| Index | Thread | Archive | Dec-2000 | Archive | Send |
 |
  |
 |
   |
|
  |
|
to the cost. In the end it will be a better antenna structurally and of even more importance to others(like myself) it will be more usable for those in "antenna restricted" areas. I personally would be VERY interested, but NOT if it required guys. That's my $.02. Thanks for asking for our opinions. George Sereikas K2WO ----- Original Message ----- From: "donty" <donty@PRODIGY.NET> To: "force12e" <force12e@lightlink.com>; "Force12Talk" <force12talk@qth.com> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2000 5:23 PM Subject: Re: [Force 12 Talk] multi-band vertical > on 12/22/00 1:20 PM, force12e at force12e@lightlink.com wrote: > > > We are developing a multi-band vertical for 40 through 10 meters and would > > like to ask the F12 Talk reflector for an opinion. The initial > > specification for this product was for it to be a true free standing > > product. However, if we make the production model free standing, it will > > add significant cost to the product as well as make it twice as heavy. If > > we require the use of one set of guys, the price and weight decreases. > > > > Therefore, the question becomes: > > > > Is a free standing product necessary at all considering it would double the > > weight and add about $100.00 to the cost of the antenna? This product will > > be priced competitively with other commercial multi-band verticals. > > > > Please send your comments to me! > > > > Thanks, > > > > Natan W6XR > > Force 12 East > > Ithaca, NY > > FN12sk > > force12@qth.com > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------- > > Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas, Inc. > > Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12 > > > > Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com > > To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com > > Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk > > For problems with the list, contact n4zr@qth.com > > > > > Natan, > > Before this question can be correctly answered, I think it would be > important to know some further details: A. How tall will the proposed > vertical be? B. What would the actual weight difference be? C. How complex > will the mechanical structure be? In other words how many elements and what > kind of loading arrangement will it be. D. Bottom line---how "user > friendly" will the vertical be in either config. I think you'll have a > market for BOTH types. If self standing is more convenient for the user, > some may not consider the extra $100.00 much of a penalty. > > Thanks, > > Don, W8AD (A C3SS user) > > > > -------------------------------------------- > Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas, Inc. > Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12 > > Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com > To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com > Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk > For problems with the list, contact n4zr@qth.com > > -------------------------------------------- Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas, Inc. Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12 Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk For problems with the list, contact n4zr@qth.com |
This Thread
|
This Author (Dec-2000)
|