a new Yagi design. I have a stick with a few inches of element material on it.I get it close to the tip of each element. If gain goes up, that element is short,if the gain goes down, that element was too long. Then trim elements as needed.
When you start getting two Yagi's very close the elements start interacting andchanging their tuning. For a 2 Meter and a 222 MHz Yagi, this is about 6 inches.
If you really want to mount them a few inches apart, and always keep them at thesame spacing, then the element lengths can be retuned and gain/SWR back to normal.
When you have one of the new 10/12/15/17/20 Meter beams there is considerableinteraction, but you just make the elements slightly shorter and gain is back to normal.Lots of time on a computer, or lots of time on the antenna range and the element toelement interaction is compensated for.
Capture Area is important for good stacking of antenna arrays, but has little todo with mounting antennas for different bands.
(Guess this good notes for your next newsletter!)
73 Kent
From: Dave Sublette via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>; Midwest VHF/UHF Society Mailing List <mvus-list@febo.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [mvus-list] : MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
Hi Kent and all,
I have used 4x33 K1FO 70 cm on a roughly 7 foot H-frame inside of 4x12 K1FO 2M outside of the 70cm on a 12 foot H-frame. They both show great directivity, gain and f/b. I suspect the patterns may have suffered some, but evidently they work. I also have 2x16 K1FO 1.25M on the center mast and a 902 looper and 1296 yagi in there. All antennas seem to work just fine. This system has been in place for over 20 years.
I would like to read your paper if it is available. If I understand your brief statement, each antenna only has to have its own clear space. The higher the frequency, the smaller the required space.
I’m not trying to start anything here. I am just willing to learn a bit more.
Nice to hear from you. I still use your small log periodic ant on a pcb board in my lab.
73,
Dave, K4TO
> On Oct 22, 2016, at 10:03 AM, KENT BRITAIN via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com> wrote:
>
>
> - CC
> -
> - MVUS LIST
>
> -
>
>
>
> Hi Jim
> This was my talk at CSVHFS this year.
> It was a great opportunity to bring up the topic.
> You want to get the 432 MHz beam out of the 144 MHz beamscapture area. But you have to get it out of it's 432 MHz capture area,not it's 144!!!! And at 432 MHz the typical 144 antenna has a capturearea of a few square inches! The old case of mixing apples and oranges.(New HiC fruit drink?)
> And if this was true, you could never have mulit band beams.
> We acturally tested this on the CSVHFS antenna range several years ago.You can get the antennas VERY close before gain changes.Now, if you are running high power and have driven elements close togetheryou might damage another rig, but this was good news for rovers with lots of antenna.73 WA5VJB
>
> From: Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
> To: KENT BRITAIN <wa5vjb@flash.net>
> Cc: MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 8:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>
> Kent, Gerd is always looking for single page items to put in the
> newsletter to fill ten pages. When members do not submit enough he starts
> looking for items on the Internet. Unfortunately that means "old" stuff
> makes it in. In this case it makes good discussion material. All of us need
> to consider writing single page items for him to publish in the newsletter.
>
> Having purchased some of your antennas, I realize that you know a lot more
> about antennas than I do so I have a question or maybe it is a comment.
>
> I had to reread your comments a few times and relooked at the article. It
> seems to me the article was trying to compare capture area differences
> between different bands, but did so poorly. If a ham had a 144 and 432
> antenna and was on both bands at the same time they would be using those
> capture areas but at different frequencies. Although I do not see any value
> in doing so, its not like the 432 antenna would take a chunk out of the 144
> antennas capture area.
>
> Seems it would have been of more value to show single band performance the
> way you described it. Sort of a here is what it looks like at 144 and a
> second here is what it looks like at 432. Showing they do not hurt the
> other bands performances.
>
> I suppose one should mount the lower band antenna high enough to get the
> tower out of the capture area. Although I suspect there is not a lot of
> value to doing so.
>
> Jim
> WB8VSU
>
> On Oct 21, 2016 10:23 PM, "KENT BRITAIN" <wa5vjb@flash.net> wrote:
>
>> That article on capture areas of beams is old, we have been unable to find
>> out
>> where it came from. It was wrong 50 years ago, and it is wrong today!
>>
>> You cannot compare 144 MHz and 432 MHz capture areas at the same time!
>> You must compare 144 MHz for both antennas, and 432 MHz for both antenna.
>> At which time the 432 beam on 144 MHz is about the size of a quarter.
>> Or 432 MHz where the 2 Meter beam has a capture area about the size of
>> a silver dollar.
>>
>> *IF* this was true.
>> You CANNOT have Log periodics because all the capture areas overlap.
>>
>> And all the people who have earned DXCC on HF with a good old Tribander
>> have to give those back as well, because you cannot have 20, 15, and 10
>> meter
>> aperture areas overlap!!!!
>>
>> We have tested this on the antenna range, dissimilar antennas have little
>> interaction.
>>
>> Kent WA5VJB
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Jim Bacher via mvus-list <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *To:* MVUS LIST <mvus-list@febo.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 8:47 PM
>> *Subject:* [mvus-list] MVUS Anomalous Propagation / October 2016
>>
>> See attached copy of the MVUS Anomalous Propagation for October 2016.
>>
>> If your email filters filter the file, you can get a copy in the archive at
>> the link at the bottom of the email.
>>
>> Jim
>> wb8vsu@mvus.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mvus-list mailing list
>> mvus-list@febo.com
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mvus-list mailing list
> mvus-list@febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
_______________________________________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
_______________________________________________
mvus-list mailing list
mvus-list@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mvus-list
