From: Ted Hils (tedhils@cyber-south.com)
Date: Thu Oct 17 2002 - 08:07:21 PDT
Somebody on the List was looking for a hardtop for a 900 series truck
and I accidently deleted the message. If they are still needing one, drop
me a line.
Thanks,
Ted
Ted Hils
Ted's Trucks 'N Stuff
RR 2 Box 66H
Midland City, AL 36350
334-983-1092
Mon-Fri, 8-5 CDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 1970 6:00 AM
Subject: mil-veh Digest #896
> Military Vehicles Mailing List Digest #896
>
> 1) Re: Working radios in MV's -VHF antennas
> by Patrick Jankowiak <eccm@swbell.net>
> 2) Re: Working radios in MV's -VHF antennas
> by Patrick Jankowiak <eccm@swbell.net>
> 3) Re: Working radios in MV's -VHF antennas
> by Patrick Jankowiak <eccm@swbell.net>
> 4) Cargo form NC to NJ
> by David Jenkins <GPW1942@bellatlantic.net>
>
> This digest is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the FEED mode, E-mail to <mil-veh-feed@mil-veh.org>
> Send administrative queries to <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 22:22:00 -0700
> From: Patrick Jankowiak <eccm@swbell.net>
> Subject: Re: [MV] Working radios in MV's -VHF antennas
> Message-id: <3DAE48F8.CA390F3E@swbell.net>
>
> Antenna tie-downs and SWR issues:
>
> I have installed one of those military low band VHF antennas on my M35.
>
> This is the vehicular type used with the PRC25, PRC77, RT246, and RT524.
>
> It's the more modern type (AS-3684/VRC) which does not require manual or
electronic tuning, and just has a BNC connector on the botom of the base
mount, and the mast is a two-piece type about 7 or 8'
> tall, where the bottom section has a coaxial conection inside its lower
end, and the top screws into the top end with a single conductor. Both piecs
are 'fat', meaning about 3/4" diameter. the top
> section tapers to about 1/4". Anyway, bad description, common antenna.
>
> I welded a sugar scoop to the backside of the front bumper, and mounted it
there. After doing some checking, I noticed that the SWR is pretty good from
about 30-90 MHz. It's 3:1 or less over the whole
> range, with a couple sweet spots of 1.5 or 2 to 1. Considering that 3:1
means that 75% of the power is going out the antenna, it's fine.
>
> I decided that this antenna needed to be tied down a bit, and I happened
to have the kit. It's a metal clip, about 3" long and 1.5" wide, which fits
onto the antenna near the top, and has an attached
> lanyard which you tie to whatever. I tied it to the windshield bracket
release handle. Tied down, the swr really went sour, it was 3:1 at very
best, and often 6:1 to 25:1!
>
> At first I thought it was from the tip being tied so close (7-8") to the
metal of the cab windshield, but it was not the case. The tip of an antenna
is usually the most sensitive part when it comes to
> proximity to other objects.
>
> The metal clip of the tie down kit is what is causing the bad SWR.
Apparently, when it is intimately in contact with the antenna shaft, it adds
alot of capacitance to the antenna, which is already a
> complex tuned system (the base has a special broadband matching network
inside, that's why there's no knob or large plug for the tuning control),
and the metal clip upsets this delicate balance. I
> proved this by just resting the antenna in the clip's edge so that the
antenna was in the 'tied-down' position, not fully enclosing the shaft in
the hook of the clip, and the SWR was not as bad. I
> removed the clip, and I bent the antenna by hand into the position where
it had been tied, and the SWR was quite acceptable.
>
> Therefore, I suggest a non-metallic loop of material instead of the metal
clip, for tying down antennas. A black or camo-colored nylon dog collar
comes to mind, or a robust plastic snap-hook of some
> kind. Whatever is used must completely encircle the antenna, or it may
jump out of an open ended hook during spirited maneuvers. Any ideas?
>
> An MFJ antenna analyzer was used for the SWR tests.
>
> ---
>
> On a humorous note,
> Iraq TV news just reported that Saddam Hussein recieved 100% of the vote
in the presidential referrendum. 100% of all eligible voters turned out, and
no other candidate was on the list. Democracy in
> action!
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 22:12:04 -0700
> From: Patrick Jankowiak <eccm@swbell.net>
> Subject: Re: [MV] Working radios in MV's -VHF antennas
> Message-id: <3DAE46A4.C41CA02B@swbell.net>
>
> Antenna tie-downs and SWR issues:
>
> I have installed one of those military low band VHF antennas on my M35.
>
> This is the vehicular type used with the PRC25, PRC77, RT246, and RT524.
>
> It's the more modern type (AS-3684/VRC) which does not require manual or
electronic tuning, and just has a BNC connector on the botom of the base
mount, and the mast is a two-piece type about 7 or 8'
> tall, where the bottom section has a coaxial conection inside its lower
end, and the top screws into the top end with a single conductor. Both piecs
are 'fat', meaning about 3/4" diameter. the top
> section tapers to about 1/4". Anyway, bad description, common antenna.
>
> I welded a sugar scoop to the backside of the front bumper, and mounted it
there. After doing some checking, I noticed that the SWR is pretty good from
about 30-90 MHz. It's 3:1 or less over the whole
> range, with a couple sweet spots of 1.5 or 2 to 1. Considering that 3:1
means that 75% of the power is going out the antenna, it's fine.
>
> I decided that this antenna needed to be tied down a bit, and I happened
to have the kit. It's a metal clip, about 3" long and 1.5" wide, which fits
onto the antenna near the top, and has an attached
> lanyard which you tie to whatever. I tied it to the windshield bracket
release handle. Tied down, the swr really went sour, it was 3:1 at very
best, and often 6:1 to 25:1!
>
> At first I thought it was from the tip being tied so close (7-8") to the
metal of the cab windshield, but it was not the case. The tip of an antenna
is usually the most sensitive part when it comes to
> proximity to other objects.
>
> The metal clip of the tie down kit is what is causing the bad SWR.
Apparently, when it is intimately in contact with the antenna shaft, it adds
alot of capacitance to the antenna, which is already a
> complex tuned system (the base has a special broadband matching network
inside, that's why there's no knob or large plug for the tuning control),
and the metal clip upsets this delicate balance. I
> proved this by just resting the antenna in the clip's edge so that the
antenna was in the 'tied-down' position, not fully enclosing the shaft in
the hook of the clip, and the SWR was not as bad. I
> removed the clip, and I bent the antenna by hand into the position where
it had been tied, and the SWR was quite acceptable.
>
> Therefore, I suggest a non-metallic loop of material instead of the metal
clip, for tying down antennas. A black or camo-colored nylon dog collar
comes to mind, or a robust plastic snap-hook of some
> kind. Whatever is used must completely encircle the antenna, or it may
jump out of an open ended hook during spirited maneuvers. Any ideas?
>
> An MFJ antenna analyzer was used for the SWR tests.
>
> ---
>
> On a humorous note,
> Iraq TV news just reported that Saddam Hussein recieved 100% of the vote
in the presidential referrendum. 100% of all eligible voters turned out, and
no other candidate was on the list. Democracy in
> action!
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 22:12:30 -0700
> From: Patrick Jankowiak <eccm@swbell.net>
> Subject: Re: [MV] Working radios in MV's -VHF antennas
> Message-id: <3DAE46BE.E3932FA7@swbell.net>
>
> Antenna tie-downs and SWR issues:
>
> I have installed one of those military low band VHF antennas on my M35.
>
> This is the vehicular type used with the PRC25, PRC77, RT246, and RT524.
>
> It's the more modern type (AS-3684/VRC) which does not require manual or
electronic tuning, and just has a BNC connector on the botom of the base
mount, and the mast is a two-piece type about 7 or 8'
> tall, where the bottom section has a coaxial conection inside its lower
end, and the top screws into the top end with a single conductor. Both piecs
are 'fat', meaning about 3/4" diameter. the top
> section tapers to about 1/4". Anyway, bad description, common antenna.
>
> I welded a sugar scoop to the backside of the front bumper, and mounted it
there. After doing some checking, I noticed that the SWR is pretty good from
about 30-90 MHz. It's 3:1 or less over the whole
> range, with a couple sweet spots of 1.5 or 2 to 1. Considering that 3:1
means that 75% of the power is going out the antenna, it's fine.
>
> I decided that this antenna needed to be tied down a bit, and I happened
to have the kit. It's a metal clip, about 3" long and 1.5" wide, which fits
onto the antenna near the top, and has an attached
> lanyard which you tie to whatever. I tied it to the windshield bracket
release handle. Tied down, the swr really went sour, it was 3:1 at very
best, and often 6:1 to 25:1!
>
> At first I thought it was from the tip being tied so close (7-8") to the
metal of the cab windshield, but it was not the case. The tip of an antenna
is usually the most sensitive part when it comes to
> proximity to other objects.
>
> The metal clip of the tie down kit is what is causing the bad SWR.
Apparently, when it is intimately in contact with the antenna shaft, it adds
alot of capacitance to the antenna, which is already a
> complex tuned system (the base has a special broadband matching network
inside, that's why there's no knob or large plug for the tuning control),
and the metal clip upsets this delicate balance. I
> proved this by just resting the antenna in the clip's edge so that the
antenna was in the 'tied-down' position, not fully enclosing the shaft in
the hook of the clip, and the SWR was not as bad. I
> removed the clip, and I bent the antenna by hand into the position where
it had been tied, and the SWR was quite acceptable.
>
> Therefore, I suggest a non-metallic loop of material instead of the metal
clip, for tying down antennas. A black or camo-colored nylon dog collar
comes to mind, or a robust plastic snap-hook of some
> kind. Whatever is used must completely encircle the antenna, or it may
jump out of an open ended hook during spirited maneuvers. Any ideas?
>
> An MFJ antenna analyzer was used for the SWR tests.
>
> ---
>
> On a humorous note,
> Iraq TV news just reported that Saddam Hussein recieved 100% of the vote
in the presidential referrendum. 100% of all eligible voters turned out, and
no other candidate was on the list. Democracy in
> action!
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <3DAEADB5.E058E082@bellatlantic.net>
> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 08:31:50 -0400
> From: David Jenkins <GPW1942@bellatlantic.net>
> Subject: [MV] Cargo form NC to NJ
>
> Anyone traveling from the FT Brag area in NC to any where in NJ?
> I need to transport about 30 empty card board tubes up to NJ. 6in round by
2
> ft long.
>
> Dj
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Military Vehicles Mailing List Digest #896
> *************************************************
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 13:24:09 PDT