Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Subject: | LF: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: J310 IMD figures |
| From: | "Roelof Bakker" <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Thu, 2 Feb 2006 22:08:44 +0100 |
| Delivery-date: | Thu, 02 Feb 2006 21:10:54 +0000 |
| Envelope-to: | [email protected] |
| References: | <000201c627fa$e6299570$e6a4c593@RD40002> <001b01c62802$9941a6a0$6901a8c0@AIRPORTTERMINAL> <000501c62816$793c8a00$2201a8c0@pcroelof> <001201c62828$19345220$66e8fc3e@l8p8y6> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
Hello Mal,Thank you for your kind offer. However I have already run an extensive series of tests in the countryside with a battery operated SLM. The outcome is that more height gives ( much) more signal, but unless the antenna is shielded by nearby bushes, the signal to noise ratio does not change. So nothing is gained with added height. Best regards,Roelof Bakker, pa0rdt |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: LF: TA tonight, MarkusVester |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: LF: TA tonight, Jay Rusgrove |
| Previous by Thread: | LF: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: J310 IMD figures, hamilton mal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: LF: J310 IMD figures, Andre Kesteloot |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |