World of Ham Radio 1997/WOHR97_AmSoft_(1997-02-01).iso/usenets/1995_08/_antenna.txt

Text File | 1997-02-01 | 1MB | 31,744 lines

The World of Ham Radio CD-ROM



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:18:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: underground antennas
Date: 1 Aug 1995 12:08:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vljh1$[e-mail]>
References: <3v93tp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>>Hmmm.... I think the best subsurface antenna would probably be a
magnetic
radiator as opposed to an electrical radiator. Try reading up on slot
antennas<<

All antennas are electromagnetic radiators. They all have an electric
field and a magnetic field. If you saying that the antenna should be low
impedance (high distributed current, low voltage) it seems reasonable that
the efficiency would be better, but they will still be very lossy when
buried or placed near lossy earth.

I agree with the suggestion that the house wiring may do most of the
radiating if the antenna is worked against a poor station ground.

  73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:18:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 1 Aug 1995 12:20:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vlk8o$[e-mail]>
References: <3vjs98$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


>Thanks for sharing that Tom.  Do you happen to remember where it
>is documented.  I'd like to read the original article.

>Rick Karlquist N6RK
>[e-mail]

Several places in tech bulletins but the most recent textbook or reference
book that sticks in my mind is in the section on transmission line design
in Electronic Designers Handbook (McGraw Hill) section 8-25. It states
that when the counducter is not solid but braided the losses must be
multiplied by approximately 2.75.

Another article I read years ago stated that the losses were proportional
to the amount of weaves per unit length and the range was from 2 to ten
times the resistance of smooth conductors. If I ever see that again in my
mess I will tell you. NASA also has data, but primarially for lightning
protection.

The increased losses may be insignificant if the antenna has low current,
but why  use it unless it is necessary?? I certainly wouldn't use it in a
very long antenna or a phased array.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:18:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!totrbbs!winston.smith
From: [e-mail] (Winston Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: subscribe
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 Aug 95 13:09:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Top Of The Rock BBS Atl, GA 404-921-8687
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Winston Smith)
Lines: 6

subscribe black-powder

----
Top Of The Rock BBS - Lilburn, GA         SYSOP: Steve Diggs
Phone: [phone]                Snailmail: 4181 Wash Lee Ct.
Lilburn, GA 30247-7440


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:18:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!news.vcd.hp.com!dmunroe
From: [e-mail] (Mbutu Nguni)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 1 Aug 1995 20:03:39 GMT
Organization: Central Africa Animal Exports Ltd.; Kikwit, Zaire
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3vm1ar$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3vci2j$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vkhgj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpvclmun.vcd.hp.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84178 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28854 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12497


Curtis Wheeler wrote:

>BTW- Even Dreamworld has CC&Rs - keeps out the riff raff.

You mean there's a 20 wpm code test?

-Dave


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:18:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 95 21:16:18 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vjvhe$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: Cecil A. Moore -FT-~ <[e-mail]>

Cecil A. Moore -FT-~ <[e-mail]> writes:

>entire magazine, just one of the authors. This is a public apology
>to anyone who thought I was slamming "Worldradio" in general.

That was very nice of you to say, and in the spirit I know it was intended,
it was received and accepted. Your material re: the points you have raised
on antennas has been forwarded and you will receive an answer. On the FET
material your query will be forwarded to the original author and he will
be asked for an explanation.                              regards.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:18:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 95 21:22:36 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vgeeg$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vlbi0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>Let me repeat from memory: I think Kurt said (in so many words) that

There may be the problem. There is a great gulf between, "said in so many
words" and you putting in QUOTE MARKS around statements. When you put the
quote marks around a phrase that means (no paraphrasing) but the exact,
again EXACT verbatim words used. Alas, much to our chagrin Kranky Kurt
answers almost no letters. Your two dollars will be refunded when it arrives.
We don't wish to add injury to....whatever.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!daily-planet.execpc.com!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!news-server.ncren.net!concert!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!freenet.vcu.edu!freenet.vcu.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cell Phone Antennas
Date: 1 Aug 1995 22:32:15 -0400
Organization: Central Virginia's Free-Net
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vmo3f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet.vcu.edu

Why are all car cell phone antennas center loaded.  It seems
that all of these antennas have a coil and are thus center
loaded; is this correct? Are they using a ground plane?

--Thanks, Todd
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
  Todd Owen (KE4UDN)         Virginia Commonwealth University
  [e-mail]      Richmond, Virginia
---------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!daily-planet.execpc.com!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!news-server.ncren.net!concert!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!freenet.vcu.edu!freenet.vcu.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 5/8 wave vs. J-pole
Date: 1 Aug 1995 22:37:26 -0400
Organization: Central Virginia's Free-Net
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vmod6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet.vcu.edu


I know that a 5/8 wave antenna (over a ground plane) has a gain
of 3dBi; what is the 1/2 wave j-pole gain? The same as a
dipole, 2.2dBi?

Can I make a colinear antenna starting with a 5/8 wave ground
plane antenna (mobile) then adding a 1/4 wave stub and
additional 1/2 wave section or can the last section be 1/4 or
5/8 wave?

Can't find info in ARRL antenna book.

--Thanks, Todd
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
  Todd Owen (KE4UDN)         Virginia Commonwealth University
  [e-mail]      Richmond, Virginia
---------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:02 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <[e-mail]> <3v09fd$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 1995 23:07:13 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3v09fd$[e-mail]
Lines: 18

I will also put two cents worth in for top loaded antennas.  I have
found that my SPIDER top loaded mobil will work on 4 bands (or seven the
way I generally run it with a special adaptor) and provide superior
perofrmance above 40 meters.  The screw driver antennas do a little
better (1 to 3 db) on 40 and 80 meters.  I do not have to retune the
antenna to switch bands.

I feed the SPIDER with an SGC-230 feed point tuner to get full band
coverage on all HF bands ( don't do 30 M mobil).  I never tune the
antenna, move switches or move wunderleads.  I just tune and transmit.

The spider is shorter and more rugged than the your options.  I have
about 50,000 miles on one.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!paonline.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 95 00:00:00 +0400
Subject: Re: Flexi-weave antenna w
Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [uucp/slip/ppp/bbs/FTPHUB]
X-Newsreader: TPCB 0.8 21100003
Lines: 21

Rk> W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:
 >I would be sceptical of woven antenna wire. It is a documented fact that
 >brading has over three times the RF resistance of the same width smooth
 >copper. So if the wire is really "woven" the resistance could be even
 >higher at RF. Lot's of stuff enters the selection, such as the radiation
 >resistance at the current peaks, but I don't know that it is that
 >necessary to use a super flexable wire in a permanent antenna.
 >
 >73 Tom

 Rk> Thanks for sharing that Tom.  Do you happen to remember where it
 Rk> is documented.  I'd like to read the original article.

It is also documented that a smooth copper strap has several times the RF
resistance of a ROUND copper conductor of the same diameter!

(References will be provided upon request!)

73 Bill
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: VOACAP Ftp Site
Date: 2 Aug 95 00:20:17 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

VOACAP can be found on the  ftp.voa.gov  site, probably in /pub/voa or some
such directory. I downloaded it a few months back. 73 de Walt - K2WK


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!news.ecn.bgu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 95 02:04:51 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vgeeg$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vlbi0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>One time on field day, I strung up an end-fed antenna tied to a string
>with no insulator which was tied to the top of a tree. I got out a lot
>better after it rained.

Ah, you are a true antenna magician since rainwater in non-conductive. But,
I believe it.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 2 Aug 1995 02:13:13 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <3vmmvp$[e-mail]>
References: <3vjs98$[e-mail]> <3vlk8o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail817.nando.net

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
 >
 >
 > >Thanks for sharing that Tom.  Do you happen to remember where it
 > >is documented.  I'd like to read the original article.
 >
 > >Rick Karlquist N6RK
 > >[e-mail]
 >
 > Several places in tech bulletins but the most recent textbook or reference
 > book that sticks in my mind is in the section on transmission line design
 > in Electronic Designers Handbook (McGraw Hill) section 8-25. It states
 > that when the counducter is not solid but braided the losses must be
 > multiplied by approximately 2.75.
 >
 > Another article I read years ago stated that the losses were proportional
 > to the amount of weaves per unit length and the range was from 2 to ten
 > times the resistance of smooth conductors. If I ever see that again in my
 > mess I will tell you. NASA also has data, but primarially for lightning
 > protection.
 >
 > The increased losses may be insignificant if the antenna has low current,
 > but why  use it unless it is necessary?? I certainly wouldn't use it in a
 > very long antenna or a phased array.
 >
 > 73 Tom

Tom, I am not ready to make an assumption that because stranded wire
causes increased loss in a transmission line that the same thing is
true for the conductor in an antenna element.  If you have some
information to share on that specific topic, I would be interested
in you sharing the info with me.

73 de W3FPR
Don




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!bird3.i-link.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Heath Antenna Tuner SA 2040 For Sale
Date: 2 Aug 1995 02:36:58 GMT
Organization: ILink Ltd
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3vmoca$[e-mail]>
References: <3vbsob$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sanantonio-1-9.i-link.net
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   Gene Mason <[e-mail]> writes:
>  Selling my pride and joy
>  Heathkit Antenna Tuner
>  KW version Model 2040
>  Good Condition
>  E-MAIL me if interested
>  Gene Mason KZ5V
>
>
>>>>
Price and any other info? I'm in San Antonio, Tx. WRU?
Bill K5CSJ      [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!bird3.i-link.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help the Astronauts Memorial Foundation
Date: 2 Aug 1995 03:07:47 GMT
Organization: ILink Ltd
Lines: 110
Message-ID: <3vmq63$[e-mail]>
References: <3uutvj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sanantonio-1-9.i-link.net
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Mike Whaley) writes:
>  Hello all!!
>
>  My name is Mike Whaley KD4UGI, and I would like to ask for help from the
>  readers of this group with a worthy cause. I am a Technical Specialist
>  with the Astronauts Memorial Foundation at the Center for Space Education
>  at the visitor's center at the Kennedy Space Center. AMF is a non-profit
>  independent organization that was originally set up a month after the
>  Challenger tragedy to honor all U.S. Astronauts who have given their
>  lives in the line of duty. As a living memorial to them, AMF operates the
>  Center for Space Education. We basically take the latest in Instructional
>  Technology (IT)... computers, software, etc... and teach educators how to
>  incorporate it into today's classrooms. It is quite a comprehensive
>  program, after an educator goes through a workshop they have been
>  instructed in everything from basic computer troubleshooting and
>  repair (hardware and software), the use of software of all descriptions,
>  and how to use this technology effectively so that really improves the
>  education of their students rather than sitting unexploited as often happens
>  at many schools who don't know how to use it. We typically teach three
>  teachers from every school in a district, right now we focus mostly on
>  Florida but work in conjunction with NASA education programs and others
>  so that we see quite a cross-section of teachers from all grade levels,
>  subjects, and locations. I work on the Instructional Technology
>  Evaluation Center, which is a large computer lab with 10 Macintosh and 7
>  PC platforms that allows us to both do training and to allow educators to
>  "test-drive" all sorts of educationally-related software and determine
>  its suitability to their needs before spending shrinking budget money on it.
>  This is a free service open to teachers, and is supported by the
>  donations of many software and hardware vendors. If you are a teacher and
>  want more info about any of this, please call AMF at the number below and
>  we can tell you more details!
>
>  I think it is important to point out that even as comprehensive as our
>  programs are, there is NO COST to the participants, other than the costs
>  they incur in travel, lodging, and for substitutes at their home schools.
>  AMF is supported by the funds from the Florida Challenger license plate
>  program and from private donations. We are not a government agency, we
>  are entirely independent although we have working partnerships with many
>  organizations and businesses.
>
>  I am posting this to r.r.a.space because I now have a unique opportunity
>  to start a Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment (SAREX) station there.  I am
>  sure that most of you are familiar with SAREX contacts where students get
>  to ask questions of Shuttle crew members, but in my view it would be even
>  more useful and lasting to get the teachers fired up about amateur radio,
>  space, and technology because they can then pass it along to hundreds or
>  thousands of students. I have approval from the powers that be to do this
>  project, however, with all the other educational projects that are ongoing
>  I need to get as many donations of equipment and help as I can before we
>  think about spending a lot of money. (Ie, only buy things that we can't
>  get donated or permanently loaned.) As the only ham currently working at
>  AMF, I am far more familiar with this than my co-workers, although myu
>  boss does know about it and has seen a videotape of a SAREX school
>  contact, and is supportive of this project. Basically, I would like to
>  get a good start (by getting not only equipment but volunteers to assist
>  with this project) before I push for significant sums of money. I believe
>  that once we have the capability of making contacts, not just SAREX but
>  Mir, satellite, and terrestrial, then it will become obvious how valuable
>  a tool this can be to get teachers interested.
>
>  For anyone out there who may be considering donating, remember that this
>  will be in a very high-visibility location... the KSC visitor's center is
>  the third most-visited attraction in the state of Florida. So of course,
>  the publicity value for companies is significant. (We will be sure to
>  publically acknowledge any assistance given us.) This is in the
>  formaticve stages right now, I have some ideas about specific equipment I
>  would like to use but I will consider anything. At minimum, right now we
>  need a 2-meter radio, a satellite antenna and the associated rotators and
>  mast, coaxial cable, and an amplifier to put out 150 watts or so if the
>  radio won't do that. Of course, I envision having a much more
>  complete/capable station than that, eventually we would like to have a
>  special event station to commemorate the return-to-flight after
>  Challenger so a full-blown station is something to look forward to. But
>  for now, my main goal is showing that this can work, and that should open
>  up doors and allow it to expand.
>
>  Thank you, and please feel free to either e-mail, call, snail-mail, or
>  visit!
>
>  Mike Whaley KD4UGI
>  The Astronauts Memorial Foundation
>  Mail Code AMF
>  Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899
>  [phone]
>
>  73 de KD4UGI
>
>  | Mike Whaley    [e-mail]   [e-mail] |
>  |     P.O. Box 510717, Melbourne Beach FL 32951-0717     [phone]    |
>  |       World Wide Web: http://w4aql.gatech.edu/~kd4ugi/mikepage.html      |
>  |              And you and I climb over the sea to the valley,             |
>  |            And you and I reach out for reasons to call. - Yes            |
>
>
>
>
>>>>
I'm K5CSJ in San Antonio, TX. My son, age 8, goes to Scobey Elementary school - named after Dick Scobey. They call themselves
the Challengers. (Scoby was from San Antonio). I have made radio presentations to the students, just 2 merer via repeaters.

It would be great to have someone fund a mobile unit to do the links with the shuttles. Of course any number of hams would be
standing in line to drive and setup the equipment. Sounds like something AMSAT could promote. (i'm a longtime life-member of
AMSAT).

Possibly some other newsgroups might be a way to promote this. Send info on the Mission, not the technical  stuff. Talk to local
bankers, etc. ----- I just went to NASA Houston & did the tour with my son. He was impressed when I told him that designed parts for the
S1-C , which is on display there.

William Bringier, K5CSJ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.ip.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 03:47:58 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 35

->
-> [e-mail] (Jim Coleman) writes:
->
-> > Unless the flexibility of braid is absolutely necessary, you can us
-> > copper water tubing as a ground connection. It's available in vario
-> > sizes at all home supply stores. I use it on my tower legs. You fla
-> > one end and make a good mechanical connection (like a bolt through
-> > drilled hole). Then you follow it up with silver solder and a propa
-> > torch. Easy to do and has maintained its integrity for more than 8
-> > years...
->
-> Grounding connections should NEVER be soldered. The heat generated by
-> strike will melt your solder and there goes the connection. ONLY use
-> mechical connections in ground systems!

Come on now!  A good silver soldered connection, if done correctly
is a darn good, low resistance connection.  The copper would have
to glow red before that solder would let go. I would guess brazing
is about the best connection as it would blend the metals better
than just about anything.
Most companies in the business of grounding are cad welding the
connections and staying completely away from any mechanical connections
what-so-ever.
Anyway, if one were to take a direct strike, a 1/4" copper wire is
going to be destroyed in microseconds no matter what type of connection
is on it.
All we can do is minimize the effects of a direct hit.  If you are
grounding for lightning protection, you are messing with mother nature
and a 2"thick ground buss might not be big enough.

Jim Wooddell
WA6OFT

RACEBBS - QWK Internet Gateway - 520.669.9225



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.ip.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 03:47:58 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 35

->
-> [e-mail] (Jim Coleman) writes:
->
-> > Unless the flexibility of braid is absolutely necessary, you can us
-> > copper water tubing as a ground connection. It's available in vario
-> > sizes at all home supply stores. I use it on my tower legs. You fla
-> > one end and make a good mechanical connection (like a bolt through
-> > drilled hole). Then you follow it up with silver solder and a propa
-> > torch. Easy to do and has maintained its integrity for more than 8
-> > years...
->
-> Grounding connections should NEVER be soldered. The heat generated by
-> strike will melt your solder and there goes the connection. ONLY use
-> mechical connections in ground systems!

Come on now!  A good silver soldered connection, if done correctly
is a darn good, low resistance connection.  The copper would have
to glow red before that solder would let go. I would guess brazing
is about the best connection as it would blend the metals better
than just about anything.
Most companies in the business of grounding are cad welding the
connections and staying completely away from any mechanical connections
what-so-ever.
Anyway, if one were to take a direct strike, a 1/4" copper wire is
going to be destroyed in microseconds no matter what type of connection
is on it.
All we can do is minimize the effects of a direct hit.  If you are
grounding for lightning protection, you are messing with mother nature
and a 2"thick ground buss might not be big enough.

Jim Wooddell
WA6OFT

RACEBBS - QWK Internet Gateway - 520.669.9225



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!bird3.i-link.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radio Shack's FM antenna
Date: 2 Aug 1995 05:09:48 GMT
Organization: ILink Ltd
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <3vn1as$[e-mail]>
References: <3v5962$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sanantonio-1-9.i-link.net
Keywords: campus radio
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Mark Manuelian ) writes:
>  In <[e-mail]>
>  [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>  >
>  >   [e-mail] (Mark Manuelian ) wrote:
>  >>An infamous prirate broadcaster sued the FCC for fining him for
>  illegally
>  >>operating a station.  The key to the case they could not show he
>  caused
>  >>any harm to anyone.
>  >
>  >Operating on unauthorized frequencies is no more harmless than
>  trespass.
>  >The crime lies in the violation of the rights of those who are granted
>
>  >legal access to those frequencies.
>  >
>  >Rulings like this give a whole new meaning to "ignorance of the law".
>  >
>  >73,
>  >
>  >Jack  WB3U
>
>  I am a broadcaster and believe me I'm very defensive of my 50kw clear
>  channel signal.  So don't even think of firing up on 1030kHz, even 2000
>  miles from us.  But...
>
>  The pirater made a point that has some validity.  The current rules
>  have no provision for low power broadcasters like himself.  Because he
>  didn't have 15 million dollars available to buy a station he was
>  prevented an outlet for his alternative programming.  You have to hand
>  to the guy he did take all the risks and was willing to get caught.  He
>  did engineer his system so as to protect others.  And broadcasting is a
>  committment...its not a casual thing like amateur radio.
>
>  I don't encourage anarchy of the airwaves and certainly their was an
>  affirmation of prosecution of those who violate the rules and do cause
>  harmful interference.  Similar relaxing of enforcement of rules for
>  "licensed" broadcasters is also in place. Again enforcement only when
>  there is harm, no routine inspections.  It makes some sense.
>
>  Anyway this is what the Boston FOB chief told us at a recent SBE
>  meeting.
>
>  mark  ke1ar
>
>
>>>>
Amateur Radio is not as "casual" as you think.  We are serious about advancing the art. I got a licence at age 15, then a First Class
Radiotelephone License at 16. With that I worked as a broadcast engineer for a radio station and two TV stations while I was in
college. During that time I founded a radio station for Tulane U. in New Orleans. It is now a full-time FM station, WTUL.

We broadcasted over the power lines when we stared at Tulane. I cranked up the power and sometime you could hear us from
several blocks away. One SWL even claimed to hearing us from 100 mies away (Maybe??).

This was a serious college operation. "Pirate Radio" is potential chaos. Anyone can put a 10KW station on the air- for about $20K it's
a snap (as a pirate of course). Who wants to finance that?

There are outlets for alternative opinions, even the cable "open access" channels. Also talk-radio.

Allowing someone to crank up a transmitter without any controlls is wrong. If one wants to do that, go to another country, set up
your station, and see what THEIR government says.










From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!bird3.i-link.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RG213 coax & 70cm
Date: 2 Aug 1995 05:32:50 GMT
Organization: ILink Ltd
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <3vn2m2$[e-mail]>
References: <3v844f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sanantonio-1-9.i-link.net
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Mark Manuelian ) writes:
>  In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Joe Mack) writes:
>  >
>  >
>  >>In <[e-mail]>
>  [e-mail]
>  >>(Clinton Peebles) writes:
>  >>>
>  >>>Hi all.   What is the maximum length of RG213 that should be used on
>  >>>70cm?  I have a Cushcraft 11 element 70cm yagi that doesn't seem to
>  be
>  >>>doing the trick.  I suspect the 100' of coax, but would like a
>  second
>  >>>opinion.  According to a chart I have, 100 feet of 213 at 400 Mhz
>  has
>  >>>aprox. 4.10 dB of attenuation.  This seems like a lot to me but I
>  >
>  >Any coax at 432 is a lot of coax and you have a LOT of coax. The only
>  way
>  >to go from here is money I'm afraid. Heliax (1/2") is relatively
>  common
>  >at the bigger ham fests. Youre worst problem is on the receive side
>  >where not only do you loose 4db of signal, but (to a first approx) you
>  add
>  >4db of noise, reducing your S/N by 8db, ie you're stone deaf. A
>  masthead
>  >preamp of some sort (eg GaAsFET from ARR, see QST for ads) or a brick
>  preamp
>  >at the masthead are two possibilities. Unless you're running
>  relatively low
>  >power (10W) the preamp will have to be switched externally in which
>  case you need
>  >an antenna change over relay.
>  >
>  >    Joe NA3T [e-mail]
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  I don't think 1/2" heliax offers significant improvement in loss over a
>  quality low loss foam 1/2" coax considering the huge difference in
>  price.  Perhaps 9913 if its not crushed or twisted is a more cost
>  effective choice.
>
>  I did not understand the 4dB more noise remark.  If there is 4dB of
>  loss the signal will be 4dB lower...the cable contributes very little
>  noise.  If the atmospheric noise is greater than the noise floor of the
>  receiver then the effective S?N will be reduced by less than four dB.
>
>  mark  ke1ar
>
>
>
>>>>
Resoprisoty applys here. See how much power you are getting at the antenna, if possible. Use aBird or equal. Possibly you can
borrow one. Check your local ham club. If you put out 25w and get 1w at hhe antenna, look for vad coax, connectors, etc.
Measurement  is the key - talk is cheap...... one measurment is worth 100k words.

Bill, K5CSJ     [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!bird3.i-link.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: toroid cores, testable?
Date: 2 Aug 1995 05:47:29 GMT
Organization: ILink Ltd
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3vn3hh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sanantonio-1-9.i-link.net
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>  In article <3v0prr$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ed Bathgate) wrote:
>  >
>  >I have a switching power supply that I am scrapping for parts,
>  >it has several quite large toroid coils, is there a way I can
>  >test and measure these in order to use for baluns, or transmatch
>  >coils?
>
>  These cores have a much higher permeability than those designed for HF
>  use.  In addition, they will exhibit higher loss and earlier saturation at
>  the higher frequencies.
>
>  I don't think you will be able to use these for the purposes you mentioned,
>  but they do make excellent "RFI blockers."  You can wrap line cords, coax,
>  phone lines, etc. through the cores and they will be very effective at
>  isolating the attached device from any RF picked up on the cable.
>
>  73,
>
>  Jack  WB3U
>
>>>>
Great answer Jack. The zillions of olf PC power supplies out there are a great source of anti-rfi parts.
Bill, K5CSJ     [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!tribune.usask.ca!news.sasknet.sk.ca!news
From: [e-mail] (Doug Appleton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Two  Meter Intermod Cure
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 08:14:10 GMT
Organization: SaskNet News Distribution
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <3vmmnh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sabre21.sasknet.sk.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55



I'll try this again .


I thought others suffering from the woes of intermod might be
interested in this item. The use of a bandpass filter has improved our
repeater beyond our expectations.

A new filter is now available to help suppress intermod at repeater
sites, mobiles, and home stations. Digital Communications Inc., of
White City Sask. Canada  is manufacturing a Two Meter filter that
meets or exceeds the characteristics of another well known supplier
who markets a four cavity filter. The filter has a bandpass of 4Mhz.
Price int the US is less then $100.00 and in Canada is around $125.00.
Amateur suppliers in both Canada and the US are selling the unit. For
further information, contact:

        Digital Communications Inc.
        Box 293, White City
        Sask., Canada,  S0G 5B0.

        Fax 306+781-2008
        Direct telco 306+781-4451
        From the USA, call 1-800-563-5351

Well worth while to look into.
73
Doug. VE5DA




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 2 Aug 1995 08:28:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vnr24$[e-mail]>
References: <3vmmvp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>>>Tom, I am not ready to make an assumption that because stranded wire
causes increased loss in a transmission line that the same thing is
true for the conductor in an antenna element.  If you have some
information to share on that specific topic, I would be interested
in you sharing the info with me.

73 de W3FPR
Don<<<

So conductor resistance behaves differently in a transmission line than in
an antenna???????

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 2 Aug 1995 08:37:20 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vnri0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


 >>>>  This sounds better, a comparison of a braid with the same number
ands
diameters of straight conductors laid parallel shows the increased length
of
conductors in the braid, and therefore higher resistance. Things get
more interesting at high frequencies, and when corrosion makes the
contacts between touching weaves lossy.<<<

Dave, Absolutely, but even more important than length is the fact that the
current travel on the surface of the braid. So the lossy pressure
connections from weave to weave add significant loss.

Try using braiding in a RF tank circuit and watch the effects. A piece of
#12 buss wire runs much cooler than the braid from RG-8 cable when used in
the high circuilating current area of a HF amplifier tank. I can only
imagine this is from reduced resistance.

I'm sure the stuff gets worse when corroded.

 I think the "approximately 2.75"  thing was a rule of thumb. The section
specifically deals with coaxial cable design, and probably assumes the
standard types of weaves associated with coax. I'm positive a denser weave
would be worse, and a simple twist much better.

73 Tom



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!swiss.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.rmii.com!nexus.interealm.com!nexus!wayne
From: Wayne Wicks <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need source for 6:1 balun
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 09:15:46 -0600
Organization: ICG/MagNET [phone]
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.950802091510.10345K-100000@nexus>
References: <3u8rqo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nexus.interealm.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: wayne@nexus
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

On Wed, 19 Jul 1995 [e-mail] wrote:

> WeaverJa <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >balun.  I tried Radio Works but they will not sell their 6:1 balun
>
> THE place to go for baluns of MANY ratios is : Palomar Engineers, Box
> 462222, Escondido, CA 92046...ph 619-747-3343  fx 619 747-3346. Jack
> Althouse is a most helpful guy and KNOWS Baluns!
>
I have purchased the Palomar 6:1 balun/xfrmr and it works great.>

Wayne Wicks WA2KEC
7581 Lost Ranger Peak
Littleton, Colorado USA
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!tribune.usask.ca!news.sasknet.sk.ca!news
From: [e-mail] (Doug Appleton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Two Meter Intermod Cure - filter.txt (1/1)
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 09:37:55 GMT
Organization: SaskNet News Distribution
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3vmrjh$[e-mail]>
References: <3vk7co$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle23.sasknet.sk.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

[e-mail] (Ken Harrison) wrote:


>I don't get it.  Why uuencode a text file?

>Ken
>--

>__________________________________________________________________________
>Ken Harrison   ---   [e-mail]   ---   Amateur Radio:  N6MHG
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I kinda screwed up a bit Ken. Not intentional. Was also having trouble
with the server. Kept telling me it wasnt sent due to hits... It
really hicupped... sorry about that..
Cheers doug






From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:20 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!apollo.hp.com!lf.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hplextra!hplb!hpwin055.uksr!hpqmoea!dstock
From: [e-mail] (David Stockton)
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Sender: [e-mail] (SQF News Admin)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 10:51:52 GMT
References: <3vlk8o$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpqmocc.sqf.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard LTD, South Queensferry, Scotland
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8.8]
Lines: 56

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:

  <snip>
: in Electronic Designers Handbook (McGraw Hill) section 8-25. It states
: that when the counducter is not solid but braided the losses must be
: multiplied by approximately 2.75.

    That sounds like a suspiciously precise number. I'd expect it to be
well fenced in with conditions about braid coverage percentage, number of
strands, wire strand diameter, frequency, etc.  How does the solid
conductor relate to the braid?  equal cross-sectional area? equal
surface area?

    I can't easily accept that there is a constant relating all braids
to all solid conductors under all circumstances. Without a condition
about relative cross-section areas, even relative DC resistances are
indeterminate.




: Another article I read years ago stated that the losses were proportional
: to the amount of weaves per unit length and the range was from 2 to ten
: times the resistance of smooth conductors. If I ever see that again in my
: mess I will tell you.

   This sounds better, a comparison of a braid with the same number ands
diameters of straight conductors laid parallel shows the increased length of
conductors in the braid, and therefore higher resistance. Things get
more interesting at high frequencies, and when corrosion makes the
contacts between touching weaves lossy.



: The increased losses may be insignificant if the antenna has low current,
: but why  use it unless it is necessary?? I certainly wouldn't use it in a
: very long antenna or a phased array.


  Yes, I agree, although most people seem to want to maximise their antenna
currents, of course.

   Just take a look at the loudspeaker cable wars in the hifi groups.
Some of the postings about even low level audio cables are rather
entertaining, if a little saddening.

   Considering the prices I've seen for fancy aerial wires, I think I'd
opt for more wire of a simpler and cheaper nature, and build cage type
conductors. Cage dipoles are rather nice, the effect on their losses is
particularly favourable as their wider bandwidth reduces the need for
matching devices and all their associated losses..


     Cheers,
             David  GM4ZNX



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-ulm.de!Wiedemann.lab.fh-ulm.de!brunel
From: [e-mail] (PE Roman Brunel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: T2FD
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 13:05:18 GMT
Organization: Fachhochschule Ulm
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wiedemann.lab.fh-ulm.de
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Hello...
I read about the T2FD- antenna and now I ┤d like to try it out. Who has made
experiences and can tell me. I think about using a 300 Ohm- resistor (where
can I get one for a tx pwr of about 100 w?) and a 1:6 BALUN to feed it with a
50 Ohm coax. Please write to my email- adress - many thanks!
73, Roman  (DL2SFE)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 2 Aug 1995 13:45:14 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 32
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vnvha$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vlbi0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
><[e-mail]> writes:

>There may be the problem. There is a great gulf between, "said in so many
>words" and you putting in QUOTE MARKS around statements. When you put the
>quote marks around a phrase that means (no paraphrasing) but the exact,
>again EXACT verbatim words used. Alas, much to our chagrin Kranky Kurt
>answers almost no letters. Your two dollars will be refunded when it arrives.
>We don't wish to add injury to....whatever.

Unless I can't remember how senile I really am, I don't put quotes
around anything I'm not looking at while I type it in. I put quotes
around some of the SGC stuff and around the FET/Bipolar stuff because
I was looking at it at the time. When I say that Kurt said something,
without quotes, I am obviously inferring what he said. When he said
that a square is always better than a dipole, I inferred that he really
meant to say that a full-wave square is always better than a half-wave
dipole, and if so, he didn't write what he meant to say. Now there may
be a lot of young/new/non-technical hams out there who believe all
squares are better than all dipoles because of what Kurt wrote.

>>One time on field day, I strung up an end-fed antenna tied to a string
>>with no insulator which was tied to the top of a tree. I got out a lot
>>better after it rained.
>
>Ah, you are a true antenna magician since rainwater in non-conductive. But,
>I believe it.

What you don't know is the string had accidentally been soaked with
salt water draining off an ice cream maker the night before.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Feeding multiband Quads
Date: 2 Aug 1995 13:58:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3voecp$[e-mail]>
References: <3vnvha$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Well, I finally made a decision.  I am going to re-build my old quad, in
time to be blown down again this comming hurricane season or winter.. I
miss it.  Tired of the 'standby' tribander that's been up there for 5+
years.  What I am looking for is either some ideas, suggestions or
references on feeding the driven elements.  The quad will be the standard
10-15-20 meter deal without Warc bands.  The original design used a simple
feed method where all three loops were simply tied together and feed
through a balun.  SWR performance wasn't what I would call spectacular.  I
do have Bill Orr's book on quads, and one method he uses a tri-gamma
matching method that while it does look good electrically, mechanically it
seems to leave alot to be desired.  Also, the need for variable capacitors
(4 total) is most un-appealing.  Anyway, I have some time, this isn't
something going up next weekend so I do want to take my time with this and
do it right.  What's your ideas?

BTW, one thing I remember about the quad is that it was seemingly immune
to precipitation static.  I can remember hearing significantly increased
static / noise levels while it was either raining heavily or snowing on
the yagi.  I do remember this did not happen to the quad.  Any quad users
out there noticed that?


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.lahabra.chevron.com!usenet
From: Curtis Wheeler <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 2 Aug 1995 14:59:53 GMT
Organization: CCnet Communications
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3vo3ta$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vm785$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cgwh.sr.chevron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84199 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28860 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12512

[e-mail] (Hank Oredson) wrote:

>Frank,
>
>you left off your callsign.
>
>You *are* a ham, right?
>
>Otherwise why would you take part in this discussion ...
>
>And you live right here in the Portland area, where it is almost
>impossible to put up a tower (or any other form of antenna) because
>of rules and regulations promulgated by bigots like yourself.
>
>Please go away and harass some other newsgroup.

Huh?  Go away because he is (or might not be) not a ham?  Just because he
doesn't like towers in his neighborhood?  A bigot?  Did he ever mention that he
didn't like hams? - not that I recall.

He didn't include his call sign?  So what.  Do you have to ID at the end of any
Amateur newsgroup posting?  Or every 10 minutes when posting articles?

If you only want to hear "from your own kind", stay in your on world - stick to
packet.

--
Curtis Wheeler - Pleasanton, CA




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 2 Aug 1995 15:48:09 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vo6np$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vlbi0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>There may be the problem. There is a great gulf between, "said in so many
>words" and you putting in QUOTE MARKS around statements.

Armond, I just re-read the entire thread and nowhere did I put "QUOTE
MARKS" around anything that wasn't a direct quote. I put no quotes around
anything that I recalled from memory, including anything about Sturba.
Perhaps it was your own initial use of quotation marks that is confusing
you.

From *your* posting:

>Kindly type on the screen for all concerned when and where Sturba ever
>said "A mobile antenna never has an SWR higher than 4:1"

Sometimes the attributions get mixed up and/or confused. I did not
commit the act you say I did.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (steven smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: dipole
Date: 2 Aug 1995 17:17:26 -0600
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3vp126$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx.cs.du.edu


I have a 2 meter 1/2 wave dipole located in my attic (the roofing material
is shake shingles). Can anyone tell me what the nominal impeadance and
signal attenuation is for this type of installation?

Also the ARRL Handbook says that a balun should be used at the dipole feed
point to eliminate RF currents in the Coax shield and recommends using
ferrite beads as an RF choke but does not say how to calculate
the inductance required. Can anyone tell me how to calculate the required
inductance or tell me the number and type of beads I should use?
(I am using RG 8X feedline).

thanks
Steve Smith  KB0SZF




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hplextra!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!rkarlqu
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-weave antenna w
Date: 2 Aug 1995 17:54:03 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3voe3r$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpscrj.scd.hp.com

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>It is also documented that a smooth copper strap has several times the RF
>resistance of a ROUND copper conductor of the same diameter!
>
>(References will be provided upon request!)
>
>73 Bill
>[e-mail]

This group is really getting interesting.  I have long suspected that
those copper strap inductors you often see in linears for the 15 meter
coil are bogus; nice to get confirmation.   I suspect most of the current
is drawn to the edges hence wasting most of the copper.

Could you post some references on this?  They should settle some
arguments I've been in about this.

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (KGrant6383)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex TB6EM info wanted--Me too!
Date: 2 Aug 1995 20:22:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vp4sn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (KGrant6383)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I also have a Telrex TB6EM.  I bought it used several years ago and have
never put it up.  It's been in my basement.  I have the Telrex print, but
no additional info.  Please pass along any info you get.  I'm considering
selling mine so if you're interested  . . .  a better email for me than
AOL is [e-mail]     Good luck, 73


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!sysop
From: Rick Lehman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Comments on Force 12 Beam Antennas
Date: 2 Aug 1995 20:36:49 GMT
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3vonl1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dffl5-35.gate.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

I am interested in comments that anyone might have on Force 12 beam
antennas.  In particular, is anyone using either the C3 or C4 beam?  How
would you rate its performance, mechanical strength, etc..

Thanks,

Rick WB4EJC



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!koala.uwec.edu!usenet
From: dan drumm <drumm>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: ROTOR - Channel master - old tv salvage
Date: 2 Aug 1995 20:38:14 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3vonnm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lilith.uwec.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; OSF1 V3.2 alpha)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna/6586-6685#3vljh1$[e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12519 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8687 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84222 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:15344

Ground score!
I found an antenna rotor, but have little not no info.

Does anyone have/use/know about the channel master crown.  I got
it from someone who was reroofing  --complete with tripod for the
roof, but I do not have the controler, and I do not even know the
voltage it needs (my guess is 12v).  All I can see are the three
wires used to control it.

It is real old, but fits nicely into me new budget;  it was free.

..any help or references appreciated.


Dan Drumm
N9VOX (general is comming real soon now, but I like this call!)
[e-mail]

                                Wishing you and extra hour each day.



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!metro.atlanta.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding multiband Quads
Date: 2 Aug 1995 20:56:28 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3voops$[e-mail]>
References: <3vnvha$[e-mail]> <3voecp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3voecp$[e-mail]>, PTracy <[e-mail]> wrote:

>What's your ideas?

This is an idea with questions attached and I don't know the answers.
Since the quad section one chooses is low impedance and therefore, low
voltage, can the switching be accomplished by relays? Is it possible
to shield/decouple the relays so they are immune to RF effects and can
be operated by DC pulses on the transmission line?

>BTW, one thing I remember about the quad is that it was seemingly immune
>to precipitation static.  Any quad users out there noticed that?

In a dipole and transmission line, there is generally no DC path between
the poles hence static buildup. In a quad there is a DC path between
the transmission line conductors so static discharges. With a 4:1 balun
on my dipole, there is also a DC path through the balun and therefore
static discharge. It was an unexpected bonus when I installed the balun.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.rmii.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!elron2.elron.net!usenet
From: David Atias <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cushcraft  AR270-10S   70 cm performance ?
Date: 2 Aug 1995 22:06:14 GMT
Organization: Elron Adar
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3vossm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.203.123.54
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Hi all,
Is any one has already some experience with this antenna, specially
with the 70 cm .
Can someone explain me the way it works without duplexer ?
Is there something unique in the matching ?
Thanks
David 4x4cg



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!asstdc.scgt.oz.au!f400.n712!f505.n712!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Distribution: world
X-Comment-To: All
From: Stephen Shaw <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 95 22:12:34 +1000
Subject: Antenna Spacing
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Sydney PC Users Group Mail Exchange
X-FTN-AREA: REC.RADIO.AMATEUR.ANTENNA
X-FTN-MSGID: 3:712/505.0 30203092
X-FTN-Tearline: Maximus 2.02
X-FTN-Origin: Sydney PC Users Group Mail Exchange (3:712/505)
X-FTN-SEEN-BY: 712/400 505
X-FTN-PATH: 712/505
X-FTN-PATH: 712/400
Lines: 2

Is there any simple formula to calculate the minimum seperation of two VHF/UHF monopole/dipole antennas so that they will not interfere with each other?



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!noao!math.arizona.edu!news.Arizona.EDU!nemo!hlester
From: [e-mail] (Howard Lester)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Alternate feedline typesi
Date: 2 Aug 1995 22:17:39 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <3voti3$[e-mail]>
References: <3vonnm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nemo.as.arizona.edu

I have a dipole on my townhome roof (yes, there are restrictions) that
I feed with 300 ohm ladderline. Since the routing must be so convoluted,
I figure that the entire system is quite unbalanced, and I may not be
"enjoying" the low losses I might otherwise expect with this balanced
line. (The antenna is 55 feet long, and I use it on 40-10m via a transmatch.)

I thought of alternatives: Use SHIELDED twin-lead (yea, where am I going
to find THAT stuff any more?) - the shielding allowing me to run a balanced
line near metal and other material (which is the case with the present
configuration);

Use something like 93 ohm RG62/U coax, with ferrite beads at the feedpoint,
and hook up a 4:1 or 6:1 Un-un (unbalanced to unbalanced) transformer at
the base of my 7 ft. high center support pole (thus hidden from the
neighbors).

I know coax is lossy at high swr's compared to straight, in the clear
twinlead, but with relatively low-loss coax, and getting the swr's down
to some "manageable level" via the Un-un, maybe that system would work
better than what I have now, with the ordinary unshielded ladderline twinlead.

Ideas?

Howard Lester   KE7QJ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:32 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!lamarck.sura.net!dtix.dt.navy.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: T2FD
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 23:54:57 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 19

I will give you a couple of hints.

1.  If you are doing any good transmitting you won't need a 100 watt
resistor since a lot of power is spent in the radiation and in the loss
factors.

2.  The Navy did a lot of research, most of documented onoy internally,
which shows that about 1000 ohms works better than a 300 ohm resistor in
all grounded return type antenna systems.  Almost no change in SWR or
bandwidth and a bid change in efficiency.

I have never actually tried one so take these tid bits with a grain of
salt.  My be start with 300 ohms and get it working and then try 1000
ohms.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:33 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!lamarck.sura.net!dtix.dt.navy.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 5/8 wave vs. J-pole
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <3vmod6$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 00:06:42 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vmod6$[e-mail]
Lines: 24

Remember, a 5/8 wave antenna is just about a half wave electrically.
The 5/8 point is easier to match.  i.e. A gamma type match as found on a
J pole vs a coil and capacitor arrangement at the 1/2 wave point.  A 5/8
performs very similar to a 1/2 wave.  If you are over an "optional
ground plane and hoe you are spaced and decoupled from the ground plane
are interesting features.  The Ringo Ranger is an interesting study in
5/8 .. 1/2 wave phased over a ground plane.

You may mix and match the 1/4, 1/2, 5/8 and other radiating and phasing
sections as you like.  Some are better some are worse but all are
interesting.  Some are easier than others to do; or at least as far as
anyone has tried.  If I remeber right the ARRL handbook or antenna book
has an 1/4 wave over a 5/8 J-pole design.  The phasing and matching can
get real interesting but at least theoretically possible.

Grab an antenna simulation program and some tubing and have a great
time.  Antennas are one of the things we can still build as well as the
factories.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY





From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Antennas
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 00:09:38 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3vmo3f$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
To: [e-mail],and
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vmo3f$[e-mail]
Lines: 7

Remeber that the cell phone is in the 800 MHz range and a 1/4 wave is
around 3.5 inches.  The coil you see is a phasing and matching section
not a center load like a 2 meter antenna.

Bill Harwood




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Antennas
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 00:10:12 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3vmo3f$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
To: [e-mail],and
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vmo3f$[e-mail]
Lines: 7

Remeber that the cell phone is in the 800 MHz range and a 1/4 wave is
around 3.5 inches.  The coil you see is a phasing and matching section
not a center load like a 2 meter antenna.

Bill Harwood




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Antennas
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 00:13:16 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3vmo3f$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vmo3f$[e-mail]
Lines: 20

[e-mail] wrote:
>Why are all car cell phone antennas center loaded.  It seems
>that all of these antennas have a coil and are thus center
>loaded; is this correct? Are they using a ground plane?
>
>--Thanks, Todd
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>  Todd Owen (KE4UDN)         Virginia Commonwealth University
>  [e-mail]      Richmond, Virginia
>---------------------------------------------------------------

Remember that cell phones are operating at 800 MHz and a 1/4 wave
antenna is only about 3.5 inches.  The coil you are seeing is for
phasing and matching not to achive electrical length.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 00:31:34 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <3vlbi0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <3vo6np$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vo6np$[e-mail]
Lines: 31

OK both of you, lets play nice.

Here is a data point for you.  I was temporarily using my SCG-303
antenna with the SGC-230 (this is my 4wd configuration) not on the QMS
system.  I was listening to an AM station on 1070 KHz.  I tuned the
system up to 1500 KHz.  The signal strength was less than S-1 on my
Yaesu 747.  I just got my SPIDER 7 band (80 to 10 without 30) top load
repaired and put it on the truck (my highway configuration) and retuned
the SGC-230 to 1500 KHz and listend to 1070 KHz.  Bingo S2 to S3.  Both
antennas are on  QD-2 couplers so e the change very quickly.

To be fair.  I have also performed the SGC-303 to CB whip (106 inch
steel) comparison.  That is a toss up on 15, 12 and 10.  Buy the time
you are at 40 meters the differance is 2 to 4 S units in favor of the
SGC-303 and the whip is even worse at 80 meters.   All with the SGC-230.
The SGC-230 is a wonderful toy, I love it and it is real rugged.  It
will not replace lots of wire or real good antenna design.

The QMS system is rugged but just so so as an antenna.  I use the
SGC-230 in combination with the 303 antenna on rough terrain and 4wd but
the SPIDER is on there the rest of the time.  Yes I always drive the
SPIDER through the SGC-230

Have a great day and smile a little

Remember its a hobby,

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Flexi-Weave Antenna Wire
Date: 3 Aug 1995 01:09:37 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3vp7kh$[e-mail]>
References: <3vmmvp$[e-mail]> <3vnr24$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger706.nando.net

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>
> >>>Tom, I am not ready to make an assumption that because stranded wire
> causes increased loss in a transmission line that the same thing is
> true for the conductor in an antenna element.  If you have some
> information to share on that specific topic, I would be interested
> in you sharing the info with me.
>
> 73 de W3FPR
> Don<<<
>
> So conductor resistance behaves differently in a transmission line than in
> an antenna???????
>
> 73 Tom

Well Tom, you did not state that the loss was due entirely to
conductor resistance, and in fact, transmission line loss is due
to dialectric loss as well.  There are differences between current
flow in a transmission line and in an antenna element.  One of the
effects is a change in the propogation velocity, it is clearly
slower in a transmission line.  All I asked was for you to share
any info on antenna wire, I am still not going to assume that the
behavior of the wire is the same in an antenna element as it is
in a transmission line unless you have data to show otherwise.

73 de W3FPR
Don




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 95 02:17:52 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vlbi0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vnvha$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>What you don't know is the string had accidentally been soaked with
>salt water draining off an ice cream maker the night before.

Yuk, Yuk, VG!....I'll have the other answers for you shortly.       73.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 95 02:33:48 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vperf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>"conventional" as a "9 foot whip" under item 5. There probably *is*
>some point in the HF spectrum where the SG-303 is 20 dB better than
>a 9 foot whip, especially sans tuner.

Some point in the spectrum. I thought we had to stay in the amateur bands.
What do we care about somewhere else? A lot has been circulating about
this and in the flurry of data whizzing around faxwise was something I
had never stopped to think about. That 20 dB represents a 100 times power
difference. What absolute piece of junk would an an antenna, any antenna,
have to be to radiate 1/100 of the power of that of some aother antenna.
A tin cup an a wire wouldn't be down 20 dB????????


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 95 02:35:20 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>

Bill Harwood <[e-mail]> writes:

>Have a great day and smile a little

OK!


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 3 Aug 1995 03:12:47 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 61
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vperf$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

Thanks for the copy of the SGC advertisment.

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Cecil: SGC makes the following claim (quote) " You can get more than 20 dB
>of gain by simply using an SGC compared with any other 1.8 to 30 MHz system."
>   The most interesting point here are : 1.8-, which includes 75M and the with
>ANY other system. ANY other! They also say "will typically yield 20 dB of
>gain over a conventional 1.8 to 30 MHz mobile installation."
>   These claims are either: (1.) verifiable, (2.) absurd, (3.) comical,
>(4.) disgusting, (5.) buffoonish. Please select your choice.

How about (6) misquoted? You could have done a lot better job on that
quote, e.g.:

"... you can get more than 20 dB of gain by simply using a QMS compared
with any other 1.8 to 30 MHz system."

That would at least have made people wonder what words you left out.
Here's the entire correct quote:

"So let us show you how you can get more than 20 dB of gain by simply
using a QMS compared with any other 1.8 to 30 MHz system" (possessing
the following problems). Problems 1-6 enumerated.

Yup, the last four words were added by me because it is pretty clear
to me that they were implied by the six problem areas that were then
discussed. I listed them a month ago and won't waste more bandwidth.
The key is that they said, "So let us show you...". Obviously, if one
doesn't suffer from the six problem areas that they enumerated, then
one will not realize the "20 dB of gain". Just as obviously, if one
doesn't suffer from any of the six enumerated problems, there will be
no gain at all. One can always read the six items and say, "Hey, they
didn't show me because I don't have the problems they listed".

They also say it "will typically yield 20 dB of gain over a conventional
1.8 to 30 MHz HF mobile antenna installation." Then they define
"conventional" as a "9 foot whip" under item 5. There probably *is*
some point in the HF spectrum where the SG-303 is 20 dB better than
a 9 foot whip, especially sans tuner.

So things are not nearly as bad as you (or Mr. Sturba) made them sound
and that is typical of Mr. Sturba. I would say that he stretched the
truth in the opposite direction more than SGC stretched the truth in
their favor.

SGC is certainly not without fault. Could be some sleazy marketing
type edited out the four implied words because it sounded negative.
He might also have edited out the "9 foot" just before "conventional"
in the first paragraph. The ad definitely could be misleading. Your
"quote" (in quotes since it wasn't a correct quote) was misleading.

So where do we stand? SGC didn't say what you said they said and
what they did say is potentially misleading for some people. But
misleading statements shouldn't be misquoted to make them even
more misleading.

My concern is that some companies may have suffered loss of revenue
because of Mr. Sturba's incorrect quotations. Ever considered editing
his column for accuracy?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.nic.surfnet.nl!tuegate.tue.nl!turtle.stack.urc.tue.nl!esrac
From: [e-mail] (ESRAC)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Comments on Force 12 Beam Antennas
Date: 3 Aug 1995 09:12:16 GMT
Organization: Student Association Stack, Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3vq3tg$[e-mail]>
References: <3vonl1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: turtle.stack.urc.tue.nl
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Rick Lehman ([e-mail]) wrote:
> I am interested in comments that anyone might have on Force 12 beam
> antennas.  In particular, is anyone using either the C3 or C4 beam?  How
> would you rate its performance, mechanical strength, etc..

> Thanks,

> Rick WB4EJC

Hello Rick,

Check out the CQ-CONTEST discussion list. Many discussions going on about
C3-4 antenna's and others, like TH6/7 PRO's

73 de Aurelio PA3EZL/AA2WH

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding multiband Quads
Date: 3 Aug 1995 12:00:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vqrr7$[e-mail]>
References: <3voops$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <3voops$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:

>This is an idea with questions attached and I don't know the answers.
>Since the quad section one chooses is low impedance and therefore, low
>voltage, can the switching be accomplished by relays? Is it possible
>to shield/decouple the relays so they are immune to RF effects and can
>be operated by DC pulses on the transmission line?
>
This may be possible, haven't ruled it out.  I have learned over time that
the selection of a good relay is no simple task.  I have a Heathkit remote
antenna switch that is out in my 'doghouse' at the base of the tower.
Even though it is protected from the elements, I already had 1 relay
failure relay in it.  It was used for switching between 4 different
dipoles, and rarely had to handle QRO.  100 watts or less 99% of the time.

If I can figure out what the trouble is, I may just use that box to switch
the different loops.  The big question is what to do to prevent this from
happening again.

Thanks for reply.

Pat, KE1C


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!teleport.com!radio
From: [e-mail] (FBenterprises)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FBenterprises Web Page
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 12:06:01
Organization: FBenterprises
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-vanc2-27.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Just a quick announcement of FBenterprises new Web Page.  FBenterprises sells
Amateur Radio Publications, including Repeater Maps, and the full line of ARRL
Publications (at a DISCOUNT!).

The URL for the page is:

http://www.teleport.com/~radio/ham.html

Thank you!

73!

Bob Martin N7JXN
FBenterprises


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.cle.ab.com!cle.ab.com!bjp
From: [e-mail] (Brian J. Pennebaker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Larson Antenna installation problem
Date: 3 Aug 1995 12:53:14 GMT
Organization: Allen-Bradley Company, Inc.
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vqgrq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kittiwake.cle.ab.com
Keywords: A friend of mine is having a problem installing

a Larson mirror mounted 5/8 wave 2 meter antenna.  The VSWR
is 4:1 range and his Tm255a Kenwood rig will only put out
5W. We are installing it on his Van's mirror.

The protection circuitry is activiated in the rig due to hight VSWR.
We have tried many different mounting ideas.  We have a good ground
connection and tried a second antenna also.

We are looking for help.  Please email me.

73,

Brian N8RPA


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.rmii.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Ray Johnston)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: AEA Isoloop - Old vs New
Date: 3 Aug 1995 14:16:00 -0400
Organization: Digital Visions Corporation
Lines: 12
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <3vr3p0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hopi.gate.net

Can anyone tell me the difference in operational characteristics
between the old Isoloop design with the 'flat' tuning unit on the
antenna loop, and the new design with the tuning unit in the
center of the loop?

Thanks...

Ray
--
--------

Ray Johnston ([e-mail] & [e-mail]) Boca Raton FL USA


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (JKenny809)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Any experience with eggbeater antenna's??
Date: 3 Aug 1995 14:17:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vr3s2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JKenny809)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I am looking at the m2 antenna's and wonder if anyone has any experience
with the eggbeater antenna's.  Any feedback would be appreciated.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:47 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!news.ucdavis.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!dgf
From: [e-mail] (David Feldman)
Subject: Re: Telrex TB6EM info wanted--Me too!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Organization? Me?
References: <[e-mail]> <3vp4sn$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 14:46:05 GMT
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]

In article <3vp4sn$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (KGrant6383) writes:
>I also have a Telrex TB6EM.

I have a TB6EM bought NEW from Telrex in 1988. It arrived ONLY with a blueprint
showing the dimensions; nothing else in terms of docs. Telrex died shortly after
I bought the thing (it was a big hassle getting a replacement trap for one that
had infant mortality).

Altho the company is gone, the antenna works well and has survived very heavy
winds (100 MPH) without any problems at all since 1988. It is still nice to
look at, too. A friend of mine has been thru two KLM KT-34XA's (with those
plastic decoupler things and such) during the same time. I do wish Telrex
had gone on to build bigger/better multiband yagis.

73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Ben Sager)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: unsubscribe
Date: 3 Aug 95 15:26:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

unsubscribe


end

*************************************************************************
Ben Sager

KC4ASF @ KC4ASF.#NOVA.VA  =  Amateur Radio Packet
AFA2OS @ AFA2OS.VA  = VA AF MARS Packet Manager
[e-mail]  <-- This address no good after August 10th!!
[e-mail] = Internet address

Fredericksburg, VA
*************************************************************************



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:49 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!ent-img.com!wb6hqk!bart
From: [e-mail] (Bart Rowlett)
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antennas - Info request
Organization: wb6hqk
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 15:28:44 GMT
Lines: 57

In article <[e-mail]>,
Jim Wooddell <[e-mail]> wrote:
>-> From: [e-mail] (Steve6920)
>-> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>-> References: <[e-mail]>
>->
>-> Hi Jim,
>->   I have been involved in HF mobile since the '70s and have used it a
>-> to support USAF MARS and other emergency communications.  I used to r
>-> the Hustler antennas and had upgraded to four of their resonators on
>-> single mast to get multi frequency operation.  I, too, recently switc
>-> to the screwdriver antenna and have made some comparisions to the Hus
>-> antenna.
>->   The screwdriver antenna is more efficient and has a much higher Q t
>-> the Hustler (note I had the regular resonators and not the super
>-> resonators.  I have heard the super resonators had a little higher Q
>-> efficiency).  It is really apparent on the lower frequencies.  I woul
>-> switch back to the Hustlers except in a emergency.
>
>Sounds interesting.  Yes the super resonators do have a wider bandwidth.

Interestingly, the efficiency of the super resonators (75 meters anyway)
is slightly below that of the standard resonator.  The increased bandwidth
appears to be partially due to the higher losses and the rest from
increased capacitance resulting from the larger size; the inductance is
slightly lower.

>How about reliability?  Is the screwdriver as tough as the Hustler
>antennas?

I think that depends on exactly what sort of abuse you're going to subject
the antenna to.  I've been running the same set of Hustlers on various
4wd vehicles for nearly 20 years now and they have survived.  I use springs
both at the base and resonator and manage to get away with all sorts of
clanging and banging against trees and canyon walls.  The screwdriver
will often have the base section protected from obsticals leaving the
relatively streamlined whip to deal with hazards.  The primary failing
of the screwdrivers is the connection between the coil and the base
section.  The contact between the fingers and coil stock is subject to
corrosion and failure at high power.  As the resistance increases, so
does the i^2 * R losses and the junction gets hot eventually causing
failure of a plastic component.

Do you think they would take a bunch of knocking around in
>a 4x4?

I'm considering upgrading to either a screwdriver or bugcatcher but currently
favor the bugcatcher since the following improvement will be a 500+
watt amplifier which will defiantly damage the screwdriver.  Otherwise
I think with the right antenna they would work OK.


bart    wb6hqk

[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 3 Aug 1995 15:41:09 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 38
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vqqml$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vperf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
><[e-mail]> writes:

>Some point in the spectrum. I thought we had to stay in the amateur bands.

Hi Armond, it occurred to me last night after my posting that you and
I could be suffering from language problems. Unfortunately, I learned
my English in Texas (some say they don't speak English in Texas :-)

I was speaking in the context of the HF amateur bands. Here's how their
claim could be true. Compare the QMS antenna system with a "conventional
9 ft whip" on 30m. Use my IC-725. I have no doubt that the QMS system
will radiate 20 dB more RF than the barefoot IC-725 because of foldback.
Admittedly, I am playing devil's advocate. I am not defending their claims.
I am demonstrating how they may be rationalizing their claims.

My native Japanese friends will never understand the difference between
"can" and "will". Compare the following two statements:

I can die tomorrow. Obviously true

I will die tomorrow. Probably false, hopefully I am mistaken.

SGS didn't say the QMS system "will" make a 20 dB difference. They
said it "can" make a 20 dB difference, given a certain set of
circumstances, which they enumerated. We all know that they exaggerated
the effects of the items they listed and it is not likely that all
the items would ever exist in unison. They may have meant to convey
the impression that the QMS system is 20 dB better, but they didn't
say it "will" improve things by 20 dB.

All I'm asking is that Mr. Sterba take the time to insure that the
statements he makes and the quotes he uses are 100% accurate except
for unintended mistakes. When he throws out the bath water, how
about him mentioning that the baby wasn't also thrown out.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC
(100% all my own fuzzy logic, not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rubber Duck Help
Date: 3 Aug 1995 17:01:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vrdg6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Why is a rubber duck called a rubber duck? Does anyone know where the name
came from?


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:51 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!druid.borland.com!csus.edu!netcom.com!klausner
From: [e-mail] (Ben Klausner)
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department
References: <3v3ev6$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 17:57:49 GMT
Lines: 27
Sender: [e-mail]

In article <3v3ev6$[e-mail]>,
Frank Adrian <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In reading the AARL Antenna Book, it mentions that normal 5/8" electrical
>contractor ground rods made of steel should not be considered as adequate
>for use as antenna grounds.  They recommend two alternatives, the first
>being the use of copper pipe (which requires soldering on tee-fittings,
>etc., to connect a hose for water drill insertion, which I really don't
>want to do), the second being the use of copper clad steel rods (which
>can be driven by hammer).  My question is, "Where can you get these
>copper clad steel rods?"
>

 On a related note, the normal "installation" method seems to be pounding
 the rods into the ground with a sledge, but the last time I did this, it
 refused to go any further than 6', in an area not noted for being rocky.

 I recently saw a TV clip (This Old House??) where they were installing
 ground rods with a heavy duty electric drill. Has anyone tried this?

 P.S. True Value hardware stores, which are a cross between local and a
 chain also normally carry ground rods.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Klausner, N5DJL                  | Storing files in /tmp is an
[e-mail]                  | oxymoron.
Austin, TX                           |


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (jbmitch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience SGC Taiwan made
Date: 3 Aug 1995 18:04:08 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech/Blacksburg Electronic Village
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3vr32o$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <3vdec2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jbmitch.beva.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jan Anker) says:

>>. SGC makes a
>>good tuner but other than that they are a bullshit outfit.

They also make a very fine 12 v 550 w mobile amplifier, the SG-500, which
I have been using for several weeks now.  The quality of this amp puts
the MFJ/Amer. to shame...
- John


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (JKenny809)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: M^2 eggbeater antenna
Date: 3 Aug 1995 18:04:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vrh4u$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JKenny809)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Does anyone have any experience with the eggbeater antenna's?  Please
share your story with me as I am contemplating purchasing them.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!xs4all!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Marco Valk)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DL6WU at 481.5 Mhz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 18:05:00 GMT
Organization: XS4ALL, networking for the masses
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: asd03-17.dial.xs4all.nl
X-Newsreader: THOR 2.1▀ (TCP/IP) *UNREGISTERED*


Hello,

Can anybody calculate to me a Antenna of the DL6WU Design According to
the book of Gunther hoch ?, and NOT calculated by a Software program ?

Specifications:

Beam: 12.5 X 12.5 Centimeters
Element : 0.6 Centimeters (6 mm)
Number of element TOTAL: +/- 30
Frequency: 481.5 Mhz
Fed by an Open Dipool with a Balun attached to it. (300/FREQ= ? X 0.659)
All elements are put Through the boom, thus are NOT isolated.
The Open Dipool, also NOT isolated, except the bottom part, where the coax
and balun is fed, the upper side of the dipool is attached ON the boom.

* So i need all element length's in Centimeters (including reflector & Dipool)
* Space in centimeters between each element.
* Calculated Lambda figures fr each dipool.

Also are there figures in Lambda that are correct to calculate the
space between each element ???, cause i have saw in a translated book
of Gunther Hoch, that there was a table displaying those figures sothat
i can calculate the spaces like this:

300/FREQ=Number

Number X 0.200 = Space (0.200 is the figure in the table for example the
space between refelctor and dipool)

MANY thanks if someone can help me with this, cause i tried to design a
antenna for this frequenty, but it is hard to interpreter a Diagram to
calculate the multiplier figure ( used when elements are THROUGH the Boom)

Also, i thought the reflecter HAS to be approx. 0.49 y, is this correct, if
not please give me the figure for my antenna for the above specifications.

Regards,

Marco Valk



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (JKenny809)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Quadrifiler antenna
Date: 3 Aug 1995 18:18:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <3vri0k$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JKenny809)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Does anyone know how to make this antenna or know where to find a good
explanation on how to make one properly?


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 18:19:28 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3v3ev6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

Yes indeed, I have used a hammer drill to install ground rods and it
works great!
73!
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]

<<cut>>

>  I recently saw a TV clip (This Old House??) where they were installing
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Klausner, N5DJL                  | Storing files in /tmp is an
> [e-mail]                  | oxymoron.
> Austin, TX                           |
>
>


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 3 Aug 1995 19:12:37 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vr735$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vo6np$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Bill Harwood  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>OK both of you, lets play nice.

Sorry, ran out of prozac. :-)

>The QMS system is rugged but just so so as an antenna.  I use the
>SGC-230 in combination with the 303 antenna on rough terrain and 4wd but
>the SPIDER is on there the rest of the time.

Bill, I haven't ever seen the 303 but from the description I gather it
is a whip within a coil so it has two resonant points. Question: what
does the whip do to the Q of the coil? Do you know anything about the
bandwidth? If it's broadband, it's lossy? If it's not lossy, it's not
broadband? For non-resonant antennas, I follow the same rule for fixed
or mobile. No less than 3/8 wavelength for a dipole - no less than
3/16 wavelength for a monopole (whip). That's why I run a 13 ft whip
with the SGC-230 to cover 10m-20m mobile. The 14 ft. S10 pickup
counterpoise helps a lot.

Come to think of it, a 13 ft whip and a 14 ft counterpoise might cure
the portable backpack antenna problem that Joanna mentioned.

I've never tried my setup on 75m and on 40m it is one 'S' unit (6dB?)
down from a bugcatcher. That's better than I was expecting.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC
(100% my own fuzzy logic, not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!news
From: [e-mail] (jim pestell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tubes
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 19:22:33 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <3vr825$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: line012.nwm.mindlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Any one have a good sorce or tubes?
I need a 6bv8 as will as others for my old tube rigs



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!news
From: [e-mail] (jim pestell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TUBES
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 19:22:36 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <3vr827$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: line012.nwm.mindlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Has anyone got a good sorce for tubes?
All rigs here are the old tube type and I  am always in need of some
thing or the other!
Help!



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.mindlink.net!news
From: [e-mail] (jim pestell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: tubes
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 19:22:38 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <3vr82a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: line012.nwm.mindlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have older rigs and need tubes , has any one got a good sorce??




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:59 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vce8q$[e-mail]> <3vj6k4$[e-mail]> <3vm10l$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 19:51:28 GMT
Lines: 42
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84277 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28878 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12556

In article <3vm10l$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mbutu Nguni) writes:
>
>Frank Adrian wrote:
>
>>I didn't say that aesthetics should be used to determine "rights".  In
>>fact, I believe that the constitution is very clear on what determines
>>rights.
>
>You believe wrongly.  The Constitution doesn't enumerate all the things
>that are possibly allowed -- it indicates which rights our government may
>not infringe on.

It lists some of the specially important rights our government may
not infringe, as well as some rights we've agreed to allow the government
to infringe. It by no means lists all rights. The Declaration of Independence
says our rights are endowed by our Creator, IE are natural rights, and are
inalienable, IE may neither be granted nor denied. Government can only
infringe rights, by use of force or threat of force, or by consensus,
though the latter is usually so rare as to be of only theoretical
consideration.

>>And there is no right (as enumerated by the constitution and
>>upheld by many levels of courts) to build a radio tower in your backyard.
>
>There is nothing enumerated in the Constitution that says I can wear a
>Hawaiian shirt either, but yet I'm doing so at this very moment!  Amazing!

Yes, government only has the power to infringe rights, through use, or threat
of use, of force. It never has the power to grant rights, which are our
inalienable heritage, though it may attempt to grant special privileges
to some, again backed by force or threats of force as necessary.

Government is the embodiment of raw power, and as Mao said, "All power
flows from the barrel of a gun." Government lives or dies on the fear
engendered by its armed minions.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:19:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!agis!ns2.mainstreet.net!ftp.netgate.net!ng62.netgate.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Bob Martin N6MZV)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: M^2 eggbeater antenna
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 21:12:37 -0700
Organization: NetGate Communications
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vrh4u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ng62.netgate.net

In article <3vrh4u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(JKenny809) wrote:

> Does anyone have any experience with the eggbeater antenna's?  Please
> share your story with me as I am contemplating purchasing them.

I've got one and am very pleased with it. Been using it mostly for SAREX
work, and WX sats. Good coverage down to the horizon and up overhead. I've
been able to work the shuttle on its wonderful 28 degree orbits with the
eggbeater, even though we only get about 11 degree elevation passes at best
here in silicon gulch.

The only thing I wish was different is to have an N connector on the thing
rather than the UHF.

When I assembled it, I put antioxidant on the ends of the copperweld where they
go into the connectors on top of the phasing box.

I'd call M2 direct and not bother with the dealers- get the ground plane kit
at the same time, it will save you time trying to duplicate what they make
very well- HRO didn't even know the ground plane kit existed for this antenna.

73-

--

Bob Martin N6MZV          * [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!nando.net!ad4rk
From: [e-mail] (Chip Irek)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 21:21:40
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail805.nando.net
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]


I have uploaded the latest version of the AD4RK Logbook for Windows shareware
(version 2.1).  The FTP site is

                                oak.oakland.edu

and the path is

                                pub3/hamradio/pc/logging/logbook.zip.

You can get to this FTP site on the WWW at the Boston Amateur Radio Club FTP
archive.  Many thanks to Scott Ehrlich!

Please give the logbook a try.  Suggestions for improvements are welcome.
Respond to [e-mail].

Thanks for your interest! 73






From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:02 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 21:23:03 GMT
Lines: 43

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin) writes:
>[e-mail] (Glenn Mead) writes:
><snip!>
>>It was explained to me that the grounds were
>>there to attempt to equalize any electrical differences between the
>>structure trying to be protected and the earth around it. The grounding
>>systems were supposed to allow a slow, natural balancing of electrical
>>potential in an effort to avoid the strike.
>
>This is also true.  If you will notice, the large diameter conductors of
>lightning "arrestor" systems on buildings are connected to large, sharp
>spikes at the top corners of buildings since this is where static charges
>would normally build anyway.  These spikes will gather the charge and
>divert it to ground, hopefully before a significant streamer can develop
>from it.  Since the copper in the wire is a much better conductor than
>the building itself the slow buildup of static electricity is drained by the
>wire to ground.

This is false. The charge that generates streamers comes *from* the
Earth (calling Earth zero volts is just a measuremental convention,
and says nothing about the charges present). So the better conductors
carry it to the pointed rods better than if it had to make its way up
the unknown impedance of the building structure. And the pointed rods
form streamers at a lower potential than blunt structures.

Lightning is an attempt to equalize the charge between Earth and cloud.
*Both* bodies have equal but opposite local charges (like the plates of
a capacitor) induced by the storm. Streamer currents flow *up* from the
Earth while step leader currents flow down from the cloud. (This is over
simplified, either Earth or cloud can be the negative charge or the
positive charge. The majority carriers obviously reverse with charge
polarity reversals, but that's a detail we can ignore here.)

The principle by which a lightning rod works is that of generating an
early and strong streamer, so that it is preferentially the target of
the strike, and not the rest of the structure that it is protecting.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!unixg.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 95 22:58:31 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vo6np$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vr735$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

Cecil: I have a message for you.
   To your 5/4 dipole. You claim 9dbi. That is 7dBd. Your antenna is about
83.6 feet long. A half-wave dipole would be about 33.4 ft. Your antenna is
2.5 half-wave dipoles. Assuming it takes a doubling of antenna size to pick up
3dBd, now we are at 2 HW. Since it would take another TWO half-waves to pick up
another 3dBd, the quarter-wave remaining adds a miniscule amount.
   As to where the other 4dBd you have claimed are hiding in all this is a good
question.
 "square" antenna (which you mocked) beat your dipole? Yes. Since
you chose to go to an "extended" dipole, I will go to the square antenna
as outlined by Bill Orr on page 99 of his book "Quad Antennas".It is the
"expanded" Quad, which is one half-wave on a side. It is a total of 2 WL
to your 1-1/4.Touche'
   Next, the SGC: Their statements are: will typically yield 20dB of gain
over a conventional 1.8 to 30 MHz HF HF mobile installation." Contrary to
your interpretation, a "conventional, etc" would not have all of the outlined
maladies they later mention.
   Next, here is the true crux of the matter: "you can get more than 20dB of
gain by simply using a QMS compared with any other 1.8 to 30 MHz system.
   Their statement is ANY OTHER. ANY OTHER! It doesn't matter if they say,
"let us show you how" They have committed themselves to saying ANY OTHER.
   As to their qualifiers: If you add them all up (as they state) you can get
as high as nearly 40dB difference. That is 10x10x10x10. Or the difference
between 100 Watts and .01 (1/100) of a watt.
   Just how totally bad would an antenna have to be to get beat like  that
by anything. Hardly a "conventional" antenna.....or "ANY OTHER" 1.8-30 MHz
system.
   Your remarks are, of course, invited and will be given studious thought.
PS. Only another OF would remember the back porch ice cream maker, round and
round the crank went.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:05 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Alternate feedline typesi
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <3vonnm$[e-mail]> <3voti3$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 00:01:10 GMT
Lines: 52

Howard Lester ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I have a dipole on my townhome roof (yes, there are restrictions) that
: I feed with 300 ohm ladderline. Since the routing must be so convoluted,
: I figure that the entire system is quite unbalanced, and I may not be
: "enjoying" the low losses I might otherwise expect with this balanced
: line. (The antenna is 55 feet long, and I use it on 40-10m via a transmatch.)

: I thought of alternatives: Use SHIELDED twin-lead (yea, where am I going
: to find THAT stuff any more?) - the shielding allowing me to run a balanced
: line near metal and other material (which is the case with the present
: configuration);

: Use something like 93 ohm RG62/U coax, with ferrite beads at the feedpoint,
: and hook up a 4:1 or 6:1 Un-un (unbalanced to unbalanced) transformer at
: the base of my 7 ft. high center support pole (thus hidden from the
: neighbors).

: I know coax is lossy at high swr's compared to straight, in the clear
: twinlead, but with relatively low-loss coax, and getting the swr's down
: to some "manageable level" via the Un-un, maybe that system would work
: better than what I have now, with the ordinary unshielded ladderline twinlead.

: Ideas?

: Howard Lester   KE7QJ
: [e-mail]
I tried using shilded 300 ohm tv feeder once. The was loss was horrible!
Don't bother. I used RG62 on my horizontal loop on all bands for 2 years.
This worked good on all bands. I used a 4:1 balun at the transmitter
end.The shields should be grounded at the rig end and left hanging at the
feed point on the antenna. Try to avoid resonant lengths of coax because
the shield makes an excellent antenna! I used 50ft. If it is resonant,
you will experience RF on everything.

Bear in mind this worked for a loop which always has a fairly low swr
anyway. The dual rg62's total to around 200 ohms and the loop is close to
that on all harmonically related frequencies. Not so with your dipole. If
you try and use an 8o meter dipole on 40 and use any kind of coax, the
swr is several hundred to one and losses are unbearable.

I submitt that your better off with the inbalance as it is. Don't bother
with alternate feeders. Note that 300 ohm transmitting line having small
windows like the 450 ohms stuff is avaible. The smaller size, 1/2". will
allow you to route it easier and keep it away from metal. Also, smaller
balanced lines can be closer to metal without unbalancing it. Finally,
the 300 ohms line results in smaller current/voltage excursions on the
line thus lowering losses.
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:06 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!newshub.nosc.mil!news!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <3vesft$[e-mail]> <3vi627$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 00:02:08 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vi627$[e-mail]
Lines: 16

I will add a couple of additional wrenches.  The Navy, San Diego, was
looking at HF antennas for small craft in the early 1960's.  Their
research showed that the higher you load an antenna the better its
efficiency.  Thus I use a top loaded SPIDER and an SGC-230 to broaden
the frequency coverage.  The SGC-303 antenna on the QMS system is sort
of two continuous loaded antenna sections which are supposedly,
according to the literature, resonate at about 10 MHz and 15 MHz
approximatly.  I have never been satisified with the transmit or recieve
performance of the SGC-230 and SGC-303 combination.

Have a Great One

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.eng.convex.com!cowart
From: [e-mail] (Michael Cowart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELP with crank-up tower
Date: 4 Aug 1995 03:09:39 GMT
Organization: Engineering, Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx USA
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <3vs31j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: neptune.convex.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I have an old Tri-Ex W36 crank-up tower.  I need a baseplate, I know
it will be hard to find one, but can anyone point me to one?  I am
pretty sure Tri-EX is out of business.  I haven't seen them advertized
in any mags since around 1988.

any info would be appreciated, thanks

Mike
WA5CMI


--

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Cowart  e-mail: [e-mail]      Convex Computer Corp.
My opinions are mine, not my employer's.    Richardson, Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!unixg.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: Theresa Pietrzak <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: test
Date: 4 Aug 1995 04:25:34 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 2
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vs7fu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-day-oh1-17.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1PE (Windows; I; 16bit)

test



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP with crank-up tower
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 95 07:30:39 MST
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3vtb5r$[e-mail]>
References: <3vs31j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ggspc.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


Tri-Ex will be startled to learn of their demise. Please
call then at 1-800-328-2393 and inform them they are out of
business. Needle retracted I talked to them just a few days ago
they are alive and well and very helpful with the older towers.
I just bought a W-36 tilt over and could make you an engineering
as built drawing from my base plate.

73 de Jerry


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.uwa.edu.au!DIALix!melbourne.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Martin Deeley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Antennas
Date: 4 Aug 1995 09:55:39 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Melbourne, Australia.
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vrnlr$jsb$[e-mail]>
References: <3vmo3f$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
: Why are all car cell phone antennas center loaded.  It seems
: that all of these antennas have a coil and are thus center
: loaded; is this correct? Are they using a ground plane?
: ---------------------------------------------------------------
:   Todd Owen (KE4UDN)         Virginia Commonwealth University
Really?
look up 5/8 over 1/4 co-linears.
G0OQC(inactive and wondering if he should ever bother again!)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!swiss.ans.net!upsnews.ups.com!newsadm
From: Guy Hamblen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 95 10:30:17 PDT
Organization: United Parcel Service
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>  <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: guy_hamblin.telecom.ups.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage



>
> The principle by which a lightning rod works is that of generating an
> early and strong streamer, so that it is preferentially the target of
> the strike, and not the rest of the structure that it is protecting.
> --
> Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary

Gary's point is logically well taken.  Now we have lightning rods, towers, and
antenna systems becoming "preferential" targets for a cloud-earth
equalization!  So "lightning protection" becomes a misnomer.  Since an
"average" discharge can exceed 60 kiloamperes with a rampup time between 0.1
to 10 microsecs, protection efforts should focus on low *impedance* paths to
dissipate this current. DC grounding techniques are not sufficient since a
discharge has a RF component.  RF grounding, shielding and bonding techniques
must be applied to maximize protection to people.  Gary C. has offered many
months of reply comments on these techniques to readers of this group.
Additional resources are:

1)   IEEE Standard 587-1980, Surge Voltages in AC Power Circuits.
2)   Roger Block, The Grounds for Lightning and EMP protection, Polyphaser
     Corp.
3)   Richard Little, Designing Facilities for Lightning Protection, June 89
     RF Design magazine.
4)   The 1993 version of the NEC code.

The Polyphaser guys are offering a tremendous amount of information for the
ham community; much of it dispelling erroneous myths prevalent in our midsts.

Keep up the effort Gary!

Guy Hamblen, AA7QZ/2



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!gopher.cs.uofs.edu!triangle.cs.uofs.edu!bill
From: [e-mail] (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 4 Aug 1995 11:27:03 GMT
Organization: Department of Computing Sciences
Lines: 24
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vt068$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vm785$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: triangle.cs.uofs.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84320 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28883 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12571

In article <3vm785$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Hank Oredson) writes:
|>
|> You *are* a ham, right?
|>
|> Otherwise why would you take part in this discussion ...
|>
|> And you live right here in the Portland area, where it is almost
|> impossible to put up a tower (or any other form of antenna) because
|> of rules and regulations promulgated by bigots like yourself.
|>
|> Please go away and harass some other newsgroup.
|>

And you call him a bigot!!  Non-hams own houses too.  And a lot of them are
very concerned with aesthetics and how they affect their property values.

bill   KB3YV
       ^^^^^   See, I got one.

--
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
[e-mail]         |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:11 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!xetron.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Tim Huster)
Subject: Re: Quadrifiler antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: timh.xetron.com
Organization: Xetron Corp.
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11
References: <3vri0k$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 12:05:40 GMT
Lines: 15

"The Satellite Experimenter's Handbook" by Martin Davidoff K2UBC. $20 from the
ARRL. pp 8-15 to 8-16.
ISBN: 0-87259-004-6.

In article <3vri0k$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Does anyone know how to make this antenna or know where to find a good
>explanation on how to make one properly?

--
  Timothy W. Huster
  [e-mail]
  kb8bnk@kc8tw.#cin.oh.usa.na
  "I like Daddy's car. It goes faster than Mommy's car!" Andrew H. age 3



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.uwa.edu.au!DIALix!melbourne.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Martin Deeley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Antennas
Date: 4 Aug 1995 14:06:01 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Melbourne, Australia.
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vs6b9$jrm$[e-mail]>
References: <3vmo3f$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
: Why are all car cell phone antennas center loaded.  It seems
: that all of these antennas have a coil and are thus center
: loaded; is this correct? Are they using a ground plane?
They're not loading coils, they're impedance transformers (or stubs if
you like). the antennas are usually 5/8 over 1/4 colinear arrays.
Mine is a higher gain model and has two coils cos its a 5/8 over 5/8 over
1/4.
The "Ringo" 144mHz antennas are the same style but they use a stub instead.
de G0OQC



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!col.hp.com!jwc
From: [e-mail] (John Chapman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Two Meter Intermod Cure - filter.txt (0/1)
Date: 4 Aug 1995 14:55:25 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <3vtcct$[e-mail]>
References: <3vk7b1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mssjwc.col.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Postmaster)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DISTRIBUTION STATUS
Date: 4 Aug 95 15:23:35 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


SMTP.HAMANT           DISTRIBUTION STATUS INFORMATION        08/04/95 0
:20:00
=======================================================================

DISTRIBUTION ID: SMTP.HAMANT.5052
SUBJECT        : Ham-Ant Digest V95 #330
DATE  SENT     : 08/04/95        TIME SENT: 08:20:00
=======================================================================

YOUR MAIL WAS NOT DELIVERED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON:

SNADS STATUS  : 0401
EXPLANATION   : INVALID DOCUMENT CLASS

=======================================================================

RECIPIENT      : DC.SYBOB
RECIPIENT NAME :
NATIVE NAME    :



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!panix!news.columbia.edu!watsun.cc.columbia.edu!jbaltz
From: [e-mail] (Jerry B Altzman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 4 Aug 1995 15:38:11 GMT
Organization: double ionizers association
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <3vtet3$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3vj6k4$[e-mail]> <3vm10l$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: watsun.cc.columbia.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84330 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28885 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12579

In article <[e-mail]>,
Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>to infringe. It by no means lists all rights. The Declaration of Independence
>says our rights are endowed by our Creator, IE are natural rights, and are

I wonder: what legal status does the DoI hold? I mean, can one win in court
claiming that one's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have
been infringed?

>Gary

//jbaltz
jerry b. altzman   Entropy just isn't what it used to be      [phone]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]  KE3ML  (HEPNET) NEVIS::jbaltz


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.dal.mobil.com!usenet
From: "Jake A. Hellbach" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Two Meter Intermod Cure - filter.txt (1/1)
Date: 4 Aug 1995 16:28:29 GMT
Organization: MEPTEC - Mobil Oil Corporation
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3vthrd$[e-mail]>
References: <3vk7co$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nolpc201.nol.mobil.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

I can't believe you are making us decode this just to see an ad to sell your
filter.
Thanks anyway but I think with this sales ploy I'll stay away.

Jake [e-mail] (Doug Appleton) wrote:

>begin 644 filter.txt
>M02!N97<@9FEL=&5R(&ES(&YO=R!A=F%I;&%B;&4@=&\@:&5L<"!S=7!P<F5S
>M<R!I;G1E<FUO9"!A="!R97!E871E<B!S:71E<RP@;6]B:6QE<RP@86YD(&AO
>



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!news
From: Force Majeur <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 4 Aug 1995 17:01:59 GMT
Organization: High Voltage Hobbyist Publications, Inc.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <3vtjq7$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3vj6k4$[e-mail]> <3vm10l$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vtet3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: will.rrgroup.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84333 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28887 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12581

[e-mail] (Jerry B Altzman) wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>to infringe. It by no means lists all rights. The Declaration of Independence
>>says our rights are endowed by our Creator, IE are natural rights, and are
>
>I wonder: what legal status does the DoI hold?

   None whatsoever.

>I mean, can one win in court
>claiming that one's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have been infringed?

   No.  The current government of the United States is founded on the
Constitution, and is legally unrelated to any document preexisting the
Constitution, including the Declaration of Independence.

>
>>Gary
>
>//jbaltz
>jerry b. altzman   Entropy just isn't what it used to be      [phone]
>[e-mail]   [e-mail]  KE3ML  (HEPNET) NEVIS::jbaltz

-FM




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!swiss.ans.net!elron2.elron.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Tsachy Lindenbaum)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft  AR270-10S   70 cm performance ?
Date: 4 Aug 1995 17:14:35 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3vtkhr$[e-mail]>
References: <3vossm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts92p12.netvision.net.il
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.4

In article <3vossm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Hi all,
>Is any one has already some experience with this antenna, specially
>with the 70 cm .
>Can someone explain me the way it works without duplexer ?
>Is there something unique in the matching ?
>Thanks
>David 4x4cg
>
Hi David
I'm sorry but I can't help you.
I don't think it's a duplexer problem - have you tried the UHF part only ?
I just wanted you to know that I saw it.
--
Good bye from:
Tsachy Lindenbaum, P.O.B 21224 Tel-Aviv 62195, Israel
                   4Z4TL @ 4Z4AAA.ISR.MDLE
                   972-9-582959



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.gmi.edu!isclient.merit.edu!onramp.freeway.net!dave
From: [e-mail] (Dave Wright)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 4 Aug 1995 17:15:47 GMT
Organization: "Freeway (TM) - America's Public Information Network"
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <3vtkk4$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vperf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: onramp.freeway.net
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #9 (NOV)

[e-mail] writes:

>My concern is that some companies may have suffered loss of revenue
>because of Mr. Sturba's incorrect quotations. Ever considered editing
>his column for accuracy?

If it was edited for accuracy, I think it would end up being to short.
--
David Wright - N8IT
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 04 16:20:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 4 Aug 1995 17:16:59 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 24
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vtkmb$[e-mail]>
References: <3vdrdh$[e-mail]> <3vesft$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3vesft$[e-mail]>,
Gerald Schmitt  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I don't think SGC can tolerate too much technical scrutiny.

I called SGC and asked them how they justify their claims. Their
advertising is based on the following shootout which they said
they would be glad to see.

Set up any mobile antenna system under 10 ft long before the
testing begins. A "no hands" rule applies after the test begins.
Run tests on every HF band keeping the "no hands" rule in effect
for the duration of the tests. Average the tests for each
configuration. They think the QMS system will win the shootout
against a bugcatcher with a fixed tap.

When they say, "Outperforms *any* other antenna system under 10
feet covering the full 1.8 to 30 MHz HF range", they are assuming
the "no hands" rule. Just change bands while in motion and push
the mike button. It appears they have not heard about the auto-
tune screwdriver antennas which should win the above shootout.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC
(100% all my own fuzzy logic, not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!usenet.cis.ufl.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 wave vs. J-pole
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 23:48:18 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3vmod6$[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
To: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 10

Try

ftp://oak.oakland.edu/pub/hamradio/mac/theory-and-morse/

I can't get it to respond today but I think there was one there.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: 5/8 wave vs. J-pole
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 14:58:38 GMT
Lines: 29

In article <[e-mail]> Bill Harwood <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>Remember, a 5/8 wave antenna is just about a half wave electrically.
>The 5/8 point is easier to match.  i.e. A gamma type match as found on a
>J pole vs a coil and capacitor arrangement at the 1/2 wave point.  A 5/8
>performs very similar to a 1/2 wave.  If you are over an "optional
>ground plane and hoe you are spaced and decoupled from the ground plane
>are interesting features.  The Ringo Ranger is an interesting study in
>5/8 .. 1/2 wave phased over a ground plane.

To head off any possible misconceptions, a J-pole *is* a 1/2-wave
radiator with a transmission line stub match (the J-hook) extending
below it. The stub isn't part of the radiator, and isn't a gamma
match. The aluminum dummy load, errr Ringo, is theoretically electrically
the same as a J-pole, but physically coils the stub around its base
instead of hanging it straight below the radiator.

A 5/8-wave vertical radiator will have a lower angle of radiation than
a 1/2-wave vertical over ground, and that can be useful for reaching your
intended receiving target rather than warming birds. Remember, the horizon
curves *down* below your line of sight, so it is rare to need antenna
gain at an elevation above the horizon for terrestrial VHF operation.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Benjamin Millan Garcia)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Spacing
Date: 6 Aug 95 03:09:27 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 95 22:12:34 +1000
>From: Stephen Shaw <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Antenna Spacing
>
>Is there any simple formula to calculate the minimum seperation of two >VHF/
>UHF monopole/dipole antennas so that they will not interfere with each >other?
>
>------------------------------

Stephen,

There are simple methods to calculate what you want. But the realiability
is not as goods as the results given by more complex methods. These
methods are known as propagation models, and as you could imagine, some
ask you a lot of data, as for example: heights of antennas, powers, terrain
irregularity, distance, frequency, topography, etc.
But the simplest methods could give you an idea of the separation of the
antennas working at the same frequency.
The simplest of these models is known as free space transmision and it
says that:
Pr/Pt = GrGt(L/(4pid^2))^2
where
Pr,t = (r)ecieved/(t)ransmitted power
Gr,t =     "            "       antenna gain power
L = Wave length
pi = 3.1415...
d = distance between transmiter and receiver

With this formula you could know the power in your receiver located at
a distance d from the transmiter working at the frequency you are
considering. In this way, you could know the saparation between the
antennas knowing the powers of each system and a parameter known as
Signal to Interference Ratio (SIR) which depends on your receiver mainly.
So for example, if one of the receiver has a SIR of 10 dB, it says that
if the power of the interfering signal is less than 10 times the power of
the desired signal, it is going to work correctly. And what you have to
calculate is the correct distance to give less than this power at the
distance of the other antenna.

There are other simple methods, and others are more complex that take
into account refletion and difraction from obstacles (natural or made
by man). Reflection and difraction are important fenomena in the
frequencies you are working.
I hope this give you an idea of what you want.

Benjamin.
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!news3.insinc.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Karim Mawji)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BEST EQUIPMENT FOR AM DXING
Date: 7 Aug 1995 05:39:35 GMT
Organization: Internet Direct Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <4048un$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.174.243.53
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

I've been thinking of getting into some am dxing.  I live 300 miles north
of Seattle, and someone told me that a GE superradio III along with
100 feet of wire strung 40 feet up in the air would allow me to get
am channels from california as well as any other channels up to 1500 miles
away.

I was just wondering is this equipment very good or is there anything
that is better.  Also does anyone know of a company in Seattle or in
Bellingham that carries the GE superradio?  I am completely new to am
dxing and would appreciate any information anyone could give me.

I don't get a chance to read this usenet very often so perhaps someone
could email me with some advice.

Thanks

Karim
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!globe.indirect.com!usenet
From: Harold Lines <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 6 Aug 1995 07:28:15 GMT
Organization: Internet Direct, Inc.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <401quf$[e-mail]>
References: <3vm10l$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vtet3$[e-mail]> <3vtt94$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip179.indirect.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b4 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84397 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28898 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12618

There's another thing to consider when you talk about CCRs, and that's
the enforcement.  When I bought my house here in Glendale, AZ (adjacent
to Phoenix, 10 years ago), I had to sign a paper that kept me from
installing outside antennas.  The paper talked about a governing board in
my development that would meet periodically and regulate what went on in
the area.  Well, of course, once the developers had sold all the houses,
they took the money and ran away, and our development never did come up
with a governing board.  After I lived there for a couple of years, I put
up an 80 meter dipole, and no one said anything.  I put up a 2 meter
Isopole a year later, and apart from one neighbor's question ("What is
that thing, anyway?"), no one said anything.  I could probably put up a
tower and a tribander, if I wanted to, but I'm getting ready to move, so
it's not worth the money.  I'll move out into an area regulated by the
County, where there are probably no CCRs (I hope).

Of course, there's no way of telling how the CCRs will be enforced when
you buy your house, but you might just luck into a situation like mine.
Try putting up a couple of antennas and see if anyone says something.
You might just be pleasantly surprised.

 - Harold
   KC7SZ



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip102.phx.primenet.com!markem
From: [e-mail] (Mark Monninger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 20:33:29 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vm10l$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vtet3$[e-mail]> <3vtt94$[e-mail]> <401quf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip102.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84443 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28903 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12635

In article <401quf$[e-mail]> Harold Lines <[e-mail]> writes:
> ...
>Of course, there's no way of telling how the CCRs will be enforced when
>you buy your house, but you might just luck into a situation like mine.
>Try putting up a couple of antennas and see if anyone says something.
>You might just be pleasantly surprised.

I live across town from Harold (in Gilbert, AZ) and I have a similar
situation. There are CC&R's prohibiting the normal things but there was no
enforcement written into them, no board or homeowner's association...only a
civil suit and the loser pays all costs. There were several TV antennas in the
neighborhood already so I put up my vertical on the roof. No one said
anything.  I now have three antennas up and a 8.5 ft TVRO dish. No one has
said anything in 6 years so I figure I'm safe. At one time the mayor lived
across the street, the town manager lived next door, and a couple town
councilmen lived in the neighborhood, too.

No one pays any attention to the CC&R's any more and, amazingly enough, the
neighborhood has not gone to hell in a handbasket. Property values have
steadily risen (could it be the LACK of CC&R enforcement? Perish the thought!)
and houses put on the market sell faster than average. I don't know how the
neighbors would feel about a nice tower & beam, but I don't have the money or
real desire to have one anyway.

On the other hand, most of the newer ticky-tacky developments in the area have
the standard bull(chicken-?)shit CC&R's and gestapo HA's to go with them. I
guess we just lucked out.

73...    Mark   AA7TA


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!newsfeed.ACO.net!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!pacifier!rvr
From: [e-mail] (Ronald Ries)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: D3W Rotatable Dipole
Date: 5 Aug 1995 03:23:55 GMT
Organization: Pacifier, a public access Internet site.  (360-693-0325)
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <3vuo8b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pacifier.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Anybody have experience or comments about the 12, 17, 30m rotatable
dipole by Cushcraft. Seems like a compact solution for antenna restricted
areas.

Looking for performance observations xmitting and receiving.

Thanks.

Ron


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Coleman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: D3W Rotatable Dipole
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 08:40:40 -0600
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vuo8b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ka6a.ccsm.uiuc.edu

In article <3vuo8b$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ronald Ries) wrote:

> Anybody have experience or comments about the 12, 17, 30m rotatable
> dipole by Cushcraft. Seems like a compact solution for antenna restricted
> areas.
>
I used the D3W above a 10,15, 20 triband beam. Height about 55 ft. It
worked very well and made me a fan of the rotatable dipole. The only
reason I took it down (still have it actually) is that my 40m beam took
some ice damage and I replaced it with Cushcraft's three element WARC
beam.

On the down side, a dipole is NOT a beam. On the up side, rotation
definitely improves things over fixed dipoles. A dipole on the WARC bands
is less of a handicap than a dipole on the conventional bands, simply
because the traffic on the WARC bands is still less than on the others.

You won't be sorry

Jim, KA6A

--
Jim
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 23:55:11 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3vdrdh$[e-mail]> <3vesft$[e-mail]>
 <3vtkmb$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vtkmb$[e-mail]
Lines: 12

To be fair, the text for the add was put together before the rash of
screw driver antennas hit the market.  The only thing for the no hands
test that would lay a glove on them was an old home brew DK-3 (from the
instructions) or one of the old hydraulic models from the 50s-60s.

I like SGC but the claim for the QMS is about like all of the adds that
Kurt N Sterba pings on every month.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 23:57:13 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3v5lo4$[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <3vperf$[e-mail]>
 <3vtkk4$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:3vtkk4$[e-mail]
Lines: 10

Kurt is at least more accurate than most of the antenna adds you see
even if he is far from perfect.

Lets say he is 3 db better than a shopping cart and matbe better than a
ladder.  How is that?

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 5 Aug 1995 20:51:04 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <400ljo$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <3vperf$[e-mail]> <3vtkk4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Bill Harwood  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Kurt is at least more accurate than most of the antenna adds you see
>even if he is far from perfect.

Hi Bill, I never never meant to imply that his column is nearly as
inaccurate as the antenna adds. It's just when one sets oneself up as
near-perfect, one might expect the same judgement techniques one is using
to be used to judge one's own work. You know, let he who is without sin
cast the first stone... people in glass houses... etc.

>Lets say he is 3 db better than a shopping cart and matbe better than a
>ladder.  How is that?

Of course, he is doing more good than not. Just wish that his colunm
was not 10% as outrageous as the adds he blasts. Of the 100% distance
between the adds and Kurt's position, I am about 10% toward the center
from Kurt. Hope that defines my position.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.uwa.edu.au!DIALix!adelaide.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Rob Silva)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 6 Aug 1995 17:14:35 +0930
Organization: DIALix Services, Adelaide, Australia.
Lines: 44
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <401rt3$hi3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3vqqml$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

[e-mail] writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>><[e-mail]> writes:

>>Some point in the spectrum. I thought we had to stay in the amateur bands.

>Hi Armond, it occurred to me last night after my posting that you and
>I could be suffering from language problems. Unfortunately, I learned
>my English in Texas (some say they don't speak English in Texas :-)

>I was speaking in the context of the HF amateur bands. Here's how their
>claim could be true. Compare the QMS antenna system with a "conventional
>9 ft whip" on 30m. Use my IC-725. I have no doubt that the QMS system
>will radiate 20 dB more RF than the barefoot IC-725 because of foldback.
>Admittedly, I am playing devil's advocate. I am not defending their claims.
>I am demonstrating how they may be rationalizing their claims.

>My native Japanese friends will never understand the difference between
>"can" and "will". Compare the following two statements:

>I can die tomorrow. Obviously true

>I will die tomorrow. Probably false, hopefully I am mistaken.

>SGS didn't say the QMS system "will" make a 20 dB difference. They
>said it "can" make a 20 dB difference, given a certain set of
>circumstances, which they enumerated. We all know that they exaggerated
>the effects of the items they listed and it is not likely that all
>the items would ever exist in unison. They may have meant to convey
>the impression that the QMS system is 20 dB better, but they didn't
>say it "will" improve things by 20 dB.

I for one don't think they were being deliberately deceitful at all. Go back
and look at the list of losses they enumerated. Clearly there are some
exaggerations and it would be unlikely to get all of them in unison. Bear in
mind, however, that all of the losses they list could be encountered in a
conventional SG-230 + Whip installation. Perhaps they're just bagging their own
product ;-)
--
-----------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Rob Silva                    |     The sooner you fall behind, the more
                             |          time you have to catch up
[e-mail] |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.pavilion.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] (pgodbold)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EZNEC
Date: 6 Aug 1995 22:15:36 GMT
Organization: None
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <403eu8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: line04.kemp-du.pavilion.co.uk
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says:
>
>Can anyone tell me where to get this program?
>
>Jay D. Hall
>WA6MOK
>[e-mail]
>
It's Available from Roy Lewelyn W7EL


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!paonline.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 95 13:30:00 +0400
Subject: Re: Flexi-weave antenna w
Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [uucp/slip/ppp/bbs/FTPHUB]
X-Newsreader: TPCB 0.8 21100003
Lines: 18

Rk> Could you post some references on this?  They should settle some
 Rk> arguments I've been in about this.

 Rk> Rick Karlquist N6RK
 Rk> [e-mail]

Hi Rick:

Sorry the books are at work and I'm on travel the next couple of weeks.
The main one that comes to mind though is Radio Engineering by Frederick
Terman. It describes just what you stated, that the current at RF is
concentrated at the edges of a flat conductor, while it's spread over
the entire surface of a round one. I can give you the exact page reference
if you still want it when I'm back in the office.

73 Bill
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!eff!news.duke.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!dobie.loop.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Michael J. Scanlan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS:  COMPACT TOWER & BEAM
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 14:38:26 GMT
Organization: The Loop
Lines: 23
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vvvoc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pma12.loop.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99.82

For Sale:

U.S. Tower Co. TMM-541SS compact crank up tower with mast, cable
stand offs and brackets, etc.  Extends to 41' plus 9' for the mast and
retracts to 12' for low profile, neighbor pleasing  operation.
Excellent condition and has complete photo documentation of previous
installation.  All down and ready to go.  $600; FOB Los Angeles, CA

Cushcraft full size tri-band beam.  Easily UPS-able to your QTH; in
original box marked for quick reassembly.  $275; FOB Los Angeles, CA

40 Meter add-on kit for above.  $150; FOB Los Angeles, CA

Ham II Rotor with control box & cable, FREE with purchase of tower &
beam or $250, FOB Los Angeles.

Further information available on request.       "73"
13428 Maxella Ave., #347
Marina del Rey, CA  90292
[phone]; Pgr [phone]
A.R.S. WA╪EPW/6 - Licensed since 1965
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!warp.cris.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 5 Aug 1995 14:47:48 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <4000ak$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: crc3-fddi.cris.com
Keywords: GAP ANTENNA
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

I am thinking about purchasing a GAP Titan DX 8 band antenna. I am currently using a G5RV for all
my HF work. The G5RV doesn't tune very well on 30 meters but does quite well on all other bands.
I noticed that the Titan DX does tune on 30 meters. My space is limited and I don't want have to
run any ground radials, so I an thinking about the GAP.

Does anyone have any experience with any of the GAP antennas?

73's

Phil
AD4WP



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!sysop
From: Rick Lehman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 6 Aug 1995 08:42:02 GMT
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <401v8q$[e-mail]>
References: <4000ak$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dffl5-34.gate.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

I own a GAP vertical and use it on 80, 40 and rarely on 12 meters. I do
not recall the model number of my GAP but it is 31 feet high and covers
80 through 2 meters(except 17 and 30 meters).  It is admittedly in a poor
location resting 10 feet from a six feet high chain link fence, 10 feet
from a single story house and 30 feet from my tower and beam.  There are
3 radials which were trimmed for 40 meter VSWR.  The radial length does
not affect 80 meter VSWR which is very good or the other bands.  My
results are as follows:

80 meters---Very poor.  I no longer transmit on this band it is too
frustrating. The antenna VSWR is very good, just like a dummy load.

40 meters-- Good.  Has served me well on this band.

12 meters-- Fair.  Worked OK.  Seemed to not work as well when compared
to another local ham working the same station as I.  He was using a wire
antenna.

My antenna model absolutely must be guyed( epecially if you get any
thunderstorms) a disappointment for me as I was under the understanding
that it was not an absolute requirement.I believe the Titan antenna was
designed for operation on the lower bands(e.g. 80 meters) and therefore
may work considerably better than mine.  Good luck , 73 Rick WB4EJC



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.kei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant H Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 7 Aug 1995 03:14:20 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <4040ec$[e-mail]>
References: <4000ak$[e-mail]> <401v8q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip121.ft.worth.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b4 (Windows; I; 16bit)

You're talking about the Challenger VIII.  Your observations match mine
pretty well -- especially on guying and 80 meter performance.

The Titan isn't going to be a very good 80 meter antenna either,
presuming GAP uses the same tuning method they use in the GAP.

I have blown several (one just yesterday) "top cap" assemblies on 80
meters.  It just won't handle a legal limit load reliably, even at 1:1
SWR.  GAP keeps sending me free top cap assemblies, but it is just more
hassle to pull the antenna down to replace them than the antenna is
worth.   The antenna is tuned on 80 meters with a coax stub terminated in
a couple of 1000V mica caps.  They can't hack it, and will arc through.

Grant/NQ5T

>
>80 meters---Very poor.  I no longer transmit on this band it is too
>frustrating. The antenna VSWR is very good, just like a dummy load.
>
>40 meters-- Good.  Has served me well on this band.
>
>12 meters-- Fair.  Worked OK.  Seemed to not work as well when compared
>to another local ham working the same station as I.  He was using a wire
>antenna.
>
>My antenna model absolutely must be guyed( epecially if you get any
>thunderstorms) a disappointment for me as I was under the understanding
>that it was not an absolute requirement.I believe the Titan antenna was
>designed for operation on the lower bands(e.g. 80 meters) and therefore
>may work considerably better than mine.  Good luck , 73 Rick WB4EJC
>




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.ip.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 1995 01:18:40 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 22

->
->  On a related note, the normal "installation" method seems to be poun
->  the rods into the ground with a sledge, but the last time I did this
->  refused to go any further than 6', in an area not noted for being ro
->
->  I recently saw a TV clip (This Old House??) where they were installi
->  ground rods with a heavy duty electric drill. Has anyone tried this?
->

    Yes, I have indeed tried this and it works great!  Actually, the
drill is a rotohammer and just looks like a drill.  Some of them
send a powerful vibration down a ground rod and push it right through
whatever might be in the way.  Drills designed for using carbide
concrete bits work too.  I have also used electric jack hammers and
these have worked better than anything I have ever tried.  You can
rent them for about $25 to $35 dollars a day and if you have alot
of rods to install, this is a cheap way to go, if'n your time is
worth anything.
Jim

RACEBBS - QWK Internet Gateway - 520.669.9225



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news3.insinc.net!news.globalx.net!usenet
From: "Steve P." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground rods
Date: 5 Aug 1995 16:43:33 GMT
Organization: HOME CONTROLS & SYSTEMS
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <40073l$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cn.globalx.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) wrote:
>->
>-> [e-mail] (Jim Coleman) writes:
>->
>-> > Unless the flexibility of braid is absolutely necessary, you can us
>-> > copper water tubing as a ground connection. It's available in vario
>-> > sizes at all home supply stores. I use it on my tower legs. You fla
>-> > one end and make a good mechanical connection (like a bolt through
>-> > drilled hole). Then you follow it up with silver solder and a propa
>-> > torch. Easy to do and has maintained its integrity for more than 8
>-> > years...
>->
>-> Grounding connections should NEVER be soldered. The heat generated by
>-> strike will melt your solder and there goes the connection. ONLY use
>-> mechical connections in ground systems!
>
>Come on now!  A good silver soldered connection, if done correctly
>is a darn good, low resistance connection.  The copper would have
>to glow red before that solder would let go. I would guess brazing
>is about the best connection as it would blend the metals better
>than just about anything.
>Most companies in the business of grounding are cad welding the
>connections and staying completely away from any mechanical connections
>what-so-ever.
>Anyway, if one were to take a direct strike, a 1/4" copper wire is
>going to be destroyed in microseconds no matter what type of connection
>is on it.
>All we can do is minimize the effects of a direct hit.  If you are
>grounding for lightning protection, you are messing with mother nature
>and a 2"thick ground buss might not be big enough.
>
>Jim Wooddell
>WA6OFT
>
>RACEBBS - QWK Internet Gateway - 520.669.9225
>

This subject is certainly open to hysteria. Lightning is not that
energetic. Amps may range from 5k to 30k amps, typically 10k but the
duration is a few microseconds  to a few dozen microseconds, possibly
repeated a few times. Calculate the ohmic heat then consider the duration
(actual energy). Good connections are obviously mandatory.

GE and others who design and install commercial microwave and repeater
sites publish good guidebooks on how to render sites lightning proof.

One of the big secrets is to have everything "rise and fall" together
voltage wise, avoiding voltage DIFFERENCES between equipments. Ground the
tower, then ground the antenna to the tower. Put inductive loops in the
transmission line etc. etc. etc. Commonalise the tower grouns with
the power ground AT THE GROUND POINT. The best ground (for we rural
dwellers) is a well casing. Avoid lip-service manuals. Well that's two
cents...
--
Steve P... [e-mail]
  45 17'N, 76 09'W. Aim Carefully
  _ _ _ ___   _   _ _ _ ___ ___   ___ _ ___   _   ___ ___ _



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
Distribution: world
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Heights tower - info want
From: [e-mail] (Forrest Gehrke)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vl6ad$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 16:28:00 -0500
Organization: Central Core BBS   201.575.8991
Lines: 16



FZ> I am considering erecting a Heights self-supporting tower and would
FZ> like to hear from anyone who has had any experience with them,
FZ> especially with the fold-over kit...Please email or call me at
FZ> 214-233-2386 (Dallas). Thanks, FZ

If you plan this tower to be unguyed consider very carefully
the worst case wind load of your antenna *and* tower.
Compare that with the tower rating and add at least 50%
safety factor.  Aluminum is subject to fatigue cracking
and it gets plenty to be fatiged about if your location
is noted for gusty winds.

--k2bt
 * RM 1.3 02583 *  Skeptics are seldom deceived.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!warwick!clyde.open.ac.uk!adminmbx
From: "Fraser Robertson (G4BJM)" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help G5MH (?) Minibeam
Date: 3 Aug 1995 08:31:14 GMT
Organization: Open University
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3vq1gi$[e-mail]>
References: <3v8f7c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: adder.open.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi Hans, it's G4MH, not G5!!

They are still available, address as follows:

The Amateur Radio Shop G4MH
2/4 Cross Church Street
Huddersfield
West Yorks
HD1 2PT
England

Tel: [phone]

G4MH's name is Jim Fish.

Good luck/73 Fraser G4BJM




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (jbmitch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF Mobile - RD Grounding Observation
Date: 5 Aug 1995 18:42:52 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech/Blacksburg Electronic Village
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <400e3c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jbmitch.beva.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

Hi Mobileers!
Just some quick observations on a problem and solution (I hope) that came
up during my HF Mobile installation.  My full size Dodge PU experienced
RFI to vehicle electronics and "hot" metal surfaces, especially rig knobs,
after completing what I thought was proper installation of 500 W/Bugcatcher
combo.  Here's what I found...
The antenna was well grounded to chassis through the bumper mount. The
rig/amp were grounded to the cab.  Upon investigation, I found the cab was
mounted to the chassis through humongous rubber doughnut washers (to
improve ride/noise level) which acted as insulators.  RF ground return
path was therefore thru whatever path was available -- linkages, cable
harnesses, you name it.  Addressed problem thru ground strapping underside
of cab to main chassis.  The result is no discernable RFI (so far) and
no RF to mention in the cab.  Also the antenna seems to dip smoother on
the auto swr meter (textbook sine curve either side around 1:1) indicating
hi-er Q.  This points up to me the necessity of good grounding throughout
the vehicle; I plan to strap other points which may not make a good RF
connection, such as the hood, in the near future.
This is just posted FYI, but, although this should be obvious, some may
not have considered it.  The five page Technical Service Bulletin which
Dodge puts out doesn't mention this problem (otherwise excellent TSB).
Buying a new computer for the truck would not be fun!
73, all  - - John


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:30 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: HF Mobile - RD Grounding Observation
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <400e3c$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 14:37:52 GMT
Lines: 66

In article <400e3c$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (jbmitch) writes:
>The antenna was well grounded to chassis through the bumper mount. The
>rig/amp were grounded to the cab.  Upon investigation, I found the cab was
>mounted to the chassis through humongous rubber doughnut washers (to
>improve ride/noise level) which acted as insulators.  RF ground return
>path was therefore thru whatever path was available -- linkages, cable
>harnesses, you name it.  Addressed problem thru ground strapping underside
>of cab to main chassis.  The result is no discernable RFI (so far) and
>no RF to mention in the cab.  Also the antenna seems to dip smoother on
>the auto swr meter (textbook sine curve either side around 1:1) indicating
>hi-er Q.  This points up to me the necessity of good grounding throughout
>the vehicle; I plan to strap other points which may not make a good RF
>connection, such as the hood, in the near future.

Yes!!!! This was a well known technique years ago, but is often overlooked
by today's unibody driving, glass mount using, amateurs. Both my Jeeps
needed *extensive* body bonding work to serve as ground return for my
equipment and groundplane for my antennas. Making sure all body parts
have a good DC and RF bond will virtually eliminate RFI both to and from
the vehicle systems.

Note: Jeeps are particularly notorious for poor electrical bonding
since the parts are painted before assembly. That practice has been
adopted by other manufacturers now for improved corrosion protection,
but it plays hell with good electrical continuity. Any system that
uses the body/chassis for return currents is begging to form a ground
loop across the various impedances at the body/chassis joining points.

Use short heavy straps, and make sure you make good electrical contact
at each end. Bolts with ordinary washers aren't usually sufficient.
Sand paint off joins, or use *aggressive* star washers under the bolts.
I use NoAlOx (or similar) as a dissimilar metal protectant in the
connections, and give the finished bond a shot of cold galvanizing spray
to restore some of the corrosion resistance lost from the removed paint.

If you follow good VHF RF practice, you'll join every seam once at
least every 5 cm along the seam, or you won't really have a good
RF bond. That's overkill for HF, but large panels should have more
than a single RF bond. Hoods and doors are particular problems since
they have to open and close. The hinges should be jumped with flexible
copper strap, the latches should have good bare metal to metal contact,
and if you want to get extreme, you can use continuous finger stock
along the seams, or at least pieces of finger stock every foot or so
along the seam. For hoods, I'd recomend at least a couple inches of
fingerstock at the front corners in addition to jumpering the hinges
at the rear.

Don't forget the internal vehicle grounds either. Make sure the
engine block is well grounded to the frame, and any electrical
common points elsewhere in the vehicle are too, especially under
the dash. Engine accessories, like AC units and alternators,
need to be checked too. If their brackets are well painted, every
time the AC clutch engages you'll have a noise spike, and alternator
whine will be much higher than is tolerable. I even had to sand
paint from the horn mounting bracket to get reliable horn operation.

Don't forget to double check fuel tank grounds to help reduce fuel
pump noise, and ground the exhaust system at *both* ends. It's
normally rubber isolated, and makes a dandy HF radiating element.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.magg.net!news
From: "Terrence R. Redding" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking for Crankup/foldover 50 to 70 tower
Date: 6 Aug 1995 20:08:45 GMT
Organization: M.A.G. Information Services (MAGG.NET)
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4037gd$[e-mail]>
References: <3vj2gh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpb-105.magg.net
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:56626 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12625

I am looking for a crankup tower, 50 to 70 feet.  If you know of a used one for
sale please call me at 407 659-6062 (night) and 407 835-4446 (day).
Thanks, 73 Terry




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!i-2000.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: looking for plans: CB base antenna
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 1995 21:51:52 GMT
Organization: I-2000 Inc. - Internet Services
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <40330m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: riverhead1.access1.dh.i-2000.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

My young nephew got an old 23 channel CB and power supply at a yard sale.  He is
looking for an antenna but his funds are limited.  Does anyone have, or know
where I can get plans for a simple ground plane?  Construction from copper pipe
or tensioned wire is what I am thinking of.  I think he would enjoy making the
antenna more than saving to buy one.  Any suggestions appreciated.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.funet.fi!mordred.cc.jyu.fi!kajami
From: [e-mail] (Jani 'Dii' Kanala)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking to buy TS-850SAT
Date: 5 Aug 1995 02:06:39 GMT
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3vujnf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tarzan.math.jyu.fi
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I'm looking to buy Kenwood TS-850SAT... If anyone is selling this
let me know fast since I'll be going back to Finland in 5 days..
Thanks in advance.

73...OH6LJN

PS. my email is in Finland, but I'm currently staying in Indiana.
--

regards,
  Jani



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.funet.fi!mordred.cc.jyu.fi!kajami
From: [e-mail] (Jani 'Dii' Kanala)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking to buy TS-850SAT
Date: 5 Aug 1995 02:09:05 GMT
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <3vujs1$[e-mail]>
References: <3vujnf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tarzan.math.jyu.fi
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Sorry everyone, I posted this to wrong newsgroup...

--

regards,
  Jani



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:33 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!fonorola!news.compulink.com!abyss!lethe!gts!westonia!ppp-4
From: [e-mail] (Joseph Cooper)
Subject: Loop Receiving Antenna for 80/160
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: ppp-4.ppp.westonia.com
Organization: Westonia
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 23:47:02 GMT
Lines: 16

Would anyone have some information (particularly the proper formula) for loop
antenna's for 80/160m (or for BC and VLF receiving for that matter),

I've read various books, such as the ARRL material, as well as others, but
they seem to be making a number of assumptions about the readers background
knowledge that does not help.

What I would like to be able to do is order a set of Ferrite rods from Amidon,
and be able to work out the proper number of turns for a particular wire size,
and then optimize this with the proper tunable capacitor.

Any suggestions (old magazine articles in particular if they are available).

Thanks and 73
Joe
VE3FMQ


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!newsfeed.tip.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Receiving Antenna for 80/160
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 1995 21:52:03 GMT
Organization: Sydsvenska Dagbladet, Malmo, Sweden
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <403do3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: a3119.dial.tip.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Joseph Cooper) wrote:

>I've read various books, such as the ARRL material, as well as others, but
>they seem to be making a number of assumptions about the readers background
>knowledge that does not help.

>What I would like to be able to do is order a set of Ferrite rods from Amidon,
>and be able to work out the proper number of turns for a particular wire size,
>and then optimize this with the proper tunable capacitor.

<I'll second that. Having read lots of antenna stuff recently in order
to find an easy, exact and _understandable_ description on how to make
one to those always needed 4:1 (or is it 1:4?) baluns I find myself
still way out in the haze.
Why can't those antenna gurus write a simple
Do-it-exactly-like-this-1-2-3-4....-and-you-can't-go-wrong? Several of
us just wants to play with different, perfect antennas for reception,
without giving a darn about SWR, and not even having any test gear to
check all this. We could always put up one to those longwires and see
what happens. But it would be more fun to compares such a wire with a
T2FD, Delta loop, Windom, W8JK, beverage, trap dipoles... if only I
could get an understandable description (and I'm not considering
myself too stupid).
Well, one of these days I'll suppose I'll manage to make one of those
baluns. Probably it'll work too, if not as intended.
Regards,
Hermod Pedersen
Malmo, Sweden




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!news1.opennet.net.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Brent Mason)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Marine Antenna
Date: 6 Aug 1995 08:20:51 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <401u13$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: per-du2-2.opennet.net.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2

I am interested in building a antenna for my Marine Radio VHF

        Australian. On the frequency 157Mhz

It is for a Home base setup and size and space are not a problem.

A 5/8 ground plane perhaps?

Any advise and ideas would be appreciated.

ps: I need real measurements

                        Regards Brent
                        Western Australia.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!news3.near.net!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!onyx!troy
From: [e-mail] (Troy Majors)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 7 Aug 1995 15:26:23 GMT
Organization: SouthWind Internet Access, Inc.
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <405bav$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: onyx.southwind.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]



--



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!news3.near.net!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!onyx!troy
From: [e-mail] (Troy Majors)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 7 Aug 1995 15:29:18 GMT
Organization: SouthWind Internet Access, Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <405bge$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: onyx.southwind.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Still looking for a copy of the book by Walt Maxwell
REFLECTIONS: TRANSMISSION LINES AND ANTENNAS.

ARRL is sold out.  Anyone have an extra copy they
want to sell?

73 Troy WI0R
[e-mail]


--



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MJF-941B Antenna Matching Unit - Help
Date: 5 Aug 1995 20:26:47 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <400k67$[e-mail]>
References: <3vu5gs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <3vu5gs$[e-mail]>, Bryan Weaver <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Interestingly enough, when I connect to the balanced line connectors, the
>receive sigs are very weak, regardless of the inductance & cap's setting on
>the MJF. But it seems to work fine when I use any of the coax inputs.

Hi Bryan, the baluns in any of the 300w MFJ tuners are designed to work
only into close to resistive loads, which yours is not. IMO, the single
component you can add to your system to get it to work is a 4:1 balun
like the Amidon HBHT200 rated at "10kw". The tiny balun in your MFJ-
941 is probably saturating and could even be damaged. There's a possible
jumper on the back from "balanced line" to "wire" that should be removed
if it exists. Even with a huskier balun, you may need to vary the length
of the ladder-line (doesn't change SWR but does change impedance). It
actually does change the "measured" SWR on the tuner meter.

The ideal solution would be some sort of balanced tuner but I don't
know of any reasonably priced commercially available units. I personally
use a 300w MFJ with the Amidon HBHT200 balun and it works very well.

73 and good luck, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!mkeitz
From: [e-mail] (Mike Keitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MJF-941B Antenna Matching Unit - Help
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 95 21:29:07 GMT
Organization: TSE Systems
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <400nrp$[e-mail]>
References: <3vu5gs$[e-mail]> <400k67$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mkeitz.beve.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <400k67$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>In article <3vu5gs$[e-mail]>, Bryan Weaver <[e-mail]>
wrote:
>
>>Interestingly enough, when I connect to the balanced line connectors, the
>>receive sigs are very weak, regardless of the inductance & cap's setting
on
>>the MJF. But it seems to work fine when I use any of the coax inputs.
>
>Hi Bryan, the baluns in any of the 300w MFJ tuners are designed to work
>only into close to resistive loads, which yours is not. IMO, the single
>component you can add to your system to get it to work is a 4:1 balun
>like the Amidon HBHT200 rated at "10kw". The tiny balun in your MFJ-
>941 is probably saturating and could even be damaged. There's a possible
>jumper on the back from "balanced line" to "wire" that should be removed
>if it exists.

No, the jumper probably needs to be there, and not having it is the cause
of the problem you are having.  On the MFJ-949D anyway (the 941 may be
built differently, and I could be off-base about it), when you turn the
selector to "Bal. Line / Wire," the output of the tuner is connected only
to the "Wire" post on the back.  Therefore if you don't have the jumper in
place, nothing is going to get to your balanced feedline other than what
couples through the air inbetween the posts.

The balun is simply a rather wimpy center-tapped bifilar wound toroid
autotransformer with the ends of the transformer connected to the two
"Balanced Line" posts and the center tap to ground.  This is the
classic "4:1 Balun" shown in the ARRL Handbook.  There is no other input to
it, the balun is connected only to the two posts and ground.  So you need
to make the connection externally, shown with a dotted line on the back
panel, if you intend to use a balanced line.

I would tend to agree with Cecil that a more optimum installation for
transmitting more than QRP levels involves an external balun with more
capacity.  But the stock one should work OK for receiving (saturation not a
problem).  The fact that adjusting the tuner does nothing at all indicates
that you are probably working with almost no coupling to the antenna, just
leakage into the radio and wiring (almost as if there were no antenna at
all).  You may want to open your unit up and look at the balun to see if it
is indeed connected as I described, and that it isn't obviously burned out.

 Even with a huskier balun, you may need to vary the length
>of the ladder-line (doesn't change SWR but does change impedance). It
>actually does change the "measured" SWR on the tuner meter.
>
The second sentence sounds like folklore to me.  It is important to
remember that the SWR meter in the tuner is located before the tuning
network, not after it.  So you can always adjust the tuner to vary the
impedance seen by the transmitter and the SWR meter to 50 ohms (low SWR),
regardless of what is connected to the antenna port (within reason of
course).  That's why you use a tuner in the first place, right?  But with
an imperfect balun, some antenna/feedline impedances will work better than
others, and you may get less loss in the balun and tuner components (thus
more power at the antenna feedpoint) if the impedance at the tuner end of
the feedline ends up reasonably near what the tuner is built for.  Changing
the length of the feedline could do that, but I'm not sure if watching the
measured SWR before the tuner will give any insight into what is best.
Adjusting the impedance by changing the length of the line is of course
frequency-dependent, so it may not be optimum on more than one band.

-Mike KD4QDM


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.ip.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MJF-941B Antenna Matching Unit - Help
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 13:57:41 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 29

-> From: [e-mail] (Bryan Weaver)
-> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
->
-> heart grow fonder?). I've misplaced the instruction for my MJF-941B a
-> matching unit. I wonder if anyone here would care to post or email me
-> proper technique of matching. (I'm using a 'G5RV' ant up about 50', f
-> 400 ohm ladder line.) After I tume up the rig into a dummy load and s
-> over to my antenna, I can't seem to get the MJF unit to give me a mat
->
-> Interestingly enough, when I connect to the balanced line connectors,
-> receive sigs are very weak, regardless of the inductance & cap's sett
-> the MJF. But it seems to work fine when I use any of the coax inputs.
->
-> Thanks for any help!
->
-> Bryan, VE3TRJ
I have not used my 941E with wire line, however I find it easy to tune
by setting my rig to am or fm and clicking the inductor selector for
the highest s-meter reading, and then adjust the transmitter and antenna
knobs for a peak reading, then I transmit and fine tune the antenna and
transmitter knobs.
If your antenna is way out of wack, or you have something wrong, it
wont work and the 941's burn up really fast.
If your signals are way down, switch to by-pass and if they are still
down, you have antenna problems.
Jim
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.ip.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MJF-941B Antenna Matching Unit - Help
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 13:57:41 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 29

-> From: [e-mail] (Bryan Weaver)
-> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
->
-> heart grow fonder?). I've misplaced the instruction for my MJF-941B a
-> matching unit. I wonder if anyone here would care to post or email me
-> proper technique of matching. (I'm using a 'G5RV' ant up about 50', f
-> 400 ohm ladder line.) After I tume up the rig into a dummy load and s
-> over to my antenna, I can't seem to get the MJF unit to give me a mat
->
-> Interestingly enough, when I connect to the balanced line connectors,
-> receive sigs are very weak, regardless of the inductance & cap's sett
-> the MJF. But it seems to work fine when I use any of the coax inputs.
->
-> Thanks for any help!
->
-> Bryan, VE3TRJ
I have not used my 941E with wire line, however I find it easy to tune
by setting my rig to am or fm and clicking the inductor selector for
the highest s-meter reading, and then adjust the transmitter and antenna
knobs for a peak reading, then I transmit and fine tune the antenna and
transmitter knobs.
If your antenna is way out of wack, or you have something wrong, it
wont work and the 941's burn up really fast.
If your signals are way down, switch to by-pass and if they are still
down, you have antenna problems.
Jim
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MJF-941B Antenna Matching Unit - Help
Date: 6 Aug 1995 00:07:18 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 35
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40113m$[e-mail]>
References: <3vu5gs$[e-mail]> <400k67$[e-mail]> <400nrp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <400nrp$[e-mail]>, Mike Keitz <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <400k67$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

>>There's a possible jumper on the back from "balanced line" to "wire"
>>that should be removed if it exists.

>No, the jumper probably needs to be there, and not having it is the cause
>of the problem you are having.

I probably wasn't clear. If he chooses to go with an external balun, as
I recommended, then he needs to remove the jumper.

> Even with a huskier balun, you may need to vary the length
>>of the ladder-line (doesn't change SWR but does change impedance). It
>>actually does change the "measured" SWR on the tuner meter.

>The second sentence sounds like folklore to me.

I probably wasn't clear again. Assuming the tuner goes through 50 ohm
coax to the external balun and then into the ladder-line, he can get
some relative idea about what SWR the tuner is seeing by switching
to "coax direct" and looking at the SWR meter. With the tuner reactive
components thus switched out of the circuit, he can vary the SWR the
tuner is seeing by varying the length of the ladder-line. It's not
folklore. That's exactly the way I trim my ladder-line to some impedance
that the tuner can handle. I have found by trial and error that if my
tuner sees an SWR of less than 8:1 in the "coax direct" position it
will usually match whatever it is seeing.

The SWR on the ladder-line does not change when the length is trimmed.
The impedance the tuner sees does change when the length is trimmed and
the SWR reported by the 50 ohm SWR meter does change when the length
is trimmed... scout's honor.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Steve6920)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Scanner discone/RG-8 cable question
Date: 6 Aug 1995 20:53:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <403o68$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve6920)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Steve,
  Your are losing most of your signals in the coax between the antenna and
the scanner.  Here are the figures (I used the table found in the Radio
Shack catalog for reference):
                            100Mhz          400Mhz
 RG-58                    3.375db        7.5db
 RG-8                      1.425db         3.075db

These figures are for your 75 foot run.  A rule of thumb is you lose half
your signal for every 3 db of loss.  At 100Mhz you will only have about
half the signal strength at the receiver that you had at the output of
your antenna.  At 400MHz, you will only have about 1/4th the signal left
by the time it reaches your scanner.  Antenna height is important, but you
have to get the signals to the receiver as well.  I would change your
cable first and see what you get.  You could use a 100 feet of RG-8 and
then would have additional cable if you wanted to raise the antenna.  Also
please note the cable loss increases significantly as the frequency goes
up, so if you are listening to trunking frequencies (800MHz) you will have
hardly any signal at all with the RG-58.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cocoa.brown.edu!tonto-slip13.cis.brown.edu!user
From: ap201002 (Steven Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Scanner discone/RG-8 cable question
Date: 6 Aug 1995 23:40:42 GMT
Organization: Brown University -- Providence, Rhode Island  USA
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tonto-slip13.cis.brown.edu

I am currently re-doing by scanner base set-up I have a bearcat 350A and a
Radio Shack pro-26 hooked up to a discone antenna. The antenna is seven
feet off my roof in a residential area, I have 75 feet of RG-58 cable
connecting it to my scanners. What is my biggest problem as far as signal
loss is it the cable or the height of my antenna? Would RG-8 cable make a
difference here? Any suggestions you could give would be a greatly
appreciated.

Steve Thompson


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news3.insinc.net!news.globalx.net!usenet
From: "Steve P." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tubes
Date: 5 Aug 1995 16:51:18 GMT
Organization: HOME CONTROLS & SYSTEMS
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <4007i6$[e-mail]>
References: <3vr825$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cn.globalx.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (jim pestell) wrote:
>Any one have a good sorce or tubes?
>I need a 6bv8 as will as others for my old tube rigs
>

Lots o' LUCK !!! I used mine for target practice with the kids about 15
years ago.
--
Steve P... [e-mail]
  45 17'N, 76 09'W. Aim Carefully
  ...* . ...** *.* . **.




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uop!pacbell.com!amdahl.com!juts.ccc.amdahl.com!Amdahl
From: [e-mail] (Bill.Nadzam)
Subject: Re: Tubes
Message-ID: <400mst$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (UTS Tech Support)
Organization: spg.amdahl.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <3vr825$[e-mail]> <4007i6$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 1995 21:13:01 GMT
Lines: 11

I have been getting my tubes from "QUEST Electronics"
they list 6BV8 for 4.85 New and used for 3.71...
Same Day shipping on most orders. check them out.
303-274-7545


------------------------------------------------
Name: Bill.Nadzam
E-mail: [e-mail] (Bill.Nadzam)
------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 07 15:03:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!info.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ratatosk.yggdrasil.com!nntp-sc.barrnet.net!news.fujitsu.com!amdahl.com!amd!netcomsv!uucp3.netcom.com!tksbbs!stephen.king
From: [e-mail] (STEPHEN KING)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: tubes
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 95 11:00:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Organization: The Kandy Shack BBS/Garden Grove, CA/[phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (STEPHEN KING)
References: <3vr82a$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.22
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.20
Lines: 12

JN>I have older rigs and need tubes , has any one got a good sorce??

Here's the address of a vendor out here in CA.

        JIMMIE L. HAWKINS
        11777 Foothill Blvd. #A-3
        Lakeview Terrace, CA 91342
        [phone]
        (818 896-2919 FAX

---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (ESTUDIANTES DE COMUNICACIONES)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 8 Aug 95 04:36:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Subscribe



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!prodigy.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Bersak)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: *Stealth Operating*
Date: 9 Aug 1995 01:27:03 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4092t7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: inugap4.news.prodigy.com
X-Newsreader: Version 1.2

My family was recently forced to relocate.  we moved into a very nice
house that my mother designed and built.  She is now denying me access to
the roof and the back yard as far as antennas go.  Does anyone have any
tips as to how to operate high power DX stealthily without frying myself??
?????


                                   KA1ZUF



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:17 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.encore.com!psoper
From: [e-mail] (Pete Soper)
Subject: 1/4 wave match questions
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 21:06:13 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: sysgem1.encore.com
Lines: 42

I've made a custom two element diamond loop with elements cut for a
14.2mhz target frequency and a 1/4 wave piece of RG11 as a matching
section.  The velocity factor of the (foam) RG11 was in doubt, so I
assumed the 80% value rather than 78%, erring on the side of a longer
piece that could be trimmed. The loop is close to exactly square, fed
from the bottom corner which is 25-30 feet above the ground, the
top corner being 50-55 feet up. (It will eventually be 10 feet higher)
After the RG11 is 120 feet of RG8X feedline. Finally, this antenna has
four booms at the corners rather than a center boom and spreaders, in
case that might have any bearing on anything.

The SWR comes out to 1.4 at 14.176mhz dipping down to 1.15 at 14.347mhz.
That is, the "center" is 150khz or more above my target.

My question is whether this indicates the antenna driven element is simply
too short, the 1/4 wave section is too long (or short!) or some other
tuning parameter needs adjustment next. I have no instruments except
the SWR meter of the tuner. If it wasn't for the matching section I'd add
1% to the driven element length as the next step before focusing on the
front to back ratio. But I'm uncertain how the matching transformer
being too long or short interacts with the SWR across frequency.

Also, I'm considering eventually replacing the RG11 and most of the RG8X
with 75 ohm twin lead, using an odd number of quarter wavelengths to a point
near the house, then finishing off with regular coax. So the matching section
would also be the majority of the feed to the station.

Am I likely to get this matched properly over the course of seven quarter wave
lengths, or might small differences in velocity factor gang up on me and
present a problem? Is the length non-critical or should I borrow an instrument
to have any chance of getting the length correct? Finally I wonder if moisture
on the twinlead will change the velocity factor, presumably corrupting the
match and make this whole idea a very bad one?

Thanks very much in advance for any light you can shed on this subject.
I hope to have this little popgun tuned and pointed at Europe in time
for the WAE.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Soper KS4XG  ([e-mail]) 919 481 3730/voice 919 481 3868/FAX
Encore Computer Corp    901 Kildaire Farm Rd       Cary, NC 27511     USA
                         "5 months a Ham"


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:18 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!hydra.carleton.ca!im
From: [e-mail] (Ian McEachern VE3PFH)
Subject: Re: 5/8 wave vs. J-pole
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: hydra.carleton.ca
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: Carleton University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:22:30 GMT
Lines: 15

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: intended receiving target rather than warming birds. Remember, the horizon
: curves *down* below your line of sight, so it is rare to need antenna
: gain at an elevation above the horizon for terrestrial VHF operation.

Unless you live in the mountains in the west of course:-)

im

--
Ian A. McEachern, VE3PFH             | Try our new www server:
Packet Working Group, Ottawa A.R.C.  | http://hydra.carleton.ca/
[e-mail]                 | Interesting stuff about packet
http://hydra.carleton.ca/~im/im.html | radio & our 56kbps radio LAN



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 wave vs. J-pole
Date: 10 Aug 1995 08:22:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40ctmn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

And remember a 5/8 wave depends on a large (several wavelength) good
conducting ground to acheive it's gain. So a 5/8 stuck up in the air or
over a small groundplane does not acheive anywhere near it's theoretical
gain, and may even be worse than a 1/2 wave. 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Eric Hoppe <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: An SWR/RF Power Meter
Date: 10 Aug 1995 00:53:52 GMT
Organization: Progressive Concepts
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <40blb0$et2$[e-mail]>
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12711 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8852 alt.radio.pirate:9558

We have the Diamond Antenna Model SX-200 RF power Meters in stock
for only $135 plus $6 shipping. These meters show forward and
reflected power and SWR. Switchable full scale readings of 5, 20,
and 200 watts. 30 day money back offer, and full one year warranty.
Visa and Master Card accepted. Call Today!

--
Progressive Concepts [phone] Fax:[phone]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:20 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antenna and lighteni
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <403vho$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 17:16:32 GMT
Lines: 32

In article <403vho$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (john 015) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary
>Coffman) said:
>
>>The charge that generates streamers comes *from* the
>>Earth (calling Earth zero volts is just a measuremental convention,
>>and says nothing about the charges present). So the better conductors
>>carry it to the pointed rods better than if it had to make its way up
>>the unknown impedance of the building structure. And the pointed rods
>>form streamers at a lower potential than blunt structures.
>
>According to the books I have read (dated), no real difference
>has been *observed* between pointed and blunt lightning rods.
>I'd be interested in data showing that there is a difference.
>Anyone have a reference ?

Even Ben Franklin, the inventor of the lightning rod, noticed that
a sharp rod broke into corona (streamer formation) earlier than a
blunt rod. That's also why mobile antennas have a "anti-corona ball"
on the end rather than a sharp point. It's not just because you
could put someone's eye out with it. :-)

For academic references, try _Atmospheric Electricity_ by John
Chalmers, or _Lightning_, Vol 1, _The Physics of Lightning_ edited
by R. H. Golde, or _The Lightning Discharge_ by Martin Uman.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!ee.und.ac.za!wabe.csir.co.za!news.pix.za!net-17
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Balun
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 95 05:11:30 GMT
Organization: PiX - Proxima information X-change
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <4072m2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net-17.pix.za
To: Everyone
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

This is a message on behalf of a friend of mine. please reply
to

[e-mail]

Regards
Paul


> Cut here <

Could anyone please help with a diagram of how to wind a 9:1
or a 10:1 balun for a HF antenna.

I would like to cover the frequencies 3 to 30mhz.


Which emporium sells the ferrite rings for the above

Your assistance is appreciated.

Regards
Ken Lawrence (ZR6KJL)

> Cut here <



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!news.jf.intel.com!ornews.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Balun
Date: 8 Aug 1995 19:20:19 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 25
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <408ddj$[e-mail]>
References: <4072m2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <4072m2$[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Could anyone please help with a diagram of how to wind a 9:1
>or a 10:1 balun for a HF antenna.

I tried the email address given and it bounced. My question was:

Is this for a transmitting antenna? Is this for a high SWR application?
If so, 450/9=50 ohms may not apply since the impedance may never be 450
ohms.

If this is for a non-resonant transmitting antenna, then a 4:1 or 1:1
balun may be as good, better, or worse than a 9:1 depending on the
impedance seen by the balun. Let's say the SWR is 10:1 and the impedance
the balun sees is 4.5+j0. A 9:1 balun would make a low impedance problem
even worse by transforming it to 0.5+j0 ohms.

The balun does not transform the characteristic impedance of the
transmission line unless the SWR=1:1. If the SWR is not close to
1:1 then the balun attempts to transform whatever impedance it sees
which is not the characteristic impedance of the transmission line.
At the resistive points it would be 450*SWR or 450/SWR for 450 ohm
ladder-line.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!sum-bk
From: [e-mail] (Christopher Jou)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Beginner Antenna
Date: 10 Aug 1995 03:12:10 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <40btea$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Hello, my names Chris, and I'm just beginning to open the book on Radios and
Antennas.  My interest in radios has just begun, I have my commercial
radio license, and I'm into CB's.  Shortly, after I study, I wanna get my
two meter ticket, and build from there.  I have a FM10a ramsey FM stereo
transmitter.  It broadcasts on 88-108mhz FM.   I was wondering how I could
build a J-pole antenna.  Since I'm a novice at this,  it may take more than
a little instruction and plain english.  If anybody is willing to help,
please e-mail me at [e-mail] or [e-mail].
Thank You! ttyl =)
                        Christopher jou



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.uwa.edu.au!DIALix!melbourne.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Martin Deeley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Butternut help wanted
Date: 9 Aug 1995 11:56:01 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Melbourne, Australia.
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4094jh$7bf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

Can anyone help with construction details of a Butternut HF5B type antenna.
Thanks in advance for replies by email.
73 de G0OQC



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!ames!olivea!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Butternut help wanted
Date: 10 Aug 1995 02:04:36 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <40bpfk$[e-mail]>
References: <4094jh$7bf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs4-16.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi:

I put one togeather for Field Day and it was no problem (really).

I would be glad to help if you need a manual, or a specific answer, just
let me know.

73

Joe - KW1K

P.S. I'm planning on selling the antenna (used for 48 hours) since I've
now got a set of phased verticals.

=======================================================================

[e-mail] (Martin Deeley) wrote:
>Can anyone help with construction details of a Butternut HF5B type antenna.
>Thanks in advance for replies by email.
>73 de G0OQC
>




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:25 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!rbloom
From: [e-mail] (Ron Bloom)
Subject: Butternut HF6V-X:  Need Guys?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:46:39 GMT
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]


Can't tell from instructions if this antenna is meant to withstand
winds or not.  The mounting section is isolated from the antenna
by a fiberglass connecting section:  looks like it can't take
as much bending as the rest of the aluminum...


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.nic.surfnet.nl!tuegate.tue.nl!turtle.stack.urc.tue.nl!esrac
From: [e-mail] (ESRAC)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Butternut HF6V-X:  Need Guys?
Date: 10 Aug 1995 10:39:12 GMT
Organization: Student Association Stack, Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <40cnkg$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: turtle.stack.urc.tue.nl
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Ron Bloom ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Can't tell from instructions if this antenna is meant to withstand
> winds or not.  The mounting section is isolated from the antenna
> by a fiberglass connecting section:  looks like it can't take
> as much bending as the rest of the aluminum...

Well Ron, I have the HF6VX with the extension kit for 12 and 17m. It is
about 30 feet high on a pole along the house. I have it guyed at ONE THIRD
from the bottom of the antenna. It's been up that pole for 4 years now.

I've talked to people that had it on the ground without guys. The anten-
na broke several times at the fiberglass section...

73 de Aurelio     [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:26 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!omen!caf
From: [e-mail] (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX)
Subject: Re: Butternut HF6V-X:  Need Guys?
Organization: Omen Technology INC
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 11:06:23 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 18

In article <[e-mail]>, Ron Bloom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Can't tell from instructions if this antenna is meant to withstand
>winds or not.  The mounting section is isolated from the antenna
>by a fiberglass connecting section:  looks like it can't take
>as much bending as the rest of the aluminum...

I've had a 6v for some years with no problems in the antenna,
except it doesn't work when iced up.  It does bend in the wind.

It is on its second matching cable (a length of 75 Ohm coax).
Water got into the first cable.

--
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX    [e-mail]        http://www.omen.com
    Omen Technology Inc      "The High Reliability Software"
Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, GSZ and DSZ
TeleGodzilla BBS: 503-621-3746  FTP: ftp.cs.pdx.edu pub/zmodem


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news.halcyon.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary P. Fiber)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 8 Aug 1995 03:31:50 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <406lr6$[e-mail]>
References: <3vm10l$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vtet3$[e-mail]> <3vtt94$[e-mail]> <401quf$55 <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blv-pm2-ip20.halcyon.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84492 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28910 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12658

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Monninger) says:
>
>In article <401quf$[e-mail]> Harold Lines <[e-mail]> writes:
>> ...
>>Of course, there's no way of telling how the CCRs will be enforced when
>>you buy your house, but you might just luck into a situation like mine.
>>Try putting up a couple of antennas and see if anyone says something.
>>You might just be pleasantly surprised.
>
>I live across town from Harold (in Gilbert, AZ) and I have a similar
>situation. There are CC&R's prohibiting the normal things but there was no
>enforcement written into them, no board or homeowner's association...only a
>civil suit and the loser pays all costs. There were several TV antennas in the
>neighborhood already so I put up my vertical on the roof. No one said
>anything.  I now have three antennas up and a 8.5 ft TVRO dish. No one has
>said anything in 6 years so I figure I'm safe. At one time the mayor lived
>across the street, the town manager lived next door, and a couple town
>councilmen lived in the neighborhood, too.
>
>No one pays any attention to the CC&R's any more and, amazingly enough, the
>neighborhood has not gone to hell in a handbasket. Property values have
>steadily risen (could it be the LACK of CC&R enforcement? Perish the thought!)
>and houses put on the market sell faster than average. I don't know how the
>neighbors would feel about a nice tower & beam, but I don't have the money or
>real desire to have one anyway.
>
>On the other hand, most of the newer ticky-tacky developments in the area have
>the standard bull(chicken-?)shit CC&R's and gestapo HA's to go with them. I
>guess we just lucked out.
>
>73...    Mark   AA7TA
All kidding aside, if you do not get the relief you are looking for.  Check into
livestock restrictions.  Nothing like a couple smelly Hogs grazing in your yard
to bring the neighbors to their senses :)  It has worked in many places before.
Best time is summertime when the winds of summer blow the right direction.

Gary


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:29 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!stevew
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <[e-mail]> <3vc51n$[e-mail]> <3vci2j$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <405pjf$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 14:22:45 GMT
Lines: 52
Sender: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84503 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28912 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12663

Curt Phillips ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson) wrote:
: >Curtis Wheeler ([e-mail]) wrote:
: >: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson) wrote:
: >Notice
: >how absolute I made that statement.  I'd love to be proved wrong on
: >this, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that you can't find a
: >new house developement anywhere in the country that doesn't prohibit
: >external towers/antennas in some fashion.

:   We still have developments here in central N.C. that don't have
: restrictions against antennas.  You have to get away from the Raleigh/
: Research Triangle area, but you can still be within commuting distance.


How many donuts would you like bearing in mind that I have to packetize
them before I send them to you via the net.. ;-)

:   As an ME, that's one of the reasons I took a real estate course
: (only $15 at the local community college) before I bought my house
: 12 years ago.  Actually, I took the course 4 years before I bought
: my house, and as I bought and sold some land prior to buying the
: house, it paid for the time and effort overwhelmingly in the real
: estate fees I saved by handling some of the sales myself.

A good idea!  But this is to my point also(I don't really think you
were arguing with me ;-)  in that most of us are ignorant.  A class
on the subject is a pretty good remedy for the situation!

I'm fortunate in having been exposed to this subject pretty
thoroughly when growing up.  My dad is a real estate appraiser
and I helped him on weekends to make my spending money.  My
grandfather was an agent also, and both of them did general
contracting as well at one time or another.  So I've been around
the building/land business as an observer for awhile.  As you'd
imagine, there were a lot of calls to Dad when I made the offer
on my first house!

:   When I made the offer for the house, it was contingent upon their
: being "no restrictions on outside antennas".  I've been a ham since
: I was 13 years old, and a car/home without an antenna is unthinkable!
: Fortunately, this development was out in the boonies (but not so much,
: nowadays) and there was no restrictions on antennas.  There WERE
: quite a few other restrictions though, and I'm glad I knew about them
: before purchasing the house.
:   I definitely recommend taking a real estate course if you can.

Good idea!

: Curt Phillips KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)      |"I don't want to gain immortality

Steve KA6S


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!gopher.cs.uofs.edu!triangle.cs.uofs.edu!bill
From: [e-mail] (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 9 Aug 1995 12:06:18 GMT
Organization: Department of Computing Sciences
Lines: 80
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40a8bq$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vm785$[e-mail]> <3vt068$[e-mail]> <405q2b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: triangle.cs.uofs.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84572 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28915 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12688

In article <405q2b$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Hank Oredson) writes:
|>
|> And just how do towers and antennas affect adjoining property values?
|> The answer is "They do not."

I'll bet you also think having a house next door that has 4 foot high weeds
and junked cars on the front lawn won't effect your chances of selling your
house too.  Like it or not, some people (non-hams) see towers and antennae
exactly the same way.  And as long as hams make up a totally non-significant
percentage of the population, this will continue to be the case.

|>
|> Several people have already posted the results from the studies
|> which show this.

My wife sells houses for a living.  I have heard a lot of reasons why people
decide not to buy a house.  Most of them strike me as absurd, but we are talking
aesthetics here, and everyones taste is different.  CC&Rs against towers and
antennae would not exist unless someone was concerned enough about it to go to
the trouble of drafting them.  If they didn't think it would increase their ability
to sell property, do you really think developers would bother??  Large numbers of
people must agree with them, or it would become a simple matter of getting your
neightbors to agree to remove them.  It isn't, so what does that tell you??

|>
|> The issue is not one of property values, but one of "We can control
|> you, and if you do not think so, just try and put up an antenna
|> here.  We don't like them, and so we will not allow them."

Nobody is controlling the ham. He can choose to live somewhere else.  There
is no guaranteed right to have a 200 foot tower in a residential neighborhood.

|>
|> I don't happen to like lots of things my neighbors do (like
|> painting their houses in pastel colors, for example, or having
|> tiny little manicured lawns instead of natural habitat).

Then you should have looked for a place to live that had CC&Rs against those
things.  I have seen CC&R's that controlled the color you could paint your
house.  That too is an aesthetic that can adversely effect your abilty to
sell your house at a later date.  But fewer people care about it, so CC&Rs
concerning house color are much less common.

|>
|> But I do not attempt to CONTROL what they do, but rather attempt
|> to INFLUENCE how they do these things.
|>
|> In most of the Western US, if you want a tower, you cannot live in:
|> a city; a housing development; a neighborhood; a large town.
|>
|> You have little or no control over the use of the property you own;
|> what you can do, how you do it, and when you can do it has been
|> decided for you.  If you don't like it, you CANNOT "buy some other
|> house" because they don't exist.

But you agreed to that restriction before you bought the house.  End of story.
No one came in and told you after the fact that they were going to start
restricting your activities.  You agreed to the restriction when you signed the
contract for the house.  The best and only practical suggestion to come out of
any of this is the suggestion that you add a clause to the contract concerning
making all CC&Rs known and that if antennae are prohibited, the contract becomes
void.  The only other thing to do is if you really want to live in a particular
area and it prohibits antennae, you could go from house to house and see if your
prospective neighbors are willing to agree to the removal of that particular CC&R,
before you buy the house.  Of course, I highly suspect you will find that there
are a lot more people who find towers and antennae unsightly than what you think.

And in the end, it comes down to what I said above.  Ham's are a statistically
insignificant number in the population.  And this is after all, supposed to be
a democracy, with majority rule.

All the best.

bill   KB3YV

--
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
[e-mail]         |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!stevew
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wilson)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vm785$[e-mail]> <3vt068$[e-mail]> <405q2b$[e-mail]> <40a8bq$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 15:33:17 GMT
Lines: 143
Sender: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84584 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28919 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12693

Bill Gunshannon ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I'll bet you also think having a house next door that has 4 foot high weeds
: and junked cars on the front lawn won't effect your chances of selling your
: house too.  Like it or not, some people (non-hams) see towers and antennae
: exactly the same way.  And as long as hams make up a totally non-significant
: percentage of the population, this will continue to be the case.


Well, first Bill, you are ignoring what the "scientific" studies
say, and second you are ignoring a fundamental piece of human
behavior.  People don't look up, they look at eye level or
lower typically.

I have a quick existance proof of this.  When I was first courting
my XYL, I took her over to my house the first time, and I'd warned
her about the HF antenna I had in the middle of the roof.  The house
is your typical 1960's ranch style house in the burbs.  The antenna
is about 20 feet above the roof mounted smack dab in the center of same.

Well, to make a long story short.  We visited my house for the first
time, then after we'd pulled away, and were down the street aways
I asked what she thought of the antenna... "Oh darn, I forgot to  look!"
She hadn't noticed it EVEN THOUGH SHE KNEW ABOUT IT and was expecting
to see some horrible monstrosity.  It just didn't enter her field
of vision while we walked up to the house front door, or left.
: |>
: |> Several people have already posted the results from the studies
: |> which show this.

: My wife sells houses for a living.  I have heard a lot of reasons why people
: decide not to buy a house. Most of them strike me as absurd,but we are talkin
: aesthetics here, and everyones taste is different.  CC&Rs against towers and
: antennae would not exist unless someone was concerned enough about it to go to
: the trouble of drafting them.If they didn't think it would increase their ability
: to sell property, do you really think developers would bother??  Large numbers of
: people must agree with them, or it would become a simple matter of getting your
: neightbors to agree to remove them.  It isn't, so what does that tell you??

It tells me that there are alot of control freaks out there!  The problem is
that the supply and demand are all out of whack.  Sure there are some
people that will only move into places like this...but then there
is the another set, that I would argue is the silent majority, that
are just like hams, and that don't know the  CC&R's are even there!

The ignorance arguement can be used quite strongly here...just as
we don't know enough to ask about CC&R's when were looking, the
average home buyer probably doesn't either.

Your wife sells real estate, but has she ever done land development?

The typical developer just uses the same set of CC&R's over and over
again.  In fact, one adhock survey found that there are just
four boiler-plate sets of CC&R's in the Greater LA area (like
San Diego to Santa Barbara) in use by all the different developers!

There isn't a whole lot of thinking here...the formula works (so
they think..) so they keep repeating it, and the general public
doesn't know what they are getting into typically, especially if
you are the second buyer of the property!

: |> The issue is not one of property values, but one of "We can control
: |> you, and if you do not think so, just try and put up an antenna
: |> here.  We don't like them, and so we will not allow them."

: Nobody is controlling the ham. He can choose to live somewhere else.  There
: is no guaranteed right to have a 200 foot tower in a residential neighborhood.

Where?  Within the town I live in there are three sets of developments.

There is stuff that is vintage 1960's, there is stuff that is circa 1980,
and the majority is circa 1990+.  So the vast majority of the property
I can buy has CC&Rs on it(1980+) and the majority of that set includes
CC&R's that prohibit antennas.

Further, you assume it's gonna be a 200 foot tower...no...55 feet will
do thank you, and that is actually limit placed by most of the
municipalities around here.   But this isn't even relevant since the
CC&R's prohibit ANY antenna.

You say I have a choice as to where I get to live...yep...anything in
this town built around 1960 will be what I'm restricted too!  I don't
accept that as a reasonable answer!

: |>
: |> I don't happen to like lots of things my neighbors do (like
: |> painting their houses in pastel colors, for example, or having
: |> tiny little manicured lawns instead of natural habitat).

: Then you should have looked for a place to live that had CC&Rs against those
: things.  I have seen CC&R's that controlled the color you could paint your
: house.  That too is an aesthetic that can adversely effect your abilty to
: sell your house at a later date.  But fewer people care about it, so CC&Rs
: concerning house color are much less common.

Yeah..and CC&Rs as to what type of front door you have, and what style
roof you have, etc. Tell these dweebs to get a life and start worrying
about their own affairs, not mine!

: |> to INFLUENCE how they do these things.
: |>
: |> In most of the Western US, if you want a tower, you cannot live in:
: |> a city; a housing development; a neighborhood; a large town.
: |>
: |> You have little or no control over the use of the property you own;
: |> what you can do, how you do it, and when you can do it has been
: |> decided for you.  If you don't like it, you CANNOT "buy some other
: |> house" because they don't exist.

: But you agreed to that restriction before you bought the house.  End of story.

Uh..wait a minute here.  What if he didn't know about the restrictions.

You are ignoring that full disclosure isn't required in all 50 states!

: No one came in and told you after the fact that they were going to start
: restricting your activities.  You agreed to the restriction when you signed the
: contract for the house.  The best and only practical suggestion to come out of
: any of this is the suggestion that you add a clause to the contract concerning
: making all CC&Rs known and that if antennae are prohibited, the contract becomes
: void.  The only other thing to do is if you really want to live in a particular
: area and it prohibits antennae, you could go from house to house and see if your
: prospective neighbors are willing to agree to the removal of that particular CC&R,
: before you buy the house.  Of course, I highly suspect you will find that there
: are a lot more people who find towers and antennae unsightly than what you think.

: And in the end, it comes down to what I said above.  Ham's are a statistically
: insignificant number in the population.  And this is after all, supposed to be
: a democracy, with majority rule.

Yep, and protection of a minorities rights.  (Igoring the fact that
I don't have a right to put up a tower from a federal point of view.)
What about the right to live in a place that I can afford, and
raise my family.  There are enough places that are seniors only, or
now children as an example.  (In CA the above is illegal...I don't
know about other locales. )   The point is that there are deceptive
selling practices going on in many places, and there is also a huge
busy-body factor that just isn't right!

: All the best.

: bill   KB3YV

Steve KA6S


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Ho)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re:  CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 9 Aug 95 16:35:33 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Dear Netter,

I have seen of a lot of arguments ranging from "you need to see the CC&R before you
buy the property" to "the realtor is obligated to show the CC&R to the buyer" etc.

I think that this is a bit far from the subject of this discussion.  Why not we just
give your own experience such as how to:

1. apply a tower permit from your city.
2. deal w/ the CC&R in your own neighbourhood.
3. deal w/ your neighbours (try to be a nice neighbour).
4. what to do if your neighbour wants to sell his house and says curb appearance is
tarnished because of your tower/antenna etc.

In this way, hams around the country can be beneficial from your discussions.


73,

Jonathan
ab6ls



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.service.uci.edu!e4e.oac.uci.edu!jwkelley
From: [e-mail] (James W. KELLEY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re:  CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 9 Aug 1995 18:14:49 GMT
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <40atup$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: e4e.oac.uci.edu

Good point Johnathon!.

I am preparing to go to my association with an application to the
Architectural Committee to put up a vertical antenna (for 2 meters in this
case).  I expect the application to be denied.

I will then go to the Board of Directors for an appeal.  This is a common
practice among homeowners in our association for any violation of CC&R's.
At that time I will present the Board with Part 97 of the CFR (the part about
local governments making reasonable allowances for amateur radio
operators), and the House and Senate joint resolution in the same regard.

In addition, I will present some examples of how city and county
ordinances have been changing recently in accordance with PRB-1.

I also intend to present some of the reports regarding radio amateurs
who participated in the emergency efforts during the Northridge
earthquake, and Laguna Beach and Malibu fires.

I may also show some photographs of antenna installations in which the
antennas are barely noticeable, and wouldn't be considered a "nuisance"!

I would suggest some compromise guidelines.  For instance, no 40 meter
beams, or no masts over 35 feet - but R7's, R5's, j-poles - any kind of
vertical or long wire under a certain height would be acceptable.

I would be prepared to have a lengthly discussion about interference.  I
understand the FCC has a new book out about it which I could make
available to the board.  The point could be made that having the antenna
up higher reduces interference.  The fact that cable TV is prevalent in
these neighborhoods means that interference to television is not at all
likely in most cases.  Some people also complain about interference to
cellular and portable phones, so I will have to prepare for that.

The Board of Directors can certainly still say no, and I will have little
recourse except to continue to apply for an exemption.  But!, this
particular association sees themselves as a local government in a sense,
so they already feel obliged to abide by the rulings of higher legislative
bodies and courts.  We have already had certain parts of our CC&R's
superseded by state law, in effect voiding those particular parts.

I will not have any luck trying to convince them that putting up an
antenna is my right, but I might be able to convince them that they are
obliged to allow me to do it - within reason.

Jim KE6JPO


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 95 03:53:26 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 66
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40c0k1$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vm785$[e-mail]> <3vt068$[e-mail]> <405q2b$[e-mail]> <40a8bq$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40c08u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Wilson) wrote:
>
>You say I have a choice as to where I get to live...yep...anything in
>this town built around 1960 will be what I'm restricted too!  I don't
>accept that as a reasonable answer!

I really don't understand the basis of this argument.  The houses you
want to buy are private property.  They don't belong to you.  Why
would you ever think you have the right to tell the seller what
conditions he should be allowed to place on the sale?  The solution is
no different than if you lived somewhere that had no jobs - find a
different place to live.

>Yeah..and CC&Rs as to what type of front door you have, and what
>style roof you have, etc. Tell these dweebs to get a life and start
>worrying about their own affairs, not mine!

It is exactly their own affairs that they *are* worrying about.  If
you don't want to agree to the restrictions, the sellers are
perfectly happy to see you walk away.  You, on the other hand, are
implying that they should be forced to sell regardless of your intent,
and without regard for their own well-being.  The fact that you don't
agree with them as to the effect of your antennas on their welfare is
entirely irrelevant to the principles involved.

>Uh..wait a minute here.  What if he didn't know about the
>restrictions.
>
>You are ignoring that full disclosure isn't required in all 50
states!

Full disclosure is a convenience, not a substitute for the buyer's
need to be aware.  Unless you want to live in a totally socialist
state, it must be the buyer's responsibility to investigate the
merits of the purchase.  The seller only has to be honost in whatever
representations he chooses to make regarding the property.  Given that
the covenants are a matter of public record, it is difficult to
imagine how the seller could defraud a buyer in this regard.

>Yep, and protection of a minorities rights.  (Igoring the fact that
>I don't have a right to put up a tower from a federal point of view.)

The issue has nothing to do with minority rights.  It has to do with
the rights of the seller to attach whatever conditions he wishes to
the sale, be it price, time of closing, condition of the property, or
restrictive covenants.

>What about the right to live in a place that I can afford, and
>raise my family.

You have no such right - you only have the right to purchase
property that a seller agrees to sell.

>The point is that there are deceptive selling practices going on in
>many places, and there is also a huge busy-body factor that just
>isn't right!

The busy-body factor can't bother you unless you voluntarily agree to
the covenants proposed by the seller.  On the other hand, if you try
to force the seller by law to agree to your terms instead, then *you*
will have destroyed the concept of private property in a way much
worse than any covenant could ever do.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!newsfeed.ACO.net!paladin.american.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 95 03:47:32 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 66
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40c08u$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> <3vm785$[e-mail]> <3vt068$[e-mail]> <405q2b$[e-mail]> <40a8bq$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84640 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28924 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12718

   [e-mail] (Steve Wilson) wrote:
>
>You say I have a choice as to where I get to live...yep...anything in
>this town built around 1960 will be what I'm restricted too!  I don't
>accept that as a reasonable answer!

I really don't understand the basis of this argument.  The houses you
want to buy are private property.  They don't belong to you.  Why
would you ever think you have the right to tell the seller what
conditions he should be allowed to place on the sale?  The solution is
no different than if you lived somewhere that had no jobs - find a
different place to live.

>Yeah..and CC&Rs as to what type of front door you have, and what
>style roof you have, etc. Tell these dweebs to get a life and start
>worrying about their own affairs, not mine!

It is exactly their own affairs that they *are* worrying about.  If
you don't want to agree to the restrictions, the sellers are
perfectly happy to see you walk away.  You, on the other hand, are
implying that they should be forced to sell regardless of your intent,
and without regard for their own well-being.  The fact that you don't
agree with them as to the effect of your antennas on their welfare is
entirely irrelevant to the principles involved.

>Uh..wait a minute here.  What if he didn't know about the
>restrictions.
>
>You are ignoring that full disclosure isn't required in all 50
states!

Full disclosure is a convenience, not a substitute for the buyer's
need to be aware.  Unless you want to live in a totally socialist
state, it must be the buyer's responsibility to investigate the
merits of the purchase.  The seller only has to be honost in whatever
representations he chooses to make regarding the property.  Given that
the covenants are a matter of public record, it is difficult to
imagine how the seller could defraud a buyer in this regard.

>Yep, and protection of a minorities rights.  (Igoring the fact that
>I don't have a right to put up a tower from a federal point of view.)

The issue has nothing to do with minority rights.  It has to do with
the rights of the seller to attach whatever conditions he wishes to
the sale, be it price, time of closing, condition of the property, or
restrictive covenants.

>What about the right to live in a place that I can afford, and
>raise my family.

You have no such right - you only have the right to purchase
property that a seller agrees to sell.

>The point is that there are deceptive selling practices going on in
>many places, and there is also a huge busy-body factor that just
>isn't right!

The busy-body factor can't bother you unless you voluntarily agree to
the covenants proposed by the seller.  On the other hand, if you try
to force the seller by law to agree to your terms instead, then *you*
will have destroyed the concept of private property in a way much
worse than any covenant could ever do.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news1.digital.com!pa.dec.com!depot.mro.dec.com!mrnews.mro.dec.com!est.enet.dec.com!randolph
From: [e-mail] (Tom Randolph)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 10 AUG 95 11:44:58
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40d9ic$[e-mail]>
References: <3u3upn$[e-mail]> <3u5u5r$[e-mail]> <3uba16$[e-mail]><3ur0f2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3v915b$[e-mail]> <3vaub2$[e-mail]> < <40a8bq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pida.enet.dec.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84666 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28926 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12729


As a ham who'll be buying a house sometime soon, I've been following this
discussion closely. My wife's a ham too, and shares similar views in regard to
CC&Rs.

A question: is there any reason the seller and I can't come to an agreement to
simply waive the CC&Rs that I don't like? Especially if this is included in a
purchase contract in some way?

The part I don't see is what a homeowner's association would have to say about
this one way or another... unless they have some way of preventing me from
buying under the conditions I want.

Luckily, there's plenty of houses with no restrictions whatsoever here in New
England.

-Tom R.   N1OOQ   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Counterpoises for Butternut vertical
Date: 10 Aug 1995 13:09:36 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <40d0eg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu

A 19" counterpoise wire on my 2m HT has made a distinct improvement
in incoming and outgoing signals.  I'm wondering if putting single
counterpoise wires for each of the WARC bands between 80-10m out
from my ground-mounted Butternut might result in the same success I'm
enjoying on 2m.  I'm already using several random-length bare wires
buried 1" under the sod, along with a ground rod, but due to severe
RFI suffered by my neighbors I switched to a dipole which has helped
the RFI problem.  I really enjoy using the HF6V vertical, and wonder
if counterpoises draped over the ground in the ravine behind our
rental might eliminate the RFI enough so that I can start to use the
vertical again.  I'm thinking of using 12 gauge insulated solid copper
wire for the counterpoises, one 1/4 wave wire for each band to start,
but am not sure what the right length for each should be...is it
a simple mechanical 1/4 wavelength, or electrical 1/4 wavelength, and
if the latter, what is the velocity factor and resulting length of
1/4 wave for 12 gauge solid copper wire for the WARC bands between
80-10m?  Thanks for your help.  Bill KB8USZ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!symbios.com!kthompso.wichitaks.ncr.com!ken.thompson
From: [e-mail] (Ken Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dish-cone HF
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 15:10:24
Organization: Symbios Logic
Lines: 14
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3u1f62$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kthompso.wichitaks.ncr.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

In article <3u1f62$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Stroppel) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (John Stroppel)
>Subject: Dish-cone HF
>Date: 12 Jul 1995 21:34:58 GMT

>

>Can the bottom of the skirt of an HF dish-cone antenna be grounded? In
>other words- The copper pipe which I used to bond the skirt wires together,
>Can it be buried in the ground?   John  WA0VYZ

DISC CONE
and yes its tied to the coax shield anyway, one can ground it.



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 6 Aug 1995 19:53:10 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4036j6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3vqqml$[e-mail]> <401rt3$hi3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <401rt3$hi3$[e-mail]>,
Rob Silva <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I for one don't think they were being deliberately deceitful at all. Go back
>and look at the list of losses they enumerated. Clearly there are some
>exaggerations and it would be unlikely to get all of them in unison. Bear in
>mind, however, that all of the losses they list could be encountered in a
>conventional SG-230 + Whip installation. Perhaps they're just bagging their own
>product ;-)

Hi Rob, it took me a day after talking to them to experience their mind
set. (where they are coming from, as my daughter would say). Their world
has an antenna system at the top of a 20 foot mast. One installs it and
uses it, as is, for all-band HF operation. An auto-tuned screwdriver may
win under those conditions, but I don't know of anything else that would
be better than the SGC system *for those circumstances*. Looks to me the
mistake that SGC made was assuming that land vehicles have the 20 foot
mast problem to contend with. Still, a shootout from a moving vehicle
would make the SGC system look good against anything that is not auto-
tuned over the whole amateur HF spectrum.

Jim, W5GYJ, would win such a shootout. He has a bugcatcher on his pickup
and could have me in the back changing taps. "Don't key up yet and watch
that curve." :-)

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 8 Aug 1995 04:05:00 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 34
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <406npc$[e-mail]>
References: <3v3432$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vckq3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

I want to thank Armond for sending me the Oct. '94 "Worldradio" and
returning my two bucks.

In that issue, "Aerials" used more than half the column slamming a
company selling an auto-tuner and vertical antenna for $900, not for
the price but for the claim, "eliminates power-draining antenna wire-
runs between the (SGC-303) antenna and (SGC-230) tuner."

Mr. Sterba then used (1) a 50 ohm antenna??? and (2) an SWR of 4:1???
to "prove" that this antenna company was wrong. He strongly implies
that the loss in 10 ft of RG-213 is neglible. He then offers the
challenge, "I'll be short of breath the whole time waiting for the
rebuttal..." The rebuttal didn't come from Bellevue, It came from
me.

I pointed out that there was no (switchable) loading coil in the
SGC system and instead of 4:1, the SWR might be 400:1. I calculated
the loss in 10 ft of RG-213 at *7 dB* using a 9 ft. whip on 20m
as an example where the loss in 10 ft of RG-213 is *not* neglible.

I don't have an SGC-303 antenna but I'm willing to bet that the
loss in 10 ft of RG-213 feeding an SGC-303 antenna without an SGC-230
tuner, is indeed "power draining" in contradiction to what Mr. Sterba
implied in his column. He did not talk about the expected high SWR
with the SGC-303 antenna, so why did he slam their true statement?
Instead of a "power-draining" sky high SWR between the tuner and the
antenna, the SWR between the auto-tuner and the transceiver is near
perfect.

Please don't mention "blast holes through major mountain ranges and
probably some laws of physics." I concede they can not blast holes
through the laws of physics.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!newsfeed.gsfc.nasa.gov!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Robert Kirk)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ferrite bead any good for antenna
Date: 9 Aug 1995 19:19:30 GMT
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <40b1o2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: isobar.gsfc.nasa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

I just got a new computer that came with a ferrite bead to clamp
around the video cable for certain monitors. I don't need it for
my monitor, so is there any good use I can put it to? Would it
help at the junction of the coax to my roll-up 2M Jpole? Anything
else? I hate to throw gear away.

Bob Kirk
N3OZB



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!sundog.tiac.net!adamkern.tiac.net!adamkern
From: [e-mail] (Adam Kern)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Fritzel 80-10 m Dipole
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 22:32:05
Organization: The Internet Access Company
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: adamkern.tiac.net
Summary: I need input on which antenna to get.
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Hey!

I'm starting up a first time HF sations, with a Kenwood 450SAT as the rig.  I
need to know what antenna to get.  I was thinking about starting with a
Fritzel 80-10 m dipole.  I would then get a Telex Hy-Gain rooftower package in
about a year.

Could somebody give any feedback on the fritzel antenna if they've used it.  I
heard good things about it from HRO, but I wanted to check with other hams
that weren't trying to sell it to me.

Thanks alot!

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fritzel 80-10 m Dipole
Date: 10 Aug 1995 13:47:24 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <40d2lc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: misz.animal.uiuc.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Adam Kern) writes:
>Hey!
>
>I'm starting up a first time HF sations, with a Kenwood 450SAT as the rig.  I
>need to know what antenna to get.  I was thinking about starting with a
>Fritzel 80-10 m dipole.  I would then get a Telex Hy-Gain rooftower package in
>about a year.

I think that Fritzel is a Windom antenna, i.e., fed at about 1/3
length and matched to coax via 1:6 balun. QST had a review article on
a U.S.-made Windom antenna.

I had one home-made. Had wider bandwith than the dipole on 80m
but worked worse than a vertical on 10-20m.

Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Illinois      1207 W. Gregory Dr., Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. [phone]         Fax: [phone]



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: "Franklin M. Hays" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 7 Aug 1995 21:32:41 GMT
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4060pp$[e-mail]>
References: <4000ak$[e-mail]> <401v8q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dd06-008.compuserve.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi...de VE6INA name is Frank, I had the GAP VOYAGER DX-IV.
A very poor constructed antenna, mine broke in half by only 45 mph
wind.  Performance was poor to considering the price.
The support was almost nil, the guy in Florida could not answer
my questions and was not very friendly.

NO GAP FOR ME ANYMORE...73 de Frank VE6INA



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 8 Aug 1995 19:41:19 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <408smv$[e-mail]>
References: <4060pp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Well,well,well... It is interesting to see some negative comments on the
GAP's. If you do not like the GAP's what would you recomend to someone
looking for a general coverage vertical antenna ?


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 8 Aug 1995 20:29:19 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <408vgv$[e-mail]>
References: <4060pp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Well,well,well... It is interesting to see some negative comments on the
GAP's. If you do not like the GAP's what would you recomend to someone
looking for a general coverage vertical antenna ?


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 95 01:37:11 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4060pp$[e-mail]> <408vgv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: BUDDY10 <[e-mail]>

   Butternut!



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.funet.fi!news.csc.fi!nokia.fi!ntc.nokia.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Mikko Laiho)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 9 Aug 1995 11:36:37 GMT
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <40a6k5$[e-mail]>
References: <4000ak$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc139-47.trs.ntc.nokia.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Keywords: GAP ANTENNA
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5


        I have had a GAP Challenger VI for four years.

        On 80m GAP is 0 to 3 S-units down on receive compared to a dipole
        at 6 meters height. Long distance stations are sometimes equal
        on both, dipole wins always for short distances.

        On 15m GAP seems to be about 1 S-unit down compared to a plain
        ground plane antenna which base is 4 meters above ground.

        On other bands GAP seems to work reasonably well, maybe because
        I have nothing to compare with.

        73 Mikko OH2BCH



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!news.rcinet.com!sally.dma.org!millersg
From: [e-mail] (Steve Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 9 Aug 1995 15:03:19 GMT
Organization: Dayton Microcomputer Association; Dayton, Ohio, USA
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <40ainn$[e-mail]>
References: <4060pp$[e-mail]> <408vgv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dmapub.dma.org

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>   Butternut!

With a good radial system!

--
Steve Miller
[e-mail]
WD8IXE - Ridin' the aethereal waves


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Date: 9 Aug 1995 11:25:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40ak1v$[e-mail]>
References: <40a6k5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

The results of use of my GAP have shown it to be a very poor performer. A
ground mounted Butternut kills it on all bands. It does have a good SWR
though. 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!mikeka
From: [e-mail] (Mike Kapitan)
Subject: Re: GAP ANTENNAS???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <40a6k5$[e-mail]> <40ak1v$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 19:13:53 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: The results of use of my GAP have shown it to be a very poor performer. A
: ground mounted Butternut kills it on all bands. It does have a good SWR
: though. 73 Tom

I agree with Tom ... I own a GAP Eagle ... was a replacement for an r7 I
had up for 2 yrs (problems with that are material for a whole 'nuther post).
Though the swr is very good on all bands its performance is basically
dismal with 40m being particularly bad despite a 1.2:1 swr. Performance on
12 and 15M bands is best with my g5rv beating it handily on all other bands.
73, Mike



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:57 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!rbloom
From: [e-mail] (Ron Bloom)
Subject: ground for radial system on roof?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:49:43 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]


Butternut antenna on 3rd story flat roof (office building) + radials.

what is to be used for "ground" ??


we've got : 1.) cold water pipes
            2.) building structural steel (eye-beams)


thanx,
wa6mqc


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!carbon!hermes.cair.du.edu!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.continuum.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ground for radial system on roof?
Date: 10 Aug 1995 01:06:27 GMT
Organization: Ocean Surveys, Inc.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <40bm2j$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cd-24.continuum.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.09

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ron Bloom) writes:
>
>Butternut antenna on 3rd story flat roof (office building) + radials.
>
>what is to be used for "ground" ??
>
>we've got : 1.) cold water pipes
>            2.) building structural steel (eye-beams)
>

If you can tie to one of these things near the base of the antenna,
fine.  If not, the radials will provide a RF, but not DC (lightning)
ground.


P.J. "Josh" Rovero                            work:  [e-mail]
Ocean Surveys, Inc.                           play:   [e-mail]
Old Saybrook, CT 06475 USA               Amateur Radio:  KK1D



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.gmi.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Helically would rotatable dipoles
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 95 01:35:11 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

The Lakeview Co. makes the elements and the dipole connector. Good folks.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!solitaire.cv.nrao.edu!sadira.gb.nrao.edu!dgordon
From: [e-mail] (David Gordon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help with 2m LPF in series
Date: 8 Aug 1995 22:13:03 GMT
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory
Lines: 7
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <408nhf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dubhe.gb.nrao.edu

When connecting 2 2m LPF together, should you use a 1/2 wave
section or does the length matter??? I think it does, they should
be in-phase(?). Thanks for the help. Post here and send me an email
copy please.

David - KB4LCI
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:28:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.cais.com!news
From: [e-mail] (The Magik is Mine!!!)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ignore This...I'm New and Just Testing Stuff
Date: 10 Aug 1995 05:45:51 GMT
Organization: The Magik is Mine!!!
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <40c6ef$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.199.120.117
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.90.3

I told you to just ignore this!!!  Sorry for the Bother!



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:00 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!tecsun1.tec.army.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: J-pole and ground plane
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
References: <405f7m$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 19:15:22 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:405f7m$[e-mail]
Lines: 28

I know that j-poles don't require a ground plane, but would the
existance of a ground plane hamper their performance.

Absolutely not.  A ground plane always helps the performance of an
antenna although it may not be "required".

I would like to put the ARRL Antenna Book's 2m Super J-pole
(1/2 wave over 1/2 wave) on my car. Is this ok?

Its pretty tall.  Lots of luck.  I have seen some on boats and motor
homes.  Also a guy in our town has a 440 version.

Can I add a 1/2 wave section to my existing 5/8 wave mag mount
antenna to form a 1/2 over 5/8 antenna?

If you can get the phasing and matching to work, go for it....
It is possible to get your antenna pattern so flat in the verticle that
you won't work high placed repeaters well.  Check the pattern with one
of the antenna modeling programs.

Have a great time.


Bill Harwood
AB6DY





From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.ip.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Leave it on, or take it off???
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 1995 04:59:09 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 25

I' ve been playing around with various dipole wire antennas on 40 and 80
meters.  Using home made 1:1 air core baluns and insulated wire (12
gauge), I am seeing reflected power of about 5 watts with 100 watts
forward on the 80 meter dipole.  I trimmed the antenna for the lowest
reflected power at 3.9 mhz and on both sides of center freq, the
reflected power goes up as I would think it would.  However, I am
curious as to why I have 5 watts reflected.  The wire I am using is
12 gauge thhn insulated wire.  When I place my mfj 941 inline, I can not
"tune" out this 5 watts reflected power.
On the 40 meter dipole, I have about 10 watts reflected for 100 out!
Ouch!  Same kind of wire, different balun, same coax...random length.
Does anyone have any experience with swr effects leaving the insulation
on the wire? The tuner will tune out the reflected power.
I have a 40 meter wire dipole at my house with no balun and stripped
12 gauge wire and have .5 watts reflected with 100 watts out.
Same with my 20 meter dipole...no balun and stripped wire and .75 watts
reflected.  Both of these antennas have random lengths of coax.

Any Ideas???



Jim Wooddell
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.rmii.com!nexus.interealm.com!root
From: [e-mail] (George J. Molnar)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Leave it on, or take it off???
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 1995 12:56:40 GMT
Organization: ICG/MagNET [phone]
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <40ab35$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp201.interealm.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) wrote:

>I' ve been playing around with various dipole wire antennas on 40 and 80
>meters.  Using home made 1:1 air core baluns and insulated wire (12
>gauge), I am seeing reflected power of about 5 watts with 100 watts
>forward on the 80 meter dipole.  I trimmed the antenna for the lowest
>reflected power at 3.9 mhz and on both sides of center freq, the
>reflected power goes up as I would think it would.  However, I am
>curious as to why I have 5 watts reflected.  The wire I am using is
>12 gauge thhn insulated wire.  When I place my mfj 941 inline, I can not
>"tune" out this 5 watts reflected power.
>On the 40 meter dipole, I have about 10 watts reflected for 100 out!
>Ouch!  Same kind of wire, different balun, same coax...random length.
>Does anyone have any experience with swr effects leaving the insulation
>on the wire? The tuner will tune out the reflected power.
>I have a 40 meter wire dipole at my house with no balun and stripped
>12 gauge wire and have .5 watts reflected with 100 watts out.
>Same with my 20 meter dipole...no balun and stripped wire and .75 watts
>reflected.  Both of these antennas have random lengths of coax.

>Any Ideas???

The amount of reflected power is no big deal. Your VSWR values are
quite low, even on 40 meters, and there will be no performance
improvement, most likely, if you change things.

The small residual SWR values could be caused by 1) meter error, 2)
effect of nearby objects, 3) antenna height above real ground, 4)
losses in the system (balun, cable, etc). The insulation on the
antenna wire probably isn't a problem, unless it contributes to a
lossy dielectric path at the feedpoint or support points.

If you're making contacts, and the reports are satisfactory, take the
SWR meter and tuner out of line and just enjoy yourself. You're
probably losing more signal in the tuner and meter than you are with
the small (apparent) mismatch.

73,

George J. Molnar
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Internet: [e-mail]
Packet radio: KF2T@N0QCU.#NECO.CO.USA.NA



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:03 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: looking for plans: CB base antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <40330m$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 17:05:41 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <40330m$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>My young nephew got an old 23 channel CB and power supply at a yard sale.  He is
>looking for an antenna but his funds are limited.  Does anyone have, or know
>where I can get plans for a simple ground plane?  Construction from copper pipe
>or tensioned wire is what I am thinking of.  I think he would enjoy making the
>antenna more than saving to buy one.  Any suggestions appreciated.

Ok, lets try something real simple and real cheap. Got a tree handy?
Measure from the highest limb you can fling a rope over to where you're
going to put the radio. Now go buy that much RG-8. Put a PL-259 on the
radio end. Now take a knife and remove the outer insulation from 104
inches of the other end of that cable. Now push, wiggle, and finagle
the braid back from the end of the cable until it's not tight on the
inner conductor anymore. Start rolling it down the coax (like a sock)
so that the braid doubles back over the insulation below the cut.
When you're done, you'll have 104 inches of exposed inner conductor
and 102 inches of shield braid folded back over the cable. Now skin
a couple of inches of inner insulation off the end of the cable, twist
a loop in it and tie a rope to it. Use that rope to hoist it up in
the tree. You're done, have fun transmitting.

This is called a coaxial sleeve dipole. If you had a VSWR bridge,
you could trim the lengths of inner conductor and braid to exact
resonance, but it'll work well enough as described.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:04 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Loop Receiving Antenna for 80/160
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <403do3$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 16:53:36 GMT
Lines: 15

In article <403do3$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Why can't those antenna gurus write a simple
>Do-it-exactly-like-this-1-2-3-4....-and-you-can't-go-wrong?

Probably because real antennas are very rarely so cut and dried.
Almost always there are objects in the near field that alter
the behavior enough that you have to fall back on measure, cut,
and try.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!newsserver.trl.OZ.AU!pcies4.trl.OZ.AU!ddiamond
From: [e-mail] (Drew Diamond)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Receiving Antenna for 80/160
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 14:37:25
Organization: TRL
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pcies4.trl.oz.au
Keywords: loop antenna
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev Final Beta #7]


>Would anyone have some information (particularly the proper formula) for loop
>antenna's for 80/160m (or for BC and VLF receiving for that matter),
>I've read various books, such as the ARRL material, as well as others, but
>they seem to be making a number of assumptions about the readers background
>knowledge that does not help.>What I would like to be able to do is order a
set of Ferrite rods from Amidon, >and be able to work out the proper number of
turns for a particular wire size, >and then optimize this with the proper
tunable capacitor.>Any suggestions (old magazine articles in particular if
they are available)>Thanks and 73>Joe>VE3FMQ

 Joe, see if you can look up;

"Wideband Active Loop Antenna" Barendrecht- Elektor Electronics Mar '95,
(loop 1 metre diameter),

"Compact 160 m Transmitting Loop Antenna"- Marris, G2BZQ, 73 Sep. '94 (square
loop),

"The disciminator" (directional receiving antenna) Marris 73 Sep '94, (looks
good, uses loopstick and "sense" antenna, maybe what you are looking for),

"An Experimental 14 MHz Loopstick Antenna"- Marris, Short Wave Mag. May '94.

"The Square Pancake Antenna"- Doolottle, W2SMR, 73 Sep. '91.

"External Ferrite Aerial Units for SW, MW and LW Radios" Marris, Elektor
Electronics, May '93 ( looks good, I think this is also maybe what you are
after).

73 Drew, VK3XU.   Telstra Research Laboratories.l








From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.funet.fi!news.tele.fi!news.inet.tele.fi!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Osmo Vuorio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Receiving Antenna for 80/160
Date: 9 Aug 1995 20:56:09 GMT
Organization: TELECOM FINLAND, Engineering
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <40b7d9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vuorios1.dial.tele.fi
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Drew Diamond) says:
..
>knowledge that does not help.>What I would like to be able to do is order a
>set of Ferrite rods from Amidon, >and be able to work out the proper number of
>turns for a particular wire size, >and then optimize this with the proper
>tunable capacitor.>Any suggestions (old magazine articles in particular if
>they are available)>Thanks and 73>Joe>VE3FMQ
..

There is also a european book: Soft Ferrites, written by Snelling.
I do not remember the exact information of the book. 1st edition
was 197x and the 2nd edition is from the late 198x. Professional
level ferrite bible ( to build up physical equipments )

Osmo Vuorio, OH2EU


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 10 Aug 1995 08:27:36 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40ctvo$[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Troy, I think the ARRL quit selling the book because their technical staff
doesn't understand conjugate matching. It is an excellent book in my
opinion. If you really want a copy bad I can call Maxwell and ask if he
has any.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MJF-941B Antenna Matching Unit - Help
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 00:20:01 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 27

G5RV's  in any specific application are frequently very pickey about
feed line length.  Try adding or deleating 1/8 to 1/4 wave length at the
frequency that is giving you trouble.


The Antennas West book that comes with their G5RV's talks about this
behavior.  I have seen the behavior in my own G5RV installations and
could not match them with a MFJ-941.  Change the length and the problem
goes away and it tunes fine.

Also some of the "dial setttings on the MFJ-941 may be strange.  That is
not always is continuoulsly more inductance needed as you go down in
frequency as you usually see in a multiband 1/2 wave dipole.


Courage and good luck.

I remember that first time.  That "this tuner was supposed to tune
anything and won't tune this" feeling.


Good Luck

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!news.ecn.bgu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!usenet
From: Jon Bell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MJF-941B Antenna Matching Unit - Help
Date: 9 Aug 1995 13:11:17 GMT
Organization: Ericsson
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <40ac5l$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vkpc112.ericsson.se

> G5RV's  in any specific application are frequently very pickey about
> feed line length.  Try adding or deleating 1/8 to 1/4 wave length at the
> frequency that is giving you trouble.
>
>
> The Antennas West book that comes with their G5RV's talks about this
> behavior.  I have seen the behavior in my own G5RV installations and
> could not match them with a MFJ-941.  Change the length and the problem
> goes away and it tunes fine.
>
> Also some of the "dial setttings on the MFJ-941 may be strange.  That is
> not always is continuoulsly more inductance needed as you go down in
> frequency as you usually see in a multiband 1/2 wave dipole.
>
>
> Courage and good luck.
>
> I remember that first time.  That "this tuner was supposed to tune
> anything and won't tune this" feeling.
>
>
> Good Luck
>
> Bill Harwood

You said it!  Like when the 941E wouldn't tune on 160 meters, but the
the small model with the meter (forgo the number) did it without
the least problem.  Weird!
Jon

> AB6DY
>
>



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!freenet3.freenet.ufl.edu!afn17891
From: "Thomas W. Castle" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need Dimensions for Ladder Line J-POLE
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 04:24:36 -0400
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <405mdq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.afn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <405mdq$[e-mail]>

The 450 ohm ladder wire j-pole specs' are as follows...

Take at least a 60" piece of 450 ladder wire; skin the 2 wires
at one end approx 1/2" each.

Bend them over towards each other and solder them together...

Then measure one side of the ladder wire to a dimension of 58"
from the soldered ends and cut it off there....

On the other side of the ladder wire, measureing from the soldered
ends to 19" and cut there. Then remove the piece of wire abt 41" by
cutting the webbs; this will leave you a j-pole looking piece of 450
ladder wire.

Now measure up about 3 & 1/2" from the solder joint on each side
of the ladder wire an clean an area for you to terminate your coax
feed line to... The center conductor to the long side an the sheild
to the short side. The positioning of the coax on the ladder wire
will determine quite a bit about your SWR. By trimming an moving
coax along the ladder wire you can tailor the j-pole to preform
to where you want it.

BTW> This antenna works on 70cm as well as on 2 mtrs at the same
time. So this will preform as a dual band antenna. I encapsulate
mine in PVC pipe 3/4" & 1/2" with a reducer just above the end of
19" leg going to the 1/2" size pipe, with a cap glued on top. This
allows me to either mast or roof mount it. The wire dimensions here;
have been adjusted for the reaction to the pvc pipe enclosure...
Hope this helps... De Tom KD4QHH



               |
               |
               |
               |
               |
               |
               |
             | |
             | |
             | |   < 3.5" from bottom - coax attaches.
             |_|
 19" side          58" side

Good Luck...



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Help with Interference from Computer to Radio
Date: 9 Aug 1995 18:08:18 -0500
Organization: GreMLIN: Greenville, SC
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

Subject: Need Help with Computer Interference

I am having problems with interference from my computer to my 2 meter
handheld HAM radio.  I am using an inside antenna, and cannot use an
outside one right now.  Can anyone help me solve it?  My computer is a
486 DX2/66.  Should I install a high-pass filter at my antenna feed
point?

                                                            -Francis
Gallivan
                                                            replies
MUST be sent to:

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip209.msp.primenet.com!berg
From: [e-mail] (david berg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: NEW WEB SITE
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 06:41:18 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip209.msp.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

Check out the new web site at: www.primenet.com/~berg
"THE HAM TRADER" list an ad for free.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!tivoli.tivoli.com!usenet
From: Tim Deagan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Q's on 3 element phased array
Date: 8 Aug 1995 18:19:56 GMT
Organization: thInk AgAIn services
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <4089sc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tivoli.tivoli.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 32bit)

A FOAF bought a HUD home and is offering me the nifty looking
antenna and 30' mast in the backyard for the taking.  I am
definetly going to grab it, but am not quite sure what it's
original use was (I'll have to bring the thing down to measure
lengths and such.)

The antenna appears to be a three-element phased array using
(1/2 wavelength?) center fed vertical dipoles.  Each of the 3
verticals appears to be approx. (very approx.) 2 - 2.5 meters
in length, made from thin diameter telescoped aluminum.  They
are fed from some kind of black box, possibly the phasing
transformer.  Inside the house there is a wallplate with a UHF
female and a funky plug approx. the same diameter as the UHF,
with four male prongs inside (possibly the mechanical switch
contacts for the transformer circuit.)

I'm guessing that this may have been a big CB antenna, although
I wouldn't be surprised to find it was for an HF band.  I just
passed my Tech class exam (ticket's in the mail :-(   and
really only listen in on HF, and don't do any CB.  I intend to
do primarily VHF and UHF (since those are my privleges)
until at some later date I pass the code test.  The mast and
mounting hardware is immediately useful, but I'm curious as to
what uses I might put the antenna, or what mods it might
survive.  Any suggestions welcomed, I'll post the actual
measurements later in the week when I get the thing on the
ground.

73,
--Tim

--
 ,----,                 <> ReV.TiM <>                  .----.
{ <> /--------------------------------------------------\ <> }
 `--(   [e-mail]  http://www.fc.net/~tdeagan   )--'
     `--------------------------------------------------'




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!ulowell.uml.edu!vtc.tacom.army.mil!news1.oakland.edu!newshub.gmr.com!news.delcoelect.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Paul J. Dobosz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quadrifilar Antenna's
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 23:46:48 GMT
Organization: Delco Electronics Corp.
Lines: 27
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4064nc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <3v7bqg$[e-mail]> <3vui1b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.208.19.134
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.46

Dan Bathker <[e-mail]> wrote:

>[e-mail] (Rane Curl) wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>,
>> William Penner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >I have been looking for information on the construction of Quadrifilar
>> >antennas for use with GPS.  Does anyone know off-hand where I might find
>> >some discussion on this?  None of the ARRL books seem to have anything.
>> >
>> >Bill Penner, WB7DPF
>> >
>> The ARRL publication _Satellite Experimenters Handbook_ (1990 - still
>> available) contains parameters (in units of wavelengths) for the
>> quadrifilar helical antenna. Some time ago a ham reported in
>> sci.geo.satellite-nav that he had built one from semi-rigid coax
>> for GPS use, and it worked.
>>
>> Rane Curl    N8REG
>>
>>
>Test,test
A rather complete coverage of this antenna is contained in the ARRL
book REFLECTIONS written by Walter Maxwell, W2DU.  If I'm not
mistaken, he was responsible for the antennas on the early OSCAR
satellites.



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.gmi.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (MikeDom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: ROTOR - Channel master - old tv salvage
Date: 9 Aug 1995 00:45:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <409egk$[e-mail]>
References: <3vonnm$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (MikeDom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12681 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8816 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84560 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:15580

Hi Dan, You have an old channel master rotor, and all of the 3 wire rotors
were basically the same. A new control box will run you old motor. I
believe its something like 20 volts AC to run the thing if you want to
make your own control.
We just used one of those beasts this last field day....but we had a 12V
DC motor installed in it ( we were QRP Battery) it worked quite well.
                     73  mike


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Temp Berdan )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Scanner ants: dual vs single efficiency?
Date: 9 Aug 1995 21:04:01 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <40b7s1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sb1-08.ix.netcom.com

Hi:
Thought you fine Amateurs could give this scanner buff some good
advice.
I'm been using a combination of Grove Scanner beam (no rotor) and A/S
broadband omni ants. (with Grove 3db (loss) splitter)with good results.
As I'm going to be relocating to a new location, I am going to be
replacing the old gear with new.
Location is going to be 120 mi north of PHX and 30 miles south
southeast of FLG @ 4000 ft., with a good sized "hill" bet. me and my
main point of interest, PHX.
Two questions:
1. What would you use as the best single or dual antenna setup
(30mh-920mh)?
2. Lottsa monsoon and heat lightening there --- any suggestions as to
good static lightening protection?
Thanks for your help.
Temp
P.S. Which preamps are you getting the best results with?
tb


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.iii.net!iii2.iii.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Thomas C Sefranek)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tubes
Date: 9 Aug 1995 14:34:17 -0400
Organization: iii.net
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <40av39$[e-mail]>
References: <4007i6$[e-mail]> <400mst$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: iii2.iii.net

I have discovered a small collection of true ANTIQUE tubes.
Like what I saw illustrated by De-Forest?
They make an 80 look modern!
I also have some very old scokets.

Make me an offer!

Tom

--
Thomas C. J. Sefranek  WA1RHP  Work: 508-425-2200


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!clipper.ssb.com!usenet
From: Larry Brandt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TVRO for microwave EME or radio astronomy?
Date: 7 Aug 1995 22:12:59 GMT
Organization: State Street Bank & Trust Co.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <40635b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lbrandt.ssb.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 32bit)

Anyone know where, how much, etc. for a 3
meter TVRO dish. I'd prefer solid (alum or f. glass)
and not mesh.

What newsgroup could I ask?

TNX ES 73,
Larry AA1EA



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Ho)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: unsubscribe
Date: 10 Aug 95 15:57:30 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

unsubscribe


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Peter Glibbery)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: US Military Field Expedient Antennas
Date: 9 Aug 1995 04:25:19 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 42
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12685 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8820 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84567

I have some fairly basic questions that I would appreciate your help and
guidance  with.

I have been reading a US Army Special Forces manual which discusses various
types of improvised, field-expedient antennas such as:

Ground Plane
Horizontal
Long-wire
Half-Rhombic
Doublet

I'm writing from the UK and the references mentioned in the manual are not at
all easy to come by - I've tried.

1) In the case of some of these designs there is a need for a 'ground'. The
diagrams in the manual show one end of a wire attached to a metal stake which
is pushed into the ground, while the other end is attached to the radio set
itself. Where on the radio set is the free end of the ground wire attached ? Is
it attached to some kind of socket, or do you somehow attach it to the body of
the radio set ?

2) When using a 1/2-Rhombic the manual mentions that you feed the two 1/4 wave
antenna elements from the centre using a 'coax'. What exactly is a 'coax' and
how does it differ from the antenna wire itself ?

3) With the 1/2-Rhombic design the manual suggests that if a coax is not
available to use a 'twisted pair'. What is a twisted pair ? My guess is two
sheathed copper wires twisted together - but is this too simple a thought ?

4) With the 1/2-Rhombic one end of the antenna wire is attached to a
terminating resistor. The idea of this resistor is to give some
directionality to the radio wave (I recognise that there is a difference
between a resistor and an insulator (in the later case, the manual suggests a
piece of wood or a C-ration spoon)). Does anyone have a good idea of what would
make a good field expedient resistor ?

Thanks,

Peter




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!nntp.msstate.edu!Nntp.wes.army.mil!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Butch Magee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: US Military Field Expedient Antennas
Date: 9 Aug 1995 14:02:44 GMT
Organization: USACE WES ITL
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <40af64$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.164.80.37
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12698 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8837 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84595

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter Glibbery) says:
>
>You'r kidding us, right Peter?  Playing a little "see who will respond"
game?  Ok!  you got one, me.

Butch


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cocoa.brown.edu!tonto-slip3.cis.brown.edu!user
From: ap201002 (Steve Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What kind of coax do I need?
Date: 8 Aug 1995 13:04:58 GMT
Organization: Brown University -- Providence, Rhode Island  USA
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tonto-slip3.cis.brown.edu

I have two scanners hooked up to a discone antenna on my roof, requiring
75 feet of cable. I primarily want to listen to the military aviation band
225-400mhz and want to receive signals from Otis AFB approx 45 miles away.
Is RG-8 good enough for my needs or do I need better, of course I'd like
to have minimal signal loss. Your imput will be of great help.

Steve


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:20 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: What kind of coax do I need?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 01:30:14 GMT
Lines: 25

Steve Thompson (ap201002) wrote:
: I have two scanners hooked up to a discone antenna on my roof, requiring
: 75 feet of cable. I primarily want to listen to the military aviation band
: 225-400mhz and want to receive signals from Otis AFB approx 45 miles away.
: Is RG-8 good enough for my needs or do I need better, of course I'd like
: to have minimal signal loss. Your imput will be of great help.

: Steve


TIP:
Take your scanner up on the roof and connect it directly to the antenna
to see if you can pick up Otis before you haul off and invest in
expensive cable. If you can't hear it, don't bother buying the fancy
stuff. If you can hear it weakly then you better get some good stuff.
Try 9913. This coax uses 9ga copper center conductor and has lower loss
than RG8. They make a flexible version also. The real 9913 is so stiff
that it will support your antenna without a tower!

73 :-)
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What kind of coax do I need?
Date: 9 Aug 1995 03:34:57 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 8
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <409ad1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Steve Ellington <[e-mail]> wrote:

>The real 9913 is so stiff that it will support your antenna without a tower!

Hey Steve, I tried it and now my ground plane is a top hat. :-)

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Where to buy:  Those lamps...
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 95 03:49:37 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <406ni1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Marc DePaul) wrote:

>Where do you buy/replace those little lamps in the SB1000...WHat will
>act as a replacement?  How about the FT101E or the '830?

Audio/video service companies have access to miniature wire lead and bi-pin
lamps in a variety of voltage and current ratings.  Most of them use
suppliers like MCM Elctronics and CEI (Consolidated Electronics).  I don't
have the addresses anymore, but a shop in your area should be able to help.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:23 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!crash!galaxy.cts.com!quasar
From: [e-mail] (Stephen F.)
Subject: Re: Where to buy:  Those lamps...
Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET), San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 23:01:37 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]
References:  <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news subsystem)
Nntp-Posting-Host: galaxy.cts.com
Lines: 22

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marc DePaul) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
>Subject: Where to buy:  Those lamps...
>Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 18:38:51 GMT



>Hello.

>Where do you buy/replace those little lamps in the SB1000...WHat will
>act as a replacement?  How about the FT101E or the '830?

>Thanks,

>Marc

:You might try Radio Shack.  I had an '830 long ago and the panel light behind
:the meter was just a "grain-of-wheat" light.  They sell 'em at Radio Shack.
:The voltage ought to be 6.3V??  Check it with a meter.

73 - Steve in San Diego, CA



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsflash.concordia.ca!vax2.concordia.ca!hirschj
From: [e-mail] (JACK HIRSCHBERG)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: where to get air gap variable capacitors
Date: 8 Aug 1995 15:50 -0500
Organization: Concordia University
Lines: 7
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vax2.concordia.ca
NNTP-Posting-User: HIRSCHJ
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.50

where does one get these things. I need one to make
a good loop antenna for am dxing. can anyone tell me
also how to substitute a varicap for the capacitor if
i can't find the value i'm looking for?
Thanks,
--jack



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuhou.aloha.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Steve W. Teegarden)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site
Date: 9 Aug 1995 06:17:10 GMT
Organization: Hawaii OnLine - Honolulu, HI
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <409jt6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: oahu-5.u.aloha.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>
>I have uploaded the latest version of the AD4RK Logbook for Windows
shareware
>(version 2.1).  The FTP site is
>
>                                oak.oakland.edu
>
>and the path is
>
>                                pub3/hamradio/pc/logging/logbook.zip.
>
>You can get to this FTP site on the WWW at the Boston Amateur Radio Club
FTP
>archive.  Many thanks to Scott Ehrlich!
>
>Please give the logbook a try.  Suggestions for improvements are welcome.
>Respond to [e-mail].
>
>Thanks for your interest! 73
>
>
>
>
Well I have an improvement for your review.... The install program doesn't
work, and there is a file missing. It's called MSAJT11.DLL and was not in
ANY of the disk ZIP files , or created anywhere.

I downloaded that monster 2 MEG file 3 times to check it on three
different machines, and then sent you mail asking for help... No reply
from you, so I'll post here in case someone else has encountered the same
problems...

If you get around to fixing it, it might be nice to have the "Fix" located
on the FTP site you listed above...

Steve WH6IC



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.cerf.net!nntp-server.caltech.edu!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 95 08:30:50 MST
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <40akhk$[e-mail]>
References: <409jt6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ggspc.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


Steve,

I had similar problems and gave up but I am still uninstalling.
Not worth the trouble IMHO.

73 de Jerry


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 10 14:29:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with 2m lpf in series"
Date: 9 Aug 95 14:41:59 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!li.net!adruda
From: [e-mail] (Andy Druda)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: *Stealth Operating*
Date: 12 Aug 1995 14:45:45 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <40ieqp$[e-mail]>
References: <4092t7$[e-mail]> <40em44$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

WA6UBE ([e-mail]) wrote:
: You can have great results on the lower amateur bands ( 40/80 meters) with
: horizontal dipole antennas as close to the ground as six feet .. On 40
: meters, the difference in performance can be as little as 4 or 5 dB in
: comparison to a 40 meter dipole that is 30 feet off the ground.. since 4
: to 5 dB is less than one "S-Unit", and closer to the ground also means
: less reception of man-made noise in some cases, the results can indeed be
: surprizing ..

: 73-
: Patricia Gibbons - wa6ube ..
: [e-mail] "The Vertical Skywave Girl"



You think no one will notice that six foot dipole?

Andy


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (V31RY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: *Stealth Operating*
Date: 13 Aug 1995 11:37:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40l68l$[e-mail]>
References: <4092t7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (V31RY)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Bersak)
>My family was recently forced to relocate.  we moved into a very nice
>house that my mother designed and built.  She is now denying me access
>to the roof and the back yard as far as antennas go.  Does anyone have
any
>tips as to how to operate high power DX stealthily without frying
myself??

 How about an attic dipole??  Make one with legs for as many bands as you
want to operate (and will fit across the attic), and feed it with some
kind of balanced line, connected to a good quality tuner..
  I've worked RTTY-DXCC and RTTY-WAS in 2 years from my attic, running
100w..  You don't need high power for DXing!!    Good Luck!

Glenn   AE0Q/V31RY   ex: WA0VPK, GM5BKC, ZB2WZ



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m/70mm car antenna too close to radio antenna??
Date: 14 Aug 1995 04:28:12 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <40mjcs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


I think I have accidently mounted the two antennas too close to each other.
They are about 3" apart. At the time, I was thinking that it would great
to have them next to each othe, rather than have on on each side. They
are mounted right next ot the engin hood. The problem is that when
I xmit on 2m, it creats a loud sound on the radio if it is on. It even
does it if I am listening to a CD. For the time being, I have been
just turning off the radio completely before xmiting. I was considering
moving the antenna to the other side, but was wondering if this would solve
the problem, or if I was still going ot have this problem even on the other
side? If so, then I don't want to mess with moving it, not tom mention the holes
I already drilled for the trunk lip mount. BTW, I have not tried to xmit on
440 to see if it is also a problem.

ANy suggestions?

Thanks!!
Drew Loker,  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 wave vs. J-pole
Date: 12 Aug 1995 12:11:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40ijs8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


>So, I should add radials to my 5/8 J-pole?  Where would they go?  At the
base
>of the "J", or at the top of the matching section?  Neither really seems
right.

>Greg  KO6TH

Greg, The problem is the radials have to be very dense (many of them) and
very long (maybe ten feet or more). That's a lot of work for a few dB.

On the other hand a few 1/4 wl radials will help decouple the feedline if
placed at the feedpoint connection and connected to the shield of the
feedline.

Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.magg.net!news
From: "Terrence R. Redding" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info
Date: 12 Aug 1995 19:54:12 GMT
Organization: M.A.G. Information Services (MAGG.NET)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <40j0t4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpb-109.magg.net

I've located a tower, at subject, but know nothing about it.

Has anyone seen or heard of the 70' Rohn crankup/foldover tower?

I will have to drive 3,000 miles round trip to get it and pay
about $1,500 for it.  It comes with a HamIV and HAM-M rotor and also
a non-working TailTwister rotor, plus a TH6DXX beam.

All comments aprreciated.  Thanks, Terry
WB5LMJ @ WB4MOZ.FL.USA.NA



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.isl.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gilbert Baron)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 23:47:33 GMT
Organization: Information Superhighways Limited
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <40jfo3$[e-mail]>
References: <40j0t4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sparc.isl.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99.82

"Terrence R. Redding" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I've located a tower, at subject, but know nothing about it.

>Has anyone seen or heard of the 70' Rohn crankup/foldover tower?

>I will have to drive 3,000 miles round trip to get it and pay
>about $1,500 for it.  It comes with a HamIV and HAM-M rotor and also
>a non-working TailTwister rotor, plus a TH6DXX beam.

>All comments aprreciated.  Thanks, Terry
>WB5LMJ @ WB4MOZ.FL.USA.NA

I had that tower for 23 years before I moved. It is very sturdy and a
good tower. I think that you are paying too much for a used tower. I
sold mine for 500. That was a bargain of course and no rotator or
beam. If the beam and rotator are in good shape maybe it is fair but
the 1500 mile trip will cost you. You need a LOT to haul it.
The disadvantage is that it requires guying at two heights. It is
guyed at the fold and the top. It takes 8 guys. It served me well but
I doubt I would buy another. It cost me 400 delivered but that was
many years ago.

BE CAREFUL taking it down. When taking mine down the fold over folded
when not ready and almost knocked someone of of the tower. IT SI
DANEROUS. Much more in taking down than putting up.


Gil Baron W0MN [e-mail], finger for my pgp key
"Bailar es vivir" pgp2.6 key http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
"Cuatro caminos hay en mi vida. Cual de los cuatro sera el mejor"

[Posted with Agent .99. For info, email [e-mail].]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (jbmitch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info
Date: 13 Aug 1995 14:47:48 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech/Blacksburg Electronic Village
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <40l3ak$[e-mail]>
References: <40j0t4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jbmitch.beva.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

In article <40j0t4$[e-mail]>, "Terrence R. Redding" <[e-mail]> says:
>Has anyone seen or heard of the 70' Rohn crankup/foldover tower?
>All comments aprreciated.  Thanks, Terry
>WB5LMJ @ WB4MOZ.FL.USA.NA

You might ask if the tower is built of 25 or 45 sections; Rohn offers
both.  The 45 is much heavier duty.  I believe the tilt over is an
excellent design, particularly if you don't like climbing towers.  (who does?)
In short, probably too much money for the 25, but not bad if it's 45.
73, John


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Hansen, James K (FL40))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info
Date: 14 Aug 95 20:05:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


>I've located a tower, at subject, but know nothing about it.
>
>Has anyone seen or heard of the 70' Rohn crankup/foldover tower?

If my memory serves me, this is not a self supporting tower.  You should
verify this point.  A self supporting tower is much easier to put up in a
typical city lot!

>I will have to drive 3,000 miles round trip to get it and pay
>about $1,500 for it.  It comes with a HamIV and HAM-M rotor and also
>a non-working TailTwister rotor, plus a TH6DXX beam.

About 7 years ago I purchased a new Telex-HiGain HD70 tower.  It is self
supporting, 20' when down, 70' when up.  This tower is aesthetically better
than most due to the lack of guy wires and the fact that I hid it directly
behind my chimney.  This was an important consideration towards obtaining
the variance to the deed restriction.

For less than $100 I constructed a derrick which gave me the foldover
feature.  The derrick attached to the mounting feed and did not utilize a
counterpoise.  The commercially available kit for folding the tower up
required a counterpoise, which was not possible due to the fact that the
tower had to tilt town away from the house and was only 1' from the house.
 I believe that the fold over feature could be added to almost any self
supporting crank-up tower as I did to mine.  However, make sure of the
structural integrity of such a modification.  I performed an engineering
analysis to verify the integrity of the derrick I built and also verified
that the shear stress on the bolts where within a safe margin.

I purchased my tower new at a time when Telex-HiGain was offering a free
antenna with the purchase of a tower, rotator, and stand-off brackets.  I
have got the TH7DX and tail twister in the package for something like $3000
to $4000.   If the tower you are thinking of is self supporting, the price
is fair.  However, I know of others who have obtained 50' crank up towers
for as little as $400.  But then again, how long do you want to shop for
that kind of deal?  Personally I would have to be in a very hard spot to
consider letting mine go for less than $2000!

Jim
WD0DIA



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 70cm sets off sensor light??
Date: 14 Aug 1995 04:32:07 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <40mjk7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


I have an external antenna at about 25', which is about 30 feet away
from a motion sensor flood light int he back yard. WHen I xmit on any
70cm freq, it is setting the sensor light off. Is there anything I can do
about this? Moving either is not really an option.

Thanks!!
Drew Loker,  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!bman.uucom.com!ns1.iamerica.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!mhv.net!usenet
From: "Bruce J. Goldstein" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 70cm sets off sensor light??
Date: 14 Aug 1995 14:26:34 GMT
Organization: MHVNet, the Mid Hudson Valley's Internet connection
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <40nmeq$[e-mail]>
References: <40mjk7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ulster-port5.mhv.net

[e-mail] (Drew Loker) wrote:
>
>
> I have an external antenna at about 25', which is about 30 feet away
> from a motion sensor flood light int he back yard. WHen I xmit on any
> 70cm freq, it is setting the sensor light off. Is there anything I can do
> about this? Moving either is not really an option.

>
> Thanks!!
> Drew Loker,  [e-mail]

For whatever it is worth.  My motion sensors are set off by just about
anything but 2 meters.  HF is really bad.  I have thought about
ferrite beads on the ac lines but most of the lights are in positions
where getting to the ac would be impossible.

My utimate solution was:
    1. Lose my job (downsizing!)
    2. Sell my house
    3. Hope my next abode is better.
    4. Know anyone wanting a software project manager, QA leader,
       system programmer, system tester, or technical writer?


Sorry, I can not be any more helpful.

       - WA3AFS














From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!venus.sun.com!news2me.EBay.Sun.COM!centralnews1.Central.Sun.COM!sunicnc.France.Sun.COM!smckinty
From: [e-mail] (Steve McKinty - SunSoft ICNC Grenoble)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ? LongWave (198kHz) antenna
Date: 14 Aug 1995 13:46:29 GMT
Organization: SunConnect
Lines: 35
Sender: smckinty@hardy (Steve McKinty - SunSoft ICNC Grenoble)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40nk3l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.france.sun.com

I know that isn't an amateur band, but I'd appreciate any help,
most of my antenna experiments have been VHF, not HF.

I live in SE France, and my girlfriend has recently moved to
an apartment at about 800m ASL. On a small portable radio the
BBC signal on 198kHz is faint, but audible. Not really a
usable signal.

On a car radio outside, and on an inexpensive HiFi tuner (both
digital, probably with broadband untuned front ends) there is a
signal present, but the content can't be distinguished.

What I'm trying to find for her is an antenna which will lift the
signal far enough out of the noise to be at least usable for news,
even if not of especially great quality. I'd prefer not to modify
the radios (or replace them with expensive GC receivers!), at least
to start with, so I'm looking for suggestions for a reasonable LW
antenna.  'reasonable' has to mean not too obtrusive, I might get
away with an internal longwire along a wall, or an external one
across the eaves.

Any suggestions on dimensions, tuning, and any other hints (including
RTFM pointers) would be welcome. Would replacing the HiFi tuner's loop
with a ferrite rod antenna help?

Thanks

Steve
F5VCG

--
Steve McKinty                   |
Sun Microsystems ICNC           |
38240 Meylan, France            |
email: [e-mail]  |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna spark problem
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 15:43:34 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 37

-> Path: global.gc.net!athos.itribe.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primene
->       usenet
-> From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Thomas)
-> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
-> Lines: 10
-> NNTP-Posting-Host: ip167.fhu.primenet.com
-> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99.82
->
-> I live in SE Arizona.  During the monsoon season (now) every evening
-> we experience a large amount of storms and electricity in the sky.  I
-> have 2 antennas, a beam and a G5RV.   I disconnect the coax's from th
-> switch box prior to each storm and can watch the cable emit a spark
-> from the connector.  Is there a way I can eliminate this?
->
-> Any help is appreciated.
->
-> Jeff
->

What you are doing is VERY Dangerous.  Before a storm, if you disconnect
your antenna lead, make sure you GROUND the coax, BOTH the shield
and the center conductor.
Voltage on a open coax during a storm can also be high enough to
arc through the dielectric insulaton between the coax shield and
center conductor and ruin your coax.

Again,  NEVER NEVER DISCONNECT A TRANSMISSION LINE BEFORE A STORM
        OR DURING A STORM AND LEAVE IT OPEN.  SOMEONE CAN BE KILLED
        OR DAMAGE CAN OCCUR.
        **********ALWAYS GROUND AN OPEN TRANSMISSION LINE, BOTH
        THE CENTER CONDUCTOR AND THE SHIELD.*************

I sure hope someone learns from this message.

Jim Wooddell, WA6OFT
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!fconvx.ncifcrf.gov!mack
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mack)
Subject: Re: Antenna spark problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center
References: <40empe$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 02:54:22 GMT
Lines: 16

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <40empe$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeffrey Thomas) writes:
>>I live in SE Arizona.  During the monsoon season (now) every evening
>>we experience a large amount of storms and electricity in the sky.  I
>>have 2 antennas, a beam and a G5RV.   I disconnect the coax's from the
>>switch box prior to each storm and can watch the cable emit a spark
>>from the connector.  Is there a way I can eliminate this?


Do you have a direct DC path from your antenna to ground? This will eliminate
static build up (and associated RF noise from corona discharge) in the antenna.
A big toroid on the antenna side of the tuner is the sort of thing I'm thinking
of.

        Joe NA3T



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 95 04:44:17 GMT
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>Radio Works also makes a choke balun that can be placed anywhere
>along the coax.

I've always believed that connecting coax to a 1/2 wave dipole without
installing a balun at the center can cause significant skewing of the
pattern.

If a choke balun is located at the opposite end of the feedline (near
the transmitter), does that alleviate this problem?  Isn't the dipole
still being driven by an unbalanced feed?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.cerf.net!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.claremont.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 11 Aug 1995 23:53:57 -0700
Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <40hj65$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: safety.ics.uci.edu

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>I've always believed that connecting coax to a 1/2 wave dipole without
>installing a balun at the center can cause significant skewing of the
>pattern.

I always wondered why I would worry about the pattern of my 1/2 wave dipole.
I figure that the building proximity, height above ground and stuff would
affect it enough, and, besides, the dipole is essentially omni directional
anyway.  I suspect that a big beam might need the balun to keep the
integrity of the pattern because that is the point of the beam.  I
am afraid of the losses in a balun, especially when using an antenna on
many bands where SWR can get a little wild at the balun/feedpoint.

No antenna expert here, just my gut feeling.

Clark
WA3JPG


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 15:36:03 GMT
Lines: 30


: I've always believed that connecting coax to a 1/2 wave dipole without
: installing a balun at the center can cause significant skewing of the
: pattern.

: If a choke balun is located at the opposite end of the feedline (near
: the transmitter), does that alleviate this problem?  Isn't the dipole
: still being driven by an unbalanced feed?

: 73,

: Jack  WB3U
Here's a hot one for ya. Coax is really balanced. The current on the center
conductor is balanced against the current on the inside of the outer
conductor.

Problems only arrise when the outside of the shield picks up signal. This
can be avoided by cutting the coax to a non-resonant length and dropping
it down at right angels to the antenna. A balun at the antenna doesn't
stop this from happening. As long as the antenna is resonant and matches
the feed line, a 1:1 balun won't do beans.

Got Rf on the coax getting into the shack and biteing your lips? Choke it
out with an in-line current choke before it gets into the shack. That's
why I mentioned the radio Works current choke.
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 12 Aug 1995 17:51:04 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <40ipm8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx2-47.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) writes:
;  Recently I have been testing several different 1/2 wave dipole antennas
;  with and without 1:1 baluns.
;  Because things are never perfect....like swr, coax length, etc., I'd
;  like to know some educated thoughts on why I should use a 1:1 balun
;  instead of connecting a 50 ohm coax directly to a center fed 1/2 wave
;  dipole.  I can choke off the current flow in the outside conductor
;  with several turns of coax at the feed point.
;  [e-mail]
;  RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider
;


Jim, see

"Some Aspects of the Balun Problem", QST, March 1983, p. 38

"Baluns: What They Do and How They Do It", The Arrl Antenna Compendium,
Vol. 1, p. 157

or the ARRL Handbook back to 1992 or so (see the index under "baluns").

These all explain what baluns do.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL

[e-mail]

[Beginning August 17, any other of my Internet addresses will be invalid.]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:40 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40hj65$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 18:30:06 GMT
Lines: 16

In article <40hj65$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner) writes:
>I always wondered why I would worry about the pattern of my 1/2 wave dipole.

>No antenna expert here, just my gut feeling.

Your gut is pretty smart. The only thing a balun buys you with a
typical HF dipole is perhaps keeping RF from backing up into the
shack, IE the hot mike syndrome. If you don't have that problem,
a balun is just a nuisance, and another loss term.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 14:50:21 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 46

->
->    [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
->
-> >Radio Works also makes a choke balun that can be placed anywhere
-> >along the coax.
->
-> I've always believed that connecting coax to a 1/2 wave dipole withou
-> installing a balun at the center can cause significant skewing of the
-> pattern.

I' ve tried this both ways and could not tell any difference in
pattern.. although I never put any real test equipment on to test
for this.

-> If a choke balun is located at the opposite end of the feedline (near
-> the transmitter), does that alleviate this problem?  Isn't the dipole
-> still being driven by an unbalanced feed?
->
-> 73,
->
-> Jack  WB3U

  I wonder if you can really consider putting chokes on the outside of
a coax a true balun.  They will stop the current flow on the shield,
but this is only one purpose of a true balun????

  On another note about baluns...
  In a perfect situation, the balun, is a 1:1 device to match an
  unbalanced 50 ohm (nominal) coax to a 50 ohm (nominal) dipole that
  is perfectly set-up as far as hight above ground, perfectly
  horizontal, and has the correct electrical length of coax (in 1/2
  wave lengths) installed.
  When is this ever a true case?
  I am finding in my portable installation the impedence of my
  centerfed antennas are lower than 50 ohms, due to the ends of the
  antenna being lower than the feed point and being close to ground.
  I am now wanting to build a balun to have 0.5:1 or .75:1 ratio to
  see if that will cure my constant reflected power I am seeing.
  I figure if my tuner can tune it out, I too, should be able to.
  To prove that I am correct, I am going to set up my antenna, test it
  and set my tuner for 0 reflected power.  Then, I'll start trying
  dummy loads with variable resistance to determine just what the
  antenna, coax and balun actually look like.
  Jim Wooddell
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 13 Aug 1995 04:17:19 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <40jucf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx7-34.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) writes:
;
; . . .

;    I wonder if you can really consider putting chokes on the outside of
;  a coax a true balun.  They will stop the current flow on the shield,
;  but this is only one purpose of a true balun????
;
;. . .

Yes.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 13 Aug 1995 05:06:49 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <40k199$[e-mail]>
References: <40jucf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx9-31.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

:   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
:  ;   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) writes:
:  ;
:  ; . . .
:
:  ;    I wonder if you can really consider putting chokes on the outside of
:  ;  a coax a true balun.  They will stop the current flow on the shield,
:  ;  but this is only one purpose of a true balun????
:  ;
:  ;. . .
:
:  Yes.
:
:  Roy Lewallen, W7EL
:  [e-mail]

Some days are like that. I meant,

  Stopping the current flow in the shield *is* the one purpose of a true balun.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 95 16:24:03 GMT
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40hj65$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner) wrote:

>I always wondered why I would worry about the pattern of my 1/2 wave
>dipole.  I figure that the building proximity, height above ground
>and stuff would affect it enough, and, besides, the dipole is
>essentially omni directional anyway.

Obviously, I can't speak for your particular installation.  However,
the pattern is essentially 180 deg, not omnidirectional.  I have tried
to take advantage of that fact when possible.

>I am afraid of the losses in a balun, especially when using an
>antenna on many bands where SWR can get a little wild at the
>balun/feedpoint.

Clark, this is absolutely correct and I have long since stopped using
baluns with non-resonant antennas.  However, the original post did
refer to 1/2 wave dipoles.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 95 16:34:36 GMT
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>Got Rf on the coax getting into the shack and biteing your lips?
>Choke it out with an in-line current choke before it gets into the
>shack. That's why I mentioned the radio Works current choke.

FWIW, I was using ferrites back in the early 70's for this purpose,
long before I ever saw anyone else do it.  This is certainly a helpful
technique, but it does have some of the same drawbacks as baluns,
including (sometimes) loss.

Anyone who uses this technique should be certain it's not costing them
RF on any of the bands of operation.  Some of the chokes I've built
seemed fine running barefoot, but would get too hot to touch at higher
power.  This means they're not only capable of choking the RF,
but also of absorbing it.  This is OK when you need an RFI filter on a
power cord, but not on an antenna feedline.

The proper solution is to fix the real problem.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!newsfeed.tip.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 22:48:09 GMT
Organization: Sydsvenska Dagbladet, Malmo, Sweden
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <40lvlp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40f1a2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: a3119.dial.tip.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (gadget) wrote:

>In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) writes:
>>Recently I have been testing several different 1/2 wave dipole antennas
>>with and without 1:1 baluns.
>>Because things are never perfect....like swr, coax length, etc., I'd
>>like to know some educated thoughts on why I should use a 1:1 balun
>>instead of connecting a 50 ohm coax directly to a center fed 1/2 wave
>>dipole.  I can choke off the current flow in the outside conductor
>>with several turns of coax at the feed point.

>One reason to use a 1:1 balun, could be to have a nice attachment for the
>lines in which you hang the dipole. :-)

>Since the function of the balun, among other things, would depend on the antenna
>being "symmetrical" towards ground (i.e. surrounding objects), I do not believe
>that the 1:1 balun ever will be anything else than a good attachment point, and
>a possible source for water leakage, and, in the case of baluns wound on a core,
>a possible source for imbalance caused by saturation of that core.

According to William Orr, in one of his many antenna handbooks, by
using a 1:1 balun on a dipole you will get a much more narrow null at
the short side of the antenna. Without the balun the dipole tends to
become more omnidirectional.
Regards,
Hermod Pedersen
Malmo, Sweden




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 13 Aug 1995 23:29:29 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <40m1sp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx5-26.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
;     [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
;
;  >Got Rf on the coax getting into the shack and biteing your lips?
;  >Choke it out with an in-line current choke before it gets into the
;  >shack. That's why I mentioned the radio Works current choke.
;
;  FWIW, I was using ferrites back in the early 70's for this purpose,
;  long before I ever saw anyone else do it.  This is certainly a helpful
;  technique, but it does have some of the same drawbacks as baluns,
;  including (sometimes) loss.
;
;  Anyone who uses this technique should be certain it's not costing them
;  RF on any of the bands of operation.  Some of the chokes I've built
;  seemed fine running barefoot, but would get too hot to touch at higher
;  power.  This means they're not only capable of choking the RF,
;  but also of absorbing it.  This is OK when you need an RFI filter on a
;  power cord, but not on an antenna feedline.
;
;  The proper solution is to fix the real problem.
;
;  73,
;
;  Jack  WB3U
;
;>>>

If you're running a kW and can still put your finger on the balun without
burning yourself, the loss is negligible from a signal-strength standpoint.

Some baluns, like the air-core variety, or ones using 60-series ferrite,
have an impedance that's primarily inductive. This is inherently lower
loss. In the case of ferrites, it's more difficult to get enough Z with
60-series ferrite. It's relatively easy to get high Z at HF with 70-series
ferrites, but the Z is primarily resistive. When using this material,
the cause of a excessive loss is that the impedance isn't high enough. The
current through the balun is the undesired current on the outside of the
coax. If the balun Z is high enough, the current is small (which is what
you want) and the balun dissipation is also small.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 04:09:28 GMT
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40mca8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

>  If a balun doesn't heat with a kW, it means that it's doing its job
>well because it's brought the current to a very low level, that it's
>resistive and has very low Z so isn't doing its job well, or that
>its Z is primarily inductive and it may or may not be working. You
>won't be able to distinguish which is true if heating is your only
>means of evalutation.

This is all true, but I was referring specifically to losses that
can occur within the choke, thus the reference to heat.

Personally, I think the other ways in which the choke might not do its
job are still reasonably detectable.  My initial comments on this
were related to the use of the choke when it's located close to the
transmitter, in order to eliminate RF on the chassis of the rig ("mic
bite").  If the choke isn't doing its job (whether or not it gets
hot), the symptoms will probably persist.

>If a balun is a "band aid" method of reducing the current on the
>outside of the shield to a low value, what's the real "cure"?

Referenced to using the choke for the purpose described above, the
solution is to perform the unbalanced-to-balanced conversion at
the feedpoint of the antenna.  That not only presents a more
predictable environment for the ferrite, but minimizes radiation from
the feedline.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 95 23:51:04 GMT
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>Here's a hot one for ya. Coax is really balanced. The current on the
>center conductor is balanced against the current on the inside of the
>outer conductor.
>
>Problems only arise when the outside of the shield picks up signal.

Not true.  The ARRL Antenna Book explains this best:

"A centerfed antenna with open ends, of which the half-wave type is an
example, is inherently a balanced radiator.  . . .  If the antenna is
fed at the center through a coaxial line, this balance is upset
because one side of the radiator is connected to the shield while the
other is connected to the inner conductor.  On the side connected to
the shield, a current can flow down over the *outside* of the coaxial
line.  The fields thus set up cannot be canceled by the fields from
the inner conductor because the fields *inside* the line cannot escape
throught the shielding afforded by the outer conductor.  Hence, these
"antenna" currents flowing on the outside of the line will be
responsible for radiation."

I think it is also safe to say that radiation from the coax is also
*partly* responsible for the skewed pattern that results when a dipole
is fed directly from a coaxial line.

So, back to my original question.  If the balun is omitted and a
shield choke is used instead (at the transmitter end of the feedline),
will the radiation pattern still be skewed?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 00:29:44 GMT
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40m1sp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:
>;   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>;  Anyone who uses this technique should be certain it's not costing
>;them RF on any of the bands of operation.  Some of the chokes I've
>;built seemed fine running barefoot, but would get too hot to touch
>;at higher power.  This means they're not only capable of choking the
>;RF, but also of absorbing it.

>If you're running a kW and can still put your finger on the balun
>without burning yourself, the loss is negligible from a
>signal-strength standpoint.

I think someone could take exception to that statement on at least two
grounds.  The first is that if the ferrite device is large, or the
transmit duty cycle low, heating may not be a reliable indicator.
Second, I don't know what degree of power loss you have in mind, but
my concept of acceptable loss may not be quite the same as yours.

Actually, I should have been clearer on this entire point.  What I
meant was that the power lost in the ferrite when running a KW is
easily detected, due to heating.  This may not be the case with QRP,
or even 100 watts, and the operator may incur losses he's not aware
of.  This is why I consider these devices to be band aids, and why I
dislike them.  :)

73

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:48 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.cerf.net!nntp2.cerf.net!pelican.com!grian!morris
From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
References: <40jucf$[e-mail]> <40k199$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 01:43:02 GMT
Lines: 40

[e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
>:   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
>:  ;   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) writes:
>:  ; . . .
>:  ;    I wonder if you can really consider putting chokes on the outside of
>:  ;  a coax a true balun.  They will stop the current flow on the shield,
>:  ;  but this is only one purpose of a true balun????
>:  ;. . .
>:
>:  Yes.
>:  Roy Lewallen, W7EL

>Some days are like that. I meant,

>  Stopping the current flow in the shield *is* the one purpose of a true balun.

>Roy Lewallen, W7EL    [e-mail]

Speaking of stopping the current flow in the shield....
A friend of mine and I were discussing six meter repeaters the other
day, and possible antenna systems that wouldn't need four or six
water-heater-sized cavities, and we came up with putting the receive
antenna at 120' on the tower, and the transmit antenna at either 40',
60' or 80', whichever would place the RX antenna in a null for the TX
antenna.  However, he feels that the TX antenna would "warm up" the
RX antenna feedline to RF, which would be ducted right into the front
end of the receiver by the feedline outer shield. Even with grounding
the outer jacket at the building entrance, and using a cavity on the RX,
there would still be a unbroken path for RF to the RX chassis.

Any ideas?  The equipment in question is a 60w Master Pro 6m repeater
that is currently being used as a base station...

Mike Morris   WA6ILQ          | All opinions must be my own since nobody
PO Box 1130                   | pays me enough to be their mouthpiece...
Arcadia, CA. 91077            |
ICBM: 34-07.9N, 118-03.8W     | Reply to: [e-mail]

--



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 14 Aug 1995 02:15:24 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <40mbjs$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx3-19.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>     [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>  . . .

>  So, back to my original question.  If the balun is omitted and a
>  shield choke is used instead (at the transmitter end of the feedline),
>  will the radiation pattern still be skewed?
>
>  73,
>
>  Jack  WB3U

A "current" or "choke" balun is a shield choke -- no more and no less.
It'll frequently do the job if placed somewhere besides the feedpoint,
but the effectiveness depends on the length of the feedline and the
effective distance from the insertion point to RF ground. In general,
it'll do best if placed an integral number of half wavelengths from the
feedpoint, but this isn't a hard and fast rule. The one thing you can
depend on is that the current on the outside of the shield will be small
at the point where the balun (or "choke") is inserted.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 14 Aug 1995 02:27:20 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <40mca8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx3-19.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

:   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
:     [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:
:  >;   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

:  >;  Anyone who uses this technique should be certain it's not costing
:  >;them RF on any of the bands of operation.  Some of the chokes I've
:  >;built seemed fine running barefoot, but would get too hot to touch
:  >;at higher power.  This means they're not only capable of choking the
:  >;RF, but also of absorbing it.

:  >If you're running a kW and can still put your finger on the balun
:  >without burning yourself, the loss is negligible from a
:  >signal-strength standpoint

:  I think someone could take exception to that statement on at least two
:  grounds.  The first is that if the ferrite device is large, or the
:  transmit duty cycle low, heating may not be a reliable indicator.

  This is true.

:  Second, I don't know what degree of power loss you have in mind, but
:  my concept of acceptable loss may not be quite the same as yours.


  This is also true. My statement was based on the fact that a 1 dB loss
  when a kW is being used is about 250 watts. This'll cook any balun.
  Even 1/10 this amount would get most of them really hot, and I wouldn't
  consider this amount of loss (0.11 dB) significant -- especially if I
  had a kW to begin with! But you may.

:  Actually, I should have been clearer on this entire point.  What I
:  meant was that the power lost in the ferrite when running a KW is
:  easily detected, due to heating.  This may not be the case with QRP,
:  or even 100 watts, and the operator may incur losses he's not aware
:  of.  This is why I consider these devices to be band aids, and why I
:  dislike them.  :)

  You could say exactly the same of antenna tuners and quite a number of
  other circuits.

  If a balun doesn't heat with a kW, it means that it's doing its job well
  because it's brought the current to a very low level, that it's
  resistive and has very low Z so isn't doing its job well, or that its
  Z is primarily inductive and it may or may not be working. You won't be
  able to distinguish which is true if heating is your only means of
  evalutation. If a balun is a "band aid" method of reducing the current
  on the outside of the shield to a low value, what's the real "cure"?

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 14:10:50 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 40

->
->    [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) writes:
-> ;  Recently I have been testing several different 1/2 wave dipole ant
-> ;  with and without 1:1 baluns.
-> ;  Because things are never perfect....like swr, coax length, etc., I
-> ;  like to know some educated thoughts on why I should use a 1:1 balu
-> ;  instead of connecting a 50 ohm coax directly to a center fed 1/2 w
-> ;  dipole.  I can choke off the current flow in the outside conductor
-> ;  with several turns of coax at the feed point.
-> ;  [e-mail]
-> ;  RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Pr
-> ;
->
->
-> Jim, see
->
-> "Some Aspects of the Balun Problem", QST, March 1983, p. 38
->
-> "Baluns: What They Do and How They Do It", The Arrl Antenna Compendiu
-> Vol. 1, p. 157
->
-> or the ARRL Handbook back to 1992 or so (see the index under "baluns"
->
-> These all explain what baluns do.
->
-> 73,
-> Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Thanks Roy!

I understand what they do, I' ve been build them for awhile!  However,
I must admit my books go way back!  I doubt the principles have changed
much.  In my original post, I think I was looking for real experiences
and educated thoughts on why they should be used.
I would love to read the articles you mentioned, however.  Now just
finding them!

Jim
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!bman.uucom.com!ns1.iamerica.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 14 Aug 1995 15:41:18 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <40nqqu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx3-04.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Mike Morris) writes:

>  . . .

>  Speaking of stopping the current flow in the shield....
>  A friend of mine and I were discussing six meter repeaters the other
>  day, and possible antenna systems that wouldn't need four or six
>  water-heater-sized cavities, and we came up with putting the receive
>  antenna at 120' on the tower, and the transmit antenna at either 40',
>  60' or 80', whichever would place the RX antenna in a null for the TX
>  antenna.  However, he feels that the TX antenna would "warm up" the
>  RX antenna feedline to RF, which would be ducted right into the front
>  end of the receiver by the feedline outer shield. Even with grounding
>  the outer jacket at the building entrance, and using a cavity on the RX,
>  there would still be a unbroken path for RF to the RX chassis.

>  Any ideas?  The equipment in question is a 60w Master Pro 6m repeater
>  that is currently being used as a base station...

In theory, current on the outside of the shield won't get into the second
receiver. If the bulkhead grounding is done right, the current will end
up on the outside of the bulkhead. Any which would get through should end
up on the outside, not inside, of the second receiver if its shielding is
good.

I presume the tower is metal. If the cable is dressed against the tower,
any current on the outside of the cable would also be induced into the
tower, which probably (although not certainly) would reduce the current
on the outside of the coax by the time it left the tower.

If current on the outside of the coax is a problem in cases like this,
you can reduce it to a low value by putting 2 or 3 "current" ("choke")
baluns at about 1/4 wavelength intervals beginning at the coupling
point.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Hansen, James K (FL40))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 14 Aug 95 20:20:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


>Speaking of stopping the current flow in the shield....
>A friend of mine and I were discussing six meter repeaters the other
>day, and possible antenna systems that wouldn't need four or six
>water-heater-sized cavities, and we came up with putting the receive
>antenna at 120' on the tower, and the transmit antenna at either 40',
>60' or 80', whichever would place the RX antenna in a null for the TX
>antenna.

That is the way it used to be done on 2M and 70cm repeaters when the cost of
the prohibitive and/or the insertion loss couldn't be tolerated.  (The
insertion loss of the early duplexers was very high.)

>However, he feels that the TX antenna would "warm up" the
>RX antenna feed-line to RF, which would be ducted right into the front
>end of the receiver by the feed-line outer shield. Even with grounding
>the outer jacket at the building entrance, and using a cavity on the RX,
>there would still be a unbroken path for RF to the RX chassis.

I don't believe this will be a problem assuming the antenna is well matched
to the feed line and that the shielding of the feed line is adequate.  You
could go and continue debating this subject for some time, or you could just
try it and proceed from there!


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!stargate!rdixon
From: [e-mail] (Bob Dixon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 14 Aug 1995 15:35:50 GMT
Organization: The Ohio State University
Lines: 22
Sender: rdixon@stargate (Bob Dixon)
Message-ID: <40nqgm$[e-mail]>
References: <3vm10l$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vtet3$[e-mail]> <3vtt94$[e-mail]> <401quf$55 <[e-mail]> <406lr6$[e-mail]> <40dhtg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: stargate.acs.ohio-state.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84896 rec.radio.amateur.policy:28989 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12893

I believe that these restrictions aften get applied more out of habit and
neglect than intention. I used to serve on a local zoning board, and we had to
approve or disapprove any new housing development in our area. One of the
things we looked at was the CCRs. To a great extent, these were often just
boilerplate that was very repetitive from one development to another, even
though they were from different developers. I suspect the developers just
use some standard CCRs they get from their own "Developers Association" or
whatever, and make a few additions of their own at the end.

The zoning board really had no grounds to force changes in the CCRs unless
they were in conflict with the zoning code or master plan or other applicable
regulations. So there was nothing I could do to get the antenna restrictions
taken out.

I believe the only way to prevent these antenna CCRs in the future is to
work with the "Developers Associations" at the national or state levels,
and convince them  to remove or modify them in their standard boilerplate.
Otherwise developers will just continue to take the course of least resistance
and use the typical CCR document and not even think much about its content.


                                        Bob W8ERD


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!gwen.pcug.co.uk!kate.ibmpcug.co.uk!gbscomms!gordy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
From: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 09:36:22 GMT
Subject: COCO analysis reqd
Lines: 7

Hi

can anyone point me to analytical data on the COCO (coaxial-colinear) antenna?

TIA

Gordy

--
Caution: Keys now changed at random security intervals.
Contact for current armoured transport file.

"You are reminded that this is an insecure circuit. The use of names,
ranks and classified information is forbidden."





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.campus.mci.net!calweb!web1.calweb.com!dlangley
From: [e-mail] (Doug Langley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: cubical quad plans
Date: 13 Aug 1995 20:43:02 GMT
Organization: Calweb
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <40lo4m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: web1.calweb.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]



Does anyone have plans for the cubicle quad they could send me?  I had all
the formulas a few years back and seem to have lost them.  Any help would be
greatly appreciated.

P.S. I'm looking for the specs for 2m, 220 and 440.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: cubical quad plans
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 02:00:33 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40lo4m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Doug Langley <[e-mail]>

Doug Langley <[e-mail]> writes:

>Does anyone have plans for the cubicle quad they could send me?  I had all
>the formulas a few years back and seem to have lost them.  Any help would be
>greatly appreciated.
>
>P.S. I'm looking for the specs for 2m, 220 and 440.

From ARRL Antenna Book #17, page 18-30....Reflector 1046.8/F-MHz,
DE 985.5/F-MHz, Directors 973.3/F-MHz......spacing is: 16" from Ref. to DE,
13 inches fro DE to Dir and 13 from dir to next director....formula is for
146 MHz....I imagine that it would scale to the other bands you want.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:55 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 15:44:13 GMT
Lines: 24

I'll make you'all a bet.

Take any of these expensive multiband verticals and compare them to the
following antenna and I just bet you can't tell the difference.

Take wire or aluminum or copper pipe or whatever and make a vertical
stick the same length as your $300 vertical. Feed it with open wire line
and a tuner.

That's right. Hang a 25ft vertical dipole from a tree, wooden pole or
tape the wire to a fiberglass fishing pole and stick it on your roof,
whatever. Feed it with 300 ohm, 450 ohm or lamp cord, whatever. Want some
radials? Fine, use some wire and make them all the same length. Use a
tuner and presto, instant multiband antenna.

I just betya the losses in that tuner and feeder are less than in the
traps of some verticals.

Have fun
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 13 Aug 1995 01:53:26 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <40jlum$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger409.nando.net

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
 >
 > I'll make you'all a bet.
 >
 > Take any of these expensive multiband verticals and compare them to the
 > following antenna and I just bet you can't tell the difference.
 >
 > Take wire or aluminum or copper pipe or whatever and make a vertical
 > stick the same length as your $300 vertical. Feed it with open wire line
 > and a tuner.
 >
 > That's right. Hang a 25ft vertical dipole from a tree, wooden pole or
 > tape the wire to a fiberglass fishing pole and stick it on your roof,
 > whatever. Feed it with 300 ohm, 450 ohm or lamp cord, whatever. Want some
 > radials? Fine, use some wire and make them all the same length. Use a
 > tuner and presto, instant multiband antenna.
 >
 > I just betya the losses in that tuner and feeder are less than in the
 > traps of some verticals.
 >
 > Have fun
 > --
 >   Steve
 > [e-mail]
 >
 >
I second that.  I have been a follower of some of the work W8JK has
done in the past, and I believe that much of his work points out
the philosophy that - if you feed it right with low loss line, and
you can get power to it, it will radiate.  IMHO the real key to
success with an antenna is to keep the feedline loss low.

Many of the designs W8JK used called for 24 foot elements and were
optimized for 20, 15 and 10 meters.  They would also work on 40 with
some sacrifice in efficiency, and in a pinch, I have loaded them on
80 too, but that is pushing it.

The bottom line is: If you can feed a 24 foot element,
it will radiate just as good as any other 24 foot element.
I admit that there may be some things that could be done
(such as top loading) to increase the current density in the
radiating element thereby increasing the efficiency,
The latter is not the usual case, particularly in some of
the multi-band vertical designs that I have seen.

73 de W3FPR

Don


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 95 22:32:42 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>I'll make you'all a bet.
>
>Take any of these expensive multiband verticals and compare them to
>the following antenna and I just bet you can't tell the difference.
        <snip>
>I just betya the losses in that tuner and feeder are less than in the
>traps of some verticals.

If the antenna/feedline you described is fed directly from a tuner
with a balun at the output, losses on at least one or two bands is
likely to be very high.  Unless you exclude this configuration, you'll
probably lose your bet.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!gwen.pcug.co.uk!kate.ibmpcug.co.uk!gbscomms!gordy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
From: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 08:42:21 GMT
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Lines: 7


In article <[e-mail]>, Steve Ellington ([e-mail]) writes:
>I'll make you'all a bet.

no thanks, I reckon you're taking pocket money from kids :)

IMHO yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, ..........

--
Caution: Keys now changed at random security intervals.
Contact for current armoured transport file.

"You are reminded that this is an insecure circuit. The use of names,
ranks and classified information is forbidden."





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 95 20:08:05 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <3vdec2$[e-mail]> <3vdrdh$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vh6rr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1g.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>In an earlier article, Kurt said that a square antenna is always better
>than a dipole. I challenged him to come up with a square that will
>outperform my 88ft dipole on 20m *and* 17m (2 lobes@9dbi and 4 lobes@
>8dbi respectively). I haven't heard anything from him.

You have said many times that WR or later KNS "stretches the truth and you give
your answer to his statement  as your version of the proof or the truth.
 NOT a dipole to start with. Here: "It is a
collinear dipole, although it can't rightfully be called a dipole because
each half of its length is greatervthan 1/2 WL (each half is actually 0.64WL).
This means that is has a reversal of current flow in each antenna half, and
therefore has more than two "poles". Thus, your antenna is not a dipole at all.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:51:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!DIALix!brisbane.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Murray Kelly)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ferrite bead any good for antenna
Date: 12 Aug 1995 18:55:03 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Brisbane, Australia.
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40hq97$sp0$[e-mail]>
References: <40b1o2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Robert Kirk) writes:

>I just got a new computer that came with a ferrite bead to clamp
>around the video cable for certain monitors. I don't need it for
>my monitor, so is there any good use I can put it to? Would it
>help at the junction of the coax to my roll-up 2M Jpole? Anything
>else? I hate to throw gear away.

>Bob Kirk
>N3OZB

Despite the 'gain sayer' the ferrite will stop RF even tho
it was sold to stop much lower freqs. It will decouple the
feeder on your 2m antenna.

Murray Kelly. vk4aok.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Donald W. Culpepper)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV antenna inquiry.
Date: 14 Aug 1995 01:54:30 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <40macm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-jac2-01.ix.netcom.com

If anyone has experience using a G5RV type dipole for SWL DX for the
16m - 49m bands I'd appreciate your info.  It almost seems too simple a
design to be a multiband.  But that's what Joseph Carr, MSEE, calls it.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:00 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: G5RV antenna inquiry.
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <40macm$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 22:03:42 GMT
Lines: 13

Donald W. Culpepper ([e-mail]) wrote:
: If anyone has experience using a G5RV type dipole for SWL DX for the
: 16m - 49m bands I'd appreciate your info.  It almost seems too simple a
: design to be a multiband.  But that's what Joseph Carr, MSEE, calls it.

The whole G5RV thing is bunk. For SWL's any length dipole longer than
about 50ft will give great results. Feed it with 300 ohm twin lead and
use a cheapo tuner to peak it up.
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: GAP  Antennas
Date: 12 Aug 1995 07:45:24 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 48
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

I have read a lot of posts in this newsgroups about how poorly their GAP
antennas perform and quite frankly am puzzled. I own 2 GAP antennas. I bought
a DX-V when they first came out, installed in per the directions and have been
working DX with 100 watts ever since. I became interested in 40m, 80m, and
160m and bought the DX-IV shortly after it came out and again I was more than
pleased. I still use both antennas regularly and can't figure out why these
antennas get such a bad rap. The Old Timers object to the claim that the GAP
design eliminates ground losses. I am not an engineer so I don't know if it is
true or not. The newer hams are disappointed that the antenna doesn't work
when it is mounted between their apartmenthouse and the neighbor's metal
garden shed. (What antenna will?) Of all the people who have complained how
many have followed the set-up instructions and if they had a problem called
GAP and talked to one of the techs or the owner? And how many think that they
followed the instructions but haven't really?

I have found the GAP antennas to be unusual antennas because through
experience I have found that the angle of radiation is so low. Many times I
have worked DX that others could not hear and had to tape record the QSO to
prove it to others. And I think the the low angle is causing many people to
say that the antennas do not work. If the band is not open for DX you won"t
hear anything. If I want to ragchew I can't do it with either of my GAP
antennas. Instead I use a regular size G5RV. When I do work DX often times the
DX op will say that I am the only stateside signal that is coming through.

To give a blanced view I will say that yes the GAP antennas do have weaknesses
that are a result of compromises that the designer decided to trade off. For
instance my DX-V works best on 10m through 20m. I have worked DX on 40m and
80m but not as regularly. With the DX-IV I do work DX regularly on 40m and
80m. 160m is another matter. Considering the size of an antenna that is needed
to put a signal on 160m I feel fortunate to be on the band at all. And no I do
not work DX regularly on 160m but I do have QSO's on the band. If I didn't
have the GAP I would not be on 160m at all. So I am happy. I live in an
apartmnet  and both GAP's are ground mounted with the feed points located
above the building per the instructions.

We are nearing the bottom of the sunspot cycle so buying an antenna with a low
angle of radiation may not be what you are looking for. GAP antennas are not a
fix all for poor band conditions, poor locations, poor installations.

Something else that I would like to bring to light is the fact that as Hams we
are being hemmed in with antenna restrictions and height restrictions. Why is
the Ham community not taking the offensive and correcting this situation? We
should be building and experimenting with antennas that we are happy with.
Instead we have to read catalogs and try to find something that might work on
a 2 foot square of land. And that 2 foot square usually has a metal fence
around it.

Joe AA6WG


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Horrock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 11 Aug 1995 20:44:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40gtib$[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Horrock)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I have a challenger and like it.  I do guide the antenna.
10meter - 80meter work fine, but remember it is still
a vertical.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!dsinc!newsfeed.pitt.edu!hudson.lm.com!news.math.psu.edu!news.cac.psu.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!pagesat.net!liberty.liberty.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bill Brannick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 00:39:38 GMT
Organization: LIBERTY Information Network
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <40gtat$[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: midcom.midcom.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] () wrote:

>Hello out there!

>As I am planning to buy a GAP TITAN Vertical, I would like to know
>something more about its qualities from HAMS who already work with it.

>Both positive and negative reactions....

I had a GAP Challenger VI for three years prior to putting up  A
Lightning Bolt Quad..  The Gap is a fine antenna.... most problems
folks have with any vertical , more often then not, can be attributed
to the surrounding environment.... verticals don't like to compete
with other metallic objects.... I had a problem for a day or two with
mine and discovered the kids left a alumunum ladder leaning against
the house..... also watch out for drain pipes, etc....   but remember
this goes for any vertical....  IMHO  , based on reports from folks
around here.. GAP's antennas compete very well with their competition.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!pipeline!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Anthony G. Catalano)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 12 Aug 1995 01:02:04 -0400
Organization: The Pipeline
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <40hckc$[e-mail]>
References: <40g8un$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pipe1.nyc.pipeline.com
X-Newsreader: The Pipeline v3.1.1

On 11 Aug 1995 in article <Re: GAP Verticals>, '[e-mail] (W8JI
Tom)' wrote:
re: the gap antenna:

>On the positive side it does match
>well on all bands.
--
So does a 10,000 meters of RG-8
------------------------------------------------
Anthony G. Catalano WW2W














From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!news.erinet.com!en.com!usenet
From: Dana Henry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 13 Aug 1995 19:24:37 GMT
Organization: Exchange Network Services
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <40ljhl$[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l2-29.en.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]()

I have a GAP Titan, up for the last 6 months.  Save your
money.  I have more invested in phone calls to their Tech
support, than I do in the antenna. Our only local stocking
dealer, even took his down.
Don't take this as someone who hoped for too much from a
trapped vertical.  300 countries with a string of 4BTV's,
Butternuts, 14AVQ's and now the GAP.  I have used verticals
for all of my 25 years as a ham.

You won't hear too much bad about a GAP, because you don't
hear them....."WHAT A PIECE OF GAP"

Dana, [e-mail]





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.erinet.com!en.com!usenet
From: Dana Henry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 13 Aug 1995 19:26:24 GMT
Organization: Exchange Network Services
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <40ljl0$[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l2-29.en.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]()

I have a GAP Titan, up for the last 6 months.  Save your
money.  I have more invested in phone calls to their Tech
support, than I do in the antenna. Our only local stocking
dealer, even took his down.
Don't take this as someone who hoped for too much from a
trapped vertical.  300 countries with a string of 4BTV's,
Butternuts, 14AVQ's and now the GAP.  I have used verticals
for all of my 25 years as a ham.

You won't hear too much bad about a GAP, because you don't
hear them....."WHAT A PIECE OF GAP"

Dana, [e-mail]





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!noc.near.net!usenet.teradyne.com!ttd.teradyne.com!rice
From: [e-mail] (John Rice)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ground for radial system on roof?
Date: 14 Aug 95 14:54:23 CDT
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: riker1.ttd.teradyne.com

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ron Bloom) writes:
>
> Butternut antenna on 3rd story flat roof (office building) + radials.
>
> what is to be used for "ground" ??
>
>
> we've got : 1.) cold water pipes
>             2.) building structural steel (eye-beams)


From a 'radiation' standpoint, install as many 'tuned' radials as you
can, for each of the bands you will be operating.

From a 'protection' standpoint, if you can get a good connection to the
building 'structural steel', go for that. It's got to be a lower
resistance path to ground than the water pipes, but if you've got access
to both, use both.


--------

   John Rice -  K9IJ       | "I speak for myself, not my employer".
   [e-mail]         |  Miracles, Magic and Sleight-of-hand done here.
   [e-mail]          |  Licensed since 1959
   (708)-438-5065 - (bbs ) |  Ex: K8YZR, KH6GHC, WB9CSP, W9MMB, WA1TXV




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!dd650
From: [e-mail] (Drew Loker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ground plane size???
Date: 13 Aug 1995 23:39:52 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <40m2g8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanga.ins.cwru.edu


>I know the $16 MFJ mag mount does 440 as well as 2 meters ...

Actually, I have two of these. In fact, the second one that I just got in
on Friday is going to go up on the roof. How big of a piece of
metal I need to use for a ground plane? I think the piece I have cut
already is 3'x2'. Somebody suggested that I use a 4x4, but I just do not
have that size available. Also, I have another question. At my wife's work
place, she works in an office inside a warehouse. The office is
constructed of plywood which fits inside the warehouse which is much
bigger. Because of the metal warehouse, we have her hooked up to a MFJ mag
mount. I drilled a hole in the roof of the office building. The problem is
that I am not able to get the antenna outside of the building, and I can
not get it to be perfectly vertical while sticking it on something metal.
It would be great if I could just stick the thing along the vertical side
of the metal building, but then it will be paralel to the ground, and
against the polarization of the repeater we are trying to get her to
reach. As the antenna is now, it is hardly working better than when we had
it hooked up inside her office on-top of a metal cabinet. If I really try,
I can probably get it out of the building, but that is not my first
choice. Currently, the antenna is using the entire metal building as a
ground plane, but it is not orientated correctly (it is hanging upside
down on the underside of the roof, but still not quite straight up and
down).  So I am thinking about putting the antenna on another piece of
sheet metal that I have, but which is only 2'x3'. Will this work? It would
be flat, straight up and down. Or would it be better to leave it on the
building???

Thanks for any feedback.

Drew Loker,  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!usenet
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground plane size???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 19:11:44 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
References: <40m2g8$[e-mail]>
Organization: NAWS, China Lake, CA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
To: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:40m2g8$[e-mail]
Lines: 8

A pizza pan is the beloved expedient ground plane of all amateurs.
Note: you must chose at any time to cook pizza or operate the radio.
The pan provides dual but not simultanious service.

Bill Harwood
AB6DY




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!news-server.ncren.net!taco.cc.ncsu.edu!sparc03bilt.unity.ncsu.edu!jwprice
From: [e-mail] (James Warren Price)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ideas: rooftop wire antennas
Date: 14 Aug 1995 02:51:25 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <40mdnd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sparc03bilt.unity.ncsu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

The NCSU club W4ATC will be moving into a new shack in a couple of
days, and we hope to get a 10/15/20m yagi back on our old tower, from which
we used to do EME around 1980.

In addition, we have the ENTIRE ROOF of the EE building available for
wire antennas, and I think it offers challenges and opportunities for
creativity.  Specs are:

1. Square building, 190' on a side, courtyard in middle
2. Relatively flat roof at 65' above street
3. Front/back of building oriented at 15-degrees NNE
4. 30' feed through old vent from shack to rooftop (on south side ~50'
   from SSE corner)
5. 25' tower on elevator room on inside SSW corner
6. possible problem finding good ground
7. restrictions: can put nothing on flat roof surface, but can mount
   masts, etc. on side walls, tower on elevator room, etc.

       +-------------------+
       |     |             |
       |     |             |
       |     |-------+     |
       |     |       |     |
front  |     |       |     |   <--- back side
side   |     |       |     |
       |     |       |     |
       |     |       |     |     lines represent 4 ft walls
       |     t-------+     |     t = 25' tower on elevator room
       |     | d           |     d = dish pointed S (avoid interfering with)
       |     |      f      |     f = vent to room next to shack
       +-------------------+

Rig will be a Drake TR-7 at about 75 watts.  Don't know what bands we'll
be operating on.  Also interesting: we've been given 1,000 ft of 12-gauge
solid aluminum wire (stiff and sturdy).  What should we put up? A full-wave
"lazy quad" for 160m?  80m wire yagi?  Phased longwires arranged at an
angle so coverage overlaps NE towards Europe?

I've made and used an 80m dipole and 20m groundplane (works great!) hung
in the trees, as well as a 6m x-beam and 35-el 2m yagi using aluminum
rod.  I have a British book on wire antennas to work from, but thought
someone else's creativity and experience might come in handy. (BTW I'm a
forestry student, not EE.)

This could be an interesting project.  I'd love to hear any suggestions.

73

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Price, ARS N3QYE, [e-mail]
Secretary/Historian
W4ATC StARS - NCSU Student Amateur Radio Society
http://www.acs.ncsu.edu/HamRadio/StARS/


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Kd8ih)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Iso-loop vs. multi-band verticals
Date: 13 Aug 1995 17:07:43 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40lpiv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Kd8ih)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Good day,

This may be an old discussion topic but I am curious about performance
comparisons between the Iso-loop (or MFJ's version) with multi-band
verticals.

Thanks,

Bob
KD8IH


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Leave it on, or take it off???
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 95 05:03:03 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) wrote:

>I' ve been playing around with various dipole wire antennas on 40 and
>80 meters.  Using home made 1:1 air core baluns and insulated wire
>(12 gauge), I am seeing reflected power of about 5 watts with 100
>watts forward on the 80 meter dipole.
          <snip>
>On the 40 meter dipole, I have about 10 watts reflected for 100 out!

This VSWR is not excessive, but it *might* be indicative of a problem
other than antenna/coax impedance.  I'm curious how you're
constructing the baluns.  Are you sure the windings have sufficient
inductance for 80 and 40 meters?  The general rule of thumb for
toroidal transformers is that the inductive reactance of the windings
should be approximately 5 times the impedance of the circuit.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Leave it on, or take it off???
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 15:08:35 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 46

->
->    [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) wrote:
->
-> >I' ve been playing around with various dipole wire antennas on 40 an
-> >80 meters.  Using home made 1:1 air core baluns and insulated wire
-> >(12 gauge), I am seeing reflected power of about 5 watts with 100
-> >watts forward on the 80 meter dipole.
->           <snip>
-> >On the 40 meter dipole, I have about 10 watts reflected for 100 out!
->
-> This VSWR is not excessive, but it *might* be indicative of a problem
-> other than antenna/coax impedance.  I'm curious how you're
-> constructing the baluns.  Are you sure the windings have sufficient
-> inductance for 80 and 40 meters?  The general rule of thumb for
-> toroidal transformers is that the inductive reactance of the windings
-> should be approximately 5 times the impedance of the circuit.
->
-> 73,
->
-> Jack  WB3U
  If I had a scanner, I'd send you a GIF of what Iam building!
  The Balun is an air-core trifilar wound 1:1 balun and are built
  differently for 80 and 40 meters.  I do not have a grid dip meter,
  however, I am told they are very wide-banded and can handle 2kw
  easy.

  ------|--|                   -----------
        X  |       X---|       X
        X  |       X   |       X
       1X  |      2X   |      3X
        X  |-------X   |-------X
        |                      |
        |                      |
        |                      |
        |-----------0 |--------|
                so-239  0 = center conductor
                        | = shield

         X = coils
  40 meter balun is trifilar wound on a 7" piece of 3/4" pvc
  15 turns of #14 solid insulated wire.  Then the whole thing
  is cased in a 10" piece of 1 1/2" pvc.
  80 meter is 18 turns on a 10" piece of 3/4" pvc.
Jim Wooddell
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Leave it on, or take it off???
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 95 23:17:18 GMT
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) wrote:

>  40 meter balun is trifilar wound on a 7" piece of 3/4" pvc
>  15 turns of #14 solid insulated wire.  Then the whole thing
>  is cased in a 10" piece of 1 1/2" pvc.
>  80 meter is 18 turns on a 10" piece of 3/4" pvc.

Jim,

I don't think you have sufficient inductance in these baluns.

To explain, the windings across the input and output should have an XL
equal to approximately 4 to 5 times the impedance of the circuit.  In
this case, the impedance of both input and output is 50 ohms,
therefore each *pair* of series windings should have an XL of 200 to
250 ohms.  Breaking this down to a single winding, 100 to 125 ohms is
required.  This isn't exact, but it's close enough for purposes of
this discussion.

I calculated the approximate inductance of the windings using the
diameter, number of turns and coil length you described.  On 80M, the
winding will have an inductance of approximately 0.44 uH, which
presents an XL of only 10 ohms at 3.5 MHz.  On 40M, the winding
calculates to 0.43 uH, which has an XL of 19 ohms at 7 MHz.

Neither of these numbers is sufficient and this means that you may be
effectively loading up the balun instead of the antenna.  This could
also explain why you can't bring the VSWR to 1:1 - the load seen by
the tuner could simply be outside its tuning range.

If you're using 1/2 wave (resonant) dipoles, I personally think you'll
be much better off building a toroidal balun for this use.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (N7CHS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Mailing List
Date: 13 Aug 1995 07:52:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40kp1f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

I understand this newsgroups is echoed on a UCSD mailing list.  Please
post the address.

Thank You
Chuck Berry
N7CHS/4


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:12 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Make $50 000 cash fast, I
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!clint.bradford
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 95 11:56:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 16

Subject: Make $50 000 cash fast, I did!!

10. Robert M. White
    RR#1 Country Harbour
    Guys. Co., N.S., Canada
    BOH 1JO

Dear Canadian Friends of Telecommunications Services,

Please dial this gentleman up. At all hours of the day and night. And
advise him that this nonsense is as illegal in Canada as it is in the
United States.

Thank you very much. Hope NAFTA is working out well for you.
---
 ■ wcECHO 4.1 ≈ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details ■ Mira Loma, CA ■ 909-681-6221


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!panix!zip.eecs.umich.edu!caen!ranecurl
From: [e-mail] (Rane Curl)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 14 Aug 1995 04:42:25 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Lines: 18
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40mk7h$[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ca.engin.umich.edu

In article <405bge$[e-mail]>,
Troy Majors <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Still looking for a copy of the book by Walt Maxwell
>REFLECTIONS: TRANSMISSION LINES AND ANTENNAS.
>
>ARRL is sold out.  Anyone have an extra copy they
>want to sell?

(I followed the later posts back to this one.)  I am seeking a
copy of the article about quadrifilar helical antennas, that I
learned from another article was in REFLECTIONS. Of course I
checked the ARRL list (before reading this), and also searched
local and a university library, without success. I would
appreciate leads to finding a copy of the article (if not a copy
of the book, which is sounding more interesting with discussion).

Rane Curl       N8REG



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.ultranet.com!k1log.ultranet.com!commo
From: [e-mail] (Norm Commo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 22:33:16 GMT
Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40ctvo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: k1log.ultranet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>From: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 95 02:18:41 -0500

>W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>Troy, I think the ARRL quit selling the book because their technical staff
>>doesn't understand conjugate matching. It is an excellent book in my
>
>Spectacular! You know where I would bet my dime.

That's interesting.  I just got a copy of this from them a fwe month's ago.
Gee, maybe I got one of the last copies and it will be a collector's item
now!

73s,
-ricK1log



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!bman.uucom.com!ns1.iamerica.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 14 Aug 1995 15:43:53 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <40nqvp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx3-04.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> writes:

>Troy, I think the ARRL quit selling the book because their technical staff
>doesn't understand conjugate matching. It is an excellent book in my

I certainly hope this isn't true! Would one of the folks from the ARRL please confirm or repute
this?

Thanks,

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 18:09:04 GMT
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40mk7h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Rane Curl) wrote:
>In article <405bge$[e-mail]>,
>Troy Majors <[e-mail]> wrote:

To anyone looking for a copy of Reflections, I just received a copy
from Joe Hays at Ham Radio Outlet in Colorado.

Their Ph. is [phone].

I don't know how many they have left, but if these are indeed out of
print the supply is limited.

73,

Jack  WB3U

>>Still looking for a copy of the book by Walt Maxwell
>>REFLECTIONS: TRANSMISSION LINES AND ANTENNAS.
>>
>>ARRL is sold out.  Anyone have an extra copy they
>>want to sell?
>
>(I followed the later posts back to this one.)  I am seeking a
>copy of the article about quadrifilar helical antennas, that I
>learned from another article was in REFLECTIONS. Of course I
>checked the ARRL list (before reading this), and also searched
>local and a university library, without success. I would
>appreciate leads to finding a copy of the article (if not a copy
>of the book, which is sounding more interesting with discussion).
>
>Rane Curl      N8REG
>


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.bu.edu!dartvax.dartmouth.edu!usenet
From: Michael McAmis <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MLog log/packet freeware, minor screwup
Date: 14 Aug 1995 13:30:07 GMT
Organization: ValleyNet, INC
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <40nj4v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: v2-p-101.valley.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b4 (Windows; I; 16bit)

> Disappointed with the commercial and shareware Windows
> logging/packet software out there?  Try MLog, freeware
> now available on the internet.
>
> For ftp users, sign on to oak.oakland.edu and get
> pub3/hamradio/pc/logging/mlog0116.zip
>
> If you're using a Web browser, start at BARC's home
> page (www.acs.oakland.edu/barc.html), pick
> "barc archives", then "PC files" (even though it
> says DOS only).  Select the "logging" directory
> and fetch mlog0116.zip
>
> Have fun...

The file import.bas was supposed to be a "little QBasic
prgram" used to import foreign logs.  Instead I included
a chunk of MLog code with the same name.  Entertaining but
not very useful.  If you need the real thing, let me know.
It's quite small and e-mailable.  Hopefully, I'll get
1.17 posted soon.

Mike/WA3ECT
[e-mail]  (internet)
WA3ECT @ W1ET.NH           (packet)




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.bu.edu!dartvax.dartmouth.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Michael McAmis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MLog, New Windows Log/Packet/CW freeware
Date: 12 Aug 1995 15:02:37 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <40ifqd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: v1-p-28.valley.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Tired of all the commercial and shareware Windows
junk out there?  Well try mine...

For ftp users, sign on to oak.oakland.edu and get
pub3/hamradio/pc/logging/mlog0116.zip

If you're using a Web browser, start at BARC's
home page (www.acs.oakland.edu/barc.html), pick
"barc archives", then "PC files" (even though it
says DOS only).  Select the "logging" directory
and fetch mlog0116.zip

Have fun...



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!network.ucsd.edu!btree.is.brooktree.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ted Morange)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Help on Mobile Antenna Specs
Date: 13 Aug 1995 14:30:10 -0700
Organization: Brooktree Corporation, San Diego
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <40lqt2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: btree.is.brooktree.com

Need help in understanding why the Diamond NR-770HA 2/.7m mobile
antenna is specified as "1-1/2, 2-5/8". It's 40" long total, with only
a loading circuit at the base and a few turns in the whip in the
center.

The whip length of about 36" roughly corresponds to 1/2 wavelength at
146MHz and 2 x 5/8 wavelength at 445MHz, but what is the theory behind
specifying it in this way? Need references if possible.

Pls any suggestions. Thanks.

Ted KE6MWB
--

UUCP: ...ucsd!btree!tedm


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!news.ecn.bgu.edu!feenix.metronet.com!jspencer
From: [e-mail] (Joe Spencer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: PDL II to 10M QUAD?
Date: 14 Aug 1995 13:48:09 GMT
Organization: Texas Metronet, Inc  (login info (214/705-2901 - 817/571-0400))
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <40nk6p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fohnix.metronet.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I am trying to convert a PDL-II (11meter) dual quad beam to 10 meters.
I have tried shortening the wires on the quads but the SWR is still
terrible.  Had to quit due to the heat but I am considering dumping
the Gamma match and feeding the quad direct.
Has anyone tried this or anyone with comments would be appreciated.
73, Joe KK5NA


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!olivea!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Portable Beam Antenna ??
Date: 12 Aug 1995 01:51:32 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <40h1f4$[e-mail]>
References: <40du60$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs4-03.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

What frequency range ??



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (V31RY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Portable Beam Antenna ??
Date: 13 Aug 1995 17:25:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40lqjh$[e-mail]>
References: <40h1f4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (V31RY)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

  For 2m or 70cm, the Arrow Beam is made for hiking and backpacking..
It's sold by Antennas West, in Utah..  Designed by a ham in Loveland, Co..
  Has 4 elements on a 4ft boom, all parts fit inside the boom, and you use
it as a walking-stick.  Assembles in about 5 or 10 minutes..

  Their nr is 800-926-7373  or  e-mail at   [e-mail]

  Jim KK7C is very helpfull there, nice to do business with..

Good Luck!

Glenn   AE0Q/V31RY   ex: WA0VPK, GM5BKC, ZB2WZ



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:19 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.telalink.net!uro!jackatak!root
From: [e-mail] (Jack GF Hill)
Subject: Re: Portable Beam Antenna ??
Organization: Jack's Amazing CockRoach Capitalist Ventures
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 12:53:12 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40du60$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Superuser)
Lines: 22

Brett Evans <annwinn> writes:

> I'm looking for a comercial portable beam antenna that is easy to put
> together and when broken down, it would fit in a backpack.
Ahhhhh.... what band? 75M?  ;^)

Why not just build a walking stick beam (assuming you really mean
146MHz)???  The materials are readily available, the cost is
reasonable, several people have built them with ease and good results,
and you can better chose your style...

Picking from a catlog is such hard work! ;^)
--
73,
Jack, W4PPT/M (75M SSB 2-letter WAS #1657/#1789 -- both from the mobile! ;^)

+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
| Jack GF Hill        |Voice: [phone] -             Ham Call: W4PPT |
| P. O. Box 1685      |Modem: [phone] -  Bicycling and SCUBA Diving |
| Brentwood, TN  37024|Fax:   [phone] -          Life Member - ARRL |
| [e-mail]  - "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose" |
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!simtel!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Sean Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.archives.msdos.announce,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: rascal21.zip - Single/Dual-reflector antenna designs w/source
Keywords: simtel, msdos
Summary: Reposted by Keith Petersen
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 18:07:44 GMT
Followup-To: comp.archives.msdos.d
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: SimTel, the Coast to Coast Software Repository (tm)
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 27
Xref: grape.epix.net comp.archives.msdos.announce:11383 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12852

I have uploaded to SimTel, the Coast to Coast Software Repository (tm),
(available by anonymous ftp from the primary mirror site ftp.coast.net
and the secondary mirrors of SimTel):

ftp://ftp.coast.net/SimTel/msdos/electric/rascal21.zip

SimTel/msdos/electric/
rascal21.zip    Single/Dual-reflector antenna designs w/source

RASCAL v2.1 is a Computer Aided Design for antennas.  Radiation and feed
patterns are computed easily.  The designer only needs to move reflectors
around, and type in the desired parameter values.  The software has been
presented in IEEE AP-S symposium twice.  Two papers and manual are
available upon request at [e-mail].

Special requirements: 386 or above with Math co-processor, MSDOS 5.0
Mouse with driver installed.

Changes: Three more configurations of antennas now are available.

rascal21.zip has replaced rascal10.zip.

FreeWare.  Uploaded by the author.

Sean Lee
[e-mail]
or contact [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:21 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: re: Scanner discone/RG-8
From: [e-mail] (Art Harris)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!art.harris
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 95 16:03:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 35

In <[e-mail]>, Steve Thompson
wrote:


AP>I am currently re-doing by scanner base set-up I have a bearcat 350A and a
AP>Radio Shack pro-26 hooked up to a discone antenna. The antenna is seven
AP>feet off my roof in a residential area, I have 75 feet of RG-58 cable
AP>connecting it to my scanners. What is my biggest problem as far as signal
AP>loss is it the cable or the height of my antenna? Would RG-8 cable make a
AP>difference here? Any suggestions you could give would be a greatly
AP>appreciated.

Depends. How high is your roof? What is the surrounding terrain like?
Increased antenna height will always improve signal strength, but the
effect is most noticeable if the additional height allows you to clear a
nearby obstruction such as a building or hill.

75 feet of RG-58 has about 9 db loss at 500 MHz which means almost 90
percent of the signal is lost in the line. But that might not be as
bad as it sounds. Since most scanners (particularly Bearcats) can't
tolerate high signal levels without desensitizing and/or generating
intermod, you might not gain much by making antenna system improvements.

The effect of changing to a lower-loss cable will be most noticeable at
the highest frequencies (e.g., 800 MHz).

If you are experiencing ANY intermod now, the condition will only get
worse if you improve the antenna system. On the other hand, if you have
no such problems and no nearby transmitters, replacing the coax and
raising the antenna might be worthwhile.

BTW, are you using a splitter to feed both radios from the single
antenna? That's another source of signal loss.

Art, N2AH


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SG230 component value <R51>
Date: 12 Aug 1995 01:35:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40heij$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hello --
I have a misprint in the manual for my SG230 smart-tuner --

there is a resistor <R51> that connects from the base of Q4 to Ground.
my particular schematic lists two R50's on the drawing, one where R51 is
supposed to go.

Does anyone have a schematic that shows what the value of R51 is supposed
to be? The color code on the resistor itself indicates 7500 Ohms but I
don't think that is what it is supposed to be.

before I call the factory and have to get into a phone conversation with
Pierre up there, I would rather find out if anyone on the net here can
answer this for me ..

thanx and 73 -

Trish

[e-mail] "The Vertical Skywave Girl"


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (IBM Del F)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SG230 component value <R51>
Date: 12 Aug 1995 18:22:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40j9jd$[e-mail]>
References: <40heij$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (IBM Del F)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Looking at a schematic drawing ( revision "T", April, 93 ) R51 is
connected across the emitter and base of Q4 with the emitter being
grounded.  The value of R51 is 7.5k Ohms (7500).

R50, on the other hand, connects to the base of Q4 and is shown as 10k
Ohms.

Del, KD4B  Raleigh, NC


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!gwen.pcug.co.uk!kate.ibmpcug.co.uk!gbscomms!gordy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
From: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 21:02:15 GMT
Subject: Slim Jim/Modified Slim Jim construction info
Lines: 94

Hi all, after several requests, I'm posting the following text I have sent to
Gary as email.

....


The Slim Jim was invented by Fred Judd, G2-something or other.  It looks
basically like a jpole, ie it has a 1/4 wave parallel matching stub at the
bottom, and the "radiating" section is 1/2 wave high, starting from the top
of the matching section. The 2 differ in that the Slim Jim's upper section
takes the form of a folded element, whereas the basic Jpole is a single
length. Just imagine a Jpole with a top section twice the length, then fold
this top section in half, so that the end of it comes to within spitting
distance of the top of the open end of the matching stub. Because of the
folded element, the bandwidth of the antenna is larger than for a simple
Jpole.
The Greek Modified Slim Jim is similar in appearance to the standard SJ but
the dimensions are different. The modifications give slightly better matching,
and a lower angle of max radiation.

The SJ and the MSJ are good antennae, but are apparently not widely used
outside of UK/Europe. The design is a bit critical of close spacing to other
conductors alongside the element, but the tapping points on the stub can be
adjusted until the VSWR is acceptable.

  Basic design for the SJ  (MSJ has the gap further up)

             -----  shorted at top
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
 upper       I   I
 radiator    I   I              1/2 wave radiator
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I   I
             I     <gap (top of stub)
             I   I
             I   I
 matching    I   I
 section     I   I               1/4 wave stub
             I   I
             Ix xI  x x = coax taps, adjust for best match. May have
             I   I       1 slightly above or below other for best match
             I   I
             -----  shorted at bottom


   Normal construction is of 1 piece if aluminium (-num) tubing, 1/4 to 1/2 in
dia, bent to form the antenna.

   Dimensions (centimetres, assuming 145MHz)  1 in = 2.54 cm

                                              SJ           MSJ
                                             ----         -----

Length of matching stub                      49.5           74

Spacing of tubing, centre-centre              4.5            4

Length of upper section                      99.0           74
(measured from the top of the open end of lower stub)

Gap width                                     2.5           10

all dims are approx, and are not too critical.

 As you can see from the figures, the MSJ is shaped more like an elongated 3/4
wave folded dipole, but mounted vertically, and fed using the lower section
as a matching stub.

Best match (from bottom) is in the region of 20 cm for SJ, and 25 cm for MSJ,
but will vary with tubing dia, mounting method, etc.

These antennae do not tolerate being enclosed in a plastic radome very well,
and will need re-dimensioning if they are.


Best of luck, Gordy

...............

Hope it's of use to you all.



--
Caution: Keys now changed at random security intervals.
Contact for current armoured transport file.

"You are reminded that this is an insecure circuit. The use of names,
ranks and classified information is forbidden."





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:25 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!io.org!torfree!aa005
From: [e-mail] (Colin McGregor)
Subject: Re: US Military Field Expedient Antennas
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 17:06:07 GMT
Lines: 45
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12826 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8918 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84809

Peter Glibbery ([e-mail]) wrote:

[stuff deleted]

: I'm writing from the UK and the references mentioned in the manual are not at
: all easy to come by - I've tried.

: 1) In the case of some of these designs there is a need for a 'ground'. The

The word in the U.K. for 'ground' is 'earth'.

: diagrams in the manual show one end of a wire attached to a metal stake which
: is pushed into the ground, while the other end is attached to the radio set
: itself. Where on the radio set is the free end of the ground wire attached ? Is
: it attached to some kind of socket, or do you somehow attach it to the body of
: the radio set ?

Depends on make/model of radio, often a screw designed just for attaching
a grounding wire.

: 2) When using a 1/2-Rhombic the manual mentions that you feed the two 1/4 wave
: antenna elements from the centre using a 'coax'. What exactly is a 'coax' and
: how does it differ from the antenna wire itself ?

Coax is short for coaxial cable. A shielded cable (ie: conductor
surrounded by insulation, a shield (ie: a conductor), and more
insulation).

: 3) With the 1/2-Rhombic design the manual suggests that if a coax is not
: available to use a 'twisted pair'. What is a twisted pair ? My guess is two
: sheathed copper wires twisted together - but is this too simple a thought ?

Your guess is right re: twisted pair, two insulated wires twisted
together.

: 4) With the 1/2-Rhombic one end of the antenna wire is attached to a
: terminating resistor. The idea of this resistor is to give some
: directionality to the radio wave (I recognise that there is a difference
: between a resistor and an insulator (in the later case, the manual suggests a
: piece of wood or a C-ration spoon)). Does anyone have a good idea of what would
: make a good field expedient resistor ?

On this one you have got me.

Colin McGregor - VE3ZAA


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!mkeitz
From: [e-mail] (Mike Keitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: US Military Field Expedient Antennas
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 95 18:20:46 GMT
Organization: TSE Systems
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <40irfi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mkeitz.beve.blacksburg.va.us
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12828 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8921 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84811

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Colin McGregor) wrote:
>Peter Glibbery ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>[stuff deleted]
[More stuff deleted]
[Need for resistor to load rhombic antenna]
>: piece of wood or a C-ration spoon)). Does anyone have a good idea of
what would
>: make a good field expedient resistor ?
>
>On this one you have got me.

* Carbon rod from dry-cell battery (not alkaline)  Resistance of these is
quite low (1-5 ohms)

* Pencil "lead", also likely to be too low in resistance to serve as
antenna load.

* Bare wires dipped in container of salt water.  Will not withstand DC or
much AC current flow without corrosion.  Also likely to corrode by itself,
depending on choice of materials.

* Antenna input of another receiver.

-Mike KD4QDM



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!gwen.pcug.co.uk!kate.ibmpcug.co.uk!gbscomms!gordy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]><[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
From: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 14:37:45 GMT
Subject: Re: US Military Field Expedient Antennas
Lines: 13
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12853 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8936 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84853

>: 4) With the 1/2-Rhombic one end of the antenna wire is attached to a
>: terminating resistor. The idea of this resistor is to give some
>: directionality to the radio wave (I recognise that there is a difference
>: between a resistor and an insulator (in the later case, the manual suggests a
>: piece of wood or a C-ration spoon)). Does anyone have a good idea of what would
>: make a good field expedient resistor ?
>
>On this one you have got me.

iron wire is often used. at rf is has quite high resistance, but it varies
with wire type, condition (corrosion) etc.

Gordy

--
Caution: Keys now changed at random security intervals.
Contact for current armoured transport file.

"You are reminded that this is an insecure circuit. The use of names,
ranks and classified information is forbidden."





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (IBM Del F)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: US Military Field Expedient Antennas
Date: 14 Aug 1995 00:33:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40mjmv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (IBM Del F)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12869 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8943 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84866

You can also use a standard 'lead' (graphite core) pencil.   Attach a wire
at each end where you expose the core (alligator clips?).  The amount of
resistance will vary with the graphite core length, density, diameter.
You can increase the resistance by filing through the pencil more or less
in the middle but just don't cut all the way through the core or you've
ruined it..  The deeper the cut into the graphite core, the higher the
resistance, BUT, you will lower the amount of power it can dissipate at
that point. The assumption here is that you have some means of determining
the resistance as you file into the core if you are concerned about a
specific value such as 600 Ohms.

Del, KD4B
Raleigh, NC


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!Empire.Net!news.net99.net!news.monmouth.com!usenet
From: Jim Hendrickson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: US Military Field Expedient Antennas
Date: 14 Aug 1995 01:27:38 GMT
Organization: Monmouth Internet Corporation
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <40m8qa$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp4.monmouth.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12874 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:8946 rec.radio.amateur.misc:84872

The terminating resistor is 600 ohms, non inductive.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:28 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What kind of coax do
From: [e-mail] (Art Harris)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsboy.utelfla.com!news.iag.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!art.harris
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 95 19:45:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 23

In <[e-mail]>, Steve wrote:

AP>I have two scanners hooked up to a discone antenna on my roof, requiring
AP>75 feet of cable. I primarily want to listen to the military aviation band
AP>225-400mhz and want to receive signals from Otis AFB approx 45 miles away.
AP>Is RG-8 good enough for my needs or do I need better, of course I'd like
AP>to have minimal signal loss. Your imput will be of great help.

More important than the coax is your antenna height. If you're trying to
hear ground transmissions from Otis over a 45-mile path, it might be
difficult. Hearing aircraft even 100 miles away is usually not a
problem.

I would say RG-8 should be acceptable for your situation.

I do quite a bit of listening in the 225 - 400 MHz range using a
40 foot high discone and about 50 feet of RG-8X cable.

BTW, I'm on Long Island and listen to the ANG flights out of Otis on a
regular basis.

73, Art (N2AH)
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:29 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!veltman
From: [e-mail] (paul Veltman)
Subject: Wind Loading Forumuas Wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 14:38:10 GMT
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]

Hi Sports Fans,
I am installing a 70 foot tower.  The antenna will be a 4 element
collinear that I estimate will consume 2 sq ft of wind loading.

The guy anchors are rated a 1000 lbs of force each.

The question is:  What are the formulas used to calculate the amount of
force on the guy anchors at a given wind speed (say 60 mph to be safe)
for a certain square area of tower face plus antenna.  My gut tells me
I'm safe, but I want the numbers to prove it.  My usual antenna
references are great for designing the antennas, but are greatly lacking
in engineering support structures.

Thanks,

Paul WA6OKQ



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip145.phx.primenet.com!nx7u
From: [e-mail] (Scott Townley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wind Loading Forumuas Wanted
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 08:23:28 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip145.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (paul Veltman) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (paul Veltman)
>Subject: Wind Loading Forumuas Wanted
>Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 14:38:10 GMT

>Hi Sports Fans,
>I am installing a 70 foot tower.  The antenna will be a 4 element
>collinear that I estimate will consume 2 sq ft of wind loading.

>The guy anchors are rated a 1000 lbs of force each.

>The question is:  What are the formulas used to calculate the amount of
>force on the guy anchors at a given wind speed (say 60 mph to be safe)
>for a certain square area of tower face plus antenna.  My gut tells me
>I'm safe, but I want the numbers to prove it.  My usual antenna
>references are great for designing the antennas, but are greatly lacking
>in engineering support structures.

>Thanks,

>Paul WA6OKQ
>
Although seemingly not related, a GREAT source of information on mechanical
antenna structures is:
Leeson, "Physical Design of Yagi Antennas", ARRL
which goes into a LOT of the wind loading, moment arm, stress and strain of
typical antenna configurations.

scott townley
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!pipeline!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Anthony G. Catalano)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site
Date: 12 Aug 1995 00:59:37 -0400
Organization: The Pipeline
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <40hcfp$[e-mail]>
References: <40gn8m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pipe1.nyc.pipeline.com
X-Newsreader: The Pipeline v3.1.1

On Fri, 11 Aug 1995 in article <Re: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site>,
'[e-mail] (Bob Ingersoll)' wrote:


>During setup I get a COMMDLG.DLL IN USE error. I select IGNORE and the
>install completes. Then when I start LOGBOOK I get a MSAJT112.DLL NOT
>FOUND error.
--
Thanks Bob, Osmo and Jerry, you guys just saved me from waisting my time. (
I have enough software headached at this time as a Novell CNE! )  ;-)  I
will check my windows installation to see if I
any other programs that I have installed (many) may have placed that in my
windows directory.

Anthony G. Catalano WW2W














From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!qnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bill Richards)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site
Date: 12 Aug 1995 19:56:14 GMT
Organization: Quantum Networking Solutions, Inc.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <40j10u$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40gn8m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup11.av.ca.qnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11


>
>During setup I get a COMMDLG.DLL IN USE error. I select IGNORE and the
>install completes. Then when I start LOGBOOK I get a MSAJT112.DLL NOT
>FOUND error.
>
>I sent the author Email a week ago and have not had any response to
>date.
>
>Am I wasting my time?
>
>I am afraid you are wasting your time I have had the exact same problem,
and Emailing the author brought no response.


>
>

--
73, Bill N6WXF
DM14 Palmdale,CA
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!purdue!news.bu.edu!dartvax.dartmouth.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Michael McAmis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site
Date: 12 Aug 1995 14:54:14 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <40ifam$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40gn8m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: v1-p-28.valley.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Try this, get mlog0116.zip from oak.oakland.edu ftp site,
directory pub3/hamradio/pc/logging

Have fun and let me know if you have any problems.

Mike/WA3ECT



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: [e-mail] (Bob Ingersoll)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Windows Logbook Shareware at FTP site
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 23:02:16 GMT
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <40jbvf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40gn8m$[e-mail]> <40ifam$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ad08-036.compuserve.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Michael McAmis) wrote:

>Try this, get mlog0116.zip from oak.oakland.edu ftp site,
>directory pub3/hamradio/pc/logging

>Have fun and let me know if you have any problems.

>Mike/WA3ECT

I got it!

I'm usin' it!

Thanks






From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!newsfeed.tip.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wire gauge
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 22:48:13 GMT
Organization: Sydsvenska Dagbladet, Malmo, Sweden
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <40lvlt$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: a3119.dial.tip.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

In all my American (and British too, for that matter) antenna
litterature the authors always refer to using wires with different
gauge.
Now that may be practical to most of you, but it isn't for me. Living
in Sweden, where wires are measured in millimeters (or parts of mm),
it would be handy if someone have a gauge->metric conversion table. I
can't even find one in ARRL Antenna Compendium (too bad, in my
opinion).
Sometime I think a saw a note that American and British wire gauge
even are different. If so, I guess that's one way of making life more
interesting...
Regards,
Hermod Pedersen
Malmo, Sweden




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wire gauge
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 03:39:32 GMT
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40lvlt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   I wrote:

>Gauge  Diam in Mils

  (Wire Table)

Two people caught my goof on this one.  Yes, the table is
milli-inches, not millimeters.  Sorry for the error Hermod.

Can't put anything past this group.  <g>

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wire gauge
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 00:05:53 GMT
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40lvlt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen) wrote:

>In all my American (and British too, for that matter) antenna
>litterature the authors always refer to using wires with different
>gauge.  Now that may be practical to most of you, but it isn't for
>me. Living in Sweden, where wires are measured in millimeters (or
>parts of mm), it would be handy if someone have a gauge metric
>conversion table.

The following is from the Copper-Wire Table in the ARRL Handbook.
Maybe this will provide at least a temporary solution.

Gauge  Diam in Mils

1         289.3
2         257.6
3         229.4
4         204.3
5         181.9
6         162.0
7         144.3
8         128.5
9         114.4
10        101.9
11         90.7
12         80.8
13         72.0
14         64.1
15         57.1
16         50.8
17         45.3
18         40.3
19         35.9
20         32.0
21         28.5
22         25.3
23         22.6
24         20.1
25         17.9
26         15.9
27         14.2
28         12.6
29         11.3
30         10.0
31          8.9
32          8.0
33          7.1
34          6.3
35          5.6
36          5.0
37          4.5
38          4.0
39          3.5
40          3.1


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Lawrence Bordeaux <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wire gauge
Date: 14 Aug 1995 02:14:33 GMT
Organization: Ghostbusters
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <40mbi9$dd7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

If I recall, that table is showing the diameter in mils, or
thousandths, of an inch.
I'm gonna guess that if you multiply the 'mils' setting by .00254
that will give you the right mm diameter.

-Lawrence


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wire gauge
Date: 14 Aug 1995 02:34:54 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <40mcoe$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx3-19.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
;     [e-mail] (Hermod Pedersen) wrote:

;  The following is from the Copper-Wire Table in the ARRL Handbook.
;  Maybe this will provide at least a temporary solution.

;  Gauge  Diam in Mils

; [wire table]

One mil = 0.001 inch = 0.0254 mm

Multiply the table values by 0.0254 to get the diameter in mm.

These values are American Wire Gauge (AWG) which is universally
used in the U.S. The British use SWG, which is, as was said,
different.

Any edition of the ARRL Handbook has a table showing the diameters
of wires of a given AWG, and the nearest SWG size.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: Wire gauge
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 18:11:53 GMT
References: <40lvlt$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 56

Hermod Pedersen ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In all my American (and British too, for that matter) antenna
: litterature the authors always refer to using wires with different
: gauge.
: Now that may be practical to most of you, but it isn't for me. Living
: in Sweden, where wires are measured in millimeters (or parts of mm),
: it would be handy if someone have a gauge->metric conversion table. I
: can't even find one in ARRL Antenna Compendium (too bad, in my
: opinion).

How about a formula instead of a table?  If you are already working out
antenna sizes and have a calculator (with exponentials) available, you can
use this:

For AWG wire:

   diameter in inches:

     inches = 10^(-.05035*gauge - 0.4884)

   diameter in millimeters = diameter in inches*25.4, so

     mm = 10^(-.05035*gauge + .9164 )

   (For gauges like 00, etc., use -1, etc. instead...)
   This is quite accurate, close than any reasonable manufacturing
   tolerances, and you can probably do fine with just:

     +-----------------------------------------+
     |   mm approx=  10^(-.05*gauge + .9 )     |
     +-----------------------------------------+

     or equivalently (slightly more accurately, actually)

     +-----------------------------------------+
     |   mm approx=  8 * 10^(-.05*gauge)       |
     +-----------------------------------------+


   For this last equations, the errors at a couple different points:

     10 gauge:  -2.3%
     20 gauge:  -1.5%
     30 gauge:  -0.7%

   If you want to know the resistance at 20C, a very close approximation
   for the resistance in ohms per 1000 feet (or per 300 meters) is:

     +-----------------------------------------+
     |     R1000 = 10^(0.1*gauge - 1 )         |
     +-----------------------------------------+

Maybe if someone asks for it I can work it out for BWG (British Wire Gauge)
as well -- but I'm not sure I have an accurate table for that standard.

73, K7ITM


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 14 20:52:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help g5mh (?) minibeam"
Date: 13 Aug 95 14:07:43 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "g5mh" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:00 1995
From: [e-mail] (Claton Cadmus)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!rosevax!hamlink!fredmail
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 5/8 Wave vs. j-pole
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 11:10:40 -0100
X-FTN-To: All
Lines: 25


Tom W8JI wrote:

W8>As modeled on a NEC based program I have. Gain is in dBi:

W8>With solid metal groundplane extending 2 wl each direction

W8>1/4 wl vert 5.2 dBi
  >1/2 wl vert 6.6 dBi
  >5/8 wl vert 7.9 dBi

I think you need to replace your antenna modeling software!  These
fiqures are way to high for single element antennas.  Now we know where
the beam manufactures get their gain figures.

73 de  Claton Cadmus,  KA0GKC
   ______________________________________________________________
  |     FIDOnet= Claton Cadmus 1:282./100                        |
  |    INTERnet= [e-mail]                    |
  |   PACKETnet= KA0GKC@WB0GDB.#STP.MN.USA.NA                    |
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   If anything I have written makes any cents, I claim copyright!
 * SLMR 2.1a * This tagline is umop apisdn.




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 Wave vs. j-pole
Date: 17 Aug 1995 16:37:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4109ai$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Claton Wrote:

>W8>1/4 wl vert 5.2 dBi
>> >1/2 wl vert 6.6 dBi
>> >5/8 wl vert 7.9 dBi

>I think you need to replace your antenna modeling software!  These
>fiqures are way to high for single element antennas.  Now we know
>where the beam manufactures get their gain figures.

>73 de  Claton Cadmus,  KA0GKC

Clayton,
I may have confused people by giving dBi figures.

A half wave dipole in free space has 2.15 dB gain over an isotropic
radiator. The ground can add 4.8 dB or so to this gain, for a total of 7
dBi for a simple vertical dipole above a perfect ground. Page 2-13 of the
Antenna Engineering Handbook by Jasik lists the gain of various simple
antennas. A quarter wave vertical dipole has 5.15 dBi in that table. This
closely agrees with the modeling program I used, as do tables in several
other reference books.

Perhaps I should have given dBi figures and not dBd. To get dBd,
subtract 2.15 dB from the dBi figures. But the point was to illustrate
that
a very big perfect ground is necessary to reach the gain potential of a
5/8
wave vertical.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!vax.sonoma.edu!harrisok
From: [e-mail] (Ken Harrison)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 Wave vs. j-pole
Date: 18 Aug 95 02:30:13 -0800
Organization: Sonoma State University
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vax.sonoma.edu

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Claton Cadmus) writes:
>
> Tom W8JI wrote:
>
> W8>As modeled on a NEC based program I have. Gain is in dBi:
>
> W8>With solid metal groundplane extending 2 wl each direction
>
> W8>1/4 wl vert 5.2 dBi
>   >1/2 wl vert 6.6 dBi
>   >5/8 wl vert 7.9 dBi
>
> I think you need to replace your antenna modeling software!  These
> fiqures are way to high for single element antennas.  Now we know where
> the beam manufactures get their gain figures.

And *I* always thought they got the figures from the sales department...

:-)

Ken
--

__________________________________________________________________________
Ken Harrison   ---   [e-mail]   ---   Amateur Radio:  N6MHG
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


















From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 Wave vs. j-pole
Date: 18 Aug 1995 09:34:50 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4124tq$[e-mail]>
References: <4105il$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Bret, The figues were reasonable. They agree with textbooks. They were in
dBi, not dBd. My last post explains it. 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.magg.net!news
From: "Terrence R. Redding" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info
Date: 16 Aug 1995 01:48:11 GMT
Organization: M.A.G. Information Services (MAGG.NET)
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <40rior$[e-mail]>
References: <40j0t4$[e-mail]> <40l3ak$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpb-105.magg.net

[e-mail] (jbmitch) wrote:
>
> In article <40j0t4$[e-mail]>, "Terrence R. Redding" <[e-mail]> says:
> >Has anyone seen or heard of the 70' Rohn crankup/foldover tower?
> >All comments aprreciated.  Thanks, Terry
> >WB5LMJ @ WB4MOZ.FL.USA.NA
>
> You might ask if the tower is built of 25 or 45 sections; Rohn offers
> both.  The 45 is much heavier duty.  I believe the tilt over is an
> excellent design, particularly if you don't like climbing towers.  (who does?)
> In short, probably too much money for the 25, but not bad if it's 45.
> 73, John

I certainly don't "like" climbing towers, and I am looking toward the
day when I "wont" climb towers.  Thanks for the comments.
  Cheers, Terry


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna T/R Switch?
Date: 16 Aug 1995 01:46:27 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <40rilj$[e-mail]>
References: <40rc57$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite191.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Damon Z Cassell) wrote:
>Help!  I need a transmit/receive switch to match some old transmitters
>with receivers.  Any suggestions on how to build one?  Or buy one?
>
>Thanks.


You can try posting on rec.radio.amateur.swap.  If you want to build one, at HF (3-30 MHz), an
open frame SPDT relay mounted in a small metal box with SO239 connectors will probably
suffice. Buying new these days is almost out of the question unless you're related to Ross
Perot or Bill Gates.



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna T/R Switch?
Date: 16 Aug 1995 01:49:17 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <40riqt$[e-mail]>
References: <40rc57$[e-mail]> <40rilj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite191.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
<<snip>>>
>You can try posting on rec.radio.amateur.swap.  <<snip>>
>
 OOPS... Make that REC.RADIO.SWAP



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:05 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!avery.med.Virginia.EDU!tjb9c
From: [e-mail] (Theodore J. Bittner)
Subject: Any good antenna tuners?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: avery.med.virginia.edu
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: uva
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 22:52:31 GMT
Lines: 13

My MFJ 949-D gave up the ghost recently and I need to find
another antenna tuner. While the 949 worked pretty good, I have
not had the best of luck with MFJ products and wondered what
others use. Has anyone had good luck with Vectronics?
        I run low power <100 watts into a G5RV @ 25 ft because
of CCR's, so my tuner needs to work well with an all band
antenna. Any comments or suggestions would be most helpful and
appreciated. Thanks.
                                Ted--KQ4MZ--
--
Ted Bittner   Charlottesville,Va                 University of Virginia
Internet: [e-mail]           Dept of Radiology
Amateur Radio: KQ4MZ                             804-924-9399


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any good antenna tuners?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 04:55:09 GMT
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

>>   [e-mail] (Theodore J. Bittner) wrote:

>       I run low power <100 watts into a G5RV @ 25 ft because
>of CCR's, so my tuner needs to work well with an all band
>antenna.

Generally speaking, a G5RV does not make great demands on a tuner.
Therefore, of the designs currently available, I believe you want a
basic tuner using either a "T" or Pi configuration (no split caps),
and the highest quality components you can find for the dollar.  In
the used market, the low power Johnson Matchbox is a great performer.

I also believe there is little difference in loss or versatility
between tuners with rotary inductors and those with switched coils.
Either style can be good or bad depending on its physical design.

BTW, the subject of tuners is a somewhat personal issue due to a lack
of hard and fast data on the efficiency of many models.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: "James A. Storm" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any good antenna tuners?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 06:52:56 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <40up08$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sf6-29.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1PE (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi Ted,

You might want to try Tucker Electronics as advertised in QST. I use the
high power one and it works quite well and is well made. I suspect it's
made by Vectronics since the pictures I see look the same. It is very
easy to tune and once you've logged your settings, it's highly
repeatable.

                        73, Jim WB6LWS in Pacifica, CA



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 01:48:01 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 52

->
-> >  Speaking of stopping the current flow in the shield....
-> >  A friend of mine and I were discussing six meter repeaters the oth
-> >  day, and possible antenna systems that wouldn't need four or six
-> >  water-heater-sized cavities, and we came up with putting the recei
-> >  antenna at 120' on the tower, and the transmit antenna at either 4
-> >  60' or 80', whichever would place the RX antenna in a null for the
-> >  antenna.  However, he feels that the TX antenna would "warm up" th
-> >  RX antenna feedline to RF, which would be ducted right into the fr
-> >  end of the receiver by the feedline outer shield. Even with ground
-> >  the outer jacket at the building entrance, and using a cavity on t
-> >  there would still be a unbroken path for RF to the RX chassis.
->
-> >  Any ideas?  The equipment in question is a 60w Master Pro 6m repea
-> >  that is currently being used as a base station...
->
-> In theory, current on the outside of the shield won't get into the se
-> receiver. If the bulkhead grounding is done right, the current will e
-> up on the outside of the bulkhead. Any which would get through should
-> up on the outside, not inside, of the second receiver if its shieldin
-> good.
->
-> I presume the tower is metal. If the cable is dressed against the tow
-> any current on the outside of the cable would also be induced into th
-> tower, which probably (although not certainly) would reduce the curre
-> on the outside of the coax by the time it left the tower.
->
-> If current on the outside of the coax is a problem in cases like this
-> you can reduce it to a low value by putting 2 or 3 "current" ("choke"
-> baluns at about 1/4 wavelength intervals beginning at the coupling
-> point.
->
-> 73,
-> Roy Lewallen, W7EL
-> [e-mail]
  And, on another note, many of the 6m antennas are not of the grounded
type.  It would be well worth the effort to buy or build antennas that
are grounded.  You can solve alot of problems on a hill top with a good
antenna.  And, at 6m, you can sure cause alot of problems on hilltops!
I had a node on a 6m backbone wipe out a microwave path for a telco
everytime it transmitted.  I was very close to their building and was
getting into their DS3 equipment big time.
Believe it or not, the Cushcraft 6m Ringo is a fair 6m antenna if the
weather is not to severe.  They are cheap and hold up well on a
tower and are grounded.  I have never ever had one fail and I have
used them all at one time or another and also have never seen a case
where a choke balun has had to be installed on a coax at a repeater
site.
Jim Wooddell
WA6OFT
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 04:08:10 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <40ufba$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger707.nando.net

Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
 > Snip...
 >
 > The balun will probably be most effective if it is used at the feed point, particularly on a
 > multi-band antenna. Getting cute and putting it somewhere else on the line can bite you if you
 > pick a quarter-wave multiple for the position.
 >
 >
 >
 > It is true that induced current from dipole radiation should cancel if the line is dressed
 > away from the dipole properly.  This does not correct for the above, however.
 >
 > Note that IMHO the seminal (what a word!) work on this topic is found in Volume 1 of the ARRL
 > Antenna Compendium and is titled "Baluns: What They Do and How They Do It" by Roy, W7EL.
 >
 >
 >
 > Regards, Wes -- N7WS
 >
Wes, I really don't know why anyone would want to feed a multiband
antenna with coax (I am assuming HF antennas).  I would not want
to suffer the losses involved in using coax with a high VSWR.  My
points are only valid for a resonant and matched dipole.  Sorry, I
failed to make that clarification.

73 de W3FPR
Don



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 01:52:34 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <40u7d2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger707.nando.net

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
 >
 >    [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
 >
 > >Here's a hot one for ya. Coax is really balanced. The current on the
 > >center conductor is balanced against the current on the inside of the
 > >outer conductor.
 > >
 > >Problems only arise when the outside of the shield picks up signal.
 >
 > Not true.  The ARRL Antenna Book explains this best:
 >
 > "A centerfed antenna with open ends, of which the half-wave type is an
 > example, is inherently a balanced radiator.  . . .  If the antenna is
 > fed at the center through a coaxial line, this balance is upset
 > because one side of the radiator is connected to the shield while the
 > other is connected to the inner conductor.  On the side connected to
 > the shield, a current can flow down over the *outside* of the coaxial
 > line.  The fields thus set up cannot be canceled by the fields from
 > the inner conductor because the fields *inside* the line cannot escape
 > throught the shielding afforded by the outer conductor.  Hence, these
 > "antenna" currents flowing on the outside of the line will be
 > responsible for radiation."
 >
I must disagree with this statement in the  Antenna Book.  In a perfect
coax cable, the entire field will be contained inside the shield.  The
equal and opposite currents on the center conductor and on the shield
will cancel all radiation to the outside of the coax shield.  This is
why you can lay the coax on the ground, tape it to a tower leg and do
all sorts of things with it that you could never do with a parallel
conductor line and still have it perform properly. You can even ground
it if you want, and no radiation will leak out to interfere with the
ground point.

Alas, the real world is not as easy as the theoretical one, and most
coax braids do have some leakage, but a GOOD coax will have very little
leakage.

So inside a good coax, there exists a balanced field, and simply feeding
a dipole by direct connection should connect these equal and opposite
currents into the two halves of a dipole.

Therefore IMHO -
Coupling of the radiated wave (from the dipole) back onto the outside
of the coax shield WILL cause RF on the outside of the coax, and will
skew the radiation pattern of the dipole.  If this happens to a parallel
line, the induced current will have an effect on both conductors, and
should be seen as a common mode current, while the transmitted signal
is differential mode.  With coax, the induced current is applied only
on the outer shield while none should appear on the center conductor,
resulting in a differential mode current which can add or subtract
directly from the transmitted current.

Physically running the feedline at right angles to the dipole is the
only way I know of to keep this undesired coupling from occuring.
The use of a choke balun should keep any of this induced current in
check, and I believe that if it is to be effective it should be placed
near the transmitter end, with the shack entrance being the most
desirable location.  I fail to see how a balun at the antenna end
could keep this induced current out of the shack except that it will
reduce the current on all parts of the coax shield, but this will
also happen if it is placed at the shack end.  An adequately sized
coil of coax should be quite effective in acting as a choke balun.
So why not coil up that extra coax outside the shack and hang it
on a convenient nail.  It will work.  If the coil is not big enough,
I would be inclined to add a chunk of ferite around the outside of
the coax until all the RF was gone.



 > I think it is also safe to say that radiation from the coax is also
 > *partly* responsible for the skewed pattern that results when a dipole
 > is fed directly from a coaxial line.
 >
 > So, back to my original question.  If the balun is omitted and a
 > shield choke is used instead (at the transmitter end of the feedline),
 > will the radiation pattern still be skewed?
 >
 > 73,
 >
 > Jack  WB3U

I don't know if I helped with your question Jack, but in theory, the
pattern should not be skewed in the first place.  I believe it is
skewed only because we live in an imperfect world, and have to do
the best we can with imperfect materials.  My guess is the real answer
is "it depends ,,,"  (on the antenna and feed configuration, nearby
stuff, and lots of other things too numerous to think about.)
For most real dipoles, why is a little pattern skewing really a bad thing,
for we can't get into free space anyway.  For a beam, this would be
an important parameter.

My $0.02 worth,

73 de W3FPR  Don



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 02:23:13 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <40u96h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40qikf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyger707.nando.net

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>
> (SNIP)...
> >Why does current flow? Usually because there is a difference in
> >potential between two points. Right? At the center of a matched dipole,
> >there is no voltage. Right? So there is no current "flowing back down
> >the coax".
>
> Absolutely.......NOT!!!! There certainly is voltage if there is any power
> at
> all! If the antenna is perfectly balanced 50 ohms with 1500 watts there is
>
> 274 volts RMS across the terminals or 387 volts peak. Half of this
> voltage appears from the terminal connected to the shield and earth. The
> voltage potential exists for appreciable current to flow in a matched
> dipole system! If the antenna is not perfectly symmetrical this condition
> can become either worse or better.
>
When the antenna is a resonant dipole, the feedpoint is an RF voltage
minimum and a current maximum.  Therefore we could ground the feedpoint
of the dipole.  This in fact is what is done in many beam antennas,
the driven element is fastened to the boom, and the boom is often
grounded as well.  The point is that there should be zero volts RF
across the feedpoint of a resonant dipole.

In the real world of ham radio, we seem to tune our antennas not
for resonance, but for minimum VSWR. (Unless the feedline Z0 is
equal to the feedpoint impedance, the two points are different)

Could it be that we do not really have a half wave dipole, and
that is the real cause of most of the RF on the outside of the coax.
If the feedpoint does have a voltage differential, there will be current
flow on the outside of the coax since it is grounded, and will result
in a skewed pattern to boot.

73 de W3FPR
Don

of the RF on the outside of the coax.  I


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 03:20:00 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 90
Message-ID: <40uch0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite187.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
> >
> >    [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
> >
> > >Here's a hot one for ya. Coax is really balanced. The current on the
> > >center conductor is balanced against the current on the inside of the
> > >outer conductor.
> > >
> > >Problems only arise when the outside of the shield picks up signal.

[Jack's comments deleted to protect the innocent]


>I must disagree with this statement in the  Antenna Book.  In a perfect
>coax cable, the entire field will be contained inside the shield.  The
>equal and opposite currents on the center conductor and on the shield
>will cancel all radiation to the outside of the coax shield.  This is
>why you can lay the coax on the ground, tape it to a tower leg and do
>all sorts of things with it that you could never do with a parallel
>conductor line and still have it perform properly. You can even ground
>it if you want, and no radiation will leak out to interfere with the
>ground point.
>
[Some comments deleted to make my newsreader happy]

>Coupling of the radiated wave (from the dipole) back onto the outside
>of the coax shield WILL cause RF on the outside of the coax, and will
>skew the radiation pattern of the dipole.  If this happens to a parallel
>line, the induced current will have an effect on both conductors, and
>should be seen as a common mode current, while the transmitted signal
>is differential mode.  With coax, the induced current is applied only
>on the outer shield while none should appear on the center conductor,
>resulting in a differential mode current which can add or subtract
>directly from the transmitted current.
>
>Physically running the feedline at right angles to the dipole is the
>only way I know of to keep this undesired coupling from occuring.
>The use of a choke balun should keep any of this induced current in
>check, and I believe that if it is to be effective it should be placed
>near the transmitter end, with the shack entrance being the most
>desirable location.  I fail to see how a balun at the antenna end
>could keep this induced current out of the shack except that it will
>reduce the current on all parts of the coax shield, but this will
>also happen if it is placed at the shack end.  An adequately sized
>coil of coax should be quite effective in acting as a choke balun.
>So why not coil up that extra coax outside the shack and hang it
>on a convenient nail.  It will work.  If the coil is not big enough,
>I would be inclined to add a chunk of ferite around the outside of
>the coax until all the RF was gone.
>
[More of Jack's comments deleted]
>
[More stuff deleted]

Look at it this way... in one respect, the coax is a balanced transmission line, ie equal and
opposite currents on the inside of the cable. The problem is, we are using it to feed an
UNBALANCED radiator. What?, you say. A dipole is a balanced antenna. Yes I say, until you hang
that transmission line on the feed point. Now you have one side fed with the inner conductor,
which is enclosed in that nice Faraday shield and the other side fed with that outer conductor
that has a propensity to radiate.



What the currents "see" when they encounter the feed point are two different loads. The shield
(inner) current has a load that consists of one half of the dipole in parallel with the
outside of the cable. The center conductor is loaded by the other half of the dipole in
parallel with --- the center conductor. The currents divide in inverse proportion to the
parallel impedances, some into the dipole, some into the shield.  The object of the choke
balun is to simply make the shield impedance much higher than the half-dipole impedance, so
the preponderance of the current flows in the dipole not in the shield.



The balun will probably be most effective if it is used at the feed point, particularly on a
multi-band antenna. Getting cute and putting it somewhere else on the line can bite you if you
pick a quarter-wave multiple for the position.



It is true that induced current from dipole radiation should cancel if the line is dressed
away from the dipole properly.  This does not correct for the above, however.

Note that IMHO the seminal (what a word!) work on this topic is found in Volume 1 of the ARRL
Antenna Compendium and is titled "Baluns: What They Do and How They Do It" by Roy, W7EL.



Regards, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 16 Aug 1995 23:57:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40ueo0$[e-mail]>
References: <40u96h$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Don,

Sorry, but I disagree with this totally:

>When the antenna is a resonant dipole, the feedpoint is an RF voltage
>minimum and a current maximum.  Therefore we could ground the feedpoint
>of the dipole.  This in fact is what is done in many beam antennas,
>the driven element is fastened to the boom, and the boom is often
>grounded as well.  The point is that there should be zero volts RF
>across the feedpoint of a resonant dipole.

The key word is minimum, but the minimum can not be zero. If it is zero
the power is zero. There is a finite amount of current, and a finite
amount of voltage. If the SWR is 1:1 with a 50 ohm feedline, the voltage
to current ratio must provide a 50 ohm impedance (this is similar to the
source impedance I talked about in conjugate mating a PA stage to the
load). So it boils down to E/I must equal 50 for a 1:1 SWR in a 50 ohm
system. Whether it's 50 volts and one amp, or 5000 volts and 100 amps
depends on the power level, but the ratio stays the same.

I agree with Wes, the proper place is at the feedpoint. If the feedline is
coupled to the antenna because of poor dress I would add a second choke
balun where the feedline leaves the area of the antenna at a non-resonate
length point. The top one would insure the currents were balanced at the
antenna, the lower one would insure the feedline was not resonate and
coupled heavily to the antenna.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 16:00:12 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 34
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40vpse$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <40ufba$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Wes, I really don't know why anyone would want to feed a multiband
>antenna with coax (I am assuming HF antennas).  I would not want
>to suffer the losses involved in using coax with a high VSWR.  My
>points are only valid for a resonant and matched dipole.

Don, there are many reasons why someone might want to do this and it
isn't always detrimental to any significant degree.

I use totally random dipoles, and I feed them with ladder line.  To
prevent the balun at the tuner from misbehaving in the face of extreme
reactance on some bands, I have relocated it to the input of the
tuner's variable components.

That said, the fact remains that there are specific combinations of
non-resonant dipole lengths, in combination with cetrtain feedline
lengths, that will yeild a more reasonable VSWR (reactance) on
multiple bands.  These combinations can be fed with coax, assuming a
heavy-duty balun is installed at the center of the dipole.

Coax loss that results from VSWR is not nearly as high as most people
believe and some of these systems perform extremely well.  The only
reason I don't personally use them is my aversion to the need to use
only a specific length feeder, and the fact that the use of ladder
line does not pose a problem at my QTH.

Yes, I like to think that I might "get out" better than a similar
system with coax.  In reality though, the difference between my
system and a coax system is probably undetectable on the air.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 16:33:21 GMT
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

> > Not true.  The ARRL Antenna Book explains this best:

>I must disagree with this statement in the  Antenna Book.  In a
>perfect coax cable, the entire field will be contained inside the
>shield.  The equal and opposite currents on the center conductor and
>on the shield will cancel all radiation to the outside of the coax
>shield.

At the point where the coax connects to the dipole, the outer shield
no longer encloses the inner conductor.  It is at this point that the
feedline's inherent internal field cancellation properties are lost,
and at which the RF is free to take any available path to ground.
Thus, current flows down the outside of the shield.

>This is why you can lay the coax on the ground, tape it to a tower
>leg and do all sorts of things with it that you could never do with a
>parallel conductor line and still have it perform properly. You can
>even ground it if you want, and no radiation will leak out to
>interfere with the ground point.
>
>Alas, the real world is not as easy as the theoretical one, and most
>coax braids do have some leakage, but a GOOD coax will have very
>little leakage.

The issue is not one of leakage, rather, the problem occurs because an
unbalanced source has been connected to a balanced load.

>So inside a good coax, there exists a balanced field, and simply
>feeding a dipole by direct connection should connect these equal and
>opposite currents into the two halves of a dipole.

Please see my other post on the meaning of "balance".  The fields in
the coax are equal and opposite, but they are not necessarily at the
same potential with respect to ground.  This means they are only
balanced with respect to each other, and will unbalance any
symmetrical "floating" load to which they are fed.

>Physically running the feedline at right angles to the dipole is the
>only way I know of to keep this undesired coupling from occuring.

No, it won't help.  The current on the outside of the coax is not the
result of current induced due to its proximity to the dipole.  It is
caused by the RF exiting the coax attempting to travel to ground.

Don, I appreciate your comments on this, but I think we're not in
agreement on the basic premise.  IMO, the radiation pattern becomes
skewed because an unbalanced feed is connected to a balanced load.

If we don't agree on this point, my question regarding the choke balun
at the transmitter becomes non-sensical.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 16:49:02 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <40vrtu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <40ufba$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite50.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Snip...
> >
> > The balun will probably be most effective if it is used at the feed point, particularly on a
> > multi-band antenna. Getting cute and putting it somewhere else on the line can bite you if you
> > pick a quarter-wave multiple for the position.
> >
[snip]>


>Wes, I really don't know why anyone would want to feed a multiband
>antenna with coax (I am assuming HF antennas).  I would not want
>to suffer the losses involved in using coax with a high VSWR.  My
>points are only valid for a resonant and matched dipole.  Sorry, I
>failed to make that clarification.
>
>73 de W3FPR
>Don
>

Don:

Does not a trap-dipole or tri-band beam qualify as a multi-band antenna? I have
protested against the idea that tuned feeders are a great idea (good maybe, but not great) but
I have no problem with using coax to feed an antenna which has been resonated on each
frequency of interest.

To clarify my previous point. Assume a 40/80 meter trap-dipole. For whatever reason, we decide
that a distance of 1/2 wavelength on 40 meters is a good place for the choke balun.
Theoretically, the impedance repeats every half-wavelength so the line behaves as though the
choke is at the feed point. We QSY to 80 meters. Oooops --- the choke is 1/4 wavelength from
the feed point. Because of the magic properties of 1/4 wave lines, the high impedance
generated by the choke is transformed (inverted) to a very low impedance at the feed point.
The current division between the dipole half and the shield moves in the wrong direction.

Could be that this is actually a better radiator in some circumstance, but it is just
circumstantial.

Regards, Wes



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 15:27:44 GMT
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Look at it this way... in one respect, the coax is a balanced
>transmission line, ie equal and opposite currents on the inside of
>the cable. The problem is, we are using it to feed an
>UNBALANCED radiator.

I think we have a point of confusion here that's semantic in nature.

The fact that currents on the inside of the coax are equal and
opposite does not mean that the feedline is balanced.  In order to
qualify as balanced, opposing voltages within the feedline, and at
both its source and load, must also be equidistant from ground.

This requires that the feedline (or any source or load) be
electrically symmetrical.  In most cases at RF, this also means it
will be physically summetrical.

It is the symmetry of the entire system with respect to ground that
maintains balance.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 17:22:26 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <40vtsi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite50.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>Look at it this way... in one respect, the coax is a balanced
>>transmission line, ie equal and opposite currents on the inside of
>>the cable. The problem is, we are using it to feed an
>>UNBALANCED radiator.
>
>I think we have a point of confusion here that's semantic in nature.

Agreed. But I did try to qualify this remark with "in one respect"

>
>The fact that currents on the inside of the coax are equal and
>opposite does not mean that the feedline is balanced.  In order to
>qualify as balanced, opposing voltages within the feedline, and at
>both its source and load, must also be equidistant from ground.

Back to semantics -- from the perspective of the fields on the inside of the line, they don't
care one wit what's happening outside. It isn't until we introduce a THIRD conductor (ground)
that we can talk about unbalance. It's the purpose of the balun to _disconnect_ this third
conductor.

>This requires that the feedline (or any source or load) be
>electrically symmetrical.  In most cases at RF, this also means it
>will be physically summetrical.
>
>It is the symmetry of the entire system with respect to ground that
>maintains balance.
>
>73,
>
>Jack  WB3U

Let's take a battery-powered rf source and enclose it in a totally shielded box. Introduce a
coaxial connector into the wall of the box and connect to it an arbritrary length of perfectly
shielded cable.  Terminate the far end of the cable with a perfectly shielded termination. I
believe that we agree that the transmission line currents on the inside of the line are equal
and opposite. So let's see what is going on outside.  Well -- nothing, actually.

I can think of no way to know what is going on inside this system by measuring something from
the outside. We can ground the box, ground the load, ground the cable anywhere on its length,
unground anything or everything and it still makes no difference.  Is this system balanced
with respect to ground? I believe it is. I know this flies in the face of conventional wisdom
and you and many others might continue to disagree but I offer it as food for thought.

Regards, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 16:32:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 34
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41091p$[e-mail]>
References: <40vtsi$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Wes wrote:

*snip*
>I can think of no way to know what is going on inside this system by
>measuring something from the outside. We can ground the box,
>ground the load, ground the cable anywhere on its length, unground
>anything or everything and it still makes no difference.

That makes sense Wes. The coax "doesn't care" if it is connected to
earth or not. Radiation stops when the current in the center and shield
are equal and 180 degrees out of phase.

The center conductor can be grounded and the shield connected to the
point where the center conductor normally is, and the line still won't
radiate if good choke balun is installed. In some power amplifiers this
technique is used to provide a 180 degree phase inversion to drive a
push pull stage, or in more sophisticated forms to accurately transform
impedances over extremly wide bandwidths.

The simplest way to see these equal currents "in action" is to connect
two small light bulbs in series at the end of a short piece of coax
mounted over a piece of PC board. Ground the shield to the PC board
at the input, and put some good ferrite sleeves over the cable. Drive the
input with RF until the bulbs just light, and then ground each
connection point of the series bulb string to the PC board (one point at
a time!). If the sleeve was properly selected to provide enough choking
impedance, both bulbs will light the same amount no matter what
single point is grounded ...either the shield side or the center conductor

side, or even the middle of the bulbs.

I believe this illustrates the point you made Wes.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:21 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <40ufba$9sl@
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 19:41:42 GMT
Lines: 19

parsifal.nando.net> <40vpse$[e-mail]>
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
Distribution: world



: reactance on some bands, I have relocated it to the input of the
: tuner's variable components.

Concerning putting the balun on the input of the tuner;

I've wondered how this works. It sounds like a good idea but would
there be a greater chance of rf on the case of the tuner? Would
this require insulated knobs etc?
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 21:18:16 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 37
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <410cgs$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40vtsi$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>>
>>I think we have a point of confusion here that's semantic in nature.
>
>Agreed. But I did try to qualify this remark with "in one respect"

Yes you did.  Still, given that I have heard this twice during the
course of the thread, I wanted to clarify it.  :)

>Let's take a battery-powered rf source and enclose it in a totally

   << additional description deleted >>

>I can think of no way to know what is going on inside this system by
>measuring something from the outside. We can ground the box, ground
>the load, ground the cable anywhere on its length, unground anything
>or everything and it still makes no difference.  Is this system
>balanced with respect to ground? I believe it is.

Your conclusion is based on the invalid assumption that "ground" is
synonymous with "earth".  "Ground" refers to the zero-voltage
reference point that the transmission system (i.e. antenna) works
against.  Because we were talking about a terrestrial-based system
that radiates RF over earth ground, earth was the reference for the
previous discussions.

Your hypothetical system is independant of earth because you have
moved the reference point.  In effect, you have constructed an
artificial ground plane that encloses the entire system.  Relative to
that ground plane, the system is *not* balanced.

Sorry Wes, no ceegar fer you. <g>

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 21:35:44 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 40
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <410dhl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <40ufba$9sl@ <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
>  I wrote:

>: reactance on some bands, I have relocated it to the input of the
>: tuner's variable components.
>
>Concerning putting the balun on the input of the tuner;
>
>I've wondered how this works. It sounds like a good idea but would
>there be a greater chance of rf on the case of the tuner? Would
>this require insulated knobs etc?

Ahh HAH!!!  Someone who _hasn't_ seen my previous posts on this.

Heh, heh.

Just kidding Steve.  'Balun first" tuners (my description) work very
well.  Yes, *everything* has to be isolated from ground.

My tuner is a Dentron SST ("3KW") that I modified for this.  I moved
the tap switch onto a very thick homebrew aluminum "L" bracket mounted
on ceramic standoffs, then added a fiber shaft and front panel chassis
bearing.  I also had to pull the bottom of the inductor off ground.
The capacitors were already on standoffs and already had plastic
shaft couplers and plastic knobs.  The input balun is inside the case,
fed from the original input connector.  In fact, from the outside the
tuner looks completely original.

I used to feed ladder line to a 55-60' dipole with this arrangement on
160 through 10 meters.  On 80 - 10, I was running a KW. Even being on
the second floor with no RF ground on the system, there was *never*
any RF in the shack.  Other antennas have given similar results.

This system works extremely well and does an excellent job of keeping
the system balanced.  You can find a representative circuit in the
ARRL Handbook in the Balanced QRP Tuner construction article.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 21:41:28 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <410d28$[e-mail]>
References: <40vtsi$[e-mail]> <41091p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite43.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>Wes wrote:
>
>*snip*
[snip]
>The center conductor can be grounded and the shield connected to the
>point where the center conductor normally is, and the line still won't
>radiate if good choke balun is installed. In some power amplifiers this
>technique is used to provide a 180 degree phase inversion to drive a
>push pull stage, or in more sophisticated forms to accurately transform
>impedances over extremly wide bandwidths.


I've seen this done. Thanks for pointing it out. This phase inversion
can also be accomplished over a narrow band by grounding the shield
1/4 wavelength from the open end.


>The simplest way to see these equal currents "in action" is to connect
>two small light bulbs in series at the end of a short piece of coax
>mounted over a piece of PC board.... [snip]

>I believe this illustrates the point you made Wes.
>
>73 Tom


Indeed it does, Tom. I've tried the same experiment with different equipment.
Mine was a slightly more expensive HP8510 Network Analyzer (~$150K more) <g>,
but the answer comes out the same.



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 23:05:15 GMT
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <40ufba$9sl@ <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>Concerning putting the balun on the input of the tuner;
>
>I've wondered how this works. It sounds like a good idea but would
>there be a greater chance of rf on the case of the tuner? Would
>this require insulated knobs etc?

Ahh HAH!!!  Someone who _hasn't_ seen my previous posts on this.

Heh, heh.

Just kidding Steve.  'Balun first" tuners (my description) work very
well.  Yes, *everything* has to be isolated from ground.

My tuner is a Dentron SST ("3KW") that I modified for this.  I moved
the tap switch onto a very thick homebrew aluminum "L" bracket mounted
on ceramic standoffs, then added a fiber shaft and front panel chassis
bearing.  I also had to pull the bottom of the inductor off ground.
The capacitors were already on standoffs and already had plastic
shaft couplers and plastic knobs.  The input balun is inside the case,
fed from the original input connector.  In fact, from the outside the
tuner looks completely original.

I used to feed ladder line to a 55-60' dipole with this arrangement on
160 through 10 meters.  On 80 - 10, I was running a KW. Even being on
the second floor with no RF ground on the system, there was *never*
any RF in the shack.  Other antennas have given similar results.

This system works extremely well and does an excellent job of keeping
the system balanced.  You can find a representative circuit in the
ARRL Handbook in the Balanced QRP Tuner construction article.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!netnews.lightside.com!user55.lightside.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Raymond J. Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 18:11:28 +0100
Organization: Raymond Sarrio Co.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40qikf$[e-mail]> <40u96h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: user55.lightside.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

We carry a book in our WWW catalog titled "Building and using baluns and
ununs" by Jerry Sevick W2FMI. I think it will answer many of your
questions. The WWW site is at URL http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html. Hope the
book helps, 73's Ray

--
Ray Sarrio Co.
http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.ecrc.de!news.forth.gr!news-ath.forthnet.gr!news.compulink.gr!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Zacharias Liangas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: beam antenna project: HELP
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 21:37:24 GMT
Organization: ME!!!!!
Lines: 62
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Expires: 10 days
Message-ID: <410fk4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena.compulink.gr
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:57259 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13055



Dear friends


I have a big doubt so I post this masage here

   First lemme tell you my system configuration fr the moment before I
   advise you my problem :
   I use a SONY ICF 7600D , a Lowe HF150 and a Philips Magnavox 2395
   all are digital
   - wire antennas - of 6m sloped 60 deg paralel to az 120 deg - and a
   hor wire 13 m [aralel to 15 deg az .Both are  TV antenna mast
guides
   -home brewn ATU operating 2- 7 mHz for 20 - 5 dB respectively
   Palce of Reception ; Thessaloniki 40N 23E

   Due to my interest in SEA  I have the particular interest for
   listening to the folowing radio stations and under the condidtions
   as below :

   - STM / V o Malaysia ( dir 120 dg az) in 15295 at mean levels of 2-
   3 with QRMers as
   R Liberty  fgrom 15290  at levels S4-5 ( abt 15-25 dB more)
   R F I  from 15300 at nearly same as R L
   from varius hand made account-ments I understood that a great
   amount of signal abt 50-60% is lost due to possible reflexions
   coming from the city's mountains at an angle of 270-025 deg az

-RRI Jakarta in 9680  at mean levels (not always receivable) of S1-2
   Only V of Turkey is QRMer at 9675 but not always QRMing due to very
   low mod

- R Singapore  in 6000 at mean levels  of S2to 3 with
   Deutschlandfunk in 6005 (S4) as the only QRMer or sometimes
   Radio Dubai at 6000  but at verylow level

   I asked  the experts  of my city for making a common antenna
constru
   ction for  these 3 freqs of a antenna individual per band , I also
   read  many boks abt antennas found solutions  but most of them  are
un-
   suitable  for  my  place ( they were quad - X beam  for example) as
I
   have minimal  room in  the 7  level building and possibly can use
only
   small constructions  of  no more than 4 x 4 sqm

   PLease help me , and suggest a good protype fr beam antenna(s)
under
   the above conditions
   Thank you in advance

   [e-mail]
PLEASE ADIVSE ME YOUR OPINIONS BY EMAIL ONLY !

======
test for 8-bit
µß≈ß±Θß≥ δΘ▄πΩß≥
Zakaria Liang!
(namanya untuk kawan sahaja!)



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!slafetra
From: [e-mail] (Skip LaFetra)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Butternut HF6V-X:  Need Guys?
Date: 16 Aug 1995 15:07:13 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard
Lines: 8
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <40t1j1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppg01.sc.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.2]

If I recall correctly (and I'm pretty certain that I do), the literature
which came with my HF6V-X claimed that it will withstand 80 mph winds.

Mine bends a lot (and would probably get to darn close to horizontal long
before the winds hit 80 mph), but it does seem to handle the wind quite
well.

- Skip AA6WK


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:29 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncr-sd!lcpd2!copsw61!gr5
From: [e-mail] (Gary Rotter)
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenn
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Nntp-Posting-Host: copsw61.elsegundoca.attgis.com
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: AT&T Global Information Solutions
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 23:20:28 GMT
Lines: 28
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:84996 rec.radio.amateur.policy:29008 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12951

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Steve Wilson) writes:
[Some quoted text deleted to save space]

> :                                         Bob W8ERD
>
> ARRL national has attempted from time to time to make such connections
> but my understanding is that they have always been rebuffed.  The
> developer's associations, etc. don't need, nor want our input into
> their business.  A shame really.
>
> Steve KA6S

Perhaps a letter writing campaign from a few thousand hams saying that
they are unwilling to buy new homes with CC&Rs that totaly restrict all
antennas would get a response.  I am willing to live some restrictions
but most CC&Rs restrict all antennas.  I have even seen CC&Rs which
restrict all operation of "shortwave" transmitters and receivers!
So, does anyone know who to write to ?



---
Gary Rotter                                  Phone: [phone]
Teradata Decision Enabling Systems Center    Email: [e-mail]
AT&T Global Information Solutions            Voice Plus: 427-7672





From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!gdss.grumman.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Rod Hignite)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCR restrictions (was Re: Local Antenna Restrictions)
Date: 16 Aug 1995 14:08:04 GMT
Organization: Northrop Grumman Data Systems; Herndon, VA
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <40su44$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: higniro1.grumman.com
X-Newsreader: <WinQVT/Net v3.9>
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:85035 rec.radio.amateur.policy:29013 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:12976

>
> *** Much Deleted ****
>  I think it is high time that we reconsider the amount
>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>of power these little tyrants sitting on HOA boards give themselves!
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Steve KA6S

In a nutshell - Steve says it all......

Rod - KB3MK



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newsflash.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!coranto.ucs.mun.ca!noah!dbeach
From: [e-mail] (David Beach, NorFam, Memorial University)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax Collinear VHF Ant. Plans Wanted
Date: 17 Aug 95 10:08:29 -0330 NST
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <1995Aug17.100829.1@noah>
NNTP-Posting-Host: noah.ucs.mun.ca

I have a surplus 150 MHz whip which, after X-raying, seems to be
constructed from modified coaxial cable inside a hollow, flexible
fibreglass casing.  I presume it is a coaxial collinear.

Before I begin cutting and chopping to make this antenna resonate on
2M, I would like to get some more theory on this type of antenna. My
standard references (1994 ARRL Handbook and Antenna Book and an old
Antenna Anthology) make no reference to coax collinears.  I would
prefer not to buy another book if possible - any on-line references
to this type of antenna?  If not, any suggestions for books or
articles?

David Beach VO2BD



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Corrected: major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 01:42:42 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 68

-> Path: global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
-> From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
-> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
-> Lines: 64
->
-> -> NNTP-Posting-Host: dbonham.seanet.com
-> -> X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)
-> ->
-> -> I'm looking for someone who knows antennas and other RF design iss
-> -> help me with a patented
-> -> wildlife monitoring system.  The amount of available money will de
-> -> what happens in September
-> -> when I show a prototype at a national conference for wildlife biol
-> -> Portland.
-> ->   I have jillions of questions - but one question is fairly urgent
-> -> to transmit at 220 MHz between
-> -> two fixed, line-of-sight points, but my transmitter can put out on
-> ->  I can use directional antennas
-> -> for both transmit and receive.  What's the most gain I can expect
-> -> out of an antenna, what's the
-> -> best general design, and how far can I expect to clearly transmit
-> -> signal that has a deviation of
-> -> only 300 Hz?
-> ->   If anyone is interested in helping with this project, please let
-> ->   Thanks,
-> ->    D.Bonham
-> ->
-> Well, you left out some important information about your receiver!
-> So, I am going to assume some things based on experience.
->
-> 10mw = 10dbm
->
-> assume a directional antenna of 7db gain.
-> assume misc. transmit losses of 1.5 db
->
-> 10db+7db-1.5db = 15.5 db transmit signal.
->
-> Assume a RSL of -70dbm for good receiver quiting and a reasonable
-> path fade margin.
-> Assume a receiver antenna gain of 7db
-> Assume 1.5db losses
-> (-70) - 7 + 1.5 =  -75.5dbm rsl required at antenna.
->
-> Using the formula...
->    free-space path attenuation=
->  36.6 + 20 log f(mhz) + 20 log d(miles)
->
->     15.5dbm tx power + (-75.5dbmRSL) = 90.5db path loss

-> 90.5 = 36.6 + 20 log 220(mhz) + 20 log d(miles)
   90.5 = 36.6 + 46.848 + 20 log d
   90.5 = 83.448 + 20 log d
   7.052 = 20 log d
   .3526 = log d
   2.25 = d

  My first post was way off!  I made a direction error...I shoulda
  went right and went left!  Oh well!  Above is a corrected
  figure of 2.25 miles.

  15.5 >-------path loss----------------------->-75.5

  Sorry for the first bloop!  I gota quit doing this stuff at
  5am!

 Jim Wooddell
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Counterpoises for Butternut vertical
Date: 17 Aug 1995 00:09:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 41
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40ufd1$[e-mail]>
References: <40d0eg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Bill,

I see you access through Oberlin. I used to live in South Amherst on
Russia and Quarry Roads when that was all farm land. I loved it there.

You wrote:

>I'm wondering if putting single counterpoise wires for each of the
>WARC bands between 80-10m out from my ground-mounted
>Butternut might result in the same success I'm enjoying on 2m.

There probably is no simple universally correct answer for that. But in
general if there are enough wires the length doesn't need to be resonant.
To be resonant they must be some distance above earth.

>I really enjoy using the HF6V vertical, and wonder if counterpoises
>draped over the ground in the ravine behind our rental might eliminate
>the RFI enough so that I can start to use the vertical again.

Only if the interference is caused by parallel currents on the feedline or

maybe a "hot" radial that is somehow coupled to the neighbors stuff. If
it is the feedline you could install a choke type balun (such as a simple
air wound solenoid of coax) in the feedline near the antenna. If the
interference is due to the antenna's normal radiation, improving the
ground can only make the interference worse. Remember the vertical's
maximum response is along the horizon, and the dipole's (at low
heights) is straight up. Also, did you try a good low pass filter? Are the

connections on the antenna all good (no corroded joints that may
generate harmonics)? Is the antenna away from the CATV and power
lines or the neighbor's antenna?

>but am not sure what the right length for each should be...is it
>a simple mechanical 1/4 wavelength

I measured some elevated radials (8 feet high) on 80 meters. The
resonant length on 3.8 MHz was around 61 feet. So 232 divided by
frequency should work OK. It is not very critical.

73 Tom W8JI


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!prairienet.org!szinski
From: [e-mail] (Steve Zinski)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Dressler ARA30 antenna - HELP!
Date: 16 Aug 1995 23:39:32 GMT
Organization: Prairienet, the East-Central Illinois Free-Net
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <40tvjk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: firefly.prairienet.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I was just given (for free) a Dressler ARA30 Active Receiving Antenna and
I am wondering what it is used for. Any help would be appreciated.

                                        --Steve

--
============================================================
==  Steven C. Zinski - N9VAH  ==  [e-mail]  ==
==  Richmond, Virginia, USA   ==                          ==
============================================================


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 16 Aug 1995 01:03:36 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <40rg58$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40p5sj$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite191.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>In a never published letter to QST's Technical Correspondence Column,
>>I explored this "Feed anything with low-loss line and your problems
>>are over" idea. In a word, this is BS.
>
>      << good information deleted >>
>
>>Look at it this way, you have a very short antenna.  The efficiency
>>is poor and it's a problem to match.
>
>Would you agree that the efficiency of the antenna itself is poor only
>if its I2R losses are significint?

Not exactly. I2R loss is what we are after, as long as the R is _radiation_ resistance. The
antenna efficiency is equal to Rr/(Rr+Rl) where Rr is the real part of the radiation
resistance and Rl is the sum of all the other loss resistances, ie, ground, conductor, loading
coils, etc.  Clearly, if Rr is relatively large and Rl is small then (antenna) efficiency is
high. If the antenna is a small loop with Rr less than an ohm, then it doesn't take much loss
resistance to put the efficiency in the toilet. On the other hand, if the antenna is a
full-wave loop, then Rr ~ 140 ohm and small loss resistances don't take much of a toll.
'Course, get that small loop efficiency too high and the bandwidth will be so narrow you can't
use it <g>. You'll be like NAA running FSK, tuning the antenna between mark and space. None of
this addresses line and tuner losses tho...


<good stuff snipped>

>BTW, zip cord works very well if you split it apart and install
>ceramic spacers.  <g>

Right you are, I hadn't thought of doing that <g>.

Regards, Wes



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:35 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <40r22v$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 02:48:55 GMT
Lines: 14

: I would be willing to bet a trap vertical with a good ground system would
: beat any ground independent antenna of the same length if the antennas are
: electrically short.

Ok then. Put your 2 meter 1/4 wave vertical on the ground with some radials
and compare it to  the same antenna with radials which is up off the ground
say 30ft. or so. What about all these guys using "elevated feed verticals"
for 80 and 160 meter dx work? They all claim far superior results than
one mounted on the ground and at a far less expense of ground wires.
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 15 Aug 1995 23:39:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40rpa1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Steve wrote:

>>>>>
Ok then. Put your 2 meter 1/4 wave vertical on the ground with some
radials
and compare it to  the same antenna with radials which is up off the
ground
say 30ft. or so. What about all these guys using "elevated feed verticals"
for 80 and 160 meter dx work? They all claim far superior results than
one mounted on the ground and at a far less expense of ground wires.
--
  Steve <<<<<

We can't compare apples to oranges Steve. The two meter antenna at 30 feet
is nearly 5 wavelengths above ground. The lossy earth is in the far field
of that antenna.

There is no comparison between the two meter example you gave and a 160
meter vertical placed 1/10 wavelength above lossy earth.  In this case the
earth is in the near field of the meager ground system.

To be more fair, place the two meter antenna 7.6 inches above ground.
Compare that to a two meter antenna on the ground. That is a realistic
comparison.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:37 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <40rpa1$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 12:16:29 GMT
Lines: 35

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Steve wrote:


: We can't compare apples to oranges Steve. The two meter antenna at 30 feet
: is nearly 5 wavelengths above ground. The lossy earth is in the far field
: of that antenna.

: There is no comparison between the two meter example you gave and a 160
: meter vertical placed 1/10 wavelength above lossy earth.  In this case the
: earth is in the near field of the meager ground system.

: To be more fair, place the two meter antenna 7.6 inches above ground.
: Compare that to a two meter antenna on the ground. That is a realistic
: comparison.


Lossy earth. Howbout this. "Ground independent" veritcals (don't you
just love how new jargon crops up) supposingly have their high current
portion elevated above ground. This is supposed to reduce near field
ground loss. I have had two Cushcraft R7's pass through my hands
recently. I mounted one about 8ft off the ground. Performance compared
to my 160m horizontal loop at 65ft. on 40m was excellent. in fact, almost
identical. The higher bands were lousey.

I put the other R7 on top of the tower. Performance on 40 was terrible.
The higher bands performed somewhat better but still no where close
to the loop.


--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 16 Aug 1995 10:13:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40sudo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Steve wrote:

>Lossy earth. Howbout this. "Ground independent" veritcals (don't you
>just love how new jargon crops up)

That's not new jargon. I have millitary antenna design books that used
that jargon in the 40's.

> supposingly have their high current portion elevated above ground. This
is >supposed to reduce near fieldground loss.

The key word is "supposed". That is a huge supposition.

> I have had two Cushcraft R7's pass through my hands recently. I mounted
one >about 8ft off the ground. Performance compared to my 160m horizontal
loop at >65ft. on 40m was excellent. in fact, almost identical. The higher
bands were >lousey.

I have one here and compared to a ground mounted Butternut it is weaker on
every band (but weaker by the least amount on ten meters). A 40 meter
dipole at 85 feet smokes it and even beats the Butternut (unless the
signal is off the ends of the dipole).

>I put the other R7 on top of the tower. Performance on 40 was terrible.
>The higher bands performed somewhat better but still no where close
> to the loop.

And what opinion have you formed from this Steve?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:39 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <40sudo$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 15:38:02 GMT
Lines: 46

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Steve wrote:

: >Lossy earth. Howbout this. "Ground independent" veritcals (don't you
: >just love how new jargon crops up)

: That's not new jargon. I have millitary antenna design books that used
: that jargon in the 40's.

: > supposingly have their high current portion elevated above ground. This
: is >supposed to reduce near fieldground loss.

: The key word is "supposed". That is a huge supposition.

: > I have had two Cushcraft R7's pass through my hands recently. I mounted
: one >about 8ft off the ground. Performance compared to my 160m horizontal
: loop at >65ft. on 40m was excellent. in fact, almost identical. The higher
: bands were >lousey.

: I have one here and compared to a ground mounted Butternut it is weaker on
: every band (but weaker by the least amount on ten meters). A 40 meter
: dipole at 85 feet smokes it and even beats the Butternut (unless the
: signal is off the ends of the dipole).

: >I put the other R7 on top of the tower. Performance on 40 was terrible.
: >The higher bands performed somewhat better but still no where close
: > to the loop.

: And what opinion have you formed from this Steve?

Just like I suspected all along. The Butternut is the best of the sticks.
Check out the article in the new QST, Sept 95, where several mobile
antennas were compared. I'de like your opinion on this one.

It was a contest for the strongest 75 meter mobile signal. The benchmark
was a Hamstick. The winner was more than 10db stronger. Measurements
took place at a distance of 2000ft. What does this prove? 10db seems
like too much to me. Could it just be the radiation angles beign
slightly different. Also, different vehicles were used.


--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 16 Aug 1995 17:53:24 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <40tbal$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40r22v$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:

>: I would be willing to bet a trap vertical with a good ground system would
>: beat any ground independent antenna of the same length if the antennas are
>: electrically short.

> Ok then. Put your 2 meter 1/4 wave vertical on the ground with some
> radials and compare it to the same antenna with radials which is up
> off the ground say 30ft. or so. What about all these guys using
> "elevated feed verticals" for 80 and 160 meter dx work? They all
> claim far superior results than one mounted on the ground and at a
> far less expense of ground wires.

What point are you making?  You seem to be in violent agreement with
the first poster :).  Elevated radials are "a good ground system" if
results are anything to go by.  "Ground independant" doesn't mean
monopole+radials; radials are an artificial ground.

regards,
Ross ve6pdq
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 16 Aug 1995 17:57:09 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <40tbhl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40rpa1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:

>I mounted [an R7] about 8ft off the ground. Performance compared
>to my 160m horizontal loop at 65ft. on 40m was excellent. in fact, almost
>identical. The higher bands were lousey.

>I put the other R7 on top of the tower. Performance on 40 was terrible.
>The higher bands performed somewhat better but still no where close
>to the loop.

Since you don't say how long the 40m path lengths were, and since a
horizontal loop is a cloud warmer by definition, it's hard to conclude
very much from this anecdote.

regards,
Ross ve6pdq
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 21:01:53 GMT
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40sudo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>Check out the article in the new QST, Sept 95, where several mobile
>antennas were compared. I'de like your opinion on this one.
>
>It was a contest for the strongest 75 meter mobile signal. The
>benchmark was a Hamstick. The winner was more than 10db stronger.
>Measurements took place at a distance of 2000ft. What does this
>prove? 10db seems like too much to me. Could it just be the radiation
>angles beign slightly different. Also, different vehicles were used.

These tests emphasize a basic problem in our service, but are also
problematic in themselves.

The interest generated by the tests serves to underscore, and is
largely the result of, the manufacturers' continued failure to publish
complete and meaningful product performance specifications.
Illumination of this fact is the only value to be found in the
publication of the tests mentioned above.

Because some readers will fail to recognize this, however, the authors
have done a not insignificant disservice to the Amateur community by
publishing the article.  Even if it is assumed that flawed results are
harmless (they're not), the very existence of the tests reinforces the
concept that in the face of insufficient product data, independent
testing is not only acceptable, but normal and routine.  This
effectively validates the manufacturers' lack of accountability, and
to both the reader and the industry represents an official sanctioning
of their negligence.

Given the unscientific and less than worthless results of this
particular test, is it also any wonder the manufacturers remain
unconcerned?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <40rpa1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40tbhl$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 20:35:22 GMT
Lines: 35

Ross Alexander ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:

: >I mounted [an R7] about 8ft off the ground. Performance compared
: >to my 160m horizontal loop at 65ft. on 40m was excellent. in fact, almost
: >identical. The higher bands were lousey.

: >I put the other R7 on top of the tower. Performance on 40 was terrible.
: >The higher bands performed somewhat better but still no where close
: >to the loop.

: Since you don't say how long the 40m path lengths were, and since a
: horizontal loop is a cloud warmer by definition, it's hard to conclude
: very much from this anecdote.

: regards,
: Ross ve6pdq
: --
: Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]

Results were the same on all paths, long and short. The R7 was WAY
down compared to the loop in all directions and all distances.

A 160 meter horizontal loop on 40m is not a cloud warmer. Computer
generated patterns as well as experience shows that it has a low
angle on 40 and above. I think it is around 25 degrees or lower.
The higher the frequency, the lower the angle of the biggest lobe.

This is beauty of the horizontal loop. Low angles on higher frequencies
is a real advantage for a utility antenna.
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 17 Aug 1995 00:09:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40ufd8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


>A 160 meter horizontal loop on 40m is not a cloud warmer. Computer
>generated patterns as well as experience shows that it has a low
>angle on 40 and above. I think it is around 25 degrees or lower.
>The higher the frequency, the lower the angle of the biggest lobe.

No, the higher the antenna in terms of WAVELENGTH the lower the radiation
angle. As you move up in frequency, the height in WL goes up so the
radiation angle drops.

>This is beauty of the horizontal loop. Low angles on higher frequencies
>is a real advantage for a utility antenna.

This is the beauty of increasing the operating frequency. For the same
height above ground, the wave angle lowers with nearly any elevated
antenna (one exception, a vertical without traps or decoupling that splits
into high angle lobes from out of phase currents in the radiator). My
dipole has a lower angle of radiation on 20 than on 80. ;-)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!mango.epix.net!gmfoster
From: Garry Foster <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 16:21:16 -0400
Organization: epix.net
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40sudo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mango.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>



On Wed, 16 Aug 1995, WB3U wrote:

:>    [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
:>
:> >Check out the article in the new QST, Sept 95, where several mobile
:> >antennas were compared. I'de like your opinion on this one.
:> >
:> >It was a contest for the strongest 75 meter mobile signal. The
:> >benchmark was a Hamstick. The winner was more than 10db stronger.
:> >Measurements took place at a distance of 2000ft. What does this
:> >prove? 10db seems like too much to me. Could it just be the radiation
:> >angles beign slightly different. Also, different vehicles were used.
:>
;> These tests emphasize a basic problem in our service, but are also
:> problematic in themselves.
:>
:> The interest generated by the tests serves to underscore, and is
:> largely the result of, the manufacturers' continued failure to publish
:> complete and meaningful product performance specifications.
:> Illumination of this fact is the only value to be found in the
:> publication of the tests mentioned above.
:>
:> Because some readers will fail to recognize this, however, the authors
:> have done a not insignificant disservice to the Amateur community by
:> publishing the article.  Even if it is assumed that flawed results are
:> harmless (they're not), the very existence of the tests reinforces the
:> concept that in the face of insufficient product data, independent
:> testing is not only acceptable, but normal and routine.  This
:> effectively validates the manufacturers' lack of accountability, and
:> to both the reader and the industry represents an official sanctioning
:> of their negligence.
:>
:> Given the unscientific and less than worthless results of this
:> particular test, is it also any wonder the manufacturers remain
:> unconcerned?
:>
:> 73,
:>
:> Jack  WB3U
:>
:>
Jack

Even the experts cam't agree on what constitutes "proper" specifications,
so I don't really understand all this beating up of antenna manfactures.
If people don't have enough understanding of the principles to have a
very good idea of what works and what doesn't the all the real data in
the world won't mean anything to them/us. And what one person considers
worthless is an inportant issus to another. I think A/B tests are about
the best type of testing there is and this is basically what the test in
QST was. Also much (if not most ) of the 75 meter work is on ground wave
so the 2000 ft path seems reasonable. (I would have perfered a longer
path over typical terrian:however I don't think many could agree on
typical.) Also these types of shootouts aren't to compare one antenna
type to another but one hams signal to another. Therefore vehicles shold
vary as well as mounting styles because they all influence one's signal.
The part I thought was significent was how close all the better antennas
were.

I just reread the third paragraph and must admit that the author did say
the purpose was to comepare antennas which would tend to cloud the issue.
Be that as it may do you see anything in the results that surprises you?
I mean Big coil up high and large capicity hat properly placed wins.
Sounds good to me. Next a screwdriver mounted high on a spare tire holder
(in the clear comes in second). Forth and fifth are two large coils with
poorly positioned hats. However both of these antennas are mounted high
and in the clear. If you would have looked at these 6 instalations
pictured couldn't you have just about placed thier order of finish?

What would be interestin is to have cut the whip off of 4 and 5 above the
hat and seen what differance if any resulted.

                                                Garry(WB0NNO)



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: 17 Aug 1995 19:24:12 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <41050s$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40rpa1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40tbhl$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:

>A 160 meter horizontal loop on 40m is not a cloud warmer. Computer
>generated patterns as well as experience shows that it has a low
>angle on 40 and above. I think it is around 25 degrees or lower.
>The higher the frequency, the lower the angle of the biggest lobe.

That would be very strongly dependant on the height of the loop and
the local soil conductivity.  You don't mention a value for either,
(nor do you say whether your numerical model understands imperfect
ground, but it probably does.)

The point I'm trying to make is that anecdotes without numbers are
just stories.  Call me a soulless number addict :).  I'm not disputing
your observations, just trying to pin down what was being observed.

regards,
Ross
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 01:41:24 GMT
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40sudo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Garry Foster <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Even the experts cam't agree on what constitutes "proper"
>specifications, so I don't really understand all this beating up of
>antenna manfactures.

I don't know which experts you mean, but the mechanical and
electrical characteristics of antennas can be measured and recorded.
Manufacturers of well-engineered products such as Andrew, Mark, etc.
publish standard and complete specifications to describe the
performance of all their products.

>If people don't have enough understanding of the principles to have a
>very good idea of what works and what doesn't the all the real data
>in the world won't mean anything to them/us.

First, without specifications, manufacturers cannot be held
accountable for the performance of their products.  Second, to say
that that proper specifications aren't useful to an uneducated
purchaser assumes that we all live in a vacuum.  Given Amateur
publications, the Internet, and on-air QSO's, even non-technical Hams
can learn the meaning and importance of this information.

>And what one person considers worthless is an inportant issus to
>another.

That's why legitimate manufacturers produce differnt versions of their
products.  Non-technical customers consult engineers and the product
is selected that best meets the client's needs.

BTW, the fact that many Hams aren't engineers (myself included) is no
excuse for any of this.  QST is supposed to be one of our sources of
legitimate information, not a repository for technical voo-doo or a
safe haven for shoddy products.  If a product is poorly made or a poor
performer because it's inexpensive, that's OK.  What isn't OK is for
the magazine and the manufacturers to assume a posture that prevents
us from knowing that.

>I think A/B tests are about the best type of testing there is and
>this is basically what the test in QST was.

Non-amateur manufacturers and their clients disagree with you.  They
know that A/B testing of antennas is wasted effort because objective
single-item testing provides objective performance specifications that
can be objectively compared on paper.

>Also much (if not most ) of the 75 meter work is on ground wave so
>the 2000 ft path seems reasonable. (I would have perfered a longer
>path over typical terrian:however I don't think many could agree on
>typical.) Also these types of shootouts aren't to compare one antenna
>type to another but one hams signal to another. Therefore vehicles
>shold vary as well as mounting styles because they all influence
>one's signal.

The problem with this is that the test results can't possibly tell you
to what extent any one of those factors actually does affect the
signal.  The entire exercise is meaningless to an extreme degree.

>The part I thought was significent was how close all the better
>antennas were.

That could mean that those products are uniformly good, or that
one or two inefficient antennas had better ground planes, or any
number of other things.  It is all useless information except to those
who want to believe it.  Those folks will be saved the anguish of
trying to make an informed decision.

>I just reread the third paragraph and must admit that the author did
>say the purpose was to compare antennas which would tend to cloud
>the issue.

Perhaps he felt the article had to feign technical merit in order to
be published.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:48 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.wimsey.com!unixg.ubc.ca!info.ucla.edu!news.bc.net!news.uoregon.edu!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!newshost.marcam.com!usc!news.cerf.net!ent-img.com!wb6hqk!bart
From: [e-mail] (Bart Rowlett)
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Organization: wb6hqk
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40sudo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 03:09:48 GMT
Lines: 59

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
>
>>Check out the article in the new QST, Sept 95, where several mobile
>>antennas were compared. I'de like your opinion on this one.
>>
>>It was a contest for the strongest 75 meter mobile signal. The
>>benchmark was a Hamstick. The winner was more than 10db stronger.
>>Measurements took place at a distance of 2000ft. What does this
>>prove? 10db seems like too much to me.

It's not too much.  You can predict almost exactly 10 dB difference in
efficiency just by comparing easily measurable VSWR vs frequency
characteristics of the various antennas.  The measurements are also
in good agreement, usually within a dB, with classical analysis
techniques.

>Could it just be the radiation
>>angles beign slightly different. Also, different vehicles were used.

The stated purpose of the shootout was to objectively compare the performance
of various mobile antenna installations.  The vehicle, antenna placement and
matching arrangements can have a considerable effect on performance as was
verified by further test measurements.  All of the antennas tested were
vertically polarized and very short compared to the minimum self resonant
length of a quarter wavelength.  The sense antenna was out well out of
the near field but was designed to be sensitive only to the horizontal
component of the radiated magnetic field to insure absoultly minimum
interference from neighboring objects.  The shootout results correlate
very well with A/B comparisons performed between DX stations (Japan primarily)
and some of the exact mobiles measured.

>The problems illustrated by these tests are twofold:
>
>First, the need to even conduct the tests merely emphasizes the
>manufacturers' avoidance of product performance issues.  This is
>further evidenced by their continued publication of specifications
>that are neither meaningful nor sufficient to allow purchasers to
>objectively evaluate product performance.

Yes, exactly the reason for the shootout!

>Second, the authors have done a not insignificant disservice to
>the Amateur community by publishing such an article.  Even if it is
>assumed that flawed results are harmless (they're not), the very
>existence of the tests reinforces the concept that for some reason, a
>lack of objective testing is not only acceptable, but normal and
>routine.  This validates the manufacturers' failure to provide useful
>specifications to which they can be held accountable and provides
>nothing less than a further continuance of the problem.

I hope it makes a difference.

bart   wb6hqk

[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE VERTICAL BUNK
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 06:01:16 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40sudo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Bart Rowlett) wrote:
>WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>This validates the manufacturers' failure to provide useful
>>specifications to which they can be held accountable and provides
>>nothing less than a further continuance of the problem.

>I hope it makes a difference.

Bart, you may have brought up a very good point with this comment.

Maybe, just maybe, if subjective tests like this one put the heat on
the wrong manufacturers, they'll start publishing specs to backup the
quality of their products.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 01:57:03 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3vh6rr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40oam2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>Hi Armond, a "dipole" is a generic term defined as "a radio antenna
>consisting of two horizontal rods in line with each other with their ends

One, di means TWO. You have received a quote, not from either of us but
from a serious book. If people "generic" term use is wrong, that does not
make it correct. You can not find a serious book where dipole is used for
anything but the everyday normal 1/2 wave antenna. Your antenna is a multi-
pled antenna which can not be a "di" pole. No way. Also, how can you justify
those gain figures for nothing more than 2 5/8 wave antennas. One is a
smidge over a dipole and the other is 3dB over that?????Where all those
other numbers coming from???????


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 00:11:27 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 32
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40u1ff$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40oam2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
><[e-mail]> writes:

>>a "dipole" is a generic term defined (quoting the dictionary) as
>>"a radio antenna consisting of two horizontal rods in line with each
>>other with their ends slightly separated".

>You can not find a serious book where dipole is used for
>anything but the everyday normal 1/2 wave antenna.

We are probably at the crux of the problem. If you don't believe Webster's
Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary is a "serious" book, we do not share a
common language. Do you believe "The ARRL Antenna Book" is not a "serious"
book? Take a look at "dipole" in the index. There are 24 sub-topics under
"dipole". One of those sub-topics is "Half wavelength". Others are "Cage",
"Fan", "Folded", "Short", and "Trap", all adjectives describing different
types of "dipoles". A "dipole" is an antenna with two physical poles.
(Butchering the English language is a pet peeve of mine.)

>Also, how can you justify
>those gain figures for nothing more than 2 5/8 wave antennas. One is a
>smidge over a dipole and the other is 3dB over that?????Where all those
>other numbers coming from???????

Directly from ELNEC modeled at 30 ft over *real ground* so I guess the
question needs to be directed to W7EL. A half-wave dipole over *real
ground* has about 6dbi gain. a 10/8 dipole should be about 3db better.
ELNEC says that a 20m 10/8 dipole has an 8dbi clover-leaf pattern on 17m
over *real ground*. Do you disagree with ELNEC? If so, that's about the
only new thing in this thread.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:52 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.psc.edu!hudson.lm.com!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hplextra!hplb!hpwin055.uksr!hpqmoea!dstock
From: [e-mail] (David Stockton)
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Sender: [e-mail] (SQF News Admin)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 11:49:33 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpqmocc.sqf.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard LTD, South Queensferry, Scotland
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8.8]
Lines: 11

[e-mail] wrote:

: You can not find a serious book where dipole is used for
: anything but the everyday normal 1/2 wave antenna.


     I prefer funny books.


        David,  GM4ZNX



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news1.halcyon.com!coho!ki7zd
From: [e-mail] (Randy Seacat)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV antenna inquiry.
Date: 16 Aug 1995 07:28:25 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <40s6mp$[e-mail]>
References: <40macm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coho.halcyon.com

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:

>Donald W. Culpepper ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: If anyone has experience using a G5RV type dipole for SWL DX for the
>: 16m - 49m bands I'd appreciate your info.  It almost seems too simple a
>: design to be a multiband.  But that's what Joseph Carr, MSEE, calls it.

>The whole G5RV thing is bunk. For SWL's any length dipole longer than
>about 50ft will give great results. Feed it with 300 ohm twin lead and
>use a cheapo tuner to peak it up.
>--
>  Steve
>[e-mail]
>
>

It sure is a shame to have this sort of BUNK info being said. THe G5RV is
a great performer. And its a shame that a 1x2 call would claim different.
I use a G5RV with 30 watts, and I have worked 4 conts., and 96 countries
with it. I get 20 over s9 sig reports on 80 meters on any night. And get
accused of lieing about my power output. I have not found a better piece
of wire to date. And, it cost a whole $4.00 to build it. (Not counting
feedline)

I had a guy tell me before I put it up, not to. He claimed it was a terrible
ant. That it wouldnt work. Well, hate to say it, but it does. When I
talked to him with it, he said "I see you decided to use something besides"
sorry, but its a g5rv design, and for multiband oper. It works well.

Not to discount that a 50 foot wire with a tuner wouldnt work either, but
Im sure that a g5rv with a tuner will work much better.

My 2 cents.

Real radios glow in the dark!
[e-mail]

--
/-/-/  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  | Amateur Radio Station                       Inet: [e-mail]
  | KI7ZD
  | WWA  CN87  73's    _._ .. __... __.. _..   "If RST > 519, Reduce Power!"


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV antenna inquiry.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 08:13:09 GMT
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40macm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40s6mp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <40s6mp$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Randy Seacat) wrote:
>[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) writes:
>
>>The whole G5RV thing is bunk. For SWL's any length dipole longer
>>than about 50ft will give great results. Feed it with 300 ohm twin
>>lead and use a cheapo tuner to peak it up.

>It sure is a shame to have this sort of BUNK info being said. THe
>G5RV is a great performer.

Yes, the G5RV design can work very well, but so will Steve's >50 foot
dipole.  Given that he included an impedance matching network (tuner)
in the proposed configuration and that the antenna will be used for
SWL only, there should be very little difference in performance
between the two types of antennas.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!van-bc!news.wimsey.com!sanjuan.amtsgi.bc.ca!salmon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV antenna inquiry.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 12:32:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
References: <40macm$[e-mail]>
Lines: 10


A>If anyone has experience using a G5RV type dipole for SWL DX for the
A>16m - 49m bands I'd appreciate your info.  It almost seems too simple a
A>design to be a multiband.  But that's what Joseph Carr, MSEE, calls it.

G5RV is a good antenna.  I had one that was 102' long, there are some
half that size and others double that size, and it worked great from
10-80meters.
---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ Salmon Siding Saloon - Salmo B.C. [phone]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip240.phx.primenet.com!markem
From: [e-mail] (Mark Monninger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV antenna inquiry.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 20:48:58 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40macm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40s6mp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip240.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <40s6mp$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Randy Seacat) writes:

>  ...
>Not to discount that a 50 foot wire with a tuner wouldnt work either, but
>Im sure that a g5rv with a tuner will work much better.
>

If you're using a tuner, it isn't a real G5RV. I'd advise you to read
Maxwell's book 'Reflections' about it (there's a whole chapter on it)  and
also some of G5RV's own writings on the antenna.

Most of the so-called "G5RV's" aren't.

They can and do work but they're not the mystical, magical antenna that lots
of folks seem to think they are.

Now, let's talk about 2M J-poles...

73...     Mark     AA7TA


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Dimensions
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 07:11:29 GMT
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40ptk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Guy Scott ) wrote:

>  Hello everybody, I'm looking for dimensions and materials required
>to build a g5rv ant.

The Radio Works in Portsmouth, VA sells kits as well as individual
components and materials.  Their number is [phone].

RW sells a "G5RV Plus" for $55 in their standard catalog.  It covers
80 - 10 meters plus WARC.  Each leg of the dipole is shown to be 51'
long and the dipole is fed with 31' of ladder line.  At the source end
of the ladder line a current balun is used, which converts the system
to coaxial feed.

RW also sells "Carolina Windoms" as well as a number of other
interesting designs.

Incidentally, in addition to their standard catalog, RW publishes
a $5 "Reference Catalog".  This item contains descriptive information
regarding products and techniques not found in their standard catalog.
I don't agree with everything they have to say on antennas and ground
theory, but it's an interesting piece just the same. :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Dimensions
Date: 18 Aug 1995 16:10:34 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 15
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <412e1q$[e-mail]>
References: <40ptk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <40ptk9$[e-mail]>,
Guy Scott  <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  Hello everybody, I'm looking for dimensions and materials required to
>build a g5rv ant. A description here or an ftp site would be just fine.

Hi Henry, G5RV's latest recommendation is to forget the coax and bring
the ladder-line all the way to the shack. 102 ft center-fed dipole is most
popular. I personally use an 88 ft center-fed dipole because it gives me
world-wide coverage on 20m and 17m with a two-lobed broadside pattern on
20m and a cloverleaf pattern on 17m. I suggest you study the radiation
patterns before you erect the antenna. Otherwise, you may be radiating
primarily over water and uninhabited land areas like the South Pole.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Dimensions
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 16:33:12 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40ptk9$[e-mail]> <412e1q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:

>I suggest you study the radiation patterns before you erect the
>antenna. Otherwise, you may be radiating primarily over water and
>uninhabited land areas like the South Pole.

Cecil, how is the radiation pattern of a non-resonant antenna
determined?  I've never seen this published, but there's obviously a
way to do it.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (William Michels)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV references?
Date: 16 Aug 95 16:44:24 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <Pine.ULT.3.90.950816123024.2005A-100000@micro2>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


Hi All,

        I am looking for copies of some of the papers regarding Louis
Varney's G5RV antenna and similar designs.  Specifically, the
references are:

        1) Varney, L., "ATU or astu?" Radio Communication, August,
                1983.

        2) Varney, L. "HF Antennas in Theory and Practice - A
                Philosophical Approach," Radio Communication, Sept.
                1981.

        3) B. Austin, "Computer-Aided Design of Multi-band Dipole
                Based on the G5RV Principle," Radio Communication,
                August, 1985

        4) P. Hawker, "More on the G5RV/ZS6BKW Antennas," Technical
                Topics, Radio Communication, Jan, Feb & Apr 1993.

        5) Varney, L., "An Effective Multi-Band Aerial of Simple
                Construction," RSGB Bulletin, July 1958.

        A formal interlibrary loan request for this came back
negative. (There were only a couple of libraries in the country that
had RSGB Bulletin archives going back as far as 1958 and neither one
could fill the request). Old serials seem to be the first thing a
library throws out when it needs to free up some space. Note that
Radio Communication is the current name of the RSGB Bulletin; these
are publications of the Radio Society of Great Britain.

        In the hope that some dedicated ham antenna people have saved
old issues of the above, I am posting this request here. I would like
to buy the specific issues mentioned or pay reasonable copying costs,
whichever is best for you.

        Best Regards,

        Bill Michels
        [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!darwin.sura.net!mother.usf.edu!frog!sffuom
From: [e-mail] (Arjay Morgan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 16 Aug 1995 06:23:09 GMT
Organization: University of South Florida
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <40s2sd$[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: frog.thpl.lib.fl.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:
: Hello out there!

: As I am planning to buy a GAP TITAN Vertical, I would like to know
: something more about its qualities from HAMS who already work with it.

: Both positive and negative reactions....

: Greetings,

: 73  DE PAOVNL

: Hans

:I've never found a ham in Tampa,FL who could get a gap to work
:Arjay, N3LKZ



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:45:59 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 15:41:21 GMT
Lines: 16



: :I've never found a ham in Tampa,FL who could get a gap to work
: :Arjay, N3LKZ

Boy, Someone needs to Flame those Gaps. If they are really this bad,
one of our fine Amateur Radio Publications needs to make us aware of
it. I read the review in QST some time ago but they go soft on stuff
like this.

N4lq
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.u.washington.edu!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Matso Limtiaco)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 16 Aug 1995 18:25:01 GMT
Organization: UW Athletic Bands
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.95.77.80

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

> : :I've never found a ham in Tampa,FL who could get a gap to work
> : :Arjay, N3LKZ
>
> Boy, Someone needs to Flame those Gapsè
>
> N4lq
> --
>   Steve
> [e-mail]
>
>
I agree.  I saw a couple of reviews of the GAP in 73 and CQ (I
think...might have been QST) from a few years ago and they seemed to be
pretty positive.  Also, around two months ago, someone came on this
newsgroup and asked about the GAP.  I remember about six or seven replies
saying "You'll never need another antenna" and only one who said it was a
waste of $$.  Where were all the people who've had no luck with the GAP
back then?

73s
Matso Limtiaco N7DUB

PS.  Yes, I bought one.  Either conditions on 40 and 30 have really been
that bad, or this antenna just plain doesn't work real well.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:01 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 20:40:25 GMT
Lines: 39

Matso Limtiaco ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

: > : :I've never found a ham in Tampa,FL who could get a gap to work
: > : :Arjay, N3LKZ
: >
: > Boy, Someone needs to Flame those Gapsè
: >
: > N4lq
: > --
: >   Steve
: > [e-mail]
: >
: >
: I agree.  I saw a couple of reviews of the GAP in 73 and CQ (I
: think...might have been QST) from a few years ago and they seemed to be
: pretty positive.  Also, around two months ago, someone came on this
: newsgroup and asked about the GAP.  I remember about six or seven replies
: saying "You'll never need another antenna" and only one who said it was a
: waste of $$.  Where were all the people who've had no luck with the GAP
: back then?

: 73s
: Matso Limtiaco N7DUB

: PS.  Yes, I bought one.  Either conditions on 40 and 30 have really been
: that bad, or this antenna just plain doesn't work real well.

Well, when you look at the Challanger, those (radial) wires are really
part of the lower half of the radiator and they lay on the ground. Am
I correct? Is this weird or what? In other words, if this is a center
fed, elevated feed antenna, then the lower half consists of some wire
which lays on the ground. I think the whole deal here is just a way
to get a low swr with little consideration given to radiation efficiency.
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 21:12:40 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

>Well, when you look at the Challanger, those (radial) wires are
>really part of the lower half of the radiator and they lay on the
>ground. Am I correct? Is this weird or what? In other words, if this
>is a center fed, elevated feed antenna, then the lower half consists
>of some wire which lays on the ground. I think the whole deal here is
>just a way to get a low swr with little consideration given to
>radiation efficiency.

Everyone is able to visually distinguish a dummy load from a radiating
element.  It's not so easy though when a manufacturer combines the two
and calls it an antenna.  :)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Horrock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 16 Aug 1995 18:46:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <40tsg8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Horrock)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>Boy, Someone needs to Flame those Gaps. If they are really this bad,
>one of our fine Amateur Radio Publications needs to make us aware of
>it. I read the review in QST some time ago but they go soft on stuff
>like this.   N4lq
>

The problem is that I like my GAP, and I would buy one again.

Of course I wish I had a sixty foot tower and multiband antenna
for 40-6meters on it.  Not to mention the fifty foot phone poles
for all the wire antennas I wish I had.  But I don't expect the GAP
to work as well as my dream antenna system does (in my mind).

I have had other verticals, Cushcraft aand Hustler, they both worked
good - but required a little more work in the adjustments department.

The WORST vertical I ever had was a BUTTERNUT.  Yet there are
people who like their Butternut.

I don't know the conditions other people used the GAP under
(poor soil, tight space, bad location, incorrect construction, stupidity)
but a few years back a DX station in  Antarctic was using the big GAP
and I worked him from Wisconsin.  They can't be that bad!

In any case I still want my dream antenna field!


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:04 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <40tsg8$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 03:48:22 GMT
Lines: 32

: The problem is that I like my GAP, and I would buy one again.

: Of course I wish I had a sixty foot tower and multiband antenna
: for 40-6meters on it.  Not to mention the fifty foot phone poles
: for all the wire antennas I wish I had.  But I don't expect the GAP
: to work as well as my dream antenna system does (in my mind).

: I have had other verticals, Cushcraft aand Hustler, they both worked
: good - but required a little more work in the adjustments department.

: The WORST vertical I ever had was a BUTTERNUT.  Yet there are
: people who like their Butternut.

: I don't know the conditions other people used the GAP under
: (poor soil, tight space, bad location, incorrect construction, stupidity)
: but a few years back a DX station in  Antarctic was using the big GAP
: and I worked him from Wisconsin.  They can't be that bad!

: In any case I still want my dream antenna field!


OOOOOH!!! This is getting too technical for me. The world has been worked
on Gotham verticals, bed springs and barbed wire. In 1965 you could
work anywhere in the world on 20 meters with a coat hanger too. I saw
it done.

N4LQ
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:05 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 19:51:20 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 11

For what it's worth, I've had a Gap DX-IV for two years and found it to
be an excellent performer on 40 and 80 for working DX both long and
short path from the west coast.  It also hears well on 160 although hard
to judge results since I don't use an amp there.  On 20 meters it seems
pretty poor compared with a three element quad, about 10 to 20 db down
but maybe that is a function of the radiation angle differences.
In general, Im very pleased with the results on this particular model.
It is definitely better than the 45' base loaded vertical previously in
use.




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Horrock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 17 Aug 1995 18:16:48 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <410f4g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Horrock)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>
>OOOOOH!!! This is getting too technical for me. The world has been worked
>on Gotham verticals, bed springs and barbed wire. In 1965 you could
>work anywhere in the world on 20 meters with a coat hanger too. I saw
>it done.
>
>N4LQ
>

Steve, maybe you have a point here.  Lets examine it.  Since we are in a
low solar activity period right now and someone buys a $300 ground
mounted antenna, wishing he had a 60' tower with a tri-bander, and after
putting up is ground mounted antenna he isn't able to work the world ----
WELL
may be he would be disappointed and blame the antenna.  I'm sure that was
your point - wasn't it?  Because as you pointed out, when conditions are
very good you can work the world on a coat hanger.  So how good/bad is any
antenna really? You can't trust performance because of conditions - as you
have pointed out.  This leaves us with the non-science appoarch:
Do you feel good about your GAP or not?  The most interesting thing about
this thread is that it bring the N4LQ's out in the open.  I enjoy your
input
speak to us some more.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:06 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 23:07:47 GMT
Lines: 14

Lets see. Gap is 10 to 20db down on 20 meters from an antenna that should
have a higher radiation angle and "I'm pleased"???? And it's better than
a 45ft vertical???? Wonder how many db down it was??? Hears well on 160
but cant tell because no amp????  Beam me up Scotty!

OH, Now we have a New New New vertical. The Hygain Vertical WINDOM. OOOOOH
check this out in the new QST. What next? How about a vertical G5RV? I
can see the add now. COVERS ALL BANDS WITH A TUNER. SUPER DX .. I WORKED
ZL WITH ONLY 2 picowatts. YOU CAN TOO!!
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!fido.asd.sgi.com!squarethru.mti.sgi.com!rfrench
From: [e-mail] (Robert French)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 18 Aug 1995 00:40:34 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc.
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <410ni2$[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: squarethru.mti.sgi.com

Well, I just received my GAP Titan the other day.  I hope to be able to
put it up this weekend.  I live in an area with no snow, little wind,
and occasional earthquakes :-) so I don't really care all that much about
it needing to support a 100MPH windload and 2 tons of ice.  The comparison
antennas (which I'll leave up for a while) are 20m and 40m inverted vee
dipoles up a whopping 15'.  (They used to be up 25' but a squirrel ate
thru my hoist rope and I haven't fixed it)  So if my GAP works better
than a dipole up 15', I will be happy.  Also, I'm running only 100w.  My
performance for the past year has been that I could very occasionally work
someone on the east coast SSB, and have worked 2 DX stations CW.  (This
as compared to a local contest station I sometimes use where I've worked
47 states and 52 countries in the same time frame)  I'll
post a review once I get a chance to compare.

                Yours for realism in antenna choice,

                                Rob


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.eng.convex.com!news.netins.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Gap verticals
Date: 18 Aug 1995 03:03:18 GMT
Organization: INS Information Services, Des Moines, IA USA
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ins.netins.net

Well.....I have owned my Gap DX-VIII for about three years now. My previous antennas were
ground mounted verticals of the 14AVQ variety with only average ground. I used these
kind of antennas for many years, dating back to the purchase of a New Hallicrafters FPM-
300 Mk II. I can recall using a 14 AVQ on forty phone and asking for a signal report
from my (then) home in Kansas City. A guy in Dallas gave me "20 over". This on a vertical
with about 4 poorly attached radials. O.K. so I didn't know much about verticals then.....
Mechanically my GAP has held up to northern Iowa winter well. There are no particalar
adjustments to make (i.e. no rotor to turn, etc) and it "gets out" well. But then recall
what I did with an antenna that was little more than one of Kurt N Sterba's grocery carts.
I have worked quite a lot of DX with mine, back when you could get 15 meters, with QRP.

And I only have room, money and a tolerance for one antenna so I VERY happy with mine. On
80 its not much, but 40 and 20 works pretty good. Remember this is anecdotal. There was
recently a good article in one of the ham magazines that explained the operation of this
kind of antenna. But when I move to the farm in a few weeks Its no longer gonna be my
only antenna and I am going to put up a bunch of wire!!!!
Assuming you had a lot of room you could do better (ie Rhombics, etc) with about $50
worth of wire. ...Just my $.02 worth. 73
WB0FDJ


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <410f4g$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 02:57:44 GMT
Lines: 10

When one pays $300 for an antenna, he may as well feel good.

I have spoken.

N4LQ
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Gap verticals
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 16:39:56 GMT
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

[e-mail] wrote:

>Assuming you had a lot of room you could do better (ie Rhombics, etc)
>with about $50 worth of wire. ...Just my $.02 worth.

Actually, good quality antenna wire has gotten pretty expensive.
$50.00 probably won't buy enough for a decent rhombic.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Grounding from the 2nd floor
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 03:10:49 GMT
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40r947$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (jim pestell) wrote:
>[e-mail] (Steve Greenberg) wrote:

>   You and I are in the same boat, and I have been playing wth ground
>systems for years, there is only one ground that works, use a quarter
>wave length of wire for each band you work , just make sure no one
can touch the ends of the wire while you are on the air!

What types of antennas are you gentlemen using?  If the antenna system
is balanced, you shouldn't need an RF ground at the rig.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.isi.edu!news.aero.org!news2.aero.org!greenberg-t.aero.org!user
From: [e-mail] (Steve Greenberg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Grounding from the 2nd floor
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 16 Aug 1995 19:57:14 GMT
Organization: Aerospace Corp
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40r947$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: greenberg-t.aero.org

Yes, I have heard of the use of 1/4 wave radials for each band, attached to
the ground lug of rig or tuner.  I am tempted to try.

I am using a full size G5RV to a tuner.

Maybe I should loose the G5RV/tuner, and go to a balanced system such as a
beam or vertical.  Not sure.

Any other comments would be appreciated.

tnx & 73s
Steve, WA6TAF


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Grounding from the 2nd floor
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 06:52:40 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40r947$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Steve Greenberg) wrote:

>I am using a full size G5RV to a tuner.
>
>Maybe I should loose the G5RV/tuner, and go to a balanced system such
>as a beam or vertical.  Not sure.

The G5RV should not cause feedline radiation.  Check the usual things
first.  The ladder line should travel away from the antenna at right
angles, and it should not be routed near other objects, especially if
they're conductive.

Out of curiosity, did you purchase the antenna from a commercial
vendor, or is it homebrew?  Also, how much power do you use?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.erinet.com!bug.rahul.net!a2i!olivea!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Grounding from the 2nd floor
Date: 17 Aug 1995 02:10:54 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <40u8fe$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40r947$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs4-03.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

In the past I have used (sucsessfully) a coaxial groud comprised of RG-8
with center conductor (not shield) tied to ground and the transmitter. At
each end the braid is connected to the center conductor via a .01ufd
5000V cap.

The theory is - the braid prevents RF reaching the center conductor and
the cap(s) provide a path for RF on the braid.

This was used to instal a (semi-serious) contest station on the 8th floor
of a 14 story buliding and seemed to work fine (no RF bite and only
unbalanced antennas).  I have subsequently used this type of ground (for
smuch shorter runs) and never experienced any problems.

I hope this may help your situation

73

Joe - KW1K




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.aero.org!news2.aero.org!greenberg-t.aero.org!user
From: [e-mail] (Steve Greenberg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Grounding from the 2nd floor
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 17 Aug 1995 18:20:13 GMT
Organization: Aerospace Corp
Lines: 39
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40r947$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: greenberg-t.aero.org

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
>    [e-mail] (Steve Greenberg) wrote:
>
> >I am using a full size G5RV to a tuner.
> >
> >Maybe I should loose the G5RV/tuner, and go to a balanced system such
> >as a beam or vertical.  Not sure.
>
> The G5RV should not cause feedline radiation.  Check the usual things
> first.  The ladder line should travel away from the antenna at right
> angles, and it should not be routed near other objects, especially if
> they're conductive.
>
> Out of curiosity, did you purchase the antenna from a commercial
> vendor, or is it homebrew?  Also, how much power do you use?
>
> 73,
>
> Jack  WB3U


HI Jack

The G5RV is homebrew, the power level is 100 watts, & the ladder line is
running down a center pole, then down the side of the house to the feedline
at ground level.  The feedline then runs back up the same side of the house
and over the roof to the shack on the opposite side of the house.

Do you think I should reposition the ladder line, if so, then it will be
running down the pole, and go horizontal over the roof to the feedline and
to the shack.   But I thought the intention of the ladder line was to be
vertical.

Oh well, everything is a compromise.

Tnx for the info & 73s
Steve.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!gwen.pcug.co.uk!kate.ibmpcug.co.uk!gbscomms!gordy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40r947$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
From: [e-mail] (Gordon B. Slater)
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 08:37:12 GMT
Subject: Re: Grounding from the 2nd floor
Lines: 17


In article <[e-mail]>, Steve Greenberg ([e-mail]) writes:

>Do you think I should reposition the ladder line, if so, then it will be
>running down the pole, and go horizontal over the roof to the feedline and
>to the shack.   But I thought the intention of the ladder line was to be
>vertical.

yes, it should be as vertical as possible, and make sure that you're not
using a metal/conductive pole. If so, try and get athe biggest possible
stand-off between the mast and line, at least 18 inches to 2 feet.

However, you may find (if you have a balanced tuner or 4-6:1 balun) that if
the twin lead will reach the shack, just cut the coax connector off the end,
plug the twin lead in the back of the tuner and away you go! Problem solved

Gordy

--
Caution: Keys now changed at random security intervals.
Contact for current armoured transport file.

"You are reminded that this is an insecure circuit. The use of names,
ranks and classified information is forbidden."





From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.wimsey.com!io.org!interlog.com!news1.fonorola.net!kowloon.terraport.net!archangel.terraport.net!mercury115
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Weaver)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help with a Ringo Ranger
Date: 18 Aug 1995 02:13:56 GMT
Organization: TerraPort Online Inc. [phone], Your Gateway to the Internet
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <410t14$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mercury115.terraport.net
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

Wonder if anyone can give me the lengths of the various parts of a Ringo
Ranger. It is a 2 meter version. I have one which has been dismantled for
re-furbishing but don't have any documentation. Specifically, what is the
distance from the bottom insulator to the hairpin, and from the hairpin to the
top. Also the matching stub at the feed point. Any help would be appreciated.

Please reply here or email me at: [e-mail]

tnx & 73 de Bryan, VE3TRJ




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!ulowell.uml.edu!vtc.tacom.army.mil!news1.oakland.edu!newshub.gmr.com!rcsuna.gmr.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Val Breault)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hustler shock mount (was Re: CCR restrictions)
Date: 17 Aug 1995 13:26:56 GMT
Organization: General Motors R&D Center
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40su44$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rinhp750.gmr.com
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of 16 Aug 1995 14:08:04 GMT
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:85089 rec.radio.amateur.policy:29029 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13024

> >  I think it is high time that we reconsider the amount
> >  of power these little tyrants sitting on HOA boards give themselves!
> >Steve KA6S

Steve, I kindly disagree.

People that live in those communities willfully and sometimes gladly
give those HOA boards the power to control the community.  The boards
have no power, no influence, no say in the lives of people that have
not given them that power.

Far too often in far too many ways the American people are willing, nay
eager to sign away their freedoms.  They believe that someone else can
protect them better than they can protect themselves.  The HOA board, like
the congress, has only as much power as the people give them.

I personally find that to be an unacceptable situation.  Every opportunity
I have I vote with my feet, my money, and my ballot to change it.

ObRadio:
I've been having a ball running HF-mobile using a Hustler system
mounted on the side of my van.  I've set it up so that the hinge
in the fold over mast is about at the drip rail level.  I can easily
reach it to set it up or bring it down and I can anchor the loose
end to the roof using a magnet.  I've installed a stand off support
just below the hinge to take the lateral load from this rather long,
stiff and heavy antenna.  This is all well and good but it's a real
pain to stop at the end of my tree lined street to erect or take down
the antenna every time I use it. I'd really REALLY like to be able to
put a shock spring just above or just below the hinge. That way I'd be
able to leave the antenna up when driving down tree lined streets or
campgrounds. Has anyone done this?  Does anyone know someone that does it?

I'll be away for a couple days longer than our local 'expire' time
so E-mail responses would be appreciated.

--
Val Breault [e-mail] \      /|
GM R&D Center - instrumentation dept.  \    / |
My opinions are not necessarily those   \  /__|     ars N8OEF
of GM R&D or of the GM Corporation.      \/   |___  Pres GM ARC


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!qnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (chris spacone)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: INMARSAT Terminals
Date: 17 Aug 1995 01:35:01 GMT
Organization: Quantum Networking Solutions, Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <40u6c6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup18.av.ca.qnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11

Does anybody out there have information regarding INMARSAT terminals?  I
could use some basic source material, perhaps an overview of the system
and maybe some prices for entry level stuff.  I have a friend that owns a
rather *large* motor/sailer and is interested in upgrading his
communications capability.

If I have posted in an inappropriate newsgroup, please forgive me.

flames > dev/nul

73, Chris, KD6OUB



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cville-srv.wam.umd.edu!ham
From: [e-mail] (Scott Richard Rosenfeld)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Larsen kulduckie good choice
Date: 17 Aug 1995 21:15:28 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <410bhg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rac8.wam.umd.edu

A friend of mine and I were at Dayton.  His double-spring BNC bit
the dust, and it was attached to a 1.5 year old Kulduckie.  Larsen
wasn't there due to some screw-up, but a call to their 800-line
netted him some valuable info: the name of a Larsen dealer who was
present and would exchange free of charge.

Expensive but worth the price, I guess you'd say.
--
Member, Leukemia Society's "Team in Training." | Tax-deductible contributions
Run/walk in Bermuda Marathon, Jan. 12-15, 1996 | accepted and welcome.  Email
-----------------------------------------------| or call for more info.  All
Scott Rosenfeld  Burtonsville MD  301-549-1022 | sponsors welcomed.  Thanks!


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!news.netconnect.com.au!news
From: Michel van der Walle <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Lindenbladt Antenna
Date: 18 Aug 1995 11:43:22 GMT
Organization: Ballarat NetConnect Pty. Ltd.
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <411ucq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: moe-ppp6.moenet.com.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

I am currently looking for a suitable antenna to receive the APT signals
from the LEO weather birds.

I am currently using a turnstile with ground plane and this antenna is
performing quit well.

However it suffers from fading during some passes. Not sure why.

Somewhere in my endevours to find the ultimate "non tracking" antenna I
came across the name "Lindenbladt"

I do remember that the article stated that this antenna was used in
Australia on the Woomera Rocket range in the late 50's early 60's to
track and receive telemetry sigs from experimental rockets.

According to the article this sky hook was used because of it's superior
circular response to signals from both, overhead and on the horizon
signal sources.

It also stated that it had some gain over a turnstile.
The article did not go into any theory or construction details.

Hence this message.

Has anybody out there in Amateur Land ever heard of this antenna and if
so have any construction details.

I would be very interested and gratefull for any details.

Warmest Regards from "Down Under"

Michel van der Walle VK3KVW.



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: 16 Aug 1995 01:23:11 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <40rh9v$[e-mail]>
References: <40pbgv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite191.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] wrote:

<<snip>>

I have jillions of questions - but one question is fairly urgent:  I need to transmit at 220
MHz between
>two fixed, line-of-sight points, but my transmitter can put out only 10 mW.  I can use directional antennas
>for both transmit and receive.  What's the most gain I can expect to get out of an antenna, what's the
>best general design, and how far can I expect to clearly transmit an FM signal that has a deviation of
>only 300 Hz?


The answer is... it depends. How large can the antennas be? How sensitive is your receiver?
What is the data rate?  What error rates can you tolerate?  Is the path truly line-of-sight or
are there obstructions such as trees, buildings, etc?

In general, you probably should be considering Yagi antennas which can have reasonable gains
of 10 to 12 dBi.  You can get more but I said "reasonable". The remainder of your problem lies
in the answers to the above.

I'm not saying I can help if you supply the answers, I'm just good at asking questions <g>

Regards, Wes



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 03:26:27 GMT
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40pbgv$[e-mail]> <40rh9v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] wrote:

>I have jillions of questions - but one question is fairly urgent:  I
>need to transmit at 220 MHz between two fixed, line-of-sight points,
>but my transmitter can put out only 10 mW.  I can use directional
>antennas for both transmit and receive.

I use an Excel spreadsheet that I wrote for path calculations.
Normally, I use this for microwave work, but the free space
attenuation is calculated against the frequency entered by the user,
so it's adaptable to 220 MHz.

Other items that need to be entered are transmitter power in watts,
signal bandwidth, receive and transmit antenna gain, feedline loss,
and receiver noise figure.  From this, the sheet calculates the EIRP
in dBmW, as well as the Carrier/Noise ratio at the receiver for
distances in whatever increments are desired.

Also, I have a chart that provides a graphic representation of 0.6
Fresnel Zone clearance.  Like the other sheet, the frequency can be
entered by the user.  The other factors it needs are receive and
transmit antenna heights, and the distance between the sites.  From
this, if calculates and plots a football-shaped image from the
transmit tower to the receive antenna, and superimposes it against a
plot of the earth's curvature, drawn for the distance involved.

>The answer is... it depends.
    << snip >>
>I'm not saying I can help if you supply the answers, I'm just good at
>asking questions <g>
>
>Regards, Wes
>

Same here.  Actually, I have almost no experience at 220 MHz,
particularly regarding readily available hardware.  If someone wants
to provide a starting point, I'd be glad to plug in some numbers and
see what the programs spit out.  For microwave work, I usually start
with the Fresnel chart first.  This tells me how tall the sites need
to be, which in turn provides the number for transmitter feedline
loss.  I'm so "green" at 220 MHz though, I'm not even sure Fresnel is
a significant concern.  Again, I'll be glad to plug in the numbers if
someone wants to give me a start in the right direction.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!kaleka.seanet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: 16 Aug 1995 05:38:43 GMT
Organization: Seanet Online Services, Seattle WA
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <40s097$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dbonham.seanet.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>     Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:
>  >[e-mail] wrote:
>
>  >I have jillions of questions - but one question is fairly urgent:  I
>  >need to transmit at 220 MHz between two fixed, line-of-sight points,
>  >but my transmitter can put out only 10 mW.
>
>>>>
Wes and/or Jack,
  As you can probably tell, I'm pretty 'green' with this RF stuff - but sounds like your spreadsheet is what I
need.  Are you interested in selling a copy?
Here's my best shot at the numbers you need:
  Antenna gain of 11 at both transmit and receive.
  10mW of transmitter power
  1KHz bandwidth (300 Hz deviation)
  feedline loss of 1dB at tranmit and receive
  I don't know my receiver noise figure - what's reasonable for Radio Shack's best police scanner?
    Would a higher priced unit be significantly better?
  I'd like to get Carrier/Noise ratios at half-mile intervals, if possible.
I'm only after some rough numbers for now - are we talking one mile, five miles, or ten?

Much appreciated,
Doug B.



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 07:49:22 GMT
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40pbgv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Doug,

Although I personally designed the spreadsheets used in this work, I
am not at liberty to distribute them.  Nevertheless, I will be glad to
provide the results, and to assist you in this project to the extent
that I am able to do so.

To begin, maintenance of 0.6 Fresnel Zone clearance is not possible at
this frequency without extraordinary measures.  Simply put, the zone
is very large and continues to intersect earth at any reasonable tower
height.  Therefore, I will assume that unlike microwave, such
clearance is not required.

Assumptions regarding the system are as follows:

  1.  The transmit and receive antennas will each be located at a
height of 50 feet.  This will provide line of sight to a distance of
approximately 20 miles over 4/3 smooth earth.

  2.  The transmission line will be RG8/U, which incurs a loss at
this frequency of approximately 4.0 dB per 100 feet.  For purposes of
the transmit EIRP calculation, I have assumed a total length of 50
feet, or a 2 dB loss. If the transmitter will be mounted on the tower
or inside a shelter some distance from the tower base, this number may
have to be adjusted.

  3.  I believe that a conservative noise figure of 2.0 dB can be
assigned to the scanner.  Assuming that you will not use a
tower-mounted preamp, transmission line (downlead) loss must be added
to this figure.  Again, assuming 50 feet of line, the result is an
equivalent noise figure of 4.0 dB.

  4.  Signal bandwidth is a crucial element in the carrier-to-noise
calculations that follow. However, the bandwidth used by the
calculations actually refers to that of the receiver, not the
transmitted signal.  Therefore, I have entered 20 KHz as an estimate
for this figure.  If you can determine the actual number, the results
will be considerably more accurate.

In addition to the above, I have used a figure of 11 dB gain for both
the transmit and receive antennas, and 10 mW transmitter output.  Line
of sight assumes there are no additional losses resulting from
obstructions or foliage in the path.

------------------------------------

System EIRP:  19.00 dBm / 0.0794 Watt

Path Length      Carrier/Noise
 (miles)             (dB)

   2.5               68.1
   5.0               62.1
   7.5               58.5
  10.0               56.0
  12.5               54.1
  15.0               52.5
  17.5               51.2
  20.0               50.0

------------------------

Given the numbers obtained above, there should be no problem with
signal reception to the distances shown on the chart.  In fact, I
suspect the limiting factor to this project will be the economics of
antenna height.

As a final note, changes to certain items can be added or subtracted
directly from the C/N ratios shown.  These items are feedline loss,
receiver noise figure, and transmit and receive antenna gain.

This is intended to be preliminary, so let me know if you need results
for a different combination of components.

Regards,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 02:55:20 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 64

-> NNTP-Posting-Host: dbonham.seanet.com
-> X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)
->
-> I'm looking for someone who knows antennas and other RF design issues
-> help me with a patented
-> wildlife monitoring system.  The amount of available money will depen
-> what happens in September
-> when I show a prototype at a national conference for wildlife biologi
-> Portland.
->   I have jillions of questions - but one question is fairly urgent:
-> to transmit at 220 MHz between
-> two fixed, line-of-sight points, but my transmitter can put out only
->  I can use directional antennas
-> for both transmit and receive.  What's the most gain I can expect to
-> out of an antenna, what's the
-> best general design, and how far can I expect to clearly transmit an
-> signal that has a deviation of
-> only 300 Hz?
->   If anyone is interested in helping with this project, please let me
->   Thanks,
->    D.Bonham
->
Well, you left out some important information about your receiver!
So, I am going to assume some things based on experience.

10mw = 10dbm

assume a directional antenna of 7db gain.
assume misc. transmit losses of 1.5 db

10db+7db-1.5db = 15.5 db transmit signal.

Assume a RSL of -70dbm for good receiver quiting and a reasonable
path fade margin.
Assume a receiver antenna gain of 7db
Assume 1.5db losses
(-70) - 7 + 1.5 =  -75.5dbm rsl required at antenna.

Using the formula...
   free-space path attenuation=
 36.6 + 20 log f(mhz) + 20 log d(miles)

    15.5dbm tx power + (-75.5dbmRSL) = -60db which can be tolerated.

 60 = 36.6 + 20 log 220(mhz) + 20 log d(miles)

 60 = 36.6 + 46.848 + 20 log d

 60 = 83.448 + 20 log d

 -23.448 = 20 log d

 -1.1724 = log d

 .0672 = d

  or about 355 feet


Hope this helps.  Keep in mind the above is assuming alot.  Your
receiver quiting level would really make a big difference here.
Jim Wooddell, WA6OFT
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 19:56:27 GMT
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) wrote:

>  or about 355 feet

Well, you sure got a different result than I did.  <g>

Guess I'll have to try and analyze this later today or tomorrow.

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 04:38:46 GMT
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Jim,

I read your post with the correction (2.25 miles) but there is still a
considerable difference in our results.  After analyzing your
procedure with mine, I have pinpointed the area causing the
discrepancy.

My calculation starts with EIRP and deducts free space loss over the
path length in order to derive the signal level reaching the receive
antenna.    Then, I add the receive antenna gain and deduct line loss,
if any.  My numbers up to this point are similar to yours.  Next, I
compare the signal level input to the receiver against ENI (Equivalent
Noise Input), which is calculated from noise figure.  The result is
the Carrier to Noise Ratio.

The reason our results are so different is that ENI for a 3.5 dB noise
figure (2.0 dB NF + 1.5 dB loss you suggested) is -127.49 dBm.  In my
calculations, each dB of signal level above that figure is 1 dB of
Carrier to Noise Ratio.

To clear up this issue, perhaps you could help me with the following
questions:

1.  Is an ENI of -127.49 dBm realistic at this frequency, or is
ambient noise considered to be above this level?  I *did* check the
ARRL Handbook for common 220 MHz noise figures (< 1 dB).  As a result,
I assumed that any differences in ambient noise between 220 MHz and
microwave would not be significant.

2.  How did you arrive at a minimum acceptable signal level of -70
dBm?

3.  What Carrier to Noise Ratio would -70 dBm represent, and does it
include signal bandwidth as a modifying factor?

4.  I was surprised to see that you were considering path fade in the
equation.  Are you sure this is required for line of sight paths of
less than 50 miles at 220 MHz?

Thanks for your help with this.  If I have made an error, now is the
time to find out.  I absolutely do not want to mislead the gentleman
who asked the original questions on this topic.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!ip240.phx.primenet.com!markem
From: [e-mail] (Mark Monninger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 20:43:11 MST
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40ctvo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40r317$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip240.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

A while back, someone wrote:
>>
>>> I think the ARRL quit selling the book because their technical staff
>>>doesn't understand conjugate matching.
>>

Not to start a flamefest, but I read some comments that Maxwell wrote about
the ARRL not selling his book any more. He seemed to blame it on their lack of
understanding of the subject and their editorial bias toward someone else's
theories on the subject, which differed from Maxwell's. He also said that they
had removed from the Handbook most of the material that he had contributed
over the years. He also mentioned a few QST articles criticizing his material
that I went back to and read. Seems there was quite an editorial war in QST a
few years back between Maxwell and someone else. Too bad it wasn't here on the
net...might have made for some interesting reading...

I read his book and thought it made a lot of sense. Based on Maxwell's
engineering contributions as an antenna engineer, it would seem he knows
something of what he speaks.

FWIW...

Mark   AA7TA


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!tcsi.tcs.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 14:57:57 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40ctvo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40r317$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Mark Monninger) wrote:

>A while back, someone wrote:

I read that post too.  Thought it was a joke at the time.

>Not to start a flamefest, but I read some comments that Maxwell wrote
>about the ARRL not selling his book any more. He seemed to blame it
>on their lack of understanding of the subject and their editorial
>bias toward someone else's theories on the subject, which differed
>from Maxwell's.

Mark, where did you read these comments?  I'm interested to know more
about this.  Who is the opposing theorist?

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:27 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!veltman
From: [e-mail] (paul Veltman)
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40ctvo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40r317$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 01:25:36 GMT
Lines: 41
Sender: [e-mail]

Mark Monninger ([e-mail]) wrote:
: A while back, someone wrote:
: >>
: >>> I think the ARRL quit selling the book because their technical staff
: >>>doesn't understand conjugate matching.
: >>

: Not to start a flamefest, but I read some comments that Maxwell wrote about
: the ARRL not selling his book any more. He seemed to blame it on their lack of
: understanding of the subject and their editorial bias toward someone else's
: theories on the subject, which differed from Maxwell's. He also said that they
: had removed from the Handbook most of the material that he had contributed
: over the years. He also mentioned a few QST articles criticizing his material
: that I went back to and read. Seems there was quite an editorial war in QST a
: few years back between Maxwell and someone else. Too bad it wasn't here on the
: net...might have made for some interesting reading...

: I read his book and thought it made a lot of sense. Based on Maxwell's
: engineering contributions as an antenna engineer, it would seem he knows
: something of what he speaks.

Well sir,
Back when this book was a series of articles in QST, I felt that
"Reflections" was as good a treatment of the subject as has appeared in
most EE texts on the same subject.  In fact, when a new ham would wander by, I
would slap a copy of these articles on them and tell them to learn it.
Then, Rod Stafford was just our division director.  I pestered him every
time I ran into him to have the big cheeses at Newington publish the
series again.  Now he's the big cheese.  I guess I'll have to start
pestering him again.
I don't know if the technical staff back there understands conjugate
matches or not.  And what they understand or don't understand really is
not material to the subject.  The plain fact is that there's a lot of
bovine excrement floating around out there with respect to antenna and
transmission line theory, and the ARRL should publish good information,
and IMHO, Reflections is good information.
Enough of this soapbox.

73

Paul WA6OKQ


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!simtel!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 06:36:21 GMT
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40ctvo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40r317$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (paul Veltman) wrote:

>The plain fact is that there's a lot of bovine excrement floating
>around out there with respect to antenna and transmission line
>theory, and the ARRL should publish good information, and IMHO,
>Reflections is good information.

I searched more than twenty-five years for a book like this.  To call
it "good information" is a gross understatement.

It is exceedingly difficult to believe that the ARRL has voluntarily
decided to take this work off the shelves.  Must be something in the
water up there.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 18 Aug 1995 16:23:11 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 16
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <412epf$[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40r317$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Mark, where did you read these comments?  I'm interested to know more
>about this.  Who is the opposing theorist?

Jack, I goofed and published parts of a personal letter from Walter
Maxwell that I shouldn't have. Mr. Maxwell would like for newsgroup
discussions not to include any of that material and I ask everyone
to respect those wishes. I appologize for my mistake.

Leaving Mr. Maxwell and "Reflections" out of the discussion, IMO the
ARRL has taken W5OLY's experimental data to mean that conjugate
matching is not important and/or doesn't really exist.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!shipping.ipctech.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John Pendergraft alt.autos.macho-trucks alt.autos.rod-n-custom alt.babylon5.uk alt.bacchus alt.backrubs alt.badgers.rose.rose.rose alt.banjo alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die alt.basement.graveyard alt.bbs alt.bbs.ads alt.bbs.allsysop alt.bbs)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 17:59:45 GMT
Organization: IPC Technologies Inc.
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shipping.ipctech.com

I just purchased an MFJ roll up J Pole antenna for $14.95 plus C.O.D. and
shipping and Tax etc. It works even better than I expected. However, in
the package with the antenna is a sheet of paper explaining the warranty
procedures and requirements. One of the requirements is that if the
product has to be  shipped back to MFJ for warranty replacement or repair,
that I have to send a $7.00 check or money order for return postage as
well as pay for the postage to ship it to them. MFJ verified this on the
phone that products older than three months incur the charge.
  Now, I checked the UPS rate to ship it to them and at 1 pound, shipped
UPS Ground, anywhere in the U.S., it costs only $2.97, max. This amount is
usually the same for the same weight item shipped in reverse, or from them
to me.
Where does the other $4.03 go to? I guess in the case of my J Pole it
would pay for the cost to manufacture the replacement item. Mayby I could
also have the old one back. Maybe they think thats fair because noone ever
has to pay the $7.00 becuase none of their products fail under warranty.
Hey, thats probobly the reason, Yeh.

--
John Pendergraft
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal?
Date: 17 Aug 1995 15:27:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <410567$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>Where does the other $4.03 go to? I guess in the case of my J Pole it
>would pay for the cost to manufacture the replacement item. Mayby I could
>also have the old one back. Maybe they think thats fair because noone
ever
>has to pay the $7.00 becuase none of their products fail under warranty.
>Hey, thats probobly the reason, Yeh.

--
>John Pendergraft

John,

I bought an extended warranty for a car. They charge a $100 fee if you use
it. If it needs a voltage regulator it's a bad deal. If it needs a
transmission it's great deal.

So if you bought a one dollar item it would be a bad deal. If you bought a
300 dollar tuner it would be a different story, wouldn't it? I don't know
about you but I'm more worried about 300 bucks than some loose pocket
change. ;-)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 22:48:40 GMT
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (John Pendergraft alt.autos.macho-trucks

>However, in the package with the antenna is a sheet of paper
>explaining the warranty procedures and requirements. One of the
>requirements is that if the product has to be  shipped back to MFJ
>for warranty replacement or repair, that I have to send a $7.00 check
>or money order for return postage as well as pay for the postage to
>ship it to them.

If in fact their printed warranty states that the $7.00 charge is
specifically for return postage (not shipping and handling), then they
rightfully owe a refund to any person who's return postage is less
than that amount.

That's not to say they will do it however, thus the warranty may be
considerably less worthwhile on less expensive products than it at
first appears.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:33 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Need Help on Mobile Antenna Specs
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <40lqt2$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 01:28:16 GMT
Lines: 23

In article <40lqt2$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ted Morange) writes:
>Need help in understanding why the Diamond NR-770HA 2/.7m mobile
>antenna is specified as "1-1/2, 2-5/8". It's 40" long total, with only
>a loading circuit at the base and a few turns in the whip in the
>center.
>
>The whip length of about 36" roughly corresponds to 1/2 wavelength at
>146MHz and 2 x 5/8 wavelength at 445MHz, but what is the theory behind
>specifying it in this way? Need references if possible.

It's specified that way because that's what it is. On 2 meters it
is a simple loaded halfwave radiator. On 70 cm it is two 5/8-wave
radiators arranged colinearly with a phasing section in between.
That's what that thing that looks like a coil in the middle is, a
phasing section that puts the currents in the 2 5/8-wave sections
in phase with each other.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!fastnet!dmarra.fast.net!user
From: [e-mail] (David M. Marra)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need source for "DK-3" HF Mobile Antenna
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 13:14:58 -0400
Organization: via FASTNET(tm) PA/NJ/DE Internet Services
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dmarra.fast.net

Hi Everyone--

I would like to find the telephone number and/or address for the
manufacturer of the DK-3 HF mobile antenna.

There is an article in the current issue of QST about it (and other HF
mobile antennas) but no contact information is given.

Also, any opinions of the DK-3 would be appreciated!



Regards,

DAVE MARRA--N3ODX
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need source for "DK-3" HF Mobile Antenna
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 15:06:55 MST
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <40tqlr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ggspc.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


There are a number of suppliers/builders of the Don Johnson
antenna. The ones that advertizer in the ham rags cost a bit
more to pay for that advertizing. Mel L. Woody made mine and it
if a fine antenna. Mel's address is 10109 Marquom Cr. Molalla Or.
97038. His price is fair and he delivers when he says he will.

73 Jerry


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!dfk
From: [e-mail] (David F. Kurth)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need source for "DK-3" HF Mobile Antenna
Date: 17 Aug 1995 00:41:56 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <40u38k$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsdrn2.col.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

David M. Marra ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Hi Everyone--

: I would like to find the telephone number and/or address for the
: manufacturer of the DK-3 HF mobile antenna.

I got mine as a kit (to save a few $$) from:

        High Sierra Antennas
        Box 2389
        Nevada City, CA  95959

        916-273-3415
        916-273-7561 Fax
        (QST also carries an ad in the back)

I called and promptly got a flyer with pictures and diagrams of
the antenna, and pictures of the various mounts available.  When
I ordered the antenna, it arrived at my door when promised.  I'm
pleased with its perforance too.

Dave  N0UVR


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need source for "DK-3" HF Mobile Antenna
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 01:49:08 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40tqlr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>

Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]> writes:

>antenna. The ones that advertizer in the ham rags cost a bit
>more to pay for that advertizing. Mel L. Woody made mine and it

Well, all tings being equal the advertised products will sell for less
because a product selling in mass costs less to make. Woody may sell for
less because (purely guessing) he has no employees, working out of his home,
not paying disability, SS, etc. Get a couple of employees and you need a
bookeeper to do all the taz stuff etc. I the history of the USA it was
when Sat eve post and others came along where mfgs could reach a large
audience that the economic life improved.


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cville-srv.wam.umd.edu!ham
From: [e-mail] (Scott Richard Rosenfeld)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Parasitic elements question
Date: 16 Aug 1995 16:28:42 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland College Park
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <40t6bq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rac2.wam.umd.edu

I would like to, in my limited-space arrangement (my attic), set
up an array of 2-element beams, each consisting of a driven element
and a reflector.

I live in a townhouse, and can't get anything rotatable up for 6m.

Anyway, I have a remote coax switch.  What I'd like to do is set up
two reflecting elements, set 90 degrees apart.  For EACH reflector
element, I'd set up TWO driven elements, one on each side of the
reflector.  I'd then choose to drive ONE of them.

The question:

Will this work?  Will the undriven element (located "behind" the
reflector) have a negative effect on the front-to-back ratio of the
array?  I can build the system, no problem.  But IS IT WORTH IT???

Alternate plan?  A system with THREE antennas 120 degrees apart.
The reflectors would be arranged in a triangle, and the driven ele-
ments set up as required.  Questions?  Comments?  Would the addi-
tional reflectors between the CHOSEN driven elements and the UNUSED
driven elements provide more in the way of isolation?

How about a shortened 6m Yagi?  I know it sounds dumb but I am REALLY
limited space-wise.

--
Member, Leukemia Society's "Team in Training." | Tax-deductible contributions
Run/walk in Bermuda Marathon, Jan. 12-15, 1996 | accepted and welcome.  Email
-----------------------------------------------| or call for more info.  All
Scott Rosenfeld  Burtonsville MD  301-549-1022 | sponsors welcomed.  Thanks!


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!rohvm1!mahpfy
Organization: Rohm and Haas Company
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 13:21:11 EDT
From: <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rubber Duck
Distribution: world
References: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 0

I like Larson....Just a thought.... Pete, KA3ROG


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rubber Duck
Date: 17 Aug 1995 13:12:23 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <40vf7n$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>I need a new rubber duck for my 2m HT.  Anyone have any comments on
>which brand is better than another?  Thanks

Just get the most expensive you can find. Not that it will
worl well, but you will be able to pride youself of having
paid well.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rubber Duck
Date: 17 Aug 1995 04:53:02 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 11
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <40uhve$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip59.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>Hi,
>I need a new rubber duck for my 2m HT.  Anyone have any comments on
>which brand is better than another?  Thanks
>Bob

A Larson is an excellent albeit expensive choice!
Gary



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!netnews.lightside.com!user55.lightside.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Raymond J. Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rubber Duck
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 18:04:21 +0100
Organization: Raymond Sarrio Co.
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40vf7n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: user55.lightside.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In article <40vf7n$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] () wrote:

> >I need a new rubber duck for my 2m HT.  Anyone have any comments on
> >which brand is better than another?  Thanks
 We have an antenna in our WWW catalog called the Floppy Duck. What makes
it work so great is that it is a full 1/2 wave on 2 meters and will load
fine on 70cm. the key is that it up 8" before it flops over, and so the
name. We have many other rubber ducks to choose from, check them aou at
http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html 73's Ray

--
Ray Sarrio Co.
http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!gatech!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rubber Duck
Date: 18 Aug 1995 10:27:33 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <411pul$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <40vf7n$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>We have an antenna in our WWW catalog called the Floppy Duck. What makes
>it work so great is that it is a full 1/2 wave on 2 meters and ....

Up to now I thought that the main idea of a rubber duck was to have
a *compact* antenna. How does having a 40" ( 1 meter) rubber device
hanging out from your HT, floping around and generally amusing/annoying
byestanders fit in here?

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:41 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uknet!bcc.ac.uk!news
From: [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby)
Subject: SWR - how good is good????????
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News System)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 08:59:34 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UCL Dept of Medical Physics
Lines: 33


I have a requirement in a computer program, to determine an antenna SWR, then
compute a 'quality factor' for it. ie:

SWR=1:1        Quality =10/10
SWR=infinity   Quality = 0/10

Ideally I want a function that takes SWR as an argument and returns a number between
0 and 1.0, that reflects how good the SWR is. It should be a continuous function.

Where would 1.5:1 be? Perhaps 9/10?? How about 2:1??

The number I get is used to optimise an antenna, which gets optimised for gain,
sidelobe level, swr, fb ratio etc. I want to put just the right amount of bias on
each parameter.

I first assumed that if I gave a quality that was directly proportional to the
fraction of power radiated by the antenna:

Quality proportional to:   (1 - ((SWR-1)/(SWR+1))^2)

this would work well. However, poor SWR's are given too high a bias by this.  An SWR
of 5.8:1 is given 5/10, when most people would think an SWR of nearly 6:1 as being
about as good as no good, so perhaps deserving only 1 or 2 out of 10.

Any thoughts? One option is to write down ten different VSWR's, give then marks out
ten, then fit a polynomial. But how does one do this semi-objectively???

davek






From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.bluesky.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: 16 Aug 1995 15:54:57 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <40t4ch$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite34.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Dave Kirkby) wrote:
>
>I have a requirement in a computer program, to determine an antenna SWR, then
>compute a 'quality factor' for it. ie:
>
>SWR=1:1        Quality =10/10
>SWR=infinity   Quality = 0/10
>
>Ideally I want a function that takes SWR as an argument and returns a number between
>0 and 1.0, that reflects how good the SWR is. It should be a continuous function.

[stuff deleted so my newsreader is happy]
>
>Any thoughts? One option is to write down ten different VSWR's, give then marks out
>ten, then fit a polynomial. But how does one do this semi-objectively???
>
>davek
>
Assuming you're continuing your work with Yagis, I must ask why you are so conserned with SWR.
IMHO, this is a matching problem, not one that affects (to the first order) the gain, FB, etc.
 If you worry about getting a good match at the center of the driven element, aren't you
automatically conpromising the other parameters?

You might want to consider the change (delta) of the driven element impedance across some
bandwidth as a figure of merit. This might make the (later) design of a matching system
easier, but I can't imagine what a "good" number might be.

If you still want to use SWR, I wouldn't extend the limit to infinity though.  How about 10:1?


Regards, Wes



From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news2.tele.fi!news.inet.tele.fi!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Osmo Vuorio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: 16 Aug 1995 21:20:50 GMT
Organization: TELECOM FINLAND, Engineering
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <40tnfi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vuorios1.dial.tele.fi
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby) says:
..
>I first assumed that if I gave a quality that was directly proportional to the
>fraction of power radiated by the antenna:
>
>Quality proportional to:   (1 - ((SWR-1)/(SWR+1))^2)
>
>this would work well. However, poor SWR's are given too high a bias by this.  An SWR
>of 5.8:1 is given 5/10, when most people would think an SWR of nearly 6:1 as being
>about as good as no good, so perhaps deserving only 1 or 2 out of 10.
>
>Any thoughts? One option is to write down ten different VSWR's, give then marks out
>ten, then fit a polynomial. But how does one do this semi-objectively???
..

In the name of the TX output power this is a good question. This classical
'1-r*r' reflection concept may not be accepted. But how about to use the
voltage: '1-r' - nothing comes back from the transmitter end (not true).
It is true that with 1 kW Tx power we have to keep the SWR in proper limits.
I think some proportional scaling would be adequate.

Osmo, OH2EU


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 05:56:14 GMT
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby) wrote:

>I have a requirement in a computer program, to determine an antenna
>SWR, then compute a 'quality factor' for it. ie:

Dave,

There is a conceptual problem with what you are trying to do.  It is
entirely possible (and not uncommon) that an antenna with a 4:1 VSWR
will be more efficient than one which provides a ratio of 2:1 or less.
In the context of a single measurement, VSWR is an extremely poor
indicator of the quality of either antennas or antenna systems.

>Ideally I want a function that takes SWR as an argument and returns a
>number between 0 and 1.0, that reflects how good the SWR is.
>The number I get is used to optimise an antenna, which gets optimised
>for gain, sidelobe level, swr, fb ratio etc. I want to put just the
>right amount of bias on each parameter.

You cannot optimize an antenna in this manner unless you know what
effect a change in VSWR will have on the *system* loss.  In other
words, sacrificing gain for lower VSWR is only valid if the reduced
VSWR nets the operator sufficiently reduced feedline loss to
compensate for the reduced gain of the antenna.

>I first assumed that if I gave a quality that was directly
>proportional to the fraction of power radiated by the antenna:

This is a misconception.  Assuming the transmitter can match the
impedance seen at the feedline and excluding feedline losses,
increased VSWR does not reduce the power consumed or radiated by the
antenna.  Reflected power is not lost, it is re-reflected at the
transmitter and fed back to the antenna.

>Quality proportional to:   (1 - ((SWR-1)/(SWR+1))^2)
>
>this would work well. However, poor SWR's are given too high a bias
>by this.  An SWR of 5.8:1 is given 5/10, when most people would think
>an SWR of nearly 6:1 as being about as good as no good, so perhaps
>deserving only 1 or 2 out of 10.

Are you attempting to define numbers on the basis of what people think
(i.e. for marketing purposes) or on the basis of engineering?

>Any thoughts? One option is to write down ten different VSWR's, give
>then marks out ten, then fit a polynomial. But how does one do this
>semi-objectively???

You can't.  It's just not that simple.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!ames!titan.ksc.nasa.gov!kscdl1.cad.ksc.nasa.gov!k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov!user
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Fred McKenzie)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 15:34:44 -0400
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Nntp-Posting-Host: k4dii.ksc.nasa.gov
Lines: 24

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
> I have a requirement in a computer program, to determine an antenna SWR, then
> compute a 'quality factor' for it.

davek-

You don't appear to have all the facts laid out here.  If your system is
working at HF, and has the capability of matching a wide range of
impedance, then a 'quality factor' would be quite high (10) throughout
that range of impedance.

On the other hand, if your system is working at UHF, and uses RG-58 Co-Ax,
then losses will be increasingly high for SWR > 1:1.  Therefore, I suggest
you include equations for transmission line loss in your calculations.
You might create a look-up table of loss per unit length vs frequency.

Having taken loss into consideration, your 'quality factor' might be
related to the logarithm of the power efficiency, where zero would be the
point where the system fails to work.

Note that actual SWR is higher than apparent SWR, if measured at the
transmitter end of a lossy Co-Ax cable.

73, Fred, K4DII


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Using manual antenna tuner with autotuner
Date: 17 Aug 1995 13:23:39 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <40vfsr$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu

Does it make sense to use a manual antenna tuner in conjunction
with an autotuner?  The autotuner in the Yaesu FL-7000 can reduce
a 3:1 SWR to 1.2:1, but I think the G5RV I'm using has an SWR higher
than 3:1 on 80m, for example.  I'm a little confused on the intent
of the '7000's autotuner, whether it's supposed to merely "touch up"
the tuning established by an additional antenna tuner, or whether it's
meant to work alone.  The '7000 tuned up nicely with a Butternut HF6V,
but due to RFI I switched to the "all-band" G5RV which has given me
a variety of SWR readings from band to band.  The '7000 is currently
in the Yaesu Clinic undergoing diagnosis and treatment, and I'm
planning to welcome it back either with an antenna tuner companion or
a multiband antenna that will be easy on its finicky constitution.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.  Bill KB8
USZ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ux4.cso.uiuc.edu!rgoldber
From: goldberger raanan i <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: what kind of antenna
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 23:44:03 -0500
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux4.cso.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

        If this is not the right place to ask this question please tell
me where I should. I have an apartment half below ground level and the
cable TV junction box is on the other side of my wall. I am barely
receiving the local channels with standard uhf and vhf antennas. I am
picking up some cable channels through the antennas. I was wondering if
there is a certain type of antenna I could use to receive all the
channels that the junction box is leaking. At the very least is there an
antenna to pick up the local channels clearly. Thanks in advance.

                                        [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Aug 18 14:46:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!sc2c526a.ra.osd.mil!nova.sti.nasa.gov!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!soap.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.telepac.pt!usenet
From: Fernando Rego <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What kind of antenna
Date: 16 Aug 1995 21:06:17 GMT
Organization: telepac
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <40tmk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lis4_p16.telepac.pt
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Hi.
I built a receiver from 40Mhz to 860Mhz. What kind of antenna do i have to bulilt for this
receiver?
Thus anyone have a program to calculate the right lenght to the antenna?
Fernando Rego.



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (tim woo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 20 Aug 95 18:02:34 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9508201135.A9140-0100000@netcom7>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

unsubscribe ham-ant [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:30 1995
From: [e-mail] (Luke Hamaty)
Subject: RE: 2M Co-Axial Gamma Match
Date: 18 Aug 95 23:15:37 -0700
References: <405kk7$[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: The Microsoft Network (MSN)
Lines: 10

I've had good results using a hairpin match to feed the antenna at
~200 ohms using a 4:1 balun constructed with 1/2 wave (electrical) of
coax. I used RG-174 coax 'cause its small and I had some and didn't
need power, but RG-58 will work as long as it has the solid
insulation, not foam. The hairpin can be #12 electrical wire. Real
simple to build if you can cut-and try or can model the antenna. I
built two using Yagimax and a hairpin calculation program to figure
the driven element and hairpin lengths, and both were right on the
money.
                                                73 de KQ4OQ


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!pendragon.jsc.nasa.gov!ames!lll-winken.llnl.gov!taco.cc.ncsu.edu!cc02du.unity.ncsu.edu!jwprice
From: [e-mail] (Jim Price N3QYE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 3 element vertical dipole phased-array
Date: 21 Aug 1995 15:17:10 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <41a81m$[e-mail]>
References: <418pv5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cc02du.unity.ncsu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Rev. Tim ([e-mail]) wrote:
: a three element phased array w/ transformer built from
: three center fed vertical dipoles made of telescoping aluminum.
: The full lenght of each dipole is 5.28 meters (17'4"), which works
: out to right about 27MHz (11 meter CB, I do believe.)

Could you use them for something on 20m?  Just a little trimming would
get you 1/4-wave elements.  I don't have the experience to know whether
you could or not.

73
Jim N3QYE, [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!ornews.intel.com!ornews.intel.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Jim Garver)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 Wave vs. j-pole
Date: 18 Aug 1995 16:38:57 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <4138ah$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ornews.intel.com


>A half wave dipole in free space has 2.15 dB gain over an isotropic
>radiator. The ground can add 4.8 dB or so to this gain, for a total of 7
>dBi for a simple vertical dipole above a perfect ground.

Well, now we know how the antenna manufacturers arrived at those fantastic
gain claims.  Boy, oh boy!


--
[e-mail]  WA7LDV                    No plane, no gain.
I speak only for myself                            Go out and fly today!


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.iii.net!dts
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 70cm sets off sensor light??
Date: 20 Aug 1995 20:48:27 GMT
Organization: Daniel Senie Consulting
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <41873e$[e-mail]>
References: <40mjk7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: peanut.iii.net

In article <40mjk7$[e-mail]>,
Drew Loker <[e-mail]> wrote:
)
)I have an external antenna at about 25', which is about 30 feet away
)from a motion sensor flood light int he back yard. WHen I xmit on any
)70cm freq, it is setting the sensor light off. Is there anything I can do
)about this? Moving either is not really an option.
)
)Thanks!!
)Drew Loker,  [e-mail]

Many brands of these passive infrared motion detector lights can be set off
at a significant distance using 2 meters or 70cm, or many other frequencies.
The motion detectors are not immune to RF. Some are, but many are not. Some
local hams have had good luck with the Heath/Zenith brand of motion detector
lights, and don't have RF setting them off.

One former co-worker built a house a short distance from K1EA, who has a
rather active packetcluster node with radios on 2m and 70cm. His motion
detector lights never stopped turning on and off. I told the fellow that
he'd have to replace the detectors or use regular switches to get it to
stop...

Dan N1JEB
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.nic.surfnet.nl!sun4nl!news.iaf.nl!idn!dnc!rik.van.riel
From: [e-mail] (Rik Van Riel)
Date: 20 Aug 95 22:51:42
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ? LongWave (198kHz) antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: Steve McKinty - SunSoft ICNC Grenob
Organization: IDN Internet Gateway
Lines: 38

 SM-S> From: [e-mail] (Steve McKinty - SunSoft ICNC
 SM-S> Grenoble) Date: 14 Aug 1995 13:46:29 GMT
 SM-S> Organization: SunConnect

The story goes:
 SM-S> I know that isn't an amateur band, but I'd appreciate any help,
 SM-S> most of my antenna experiments have been VHF, not HF.

 SM-S> I live in SE France, and my girlfriend has recently moved to
 SM-S> an apartment at about 800m ASL. On a small portable radio the
 SM-S> BBC signal on 198kHz is faint, but audible. Not really a
 SM-S> usable signal.

 SM-S> Any suggestions on dimensions, tuning, and any other hints (including
 SM-S> RTFM pointers) would be welcome. Would replacing the HiFi tuner's loop
 SM-S> with a ferrite rod antenna help?

If the HiFi has an external loop antenna, you could make a
longwire outside (~10 or more metres) and use an inductive
coupling with your HiFi (see below) to make sure the tuner
won't be influenced concerning it's frequency

   =========OO-----------------------------------------
     ^      ^^                ^
to HiFi     ||         your longwire
  HiFi's    | \
ferrite loop/   \
internal ferrite  \--------either a ferrite bar from your longwire
bar                        next to the ferrite bar inside your HiFi,
                           or next to the HiFi's external loop,
                           try till you find the best position




... ... from the border between openminded and emptyheaded.
--
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!news
From: [e-mail] (Peter and Alexis Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Amateur radio antennas
Date: 19 Aug 1995 15:14:54 GMT
Organization: The Internet Group
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <414v5e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp3-03.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

I am looking for information on an antenna known as the
Carolina Windom, which I know is fed with a single wire
at some point around two/thirds or three/quarters of its
flat top length.  Any details sufficient to let me build
 one of these would be very much appreciated.
  I can of course be contacted here or via ZL1ARB.
73
Peter


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:34 1995
From: [e-mail] (Luke Hamaty)
Subject: RE: Antenna spark problem
Date: 18 Aug 95 23:33:37 -0700
References: <40empe$[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: The Microsoft Network (MSN)
Lines: 13

Just to be sure... does the spark occur exactly when you disconnect
the antenna? Does it happen if you disconnect it when there are no
storms nearby? The reason I am asking is that I once had a problem
where AC was leaking from one side of the line through a bad
component into the chassis of my rig. The rig wasn't grounded but the
coax shield was, so by disconnecting the antenna there was 120V at
thankfully low current on between the rig and the coax. You can guess
how I discovered that!

Best idea is to have a station ground connected to an 8-ft ground
round, and ground each piece of equipment to that. If the antenna can
have a DC ground too, even better. The Handbook has a good discussion
of this.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:34 1995
From: [e-mail] (Luke Hamaty)
Subject: Re: Antenna spark problem
Date: 18 Aug 95 23:37:59 -0700
References: <40empe$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: The Microsoft Network (MSN)
Lines: 10

>>>If there is no gap there can be no spark.  I took two SO-239s and
soldered their center conductors together with the braid from the
RG-59 I had.  I used lots of solder.  I ran another piece of braid to
the "shielded" section on each connector, essentially shorting both
connectors.

Better to use a good mechanical connection. Solder vaporizes too
easily when exposed to lightning. Also, more is not better when it
comes to solder. A blob of solder is a lead-tin resistor. The key is
to "wet" both surfaces in contact with each other.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna/coil design program
Date: 20 Aug 1995 19:53:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <418hu8$[e-mail]>
References: <40c8ce$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

What the hell is this and why is it posted continuously ?


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any good antenna tuners?
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 95 07:40:07 GMT
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Jim Durham <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I've wondered this myself. Seems like a fun thing to do might be to
>put an HF slug in a Bird, tune up the rig into a dummy, and read it,
>then shove it through a Matchbox or whatever and read the difference.

>I don't have any Bird slugs appropiate, does anyone? Who could do
>this test?

No need, Jim.  There's a two part article in the April/May '95 issues
of QST called "How to Evaluate Your Antenna Tuner".

In this article, the author checks a number of tuner for three main
parameters:  power loss, SWR bandwidth, and output balance.  He
performs these tests over a reasonably wide range of output
impedances, on each of the bands 80M thru 10M, and the results are
published in the article.  He also explains the procedures and
equipment needed to do the tests.  Overall, it's a pretty inexpensive
proposition, except for the tuners themselves. <g>

BTW, the results were all over the place on the various tuners.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!w2xo.pgh.pa.us!durham
From: Jim Durham <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any good antenna tuners?
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 19:32:22 -0400
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: w2xo.pgh.pa.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 17 Aug 1995, WB3U wrote:

> >>   [e-mail] (Theodore J. Bittner) wrote:
>
> >     I run low power <100 watts into a G5RV @ 25 ft because
> >of CCR's, so my tuner needs to work well with an all band
> >antenna.
>
> the used market, the low power Johnson Matchbox is a great performer.
>
(stuff deleted)
>
> BTW, the subject of tuners is a somewhat personal issue due to a lack
> of hard and fast data on the efficiency of many models.
>

I've wondered this myself. Seems like a fun thing to do might be to
put an HF slug in a Bird, tune up the rig into a dummy, and read it,
then shove it through a Matchbox or whatever and read the difference.

Of course, this would only show the efficiency in the 50 ohm case.
I know that a 250 watt matchbox isn't too efficient in loading very
low impedance loads. Loss = heat. I burned mine up..took me years to find
the replacement coils! So, I suspect that a lot of measurements would have
to be made to get the real story, but a 50 ohm experiment would be easy and
might at least show some ballpar results.

I don't have any Bird slugs appropiate, does anyone? Who could do this
test?

73
-Jim, W2XO





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!news.uoregon.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 18 Aug 1995 17:14:53 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <412hqd$[e-mail]>
References: <410dhl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx7-45.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

Regarding using a balun at the input side of a tuner, see "Some Additional Aspects of the Balun
Problem" by Al Roehm, W2OBJ in the ARRL Antenna Compendium, Vol. 2.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 19 Aug 1995 02:35:20 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4140n8$[e-mail]>
References: <413iou$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Don:

Sorry but I still disagree with:

>The voltage at the midpoint of an antenna will be at zero volts with
>respect to the RF voltages present over the entire antenna, and this
>center point can even be grounded with no change in the radiation or
>feed requirements assuming we could get an actual ground point up at
>the antenna location.

Unless you specify the antenna is unbroken at the center, such as in a
yagi.
If you specify an unbroken feedpoint then this is true:

>Since the voltage is zero, the voltage at the feedpoint cannot be
>the cause of RF current flowing on the coax shield.  This is the main
>point I am making.

For a conventional dipole, which I thought we were discussing there is
voltage, with the antenna resonant or not. If there would be no voltage,
the feedpoint impedance would be zero ohms.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 95 07:59:26 GMT
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40u96h$[e-mail]> <40ueo0$[e-mail]> <413iou$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> wrote:

>If we remove the antenna from the end of the feedline, and replace it
>with a resistor with a value the same as the antenna feed impedance,
>then key the transmitter - How much RF current will flow on the
>outside of the feedline? - None.  The resistor will have the same
>voltage at the feedpoint as the antenna if this voltage theory is
>correct, and the same currents should flow.  My conclusion is that
>the voltage at the feedpoint is not the cause of any RF on the
>shield.

Don, I think that if you place an axial-lead resistor across the coax,
RF *will* flow on the outside of the shield.  Just as with the dipole,
there will be an attraction to ground by RF exiting the inside of the
shield.  This is one of the reasons commercial dummy loads use coaxial
resistors, or at least circumferential shielding.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:41 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <40qikf$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 14:53:46 GMT
Lines: 146

In article <40qikf$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>Jack wrote:
>: Not true.  The ARRL Antenna Book explains this best:
>: "A centerfed antenna with open ends, of which the half-wave type is an
>: example, is inherently a balanced radiator.  . . .  If the antenna is
>: fed at the center through a coaxial line, this balance is upset
>: because one side of the radiator is connected to the shield while the
>: other is connected to the inner conductor.  On the side connected to
>: the shield, a current can flow down over the *outside* of the coaxial
>
>Steve replied>
>>The olde inside out gag. Someone is selling a lot of baluns.
>
>>Here I am up at the center of my dipole hanging on with one hand while
>>examining the center of my coax fed dipole. I notice the braid coming
>>from the coax and the center conductor form a Y where they connect.
>>The braid is rather flat, wrapped around the dipole's wire and soldered.
>
>>now I ax this question, which is the "outside of the braid"??? The old
>>jazz about RF flowing down the outside of the braid sounds like
>>something from one of those W2AU BIG SIGNAL adds.
>
>Ahh, but RF current certainly can flow on only the inside or outside of a
>closed hollow conductor. That effect is fundamental to how many things
>work, Steve. If
>RF current on the shield and center conductor terminations are balanced
>and 180 degrees out of phase current flows ONLY on the inner surface of
>the shield of coaxial cable and the outer surface of the center conductor!
>
>Current appears on the outside of the cable only when the current in the
>center and shield is NOT balanced and 180 degrees out of phase
>(assuming the conductor is much thicker than the skin depth at the
>operating frequency).

Well, that's almost true. Assuming adequate skin depth, no transmisson
line forward currents flow on the outside of coax. And forward transmission
line currents are always 180 degrees out of phase on inner and outer unless
there is an unbalanced reactance in series with one of the conductors but
not the other causing a phase lead or lag. This is all *inside* the coax,
thanks to skin effect, and has no effect on coax radiation, or lack thereof.

>>Why does current flow? Usually because there is a difference in
>>potential between two points. Right? At the center of a matched dipole,
>>there is no voltage. Right? So there is no current "flowing back down
>>the coax".
>
>Absolutely.....NOT!!!! There certainly is voltage if there is any power at
>all! If the antenna is perfectly balanced 50 ohms with 1500 watts there is
>274 volts RMS across the terminals or 387 volts peak. Half of this
>voltage appears from the terminal connected to the shield and earth. The
>voltage potential exists for appreciable current to flow in a matched
>dipole system! If the antenna is not perfectly symmetrical this condition
>can become either worse or better.

Well, you can't say that half the voltage appears between shield and
Earth. That would assume that Earth is at a potential of zero volts,
and we don't know that's true. In fact, we don't know the potential
of Earth at all in many cases. Calling Earth zero volts is just a
convention. The potential of a given point on Earth can vary widely,
and *will* due to the induced current mirror under the antenna.

And it doesn't matter anyway in many other cases, for example suppose
the coax shield is not connected to an Earth ground, autos and airplanes
are obvious examples. Then there isn't a complete circuit to Earth. All
we can say about the potential at the antenna feedpoint is that the
differential between inner and outer is 274 volts under the conditions
stated. What the potential is between either the inner or the outer
and Earth is an unknown without further information. In particular,
we need to know things like the feeder length, antenna height above
Earth, and antenna symmetry with respect to Earth before we can say
much of anything at all about the potential between either conductor
of the coax at the feedpoint and Earth.

>>That braid will have no more effect than balanced open wire unless
>>it picks up the system becomes unbalanced and baluns don't balance
>>your dipole by the way. If that wire slants or passes by a metal tower
>>etc., your dipole will be unbalanced and THEN you will have current on
>>the feeder. AND you would have antenna currents on ANY feeder, not
>>just coax. Try a Windom some day! Talk about Frying you chops!
>
>The balun's job is not to balance the antenna. The job is to balance the
>current in the feedline (yes even open wire) so it does not have parallel
>radiating currents. Adding a properly designed balun at the antenna
>terminals will stop feedline radiation with any twin wire or coaxial line.

Since all forward transmission line currents in coax are *inside* the
outer shielding, as you stated above, it is *impossible* for them to
radiate regardless of whether the currents flowing in the inner and
outer are balanced. The skin depth of the outer shielding prevents
that by forming a Faraday cage to any radiation field. This is different
from the open wire case where unbalanced currents can generate uncancelled
radiation fields free to escape into space.

>The fact the antenna is not symmetrical has nothing to do with this
>problem. It is a feedline to the feedline's termination problem.

Absolutely not! Steve's at least half correct. It is unbalanced induction
fields picked up by the coax shield that causes radiation currents to flow
on the coax outside. That *requires* an asymmetry in the installation of
the antenna and coax. It's this lack of *physical* balance that permits
uncancelled induction field induced currents to flow on the coax shield's
outer surface.

I say he's half correct because an electrical imbalance can do a
similar thing. The impedance presented by the antenna leg connected
to the inner can differ from the impedance presented by the antenna
leg and coax outside connected to the inside of the coax outer conductor.
In other words, the currents on this leg *can* "turn the corner" and
divide between this antenna leg and the coax outside. A choke balun
can stop this by raising the impedance of the coax outside path to
a high value, and thus forcing the currents to divide unequally in
favor of this antenna leg rather than the coax so that the leg's
currents nearly match those in the other antenna leg (assuming
physical balance of the legs).

So-called voltage baluns and current baluns will *not* do this, unless
they also happen to function as choke baluns (which fortunately most
do). A current balun can force equal currents into two antenna legs,
but unless those legs are physically symmetric with respect to each
other, and to the coax, this will not stop induction field imbalances
from causing radiation currents to flow on the coax outside.

Physical balance is the key factor. If you don't have that, no balun
can correct the problem of a "hot" feeder. However, a shield *can*.
If you shield the feeder from induction fields, it can't become "hot"
from those fields. An example of that is a coax routed under the
groundplane of a vertical on a car. The metal body shields the feeder
from induction field pickup, and stops outer currents attempting to
"turn the corner". Incidentally that's why on-glass antennas are bad.
The glass is ineffective at shielding the coax outside from unbalanced
induction fields, and doesn't stop currrents trying to "turn the corner",
so the coax becomes "hot" and contributes to the radiation (inside the
car where you don't want it).

It should be obvious that a balun is useless for an asymmetric antenna
like a coax fed vertical monopole. There is nothing balanced about the
antenna to "bal" to. All you can do in such cases is attempt to shield
the coax from induction fields. It's already self-shielded against
radiation due to unbalanced currents *inside* the coax.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <40qikf$[e-mail]> <40u96h$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 15:24:07 GMT
Lines: 55

In article <40u96h$[e-mail]> DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>
>When the antenna is a resonant dipole, the feedpoint is an RF voltage
>minimum and a current maximum.  Therefore we could ground the feedpoint
>of the dipole.  This in fact is what is done in many beam antennas,
>the driven element is fastened to the boom, and the boom is often
>grounded as well.  The point is that there should be zero volts RF
>across the feedpoint of a resonant dipole.

No, there should be zero volts precisely at the *mid-point* of a dipole,
but we don't drive it there. We drive it a bit to either side of that
point (Tee Match), or asymmetrically to one side of that point (Gamma
Match), where the impedance convienently appears as 50+j0. Or we
split it and feed the separate pieces. We never try to drive the
geometric center. If we tried, we'd need a single wire feeder, and
the dipole would just function as a capacity hat for that feeder
which would become our actual radiator.

>Could it be that we do not really have a half wave dipole, and
>that is the real cause of most of the RF on the outside of the coax.
>If the feedpoint does have a voltage differential, there will be current
>flow on the outside of the coax since it is grounded, and will result
>in a skewed pattern to boot.

The coax isn't always grounded. Consider for example a battery
powered rig sitting on a picnic table driving a dipole hung in
the trees through a piece of coax. The coax has no connection
to Earth, in fact *nothing* in the system has a connection to
Earth, but it works just the same. And we can still have a
"hot" feeder too, because of physical imbalances that induce
currents on the outside of the coax, or because of currents
attempting to "turn the corner". The coax is physically
part of one leg of the antenna. Currents will try to flow on
it just as they do on the antenna leg. That results in a
geometric imbalance of the radiating elements, and a skewed
pattern.

Since a dipole doesn't have much of a pattern to begin with,
especially one mounted low, the pattern skew is hardly ever
significant, but a "hot shack" can be. A choke balun mounted
at the feedpoint can stop currents from "turning the corner"
and flowing back down the outside of the coax, but it does
nothing to stop induced field currents from a physically
asymmetric installation. A choke balun *at the shack*, however,
can stop hot shack problems from either cause. It won't
correct pattern skew, of course, only physical symmetry
can do that.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:43 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <40u96h$[e-mail]> <40ueo0$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 15:43:10 GMT
Lines: 44

In article <40ueo0$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>Hi Don,
>
>Sorry, but I disagree with this totally:
>
>>When the antenna is a resonant dipole, the feedpoint is an RF voltage
>>minimum and a current maximum.  Therefore we could ground the feedpoint
>>of the dipole.  This in fact is what is done in many beam antennas,
>>the driven element is fastened to the boom, and the boom is often
>>grounded as well.  The point is that there should be zero volts RF
>>across the feedpoint of a resonant dipole.
>
>The key word is minimum, but the minimum can not be zero. If it is zero
>the power is zero. There is a finite amount of current, and a finite
>amount of voltage. If the SWR is 1:1 with a 50 ohm feedline, the voltage
>to current ratio must provide a 50 ohm impedance (this is similar to the
>source impedance I talked about in conjugate mating a PA stage to the
>load). So it boils down to E/I must equal 50 for a 1:1 SWR in a 50 ohm
>system. Whether it's 50 volts and one amp, or 5000 volts and 100 amps
>depends on the power level, but the ratio stays the same.

No, the geometric center of a resonant dipole *really* is a zero voltage
point. That's why we can use plumber's delight construction techniques
and not have current flows down the boom. The reason we get a 50+j0 ohms
feedpoint is that we *offset* our connections to the dipole from the exact
geometric center. We do that in a lot of different ways, from a Gamma Match
to a Tee Match to cutting the dipole in two and separating the pieces from
the geometric center. In all those cases, we're feeding the dipole somewhere
*other* than at the precise geometric center where the voltage must be zero
and current maximum.

Of course at any frequency except exact resonance, the geometric center
is no longer precisely zero volts, but it remains very low over a fairly
reasonable bandwidth, so plumber's delight construction remains viable
over an amateur band. If the center approached 50 ohms, then much of
the current would flow down the boom instead of out the elements and
we'd have a lousy F/B ratio.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <40u7d2$[e-mail]> <40uch0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 15:49:58 GMT
Lines: 20

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>This requires that the feedline (or any source or load) be
>electrically symmetrical.  In most cases at RF, this also means it
>will be physically summetrical.
>
>It is the symmetry of the entire system with respect to ground that
>maintains balance.

Symmetry is the key, but not with respect to ground. The system
must be symmetric with respect to *itself*, IE self-symmetry.
Any balanced antenna is self-symmetric, and doesn't work against
ground. It's that self-symmetry we are trying to preserve.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <412pbl$[e-mail]> <412uuv$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 16:07:32 GMT
Lines: 30

In article <412uuv$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rane Curl) writes:
>(Let me try...) No. Even if the characteristic impedance of the antenna alone
>and coax are identical, a balun is needed. My explanation is as follows:
>
>The rf current in a well-shielded coax flows on the inside opposing
>surfaces of the central conductor and shield, and are equal and opposite.
>Where the coax is joined to the antenna, the inner conductor sees one
>arm of the (say) dipole, while the inside of the shield current flows out
>upon the other arm of the dipole *and the shield exterior*. In effect,
>that arm of the dipole includes the antenna proper and the exterior of
>the coax, so is much longer than the other arm of the dipole, and is
>being fed at some indefinite point. The result will be an impedance
>mismatch.

Which is why the old wives' tale about changing feedline length will
change VSWR hangs on with us. It really can. Changing the feeder length
is effectively changing the length of one leg of the antenna. That
can't help but change the load impedance, which in turn changes the
VSWR. And it's also the source of advice to use a feeder that's a
multiple of 1/2-wave, because the end of a 1/2-wave wire will present
a very high impedance, thus not loading that leg of the antenna and
virtually disappearing in regard to antenna resonance and feedpoint
impedance. Ain't science wonderful?

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 20 Aug 1995 18:11:06 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <417trq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <412pbl$[e-mail]> <412uuv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup57.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:


[stuff deleted]
>
>Which is why the old wives' tale about changing feedline length will
>change VSWR hangs on with us. It really can. Changing the feeder length
>is effectively changing the length of one leg of the antenna. That
>can't help but change the load impedance, which in turn changes the
>VSWR. And it's also the source of advice to use a feeder that's a
>multiple of 1/2-wave, because the end of a 1/2-wave wire will present
>a very high impedance, thus not loading that leg of the antenna and
>virtually disappearing in regard to antenna resonance and feedpoint
>impedance. Ain't science wonderful?
>

Gary:

You make some good points, however, one question:

How do you arrive at the conclusion that the end of the half-wavelength wire will present a
a very high impedance?

Regards, Wes --N7WS



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 20 Aug 1995 15:37:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4182tv$[e-mail]>
References: <413iou$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Don wrote:

>If we remove the antenna from the end of the feedline, and replace it
>with a resistor with a value the same as the antenna feed impedance,
>then key the transmitter - How much RF current will flow on the
>outside of the feedline? - None.  The resistor will have the same
>voltage at the feedpoint as the antenna if this voltage theory is
>correct, and the same currents should flow.  My conclusion is that
>the voltage at the feedpoint is not the cause of any RF on the
>shield.

It's correct that little or no current flows on the outside of the shield
with the resistor, Don. The reason is the resistor has a very high
impedance from both terminals to ground for parallel currents. The
antenna does not. As a matter of fact the floating resistor is a good
example of what the antenna looks like when a good choke balun is
used!

Consider measuring impedance of a single leg of the antenna to ground
(or even another piece of wire that's floating from ground). It will have
some moderate to low value of impedance. But if the impedance of one
leg of the resistor is measured against ground (the other detached) the
impedance will be nearly infinite.

With the floating resistor the voltage at the load end of the transmission

line has nothing to push against except the other terminal of the same
feedline. The current in the feedline is thus totally balanced and exactly

out of phase. The balanced out of phase currents cause any radiation
from the coaxial cable (or even a balanced line) to cancel, and in the
coaxial line all currents move to the inside of the shield (assuming a
line without defects). An ungrounded very small loop antenna has this
effect also, but larger loops do not.

An elementary example of a perfectly balanced large antenna *must*
use two resistors in series with the common resistor junction connected
to ground. The feedline connects across the entire pair. If you analyze
this circuit you will see how certain lengths of feedline aggravate or
reduce the parallel currents. At a 1/4 wave (outside of line VP length,
not the internal slower VP rate) if the source end of the line is
grounded parallel current and the upsetting of the feedpoint impedance
will be minimized. At 1/2 wl (source end grounded) the unwanted
effect is maximized.

73 Tom W8JI


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 20 Aug 1995 18:02:50 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 217
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <418bea$[e-mail]>
References: <4182tv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Phew, this gets long as things diverge from the original subject. It would
be nice to debate one point at a time. :-)

I wrote:

>Absolutely.....NOT!!!! There certainly is voltage if there is any power
>at all! If the antenna is perfectly balanced 50 ohms with 1500 watts
>there is 274 volts RMS across the terminals or 387 volts peak. Half of
>this voltage appears from the terminal connected to the shield and
>earth. The voltage potential exists for appreciable current to flow in a
>matched dipole system! If the antenna is not perfectly symmetrical
>this condition can become either worse or better.

Gary wrote:

:Well, you can't say that half the voltage appears between shield and
:Earth. That would assume that Earth is at a potential of zero volts,
:<snip>

I was speaking of a perfectly balanced dipole over plain. Gary is
correct, it doesn't need to be earth, it could have been any neutral
electrical mass. I thought "perfectly balanced" was the minimum
statement necessary without an elaborate essay. ;-)

:And it doesn't matter <snip> All we can say about the potential at the
:antenna feedpoint is that the differential between inner and outer is
:274 volts under the conditions stated. What the potential is between
:either the inner or the outer and Earth is an unknown without further
:information. In particular, we need to know things like the feeder
:length, antenna height above Earth, and antenna symmetry with
:respect to Earth before we can say much of anything at all about the
:potential between either conductor of the coax at the feedpoint and
:Earth.

Remember I stated a *perfectly balanced antenna with a feedpoint
impedance of 50 ohms*. The feedline length can not change this
voltage. To do so it would have to "pull" the antenna out of balance
and spoil the qualification. If the height spoils the impedance value
specified it also spoils the qualification. That's the beauty and the
problem with a simple specific example. But Gary is correct, in a real
world system the height above ground and the impedance presented to
the antenna for parallel currents can and will change this qualification.
It can make it either worse or better.

Next I said
>
>The balun's job is not to balance the antenna. The job is to balance
>the current in the feedline (yes even open wire) so it does not have
>parallel radiating currents. Adding a properly designed balun at the
>antenna terminals will stop feedline radiation with any twin wire or
>coaxial line.

Gary said
:Since all forward transmission line currents in coax are *inside* the
:outer shielding, as you stated above, it is *impossible* for them to
:radiate regardless of whether the currents flowing in the inner and
:outer are balanced. The skin depth of the outer shielding prevents
:that by forming a Faraday cage to any radiation field. This is different
:from the open wire case where unbalanced currents can generate
:uncancelled radiation fields free to escape into space.

Sorry Gary. All transmission line currents are in the line. But
unbalanced unwanted parallel currents are on the outside of the shield
and can appear on both conductors of the open wire line. Even with the
best shield in the world coax will radiate from unequal currents on the
center conductor and the shield. My statement is correct, the thing that
stops coax from radiating is having equal and 180 degree out of phase
currents on the center conductor and the braid. When that occurs ALL
RF current is confined to the inner side of the braid and the outer side
of the center conductor if the conductors are thicker than the skin depth
at that frequency. The only reason why induced field (or coupled
currents) make a transmission line of any type radiate is because they
modify the balanced out of phase condition. Just try to site one
example of a two wire transmission that can radiate without having
unbalanced or non-180 degree shifted currents in the conductors.

>The fact the antenna is not symmetrical has nothing to do with this
>problem. It is a feedline to the feedline's termination problem.

:Absolutely not! Steve's at least half correct. It is unbalanced induction

:fields picked up by the coax shield that causes radiation currents to
:flow on the coax outside.

No, currents can flow on the outside even with a perfectly symmetrical
antenna. A dipole is a prime example.

:That *requires* an asymmetry in the installation of the antenna and
:coax. It's this lack of *physical* balance that permits uncancelled
:induction field induced currents to flow on the coax shield's outer
:surface.

Asymmetry can cause unbalanced currents in a balanced feeder, but
asymmetry can reduce or increase the problem with coax. For example,
a ground plane it totally non-symmetrical but unwanted currents on the
outside of the coax are minimized.  If the center conductor of the same
ground plane were connected to the ground, and the shield to the
radiator, the problem would be aggravated by the non-symmetry of the
antenna.

:I say he's half correct because an electrical imbalance can do a
:similar thing.<snip> So-called voltage baluns and current baluns will
:*not* do this, unless <snip>

Hmmm. Describe a current balun that won't do this.

:to the coax, this will not stop induction field imbalances
:from causing radiation currents to flow on the coax outside.

Ahh but it can. If the coax is broken into a non-resonant or electrically
short length by choke baluns it becomes invisible or partially invisible
to the radiation fields and subsequent induced currents. The effect
would be the same as breaking up guylines in the field of a radiator.

:Physical balance is the key factor. If you don't have that, no balun
:can correct the problem of a "hot" feeder.

That is absolutely untrue. Any properly designed choke balun will
insure equal and out of phase feedline currents. That will stop feedline
radiation with all types of antennas, physically balanced or otherwise.
The prime example of this is a coaxial cable with the center conductor
extended 1/4 wl past the shield. If a properly designed and adequate
impedance current or choke balun is installed exactly 1/4 wl back from
the open termination of the shield, the coax will not radiate on the
source end of the coax. As a matter of fact the balun can be moved
closer or farther from the shield termination and the same effect would
occur. That is a highly non-symmetrical antenna and a choke or current
balun will stop feeder radiation in it, as it will any antenna I can think

of....Windom included, unless a separate balance problem exists at the
source.

:However, a shield *can*. <snip> It should be obvious that a balun is
:useless for an asymmetric antenna like a coax fed vertical monopole.
:There is nothing balanced about the antenna to "bal" to.

That's not true. I use choke baluns on vertical receiving antennas to
prevent unwanted signals from being conducted or picked-up and
conducted to the ground system. These signals can pump the less than
perfect ground up and down at a different amount than the radiator and
appear as normal feedline currents to the receiver. A choke balun will
also allow an off center fed antenna to be fed with coax or balanced
line without the line radiating. The military frequently does this with
ground independent antennas, and so do companies like Cushcraft (R5
and 7). Baluns absolutely do work and have a purpose with
asymmetrical antennas.

Then I wrote...

>Hi Don,
>
>Sorry, but I disagree with this totally:

Don wrote:

>>When the antenna is a resonant dipole, the feedpoint is an RF
>>voltage minimum and a current maximum.  Therefore we could
>>ground the feedpoint of the dipole.  This in fact is what is done in
>>many beam antennas, the driven element is fastened to the boom,
>>and the boom is often grounded as well.  The point is that there
>>should be zero volts RF across the feedpoint of a resonant dipole.
>

I wrote:

>The key word is minimum, but the minimum can not be zero. If it is
>zero the power is zero. There is a finite amount of current, and a finite
>amount of voltage. If the SWR is 1:1 with a 50 ohm feedline, the
>voltage to current ratio must provide a 50 ohm impedance (this is
>similar to the source impedance I talked about in conjugate mating a
>PA stage to the load). So it boils down to E/I must equal 50 for a 1:1
>SWR in a 50 ohm system. Whether it's 50 volts and one amp, or 5000
>volts and 100 amps depends on the power level, but the ratio stays
>the same.

Gary wrote:

:No, the geometric center of a resonant dipole *really* is a zero voltage
:point. That's why we can use plumber's delight construction techniques
:and not have current flows down the boom. The reason we get a 50+j0
:ohms feedpoint is that we *offset* our connections to the dipole from
:the exact geometric center. <snip>

First of all, a dipole has two insulated poles. If the statement "the
voltage at the center of a dipole is zero" is true, I should be able to
construct a dipole that has zero impedance at the feedpoint.  Applying
any power to this dipole would take an infinite amount of source
current, even at a few milliwatts. Has *anyone* out there ever had a
*dipole* with a zero ohm feedpoint?

The case of a shunt fed radiator is entirely different. If it is gamma
matched it will not require a balun, but if is delta or Tee matched it
still
will require a balun.

:We do that in a lot of different ways, from a Gamma Match <snip> Of
:course at any frequency except exact resonance, the geometric center
:is no longer precisely zero volts, but it remains very low over a fairly
:reasonable bandwidth, so plumber's delight construction remains
:viable over an amateur band. If the center approached 50 ohms, then
:much of the current would flow down the boom instead of out the
:elements and we'd have a lousy F/B ratio.

Actually if it is a truly balanced element it remains balanced
independent of frequency. Being non-resonant or off-resonance has
nothing to do with the balance. The impedance in the center of a shunt
fed symmetrical unbroken element is near zero ohms only because the
element is shorted. If the element is 1/8 wave, or two wl, or anything
else the center impedance remains the same because it is electrically
shorted there! The gamma or tee impedance is another matter.

But remember, this closed element is not a dipole, di meaning two. I
believe a more correct term would be a "unipole" or monopole. And
there is no argument that feeding such a gamma matched element
eliminates or substantially reduces the need for a balun.

73 Tom W8JI


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:50 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]> <412pbl$[e-mail]> <412uuv$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 01:37:40 GMT
Lines: 50

Rane Curl ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <412pbl$[e-mail]>, W5GIE <[e-mail]> wrote:
: ><lots of stuff deleted about currents on shield, etc.>
: >
: >Now that someone brought it up.....
: >Does anyone know if the need for a balun is related to *mismatch*.  For
: >example,
: >if I have a balanced antenna that presents a resistive match(say 73 ohms)
: >to the  characteristic impedance of an unbalanced line(say 73 ohms), do I
: >need a balun.
: >
: >Just wondering--
: >
: >Wayne
: >W5GIE operating CW from Redlands, CA
: >(No disclaimer required)

: (Let me try...) No. Even if the characteristic impedance of the antenna alone
: and coax are identical, a balun is needed. My explanation is as follows:

: The rf current in a well-shielded coax flows on the inside opposing
: surfaces of the central conductor and shield, and are equal and opposite.
: Where the coax is joined to the antenna, the inner conductor sees one
: arm of the (say) dipole, while the inside of the shield current flows out
: upon the other arm of the dipole *and the shield exterior*. In effect,
: that arm of the dipole includes the antenna proper and the exterior of
: the coax, so is much longer than the other arm of the dipole, and is
: being fed at some indefinite point. The result will be an impedance
: mismatch.

: The effect is similar to what would happen if you fed the dipole with
: a ladder line (which would be balanced), but also hung a long wire
: off at right angles to the junction point of one side of the ladder
: line and the antenna. There would then be an impedance mismatch.

: Rane L. Curl  N8REG
:


Easy problem to cure. AT the antenna feed point, you simply strip the coax
back as you normally  would and solder the braid to one side of the
dipole but before doing this, twist the braid. Now the RF can't figure
out which is the inside and which is the outside of the braid.

Great Wisdom has spoken
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!parsifal.nando.net!usenet
From: DB Wilhelm <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 19 Aug 1995 02:37:18 GMT
Organization: News & Observer Public Access
Lines: 88
Message-ID: <413iou$[e-mail]>
References: <40u96h$[e-mail]> <40ueo0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail405.nando.net

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>
> Hi Don,
>
> Sorry, but I disagree with this totally:
>
> >When the antenna is a resonant dipole, the feedpoint is an RF voltage
> >minimum and a current maximum.  Therefore we could ground the feedpoint
> >of the dipole.  This in fact is what is done in many beam antennas,
> >the driven element is fastened to the boom, and the boom is often
> >grounded as well.  The point is that there should be zero volts RF
> >across the feedpoint of a resonant dipole.
>
> The key word is minimum, but the minimum can not be zero. If it is zero
> the power is zero. There is a finite amount of current, and a finite
> amount of voltage. If the SWR is 1:1 with a 50 ohm feedline, the voltage
> to current ratio must provide a 50 ohm impedance (this is similar to the
> source impedance I talked about in conjugate mating a PA stage to the
> load). So it boils down to E/I must equal 50 for a 1:1 SWR in a 50 ohm
> system. Whether it's 50 volts and one amp, or 5000 volts and 100 amps
> depends on the power level, but the ratio stays the same.
>
> I agree with Wes, the proper place is at the feedpoint. If the feedline is
> coupled to the antenna because of poor dress I would add a second choke
> balun where the feedline leaves the area of the antenna at a non-resonate
> length point. The top one would insure the currents were balanced at the
> antenna, the lower one would insure the feedline was not resonate and
> coupled heavily to the antenna.
>
> 73 Tom

I should not have said voltage minimum, but zero volts.  Look at the
voltage distrubution of an antenna that is an odd number of half
waves long, and the voltage will be going through a zero crossing at
the midpoint.  The current will also be a maximum here, since the
current at the ends of an antenna will be forced to be zero.

The voltage at the midpoint of an antenna will be at zero volts with
respect to the RF voltages present over the entire antenna, and this
center point can even be grounded with no change in the radiation or
feed requirements assuming we could get an actual ground point up at
the antenna location.

Since the voltage is zero, the voltage at the feedpoint cannot be
the cause of RF current flowing on the coax shield.  This is the main
point I am making.

If we remove the antenna from the end of the feedline, and replace it
with a resistor with a value the same as the antenna feed impedance,
then key the transmitter - How much RF current will flow on the
outside of the feedline? - None.  The resistor will have the same
voltage at the feedpoint as the antenna if this voltage theory is
correct, and the same currents should flow.  My conclusion is that the
voltage at the feedpoint is not the cause of any RF on the shield.

After doing a better examination of the antenna system, my hypothesis
is that when we get RF on the shield, the antenna feedpoint is not
a purely resistive load, and that this condition can and will cause RF
current flow on the feedline.

If I shorten an antenna and look at the current distribution, I find
that the current in the center of the antenna is reduced, and in fact
is folded back onto the feedline.  When the feedline is a parallel
conductor type, this folded back current results in out of phase
currents on the upper portion of the feedline, and then looking at the
voltage distribution, I find that the point where the zero crossing
occurs is at some distance away from the antenna.  This is just fine,
and the parallel line is quite happy with this arrangement, the current
is still equal and opposite on the two feedline legs.  Now if I try
the same thing with coax, I have difficulty because of the inside of
the shield vs. the outside of the shield situation.  The folded back
current will try to flow on the outside of the shield, because it is
now effectively a part of the antenna, and there is no opposing
current to balance it.  I'm hesitant to say where it will go from this
point, but the system will get quite confused by this extra current.

I will extend my hypothesis with the observations that we do not often
feed our antennas with a transmission line which has the same impedance
as the dipole, and if I prune the antenna for a 1:1 VSWR I will usually
do this by shortening it.  I believe that this shortening may be the
root cause of RF on the outside of the coax.  At least it is food for
thought.

73 de W3FPR
Don





From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:53 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <412pbl$[e-mail]> <412uuv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <417trq$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:18:38 GMT
Lines: 22

In article <417trq$[e-mail]> Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:
>How do you arrive at the conclusion that the end of the half-wavelength
>wire will present a very high impedance?

Simple, a halfwave resonant wire has voltage maximums and current
minimums at each end. From Ohm's Law, R=E/I, so when E is high,
and I is low, R is large. The coax isn't acting as a transmission
line here, where a halfwave would simply repeat the impedance at
one end to the other end. Its outside is just acting as an end fed
wire element. The impedance of such an end fed wire is typically
2,000-3,000 ohms. Meanwhile, the impedance of the end fed quarterwave
that is one leg of the dipole is on the order of 25-35 ohms. So
the currents will divide in inverse proportion to the impedances,
and roughly 10 times as much current will flow in the antenna leg as
on the coax shield, which is what we want the current to do.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!qns3.qns.com!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!bubba.ucc.okstate.edu!gcouger
From: [e-mail] (Gordon Couger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 21 Aug 1995 19:06:28 GMT
Organization: Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <41alfk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <412uuv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Gordon Couger <[e-mail]>=
NNTP-Posting-Host: jsun.agen.okstate.edu

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>
>>And it's also the source of advice to use a feeder that's a multiple
>>of 1/2-wave, because the end of a 1/2-wave wire will present a very
>>high impedance, thus not loading that leg of the antenna and
>>virtually disappearing in regard to antenna resonance and feedpoint
>>impedance. Ain't science wonderful?
>
>Not to nit pick (well, maybe a little), I thought this was the result
>of the belief that the impedance at the feedpoint of the antenna will
>be repeated at the transmitter.  Thus, the VSWR reading will be that
>of the antenna, not the (unknown) result of the antenna plus feedline.
>
Wile picking nits, it is unlikley that the velocity factor of the outside
of the sheild of the coax is the same as the velocity factor of the coax.
so if you had a electrical half wave of 60% velocity coax and the V factor
of the outside of the sheild was 95% the electrical length of the sheild
would be .32 wave lengths giving it somthing like 200 + 150i impeadance.

This is off the top of my head but it's not too far off.
Gordon Couger - 624 Cheyenne, Stillwater, OK 74075
[e-mail] 405-624-2855 evenings
    I do not speak for my employer


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet
From: host [e-mail] (Your real Name)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Curtain Antenna Handbook
Date: 19 Aug 1995 23:50:10 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <415tbi$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jlb.earthlink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14

Hi,
I am interesred in reading about the old curtain type antennas with
screen reflectors. The main book I am looking for is the "Antenna
Engineering Handbook" by Jasik, first edition, copywrite 1961. If you
have a copy for sale please e-mail me direct. Also if you have any
textbooks from that era pertaining to curtain arrays with screen
reflectors please let me know.
Thanks,
Joe AA6WG
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.micron.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Brian Case)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Delcom Tranciever
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 01:58:41 GMT
Organization: Micron Internet Services
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <413cmv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs003p11.nam.micron.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have a Delcom 960Air Aviation Tranciever that need repaired. Does
anyone know where I can find a schematic for this radio, or where to
send it to have it repaired.

Thanks
Brian

Please email responses to [e-mail]

------------------------------------------------------------
Brian      [e-mail]
------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!hmaxwell
From: [e-mail] (Helene Maxwell)
Subject: dual band glass mount question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 20:09:59 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]

I recently installed a dual band (2/440) rig in my car with an
MFJ glass mount antenna, fed through a diamond duplexer.  The first
day or so it worked OK, but now I'm noticing some static interference
when receiving (that goes away with the car engine shut off).  The
antenna connections are all tight.

It seems odd that I wouldn't have had this problem right away.  I'm
relatively new to this--is the glass mount a bad idea to begin with, and
are there supressors available that I can get to fix any interference
problem the ignition system in the car may be causing?

Any thoughts and assistance greatly appreciated!


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: 20 Aug 1995 17:41:03 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 43
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <417s3f$[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <40u1ff$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4160ki$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <4160ki$[e-mail]>, Dick Hughes <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hey guys, could we talk about our experiences with the SGC tuner?  I
>would really like to hear about it.

Gladly, The tuner is the SG-230 and the SGC antenna is the SG-303. I
don't know much about the antenna except it doesn't work well on 75m.

The SG-230 antenna tuner is a pi network tuner, switched cap banks to
ground and switched series inductors. The switching is done by a
microcontroller which initializes all the caps out of the circuit, i.e.
open circuit, and all the coils out of the circuit, i.e. short circuit.
The beauty of that is if the antenna has a low SWR at the present
frequency of operation, the SG-230 puts nothing but a near-short
between the input and the output. It's a less lossy design than the
average MFJ T network where one must have two capacitors and an
inductance in the circuit at all times (or else switch to direct coax
if that function exists).

For 75m mobile, one usually needs a coil at the base of a bugcatcher
in addition to the center loading coil and taps must be changed to
maintain a low SWR over the entire band. I use a homemade bugcatcher
on 75m with no coil at the base because the SGC-230 performs the
function of the base coil. In addition, I can cover the entire 80m-
75m band without switching taps. The same is true for 40m which is
a single tap on my bugcatcher. The SGC-230 allows me to tune the
entire 40m band without changing taps.

My favorite setup is a 17m resonant whip (13 ft, no coils) which acts
as a non-resonant monopole on all other 20m-10m bands. It outperforms
my bugcatcher on 17m-10m and one must have an eagle eye to detect
any difference on 20m. IMO this setup can't be beat for automatic
multi-band mobile operation 20m-10m. Much to my surprise, the SG-230
and the 13 ft whip is only one 'S' unit down from my bugcatcher on
40m. That one 'S' unit usually doesn't make an appreciable difference.
I never have to worry about transmission line losses.

The SG-230 has no coax connector on the output, just a high voltage
terminal which must be connected directly to the antenna with a
short as possible piece of large wire, like the center conductor
of RG-8. Where the SG-230 really makes sense is maritime mobile.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 95 02:22:17 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <40u1ff$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4160ki$[e-mail]> <417s3f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>I never have to worry about transmission line losses.

Assuming using an antenna resonant for the band in use......How much loss
is there in the 15ft of coax from rig to antenna if the tuner wasn't at
the antenna?


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.wimsey.com!fonorola!news.capitalnet.com!user68
From: [e-mail] (chris walker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FAQ
Date: 18 Aug 1995 01:57:25 GMT
Organization: Capitalnet
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <410s25$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: user68.capitalnet.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

Hi there,
  I was wondering if someone could possibly post or send me the FAQ for this
group. Thanks a lot.


        [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (William Rice)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS:MILITARY ANTENNAS
Date: 18 Aug 1995 23:51:38 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 5
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <41392a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-atl6-14.ix.netcom.com

For Sale: Military AT1011 32foot whip standard with most military hf
sets $100
AS2259 NVIS Near Verical Incidence Skywave antanna. New condition made
by hygain. $125
David Panek email or call 404-331-7211


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:58:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV Dimensions
Date: 19 Aug 1995 18:53:47 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <415bvr$[e-mail]>
References: <40ptk9$[e-mail]> <412e1q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Cecil, how is the radiation pattern of a non-resonant antenna
>determined?  I've never seen this published, but there's obviously a
>way to do it.

Hi Jack, above 10/8 wavelength which is maximum broadside gain, the
pattern of a centerfed dipole changes to multilobed. Thus a 20m 10/8
dipole has a cloverleaf pattern on 17m with very little broadside
radiation. A 10/8 wavelength on 20m is approximately a 12/8 wavelength
on 17m. As the frequency is increased (with the same dipole) the four
major lobes gradually move toward the ends of the antenna.

Actually, I did it the easy way. I ran the patterns on ELNEC after
reading the Antennas West tech note on the 102 ft G5RV. That tech
note gives the radiation patterns for 102 ft centerfed dipoles.

If anyone is expecting broadside radiation on 20m or higher out of
their 102 ft G5RV, he/she will be sadly disappointed.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:00 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!news.compulink.co.uk!cix.compulink.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] ("David Latimer")
Subject: Re: G5RV references?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Compulink Information eXchange
References: <Pine.ULT.3.90.950816123024.2005A-100000@micro2>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 21:48:35 GMT
X-News-Software: Ameol
Lines: 8

I can help, Bill, with copies of the more recent Rad Comm references as I
will have them around myself.  Mine don't go back to 1958 though.  If you
consider it necessary I will ring the RSGB and check out if they can
provide a copy but have not found them great for service.
Let me have you address in a reply and I will get the other things sorted.
73
David Latimer G3VUS
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Horrock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 19 Aug 1995 16:16:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <415grk$[e-mail]>
References: <410ni2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Horrock)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Thanks Bob - We all await your report!
73


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:01 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 22:11:38 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 14

Obviously you have missed the point!
If the capture angle is lower than the angle of incident, it will be
less sensitive than an antenna at the ideal angle.
Secondly, the quad already has a gain advantage over a single element,
or in this a vertical dipole of some sort.
Thirdly, the proof is in the performance and working Europeans,
Africans, and the middle East long path and getting very favorable
reports against dipoles and other GP verticals with lots of radials at
least suggests that the antenna works on 40 and 80.
Japan on 160M with 100 watts ain't bad either.
This antenna at my QTH works well.  Your results were obviously
different.




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!news.uoregon.edu!news.dacom.co.kr!news.netins.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 19 Aug 1995 02:21:59 GMT
Organization: INS Information Services, Des Moines, IA USA
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ins.netins.net

I'm the guy that suggested the $50 worth of antenna wire. Boy I gotta be more careful
with my figures!!! But as the VE6 pointed out on 15 mtrs I wasn't to far off.
The whole question about whether or not GAP verticals are "good" or not is somewhat
futile. (It doesn't stop ME from discussing it, of course! 8-)  ) As I said in my
previous post I once used a vertical that couldn't have been even 20% efficient but
mananged to pump enough power to get out well with rave reports. When I lived in
North Dakota I ran 3, count'em, 3 watts to a 60 piece of wire up maybe 25 feet. For two
years I had the most fun since I got my ticket. BUT the two years were 1979-81. When
you could, as one gent put it, work the world on coat hangers and grocery carts.
The GAP that I'm running is mechanically very sound. In some parts of the world this fact
alone might make it a "good" antenna. (Like northern Iowa in a killer ice storm). It
requires very little real estate. It has one coax line going into the shack. It has
required very little in the way of maintenance. And it actually "works". IF proof is
 in the performance I would say that on 40 and 20 meters mine has worked quite well. I
have put some pretty cool DX into the log just in the last 2 or 3 years when the 'spots
were OK, not necessarily great.
But I bought mine when the were a lot cheaper. And you can still build a pretty good wire
antenna, maybe not a rhombic, for about $50. So I like my GAP and have had good luck with
it. And would recommend it, but would counsel new hams to look at less expensive
antennas. Loops, dipoles, even Zepps can also work well on less $$$$$.
Thats my $.04 worth. (The cost of my opinion went up with the cost of copper. ;-)  )
73 de WB0FDJ


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP Verticals
Date: 21 Aug 1995 20:42:54 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <41ar4e$[e-mail]>
References: <40f6ta$[e-mail]> <40s2sd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <limtiaco-1608951136230001@128.95.77.80> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usenet4.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>   [e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
>
>>Well, when you look at the Challanger, those (radial) wires are
>>really part of the lower half of the radiator and they lay on the
>>ground. Am I correct? Is this weird or what? In other words, if this
>>is a center fed, elevated feed antenna, then the lower half consists
>>of some wire which lays on the ground. I think the whole deal here is
>>just a way to get a low swr with little consideration given to
>>radiation efficiency.
>
>Everyone is able to visually distinguish a dummy load from a radiating
>element.  It's not so easy though when a manufacturer combines the two
>and calls it an antenna.  :)

I suppose then that a full size quarter wave vertical, base fed, is REALLY in
trouble since the WHOLE lower half is just laying there on the ground :-)

Actually, the Challenger seems to be a respectable radiator on the bands above
80 meters.  (You have to ignore all the malarky about 6 and 2 meters I think, unless
you're trying to work the shuttle when its directly overhead). On 80, well, the
dummy load analogy is pretty darn close.  Now, when
I say respectable, I don't mean relative to wide spaced 10 element full sized
beams at a wavelength up over perfect earth -- but certainly respectable relative
to a lot of other compromise antennas.  (For those of us who can't put beams or
dipoles at 100' -- comparisons to ultimate antennas don't make a lot of sense).

On 80 meters, these things use a resonated coax stub to handle the matching.  They
use 1KV mica caps up in the TOP of the antenna, and although advertised to handle
the legal limit below 2:1 SWR, those little bitty caps can't hack it and keep
sizzling away into oblivion.  I'm currently looking for a better mouse trap to put
up in my "nothing over 30' " neighborhood. (I've tried the Butternut, and it has
never seemed to be any better in any practical sense -- though it has its
supporters).

Grant/NQ5T



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:04 1995
From: [e-mail] (Luke Hamaty)
Subject: Re: Grounding from the 2nd floor
Date: 18 Aug 95 23:50:32 -0700
References: <[e-mail]> <40r947$[e-mail]> <40u8fe$[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: The Microsoft Network (MSN)
Lines: 9

I also have used a "coax" ground. They really work. It was a better
ground from the second floor than my 1st floor ground of a 6-ft wire
to an iron water pipe where it came into the house. Use any length of
junk RG-8, doesn't matter how cruddy. I've heard a different theory
of operation, but it doesn't matter.

The third-wire outlet ground isn't really very good at 60-Hz and is
worse than useless at RF --- it will very effectively send your spare
RF everywhere it shouldn't go!


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!caen!night.primate.wisc.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!news
From: Kevin Shea <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lindenbladt Antenna
Date: 19 Aug 1995 01:13:54 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <413dsi$[e-mail]>
References: <411ucq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: f182-051.net.wisc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b4 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Michel van der Walle <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I am currently looking for a suitable antenna to receive the APT signals
>from the LEO weather birds.
>
>I am currently using a turnstile with ground plane and this antenna is
>performing quit well.
>
>However it suffers from fading during some passes. Not sure why.

>Somewhere in my endevours to find the ultimate "non tracking" antenna I
>came across the name "Lindenbladt"
>
..
>
>Has anybody out there in Amateur Land ever heard of this antenna and if
>so have any construction details.
>
>I would be very interested and gratefull for any details.
>
>Warmest Regards from "Down Under"
>
>Michel van der Walle VK3KVW.
>

Michael,

You can find info on the Lindenblad in Martin Davidoff's boook _The
Satellite Experimenter's Handbook_  Altho more difficult (perhaps) to build
the quadriflar helix antenna is a better antenna, it is also described in
Davidoff's book.  There may however be a mistake in one of the pictures in
that article.

Good Luck,

Kevin

--
****************************************
* Kevin G. Shea  N9JKP                 *
* 4460 Dahmen Pass                     *
* Cross Plains, WI 53528 USA           *
* 608.789.4326,voice; 608.798.1747,fax *
****************************************




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:05 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!torn!nott!cunews!freenet.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!ab376
From: [e-mail] (Mike Ligeza)
Subject: Loop Information??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Mike Ligeza)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mike Ligeza)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 09:51:33 GMT
Lines: 18

I live in a condo, with the usual antenna restrictions, and as a result
have been thinking about the MFJ or AEA loops advertised in all the magazines.

However, one of the questions that occurs to me, is; does the loop consist
of a single solid unit?  Access to my attic, which is where I am thinking
about locating a loop, is through an access that is less than the 39 or 36
inch diameter of the loops as advertised.

If the loop doesn't come apart, then how do I get it through the access
trap door into my attic??

Mike
--
##############################################################################
                              Mike Ligeza Snr.- VE3UIL
                                 Ottawa, Ontario
                                    Canada



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Mail Failure - Apology
Date: 18 Aug 1995 15:25:35 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13097 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:16026 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9052 rec.radio.amateur.policy:29041 rec.radio.amateur.space:4627

My apologies to the list(s).  We had a system failure on our end.
It has been corrected.

Kevin, WB5RUE
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:08 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!ftpbox!mothost!lmpsbbs!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Karl Beckman)
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Organization: Motorola LMPS - Pvt Data Sys
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 14:12:46 -0400
Message-ID: <csle87-1808951412460001@145.39.1.10>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (LMPSBBS News Account)
Nntp-Posting-Host: 145.39.1.10
Lines: 92

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

> Jim,
>
> I read your post with the correction (2.25 miles) but there is still a
> considerable difference in our results.  After analyzing your
> procedure with mine, I have pinpointed the area causing the
> discrepancy.
>
> My calculation starts with EIRP and deducts free space loss over the
> path length in order to derive the signal level reaching the receive
> antenna.  Then, I add the receive antenna gain and deduct line loss,
> if any.  My numbers up to this point are similar to yours.  Next, I
> compare the signal level input to the receiver against ENI (Equivalent
> Noise Input), which is calculated from noise figure.  The result is
> the Carrier to Noise Ratio.

Surely you don't claim to have an unobstructed path just because you have
line of sight.  At the minimum you must still consider Fresnel losses,
which are 6 dB at line of sight.  Further, if you assume forests in the
Pacific Northwest, the trees are >150 feet tall.  50 ft towers would be
woefully inadequate, and you most certainly cannot use any "free space"
generalizations.

>
> The reason our results are so different is that ENI for a 3.5 dB noise
> figure (2.0 dB NF + 1.5 dB loss you suggested) is -127.49 dBm.  In my
> calculations, each dB of signal level above that figure is 1 dB of
> Carrier to Noise Ratio.
>
> To clear up this issue, perhaps you could help me with the following
> questions:
>
> 1.  Is an ENI of -127.49 dBm realistic at this frequency, or is
> ambient noise considered to be above this level?  I *did* check the
> ARRL Handbook for common 220 MHz noise figures (< 1 dB).  As a result,
> I assumed that any differences in ambient noise between 220 MHz and
> microwave would not be significant.

In some recent testing (last two years), the measured 220 MHz noise levels
at a great number of sites in suburban and rural areas came in between
-101 and -86 dBm.  For a reasonably SOTA receiver, front end noise level
is certainly NOT the limiting factor at frequencies below 1 GHz.

>
> 2.  How did you arrive at a minimum acceptable signal level of -70
> dBm?

Assume that you were to use standard V.32 9600 bps telephone line modems.
They require a S/N of 32 to 39 dB, depending on manufacturer.  Obviously
slower baud rates can operate at lower S/N ratios, but the equipment gets
really bulky, slow, and costly when you are decoding below the noise
floor.

>
> 3.  What Carrier to Noise Ratio would -70 dBm represent, and does it
> include signal bandwidth as a modifying factor?

There is no relationship to modify.  The -70 dBm number is the strength of
the signal, but says nothing about the local RF noise level, noise in the
receiver, the  modulation/demodulation process, or any other part of the
working environment.

>
> 4.  I was surprised to see that you were considering path fade in the
> equation.  Are you sure this is required for line of sight paths of
> less than 50 miles at 220 MHz?

Path fade is only important if you want the system to talk more than once,
and preferably in some repeatable fashion.  Just warn him to sell his
backers while the path is 30 dB hot, pay himself three years of huge
salary in advance, and skip town.

>
> Thanks for your help with this.  If I have made an error, now is the
> time to find out.  I absolutely do not want to mislead the gentleman
> who asked the original questions on this topic.
>
> 73,
>
> Jack  WB3U

--

Karl Beckman, P.E.  WA8NVW          <  The value of field experience  >
Motorola LMPS - Fixed Data          < is directly proportional to the >
                                    < price of the equipment damaged. >
If you agree with the opinions expressed, they're mine. If not, who cares?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
By sending unsolicited commercially-oriented e-mail to this address, the
sender agrees to pay a $100 fee to the recipient for proofreading service.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 21:33:13 GMT
Lines: 97
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <csle87-1808951412460001@145.39.1.10>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Karl Beckman) wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

>Surely you don't claim to have an unobstructed path just because you
>have line of sight.  At the minimum you must still consider Fresnel
>losses, which are 6 dB at line of sight.  Further, if you assume
>forests in the Pacific Northwest, the trees are >150 feet tall.  50
>ft towers would be woefully inadequate, and you most certainly cannot
>use any "free space" generalizations.

Thanks for the info on Fresnel loss.  At this frequency it isn't
possible to achieve the 0.6 Fresnel clearance I'm accustomed to and I
didn't have an approximation to use.

What degree of loss would you anticipate per mile for heavy foliage
of the type found in the Northwest, or are you saying that the signal
should be entirely clear of this?  The original question (and my
answer) did state that line-of-sight would be achieved with no
intervening obstructions or foliage.  Perhaps that won't actually be
the case.

>In some recent testing (last two years), the measured 220 MHz noise
>levels at a great number of sites in suburban and rural areas came in
>between -101 and -86 dBm.  For a reasonably SOTA receiver, front end
>noise level is certainly NOT the limiting factor at frequencies below
>1 GHz.

Thanks again.  It appears that MOSFET preamps with 1 dB noise figures
are common on this band.  At 220 MHz with an estimated receive
bandwidth of 20 KHz, the ENI is approximately -130 dBm.  Reducing
the bandwidth to 3 KHz, it drops even further, to about -138 dBm.
This is well below the ambient noise you're quoting, but perhaps it's
occasionally useful when the band is quiet, or if receive feedline
losses are unusually high.  Given this, I am especially surprised that
anyone would go a step further and employ GaAsFETs for this use, but
that's what I found in the Handbook.

At any rate, I obviously misinterpreted this information and
I'll make the necessary corrections.

>Assume that you were to use standard V.32 9600 bps telephone line
>modems.  They require a S/N of 32 to 39 dB, depending on
>manufacturer.  Obviously slower baud rates can operate at lower S/N
>ratios, but the equipment gets really bulky, slow, and costly when
>you are decoding below the noise floor.

Do you know what the conversion factor would be to derive
carrier/noise from S/N for data?  For AM video, we assume that S/N
will be approximately 7 to 10 dB below C/N.  It's approximate
because there is some disagreement as to the exact formula.

>> 3.  What Carrier to Noise Ratio would -70 dBm represent, and does
>>it include signal bandwidth as a modifying factor?

>There is no relationship to modify.  The -70 dBm number is the
>strength of the signal, but says nothing about the local RF noise
>level, noise in the receiver, the  modulation/demodulation process,
>or any other part of the working environment.

I understand that, but this number is derived "backwards" from the
goal of a certain minimum acceptable C/N (or S/N).  That minimum
acceptable ratio is achieved at the receiver's detector, thus receiver
bandwidth is one of the contributing factors to the ratio.  Working
towards the receiver input from that minimum C/N requirement, the
mininum required signal level is therefore contingent, in part, on the
bandwidth of the receiver.

What you said earlier about the possibility of decoding below the
noise floor obviously has a lot to do with this also.  It won't be
possible to determine the required input without knowing what
C/N is required by the decoder.  That information hasn't been
supplied, so in its absence, I will use the worst-case figures you
quoted earlier for a standard modem.  Again, knowing the equivalent
C/N, rather than S/N, would be a big help.

>Path fade is only important if you want the system to talk more than
>once, and preferably in some repeatable fashion.  Just warn him to
>sell his backers while the path is 30 dB hot, pay himself three years
>of huge salary in advance, and skip town.

If we assume that the path is truly line-of-sight, how far below the
"nominal" level, where atmospherics are not playing a role, would you
expect signals to fade?  At 2.5 GHz where I'm more accustomed to
performing these calculations, signal fade from atmospherics and
precipitation is generally so slight as to not even be a consideration
in path lengths of 25 or 50 miles.  This was why I didn't factor this
in initially.  I assumed that lower frequencies are generally even
less susceptable to line-of-sight fades.

Any additional information you have regarding these issues would be
appreciated.  I'd like to come out of this with a spreadsheet that can
perform the calculations with some semblance of accuracy.  :)

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 19:18:06 GMT
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <40r317$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <412epf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:
>WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>Mark, where did you read these comments?  I'm interested to know
>>more about this.  Who is the opposing theorist?

>Jack, I goofed and published parts of a personal letter from Walter
>Maxwell that I shouldn't have. Mr. Maxwell would like for newsgroup
>discussions not to include any of that material and I ask everyone
>to respect those wishes. I appologize for my mistake.

Cecil, I don't know anything the letter or when you posted it.  If I
come across it, and assuming that I recognize it for what it is, rest
assured I will not include any part of it im my posts.

>Leaving Mr. Maxwell and "Reflections" out of the discussion, IMO the
>ARRL has taken W5OLY's experimental data to mean that conjugate
>matching is not important and/or doesn't really exist.

I'm not familiar with W5OLY's work.  Are his opposing conclusions
derived from mathematical theorems or empirical results (or both)?

Also, being familiar with both sets of theorems, which do you find the
most plausible?

Not to put you on the spot or anything. <g>

73,

Jack WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 19 Aug 1995 19:15:53 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 32
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <415d99$[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <412epf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I'm not familiar with W5OLY's work.  Are his opposing conclusions
>derived from mathematical theorems or empirical results (or both)?

It was published in QST. My foggy memory says around Nov. 1992.
Somebody please correct me if that's not right. The approach was
empirical. A signal generator slightly off frequency from the
operating transmitter was used to measure the output impedance of
the transmitter at the signal generator frequency. The conclusion
was that a conjugate match did not exist and maybe has never existed.

>Also, being familiar with both sets of theorems, which do you find the
>most plausible?

I agree that a conjugate match did not exist at the signal generator
frequency. However, it does not mean that a conjugate match did not
exist at the transmitter frequency which was the ARRL's conclusion
which negated the published information on conjugate matching.

IMO, the ARRL is all wet in their thinking. IMO, they don't know how
a non-reflective mirror works (just like a Z0-match). Incidentally,
I have hard copy showing one of the ARRL gurus didn't even know what
a Z0-match is. IMO, the ARRL is in the process of dumbing down.

It seems to be a case of do something, even if it is wrong. If I were
paranoid, I would think it is a federal plot to prove the Amateur
Radio Service, via the ARRL, is made up of a bunch of know-nothings
who don't deserve any frequencies at all (except maybe 11m).

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 19 Aug 1995 21:32:30 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <415l9e$[e-mail]>
References: <405bge$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <412epf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <415d99$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite22.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>I'm not familiar with W5OLY's work.  Are his opposing conclusions
>>derived from mathematical theorems or empirical results (or both)?
>
>It was published in QST. My foggy memory says around Nov. 1992.
>Somebody please correct me if that's not right. The approach was
>empirical. A signal generator slightly off frequency from the
>operating transmitter was used to measure the output impedance of
>the transmitter at the signal generator frequency. The conclusion
>was that a conjugate match did not exist and maybe has never existed.
>
[snip snip snip]
>
>73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


Pretty good for a foggy memory, Cecil... You only missed by a year <g>
Much better than I usually do.  It was titled "RF Power Amplifiers and
the Conjugate Match", and was in the Nov, 1991 issue of QST.

Jack, There was a raging thread going on here for months on this subject.
RIP.  IMHO, a major flaw in Bruene's work was that he made a scalar (magnitude
only) measurement and magically came up with a vector (complex) answer.
But as I said, RIP.

73, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 20 Aug 1995 10:47:26 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <417htu$[e-mail]>
References: <415l9e$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Cecil,

I said it  a dozen times in the Meaning of Matched thread. If anyone else
gets off the duff and duplicates Bruene's tests, or uses the second method
I used, you will plainly see a conjugate match does occur at or near
maximum power transfer (efficiency). It's so easy to measure I can't
beleive everyone keeps saying it's impossible!

Secondly, if you look at Bruene's results for the Alpha amplifier you will
see it crosses 50 ohms at around 1100 watts. I would be willing to bet
hard cold cash that he had the amp tuned for maximum efficiency at 1100
watts when he made the measurement.

The people that claim the efficiency can't be more than 50% need to get
out some test equipment and get their hands dirty once in a while.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!freenet.vcu.edu!freenet.vcu.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need M^2 telephone number
Date: 18 Aug 1995 13:24:00 -0400
Organization: Central Virginia's Free-Net
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <412ibg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet.vcu.edu


Need M^2 telephone number to request a catalog.

--Thanks, Todd
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
  Todd Owen (KE4UDN)         Virginia Commonwealth University
  [e-mail]      Richmond, Virginia
---------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.micron.net!news
From: Terry Dobler  KJ7F <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Prop Pitch Rotator Info
Date: 20 Aug 1995 17:51:18 GMT
Organization: Micron Internet Services
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <417smm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs002p41.micron.net

Greetings,

   Would anyone here be able to point me towards any magazine
articles relating to prop pitch rotators?   Any info would be
greatly appreciated.   Thanks.

Terry  KJ7F



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Gerald Schmitt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need source for "DK-3" HF Mobile Antenna
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 95 20:20:48 mdt
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <413iam$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: transitory1.lanl.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage


Well Mr. Armond all things must not be equal because the heavily
advertised DK-3s do sell for a lot more than the garage produced
ones. I have talked to several of the commercial producers about
their antennas and have found the biggest prices are associated
with the most bull. When Don Johnson sold them he got $125 for one.
Look at the current ads more than twice that in my opinion a rip.
The original poster asked for a source not an economics lesson.
Jeez.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet
From: host [e-mail] (Your real Name)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Newsgroup Archive Retrieval
Date: 20 Aug 1995 03:31:32 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <416aak$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jlb.earthlink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14

Hi,
Would someone please let me know how to access postings that are no
longer visible on the newsgroup screen? How far back can we access
postings? Can we do a search by subject or author? Any information would
be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Joe AA6WG



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Maurice Andries)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Outbacker Mobile Antennas.
Date: 19 Aug 95 16:36:22 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Hi all,

I'm looking for info on the mobile antennas Outbacker. Who uses one and how
do  they  perform.  Which types can be taken apart in small parts (to fit a
suitcase)?

What  kind of base is availlable. I will need a base that can be used on as
many  different  cars as possible since most of the time I will have to use
the  antenna  on  a  rental  car.  A Magnetic mount would be ideal (I'm not
driving and QSO'ing at the same time anyway).



All other info welcome too


TNX a lot.



Bye, from [e-mail] ( Maurice Andries )
          ON4BAM@ON6AR.#AN.BEL.EU




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.smartlink.net!pm178-52.smartlink.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Jeffery Allan Purtle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Outbacker Mobile Antennas.
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 11:57:22 -0800
Organization: SmartLink.net Premier ISP 805-294-1273
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm178-52.smartlink.net

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Maurice
Andries) wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm looking for info on the mobile antennas Outbacker. Who uses one and how
> do  they  perform.  Which types can be taken apart in small parts (to fit a
> suitcase)?
>
> What  kind of base is availlable. I will need a base that can be used on as
> many  different  cars as possible since most of the time I will have to use
> the  antenna  on  a  rental  car.  A Magnetic mount would be ideal (I'm not
> driving and QSO'ing at the same time anyway).
>
>
>
> All other info welcome too
>
>
> TNX a lot.
>
>
>
> Bye, from [e-mail] ( Maurice Andries )
>           ON4BAM@ON6AR.#AN.BEL.EU

HI.

I have the Outbacker Perth and like it.  The only commentsI have is that
80 meters doesn't seem to be that great.  Good reports on everything
else.  Also, you have to get out of the car to change the coil tap.  I am
thinking of trying one of those Screwdriver type antennas.  But, I don't
know of one that covers 160 through 10 without adding a coil for 160.

Also, for a ball mount, the Hustler one is the best.  It can stand-up to
anything.  I have driven my car 90 MPH into a headwind and had no problem
with it and the Outbacker.  Don't get the radio shack ball mount.  IT
SUCKS!  You get what you pay for.

73,
jeff
ac6iw


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:17 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Pager extender
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!clint.bradford
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 95 14:04:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 13

Subject: Pager extender

>>...pager range extender ... to use when in the fringes...

You might want to contact your paging company, and let them know that
their advertised range isn't what you're experiencing. Approached
correctly, they might give you an upgraded unit at no charge.


Clint Bradford
---
 * TLX v4.00 * ATTENTION to Details BBS - 909/681-6221 - EFF/AOP/ASP
 ■ wcECHO 4.1 ≈ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details ■ Mira Loma, CA ■ 909-681-6221


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!tcp.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Darren)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Parasitic elements question
Date: 19 Aug 1995 21:20:05 GMT
Organization: Sugar Radio DX group
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <415ki5$[e-mail]>
References: <40t6bq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: du2-11.tcp.co.uk
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

In article <40t6bq$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Scott Richard Rosenfeld) says:
>
>I would like to, in my limited-space arrangement (my attic), set
>up an array of 2-element beams, each consisting of a driven element
>and a reflector.
>
>How about a shortened 6m Yagi?  I know it sounds dumb but I am REALLY
>limited space-wise.
>
What about a four square? ( four phased verticals works in four directions)
A mate of mine uses four mobile CB antennas on the tin roof of his garage!
It works like a 2 ele yagi on 10m, the design came out of the ARRL Antenna
handbook...If you were using it in your attic then aluminium cooking foil
spread all around would be a great groundplane...
                                                 73 Darren G0TSM


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!prairienet.org!mgarrett
From: [e-mail] (Mark A. Garrett)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: part 15 antennas for broadcast band
Date: 19 Aug 1995 17:31:52 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <415768$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark A. Garrett)
NNTP-Posting-Host: firefly.prairienet.org


I am wondering if anyone out there has had experience with running a antenna
for a part 15 type transmitter in the am broadcast band that meets the FCC
requiremts for part 15 being at the last time I checked around 10 feet
including feedline.  Any good or bad comments on designs appreciated.
--
Mark Garrett   [e-mail]
               KA9SZX @ N9LNQ.#ECIL.IL.USA.NOAM


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!fido.asd.sgi.com!squarethru.mti.sgi.com!rfrench
From: [e-mail] (Robert French)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN
Date: 21 Aug 1995 21:12:03 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc.
Lines: 71
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <41asr3$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: squarethru.mti.sgi.com

There has been a lot of talk about GAP verticals recently.  This weekend
I built and installed a GAP Titan (which is a very new antenna).

Physical description:

The antenna is 25 feet tall and weighs about 25 pounds.  It is made of
aluminum, with the lowest section being triple-walled and the
second-lowest being double-walled.  There are four main tuning rods
symmetrically placed parallel to the middle of the antenna, and a few
other random tuning rods placed at odd places.  There is a small
capacitative hat for 80m at the top of the antenna.  At the bottom is
a counterpoise mounted as a square of wire offset 7 feet from the
mast.  This makes the footprint pretty large if you mount it close to
the ground.  Mounting is thru attachment to a 1 1/4" pipe.

The antenna bends quite easily, but once guyed seems sturdy enough.  I
don't live in an area with ice or snow or heavy winds, so I don't
really care.

Construction:

It took a friend and I about 8 hours to build and raise the antenna.
Most of this was attaching various tubes, tuning rods, etc.  The
counterpoise needs to be assembled once the antenna has been made
vertical.  We mounted it on a 5 foot mast section in the middle of my
back yard to assemble the counterpoise (which is then at about eye
level).  Directions were pretty clear and we never ran into any
serious problems during construction.

Performance:

I tested the antenna with an FT-707 running 100w thru 110 feet of
RG-8/M coax.  The antenna is mounted 5 feet off the ground and is
relatively near a large tree, a 2 story house, and a long length of 6
foot tall wooden fence.  It does not have a "clear shot" at the
horizon in any direction.  It's one of the worst places you could
think to put an antenna.

For comparison, I used to have a 20m and 40m inverted vee dipole in
this same location.  The apex was at about 20 feet, and the ends at
about 5 feet.  I was able to work only a couple of people SSB over the
months, and a few people on CW.  It was in general pretty useless for
long distance contacts.  The greatest distance I worked was GA on 20m
SSB (very weak signal report) and Eastern Russia on 40m CW.

It turns out the NA QSO Party contest was this weekend, so I was able
to make a fair number of contacts Saturday evening.  From central
California I worked CA, UT, IA, and IN on 20m SSB after dark.  I
received a 59 signal report from IN and had a nice QSO with a person
there.

The antenna is supposed to tune on 10, 12, 15, 17, 20, 30, 40, and
part of 80 without an antenna tuner.  I found 20 worked fine, but I
needed the tuner on 40 (there is an adjustment for 40 that I haven't
done yet, so that may be the problem).  I could hear plenty of people
on 80, some as far as central Canada, but was unable to talk to any of
them (previously I couldn't even hear people on 80).

I have an AEA HF Analyzer that I'll use to see how well the antenna
tunes, but its batteries were dead this weekend so I can't give that
information now.  And yes, I'm well aware that a low SWR doesn't mean
anything, but at least it might say I assembled the antenna correctly.

Conclusion:

I'm tentatively happy with the antenna, if for no other reason than
it's so much better than the lousy setup I had before.  Once I have a
chance to put it in its final location (which will be up another 5
feet) and work some stations, I'll post more results.

                Rob, AC6GO


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!mail.megaweb.com!BamaFan
From: [e-mail] (Kelvin Nunn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Recommendations for a HT External Antenna
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 20:32:19
Organization: Megaweb
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <418od6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @www_7_193.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: GNN Messenger 1.1


I just passed my Tech :) and got an dual band HT!!  I would like some advise for an external antenna
for home.  I am also thinking about an amp too.  Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.  What
hav you used?  How well does it work?

Also does anyone know if there is a AC adapter for the 51-R?  I know they make an adapter for
cars.  The HT will run in the charger if the battery is dead but I suspect that doing this may damage
the battery.


Kelvin Nunn




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: re: SWR  how good is good??????
Date: 20 Aug 1995 15:17:26 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

Could a high SWR effect the antenna pattern of a 3-element beam for example?
Could a conjugate match effect the antenna's pattern?

Joe AA6WG


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:22 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.telalink.net!uro!jackatak!root
From: [e-mail] (Jack GF Hill)
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Organization: Jack's Amazing CockRoach Capitalist Ventures
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 15:45:11 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Superuser)
Lines: 56

[e-mail] (Dave Kirkby) writes:
> I have a requirement in a computer program, to determine an antenna SWR, then
> compute a 'quality factor' for it. ie:
>
> SWR=1:1        Quality =10/10
> SWR=infinity   Quality = 0/10
>
> Ideally I want a function that takes SWR as an argument and returns a number
> 0 and 1.0, that reflects how good the SWR is.

> The number I get is used to optimise an antenna, which gets optimised
> for gain, sidelobe level, swr, fb ratio etc. I want to put just the
> right amount of bias to each parameter.

Well, I think you need to re-think your analysis of your basic
proposition: that the antenna SWR is important to the performance of
the antenna.

Call me old-fashioned and loads of other epithets, but SWR is NOT, in
and of itself, a measure of antenna performance and quality. In fact,
it is not usually a function of hte antenna at all, but rather is a
SYSTEMIC value... that is, the SYSTEM SWR is perhaps relevant to how
the antenna system will perform, but even here it is NOT the primary
nor even a seriously important variable, ASSUMING one is able to load
the SYSTEM properly.

Consider the opening chapters of Maxwell's "Reflections" where Walt
describes an antenna SYSTEM *designed* with a SWR of 4.4:1 for a
weather satellite and another NAVSAT design that had a 9.3:1 SWR! To
assume that taken by itself the SWR is any kind of measure of the
quality of hte antenna SYSTEM is to ignore what happens in the SYSTEM.
Incidently, the total loss of the 4.4:1 SWR system was only 9.6% and
the loss due to a SWR of 9.3:1 was only 0.79dB!

Since the antenna itself is presumably designed for some set of
optimized characteristics, the SWR does NOT exist at the antenna
itself, but rather when a feedline of different impedance is connected
between the antenna and the RF processing mechanism (transmitter or
receiver) without some form of "matching"... The effect of that
mis-match or SWR on the performance of the SYSTEM is dependent upon
many variables, feedline loss being one...

> Quality proportional to:   (1 - ((SWR-1)/(SWR+1))^2)
> this would work well. However, poor SWR's are given too high a bias by this.
Well said... giving SWR a "quality" measure at all probably gives it
too much weigh/bias...
--
73,
Jack, W4PPT/M (75M SSB 2-letter WAS #1657/#1789 -- both from the mobile! ;^)

+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
| Jack GF Hill        |Voice: [phone] -             Ham Call: W4PPT |
| P. O. Box 1685      |Modem: [phone] -  Bicycling and SCUBA Diving |
| Brentwood, TN  37024|Fax:   [phone] -          Life Member - ARRL |
| [e-mail]  - "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose" |
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!tgold.dialup.access.net!tgold
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 95 17:16:17 GMT
Organization: Myorganisation
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: tgold.dialup.access.net
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Jack GF Hill" writes:

> Well said... giving SWR a "quality" measure at all probably gives it
> too much weigh/bias...

Indeed, or else just soaking our coax in water would be the magic formula
to improving the "quality" of the antenna.

73.
--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 15:47:16 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 76

-> From: [e-mail] (Jack GF Hill)
-> References: <[e-mail]>
-> Lines: 56
->
-> [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby) writes:
-> > I have a requirement in a computer program, to determine an antenna
-> then
-> > compute a 'quality factor' for it. ie:
-> >
-> > SWR=1:1        Quality =10/10
-> > SWR=infinity   Quality = 0/10
-> >
-> > Ideally I want a function that takes SWR as an argument and returns
-> number
-> > 0 and 1.0, that reflects how good the SWR is.
->
-> > The number I get is used to optimise an antenna, which gets optimis
-> > for gain, sidelobe level, swr, fb ratio etc. I want to put just the
-> > right amount of bias to each parameter.
->
-> Well, I think you need to re-think your analysis of your basic
-> proposition: that the antenna SWR is important to the performance of
-> the antenna.
->
-> Call me old-fashioned and loads of other epithets, but SWR is NOT, in
-> and of itself, a measure of antenna performance and quality. In fact,
-> it is not usually a function of hte antenna at all, but rather is a
-> SYSTEMIC value... that is, the SYSTEM SWR is perhaps relevant to how
-> the antenna system will perform, but even here it is NOT the primary
-> nor even a seriously important variable, ASSUMING one is able to load
-> the SYSTEM properly.
->
-> Consider the opening chapters of Maxwell's "Reflections" where Walt
-> describes an antenna SYSTEM *designed* with a SWR of 4.4:1 for a
-> weather satellite and another NAVSAT design that had a 9.3:1 SWR! To
-> assume that taken by itself the SWR is any kind of measure of the
-> quality of hte antenna SYSTEM is to ignore what happens in the SYSTEM
-> Incidently, the total loss of the 4.4:1 SWR system was only 9.6% and
-> the loss due to a SWR of 9.3:1 was only 0.79dB!
->
-> Since the antenna itself is presumably designed for some set of
-> optimized characteristics, the SWR does NOT exist at the antenna
-> itself, but rather when a feedline of different impedance is connecte
-> between the antenna and the RF processing mechanism (transmitter or
-> receiver) without some form of "matching"... The effect of that
-> mis-match or SWR on the performance of the SYSTEM is dependent upon
-> many variables, feedline loss being one...

  In a system, I think the swr can exist at the antenna.  If a system
  is designed to operate at 50 ohms and you have it mis-tuned to
  say 25 ohms with a zero length of transmission line from a 50
  ohm transmitter the swr exists at the antenna and or is the cause
  of the mis-match.  If one was to cut the transmission line in
  electrical muliples of 1/2 wave length at the operating frequency,
  in theory, the swr would be the same at the transmitter as it
  would be at the antenna.  The transmission line would not effect
  the swr at the antenna.  If the transmission line was not cut
  to a given 1/2 wave multiple, then one would see a change in swr
  between the swr at the antenna and at the transmitter.  The coax
  would become part of the "tuned" circuit.
  I think this is why I read about people trimming their transmission
  line to get a good match.  What they are doing is "tuning" the
  entire system because they do not have a proper match at the
  antenna.  The higher the swr, the more the transmission line plays
  a part in being part of the tuned circuit.
  I firmly beleive this is why it is important to tune a new antenna,
  at the antenna, with the transmitter having the shortest possible
  length of transmission line possible, say 4" + the meter length.
  Once the antenna is tuned to a transmitter, then one can add
  electrical 1/2 wave lengths of transmission line.  I think this
  takes the transmission line out of the equation (for the most part).
  Of course, in many installations, this is just about impossible to
  to do.
  WA6OFT
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 16:35:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 68

-> >
-> > SWR=1:1        Quality =10/10
-> > SWR=infinity   Quality = 0/10
-> >
-> > Ideally I want a function that takes SWR as an argument and returns
-> number
-> > 0 and 1.0, that reflects how good the SWR is.
->
-> > The number I get is used to optimise an antenna, which gets optimis
-> > for gain, sidelobe level, swr, fb ratio etc. I want to put just the
-> > right amount of bias to each parameter.
->
-> Well, I think you need to re-think your analysis of your basic
-> proposition: that the antenna SWR is important to the performance of
-> the antenna.
->
-> Call me old-fashioned and loads of other epithets, but SWR is NOT, in
-> and of itself, a measure of antenna performance and quality. In fact,
-> it is not usually a function of hte antenna at all, but rather is a
-> SYSTEMIC value... that is, the SYSTEM SWR is perhaps relevant to how
-> the antenna system will perform, but even here it is NOT the primary
-> nor even a seriously important variable, ASSUMING one is able to load
-> the SYSTEM properly.
->
-> Consider the opening chapters of Maxwell's "Reflections" where Walt
-> describes an antenna SYSTEM *designed* with a SWR of 4.4:1 for a
-> weather satellite and another NAVSAT design that had a 9.3:1 SWR! To
-> assume that taken by itself the SWR is any kind of measure of the
-> quality of hte antenna SYSTEM is to ignore what happens in the SYSTEM
-> Incidently, the total loss of the 4.4:1 SWR system was only 9.6% and
-> the loss due to a SWR of 9.3:1 was only 0.79dB!

   Forgive me for being stupid, but I am missing something here.

   A rough example (figures are approx.):

   100 watt transmitter = 50 dbm
    10 watts reflected power = 40 dbm
   Gives 90 watts radiated power = 49.54 dbm
   Difference = .46 dbm
   10 watts reflected power represents an vswr of approx 1.75:1

   Is this not 10 % of the transmitter power, in watts, being absorbed
   (wasted) in the "system"?
   I consider this to be significant and would certainly take measures
   to correct it.
   I might add here that some transmitters have automatic protection
   circuits in them.  Some will start reducing transmitter power
   with swr's of 2:1 to protect themselves.  Usually, the reflected
   power or much of it is absorbed in the final output device.

   Another example:
   10 watt transmitter
    3 watts reflected power
   This is 30 % of the transmitter power being absorbed by the system.
   Vswr would be approx 3.42:1.
   I dont know about your transmitters, but mine would be folding back
   the output power to protect itself!
   Another example:
   100 watt transmitter
    25 watts reflected
   This is 25% of the output power being asorbed by the system.
   Vswr would be roughly 3.0:1.

   So what gives here?  These figures are significant are they not?
   Jim, WA6OFT
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: 20 Aug 1995 18:18:25 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 30
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <417u9h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Jim Wooddell <[e-mail]> wrote:

>   Forgive me for being stupid, but I am missing something here.
>   100 watt transmitter = 50 dbm
>    10 watts reflected power = 40 dbm

Hi Jim, I'm certainly not implying that you are stupid but I do
think you are missing something.

In the above example, the transmitter is delivering 100w and the
reflected "power" is 10w so, *in a properly tuned system*, the forward
power will measure 110w and *all* the power delivered by the transmitter
will be delivered to the load no matter how mismatched assuming
lossless transmission lines and steady state conditions. The 10w of
reflected energy circulates and does not dissipate until the power
is removed. (I know a watt is not energy but I have been chastised in
the past for saying "reflected power").

And here's a personal opinion: The reflected energy must be re-reflected
before it reaches the transistor final or else some of it *can* be
dissipated "in the system". A simple antenna tuner accomplishes a
Z0-match at its input thereby 100% re-reflecting the reflected energy
back toward the load. That's how conjugate matching works.

In your example, with 10w being absorbed by the system, you must
be using a $40,000 network analyzer for the source which has
expensive circuitry built in to absorb reflected energy.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR - how good is good????????
Date: 20 Aug 1995 19:09:23 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 35
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <418193$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Jim Wooddell <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  In a system, I think the swr can exist at the antenna.

We must be careful with words. The swr originates at the antenna/
xmission line junction. If the antenna is resistive, then no energy
transfer takes place from antenna to xmission line. So a 50 ohm
antenna fed with 300 ohm ladder-line would cause a 6:1 swr on the
ladder-line but all the power transferred from the ladder-line to
the lossless antenna will be radiated.

If the antenna has a reactive component it can pump energy back
from the antenna into the xmission line just like it would if
it were a real capacitor or coil. This is the mechanism that can
possibly (not necessairly will) cause energy to make a round trip
to the antenna and back and be dissipated in the final transistor
if there is no match to cause 100% re-reflection.

>  I firmly beleive this is why it is important to tune a new antenna,
>  at the antenna, with the transmitter having the shortest possible
>  length of transmission line possible, say 4" + the meter length.

If your xmission line is near lossless and doesn't radiate, tuning
at the antenna is not necessary (good thing, I can't get up there
anymore). With *any* length of xmission line, if one conjugately
matches whatever impedance exists, then almost all the power delivered
by the transmitter will be delivered to and radiated by a near
lossless antenna. Thus one has resonated the entire system even
though the antenna itself may be a non-resonant length. If one knows
what one is doing, SWR by itself, doesn't matter. Trimming ones SWR to
1:1 is playing it safe (unless one is resorting to a dummy load :-).
Depending on the application, an SWR of 10:1 may be just dandy.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:28 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: SWR Meters and Coax Radiation
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 16:27:50 GMT
Lines: 39

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>A few weeks ago there was a thread on this topic in which I stated
>that an SWR meter would not be accurate in the presence of shield RF.
>Someone (sorry, I don't remember who it was) questioned whether
>this was true.
>
>As explanation, the reason the meter can't be trusted under these
>conditions is that the detection and metering circuits need a
>reference to work against. If the reference is modulated by RF, the
>readings may not indicate either the true values of forward and
>reflected power, or the ratio between them.

While granting that this can be affected by the particulars of
meter construction, this explanation is, in general, not true.
A VSWR meter works by measuring the *ratio* of forward to reverse
voltages *inside* the line. Since what it measures is just a
ratio, no reference potential is required. Since it only deals
with voltages *inside* the line, voltages *outside* the line
are of no consequence to the measurement. If the meter leads,
which do extend outside the measured line section, aren't properly
decoupled for RF, the meter reading could be affected by rectification
in a dissimilar metal junction. But that's just poor instrument
design, and not inherent.

The real reason VSWR readings may be anomolous under the condition
of RF on the outside of the coax is that the coax is forming part
of one leg of the antenna, and thus any fooling with it to do the
measurement changes the antenna, which of course changes the
impedance presented to the feedpoint of the coax, which in turn
changes the VSWR. The meter isn't lying, it's just measuring a
different antenna than the one without the VSWR meter in one leg
of the radiator.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:29 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!svc.portal.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Subject: Re: SWR Meters and Coax Radiation
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 17:50:19 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]
Lines: 28

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:

: While granting that this can be affected by the particulars of
: meter construction, this explanation is, in general, not true.

etc.

I think Gary's explanation on this is right on.  (And I can recall when he
was on the other side of the fence on this one...!)

But don't take our word for it.  If you think your SWR meter responds to RF
on the outside of a line, do a simple test.  Put the SWR meter in an
antenna, where there is LOTS of RF on the outside of the "line".  See if it
reads anything.  If it does, it's not constructed properly.  You can do
this either by putting the meter in a length of coax which is shorted at
each end, and using that length of line as part of an antenna (e.g.,
dipole).  You can put the meter at a high current point, and a high voltage
point, to check response to both electric and magnetic fields.  Or you can
do the same thing by shorting the meter RF input and output ports and just
connecting the meter in a cut in an antenna element.  (With the meter in a
length of line, you stand some chance of exciting current inside the line
from currents outside the line.  Coax is not perfectly shielded.)

Oftentimes, a simple test will resolve a dispute of hundreds of unfounded
opinions...

73, K7ITM



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:30 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: SWR Meters and Coax Radiation
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:38:13 GMT
Lines: 72

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>
>>While granting that this can be affected by the particulars of
>>meter construction, this explanation is, in general, not true.
>>A VSWR meter works by measuring the *ratio* of forward to reverse
>>voltages *inside* the line. Since what it measures is just a
>>ratio, no reference potential is required. Since it only deals
>>with voltages *inside* the line, voltages *outside* the line
>>are of no consequence to the measurement. If the meter leads,
>>which do extend outside the measured line section, aren't properly
>>decoupled for RF, the meter reading could be affected by
>
>     << snip >>
>
>Yes, a VSWR meter is supposed to compare only the ratio of forward to
>reverse power.  Most of the ones I've seen in ham shacks do this by
>running the coax center conductor through a toroidal pickup coil.
>Currents in the center conductor generate a directional voltage at the
>ends of the coil.

This is actually an ISWR meter, and would present a *horrible* impedance
bump at VHF+, but that's not very important at HF. At VHF+, coupled
transmission line segments, ala Micromatch (or a Bird wattmeter), would
be used to preserve a constant impedance through the instrument. the
only leads sticking through the outer of the line section would be
at DC for connection to the meter movement. These should be RF decoupled
by feedthrough capacitors.

>If it was possible to measure that voltage without a reference,
>(for instance with a floating directional voltmeter at the coil),
>then currents flowing on the outside of the line would have no effect.
>However, none of these meters work this way.  They all develop the RF
>from each side of the coil across a resistor tied to ground, and that
>ground is not inside the coax.  It is external to the coax (although
>inside the case of the meter) and any RF currents present on the
>shield of the coax will be present on the reference ground.

This is where you're going wrong. The case *is* the outside of the
transmission line for this style of ISWR meter. The case has coax
connectors on each end, and the shield connection is furnished by
the case. Thus any stray shield currents flow on the *outside* of
the case. Only the transmission line currents flow *inside* the case.
Skin effect keeps them separated, just as it does anywhere else
on a coaxial line. So they won't affect the resistor or diode in
the ISWR detector. Now if the meter isn't shielded, it can form
an opening in the case shielding that *can* cause upsets, so a
metal shell meter movement should be used, or an external meter
movement should be used, fed via feedthrough capacitors in the
case wall as with the case for VHF+ instruments.

>>The real reason VSWR readings may be anomolous under the condition
>>of RF on the outside of the coax is that the coax is forming part
>>of one leg of the antenna, and thus any fooling with it to do the
>>measurement changes the antenna, which of course changes the
>>impedance presented to the feedpoint of the coax, which in turn
>>changes the VSWR. The meter isn't lying, it's just measuring a
>>different antenna than the one without the VSWR meter in one leg
>>of the radiator.
>
>I agree with this, I'm just not certain it's necessarily the primary
>reason for the phenomenon.

I hold that with any properly constructed instrument it is the *only*
reason.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (D E Sloan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: unsubscribe
Date: 20 Aug 1995 12:34:22 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <417o6e$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

UNSUBSCRIBE


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Using manual antenna tuner with autotuner
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 95 05:41:28 GMT
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <40vfsr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:

>Does it make sense to use a manual antenna tuner in conjunction
>with an autotuner?  The autotuner in the Yaesu FL-7000 can reduce
>a 3:1 SWR to 1.2:1, but I think the G5RV I'm using has an SWR higher
>than 3:1 on 80m, for example.

Yes, VSWR from a 102' dipole will be relatively high everywhere except
20M, where it is a 3/2 wave radiator.  Personally, I would bypass the
auto tuner and use the manual unit only.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.ais.net!kiwi.pyrotechnics.com!dirge
From: [e-mail] (James Meehan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wanted: 900 MHz Antennas
Date: 18 Aug 1995 19:36:28 GMT
Organization: PYROtechnics Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <412q3s$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kiwi.pyrotechnics.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I'm looking for an omnidirectional antenna for the 900 MHz band.  If you
have one, or know of someone who makes them new, please let me know.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James C. Meehan                            PYROtechnics, Inc.
1566 W. Algonquin Rd., Ste. 112            Computer consulting, custom
Hoffman Estates, IL  60195                 programming, hardware sales
                                           and Internet connectivity.
work phone: [phone] ext. 2
pager:      [phone]                 http://www.pyrotechnics.com/~dirge
------------------------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!esol.intermedia.com!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wanted: Old Test Equip. Catalogs
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 95 08:43:09 PDT
Organization: (None)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.149.224.16
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:85271 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9087 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13168


I would like to purchase old test catalogs for my library.  I am interested in
catalogs and data sheets from the 50's through the mid 70's.  If you have any
H.P., Tektronix, General Radio, Wavetek, Boonton Radio, or similar catalogs
please contact George Carlson at Email [e-mail] or telephone
office-[phone], home-[phone]



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.funet.fi!news.tele.fi!news.inet.tele.fi!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Osmo Vuorio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: 19 Aug 1995 21:04:26 GMT
Organization: TELECOM FINLAND, Engineering
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <415jkq$[e-mail]>
References: <412t8g$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vuorios1.dial.tele.fi
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob Schreibmaier) says:
..
>Didn't we decide the last time this thread was discussed that it was Bayonet
>Neill Concilmann (sp?) after the Bell Labs engineers who invented it?
>
>73,
>Bob K2PH
..
I have been thinkering this BNC stands for what?? in my mind.
Let's say - the past 25 years. If this is true - thank you !

Osmo, OH2EU


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.umbc.edu!rkirk1
From: [e-mail] (Robert Kirk)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: 19 Aug 1995 00:40:54 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <413bum$[e-mail]>
References: <412c68$[e-mail]> <412t8g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: f-umbc8.umbc.edu
NNTP-Posting-User: rkirk1
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Gordon Pritchard ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (Jose Rivera) wrote:

: >Does BNC (from BNC connector) stands for something ?

: Yes.  Bayonet-Nut Coupling (from the push-and-twist outer nut which
: couples the connector together).


: _______________________________ |\      _,,,--,,_  ,) _______________
: [e-mail]   /,`.-'`'   -,  ;-;;'
:      Gordon Pritchard           |,4-  ) )-,_ ) /\  don't ever disturb
: ______________________________ '---''(_/--' (_/-'_____a sleeping cat!

I understood that it was "Bayonet: Neill-Councilman" for the
inventing engineers... Bob Kirk Ne



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 23:08:21 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 12

->
-> [e-mail] (Jose Rivera) wrote:
->
-> >Does BNC (from BNC connector) stands for something ?
->
-> Yes.  Bayonet-Nut Coupling (from the push-and-twist outer nut which
-> couples the connector together).
->
I thought it was called  Bulk Navy Connector and the Type N connector
was called the Navy Connector. Hmmmm.
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!DIALix!brisbane.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Murray Kelly)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: 21 Aug 1995 01:05:52 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Brisbane, Australia.
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <417j0g$k0t$[e-mail]>
References: <412c68$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

Bayonet NC.
Murray kelly vk4aok



From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Jajb)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: 20 Aug 1995 13:02:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <417pq9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jajb)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

What I've been told throughout the years and by some history from the
maufacturers is that it means "Baby 'N' Connector". A smaller version of
the grand-daddy 'N' connectors used earlier for VHF and UHF Military
radios.


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 23:40:03 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 28

-> Path: global.gc.net!athos.itribe.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pi
->       pipex!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!no
->       mail
-> From: [e-mail] (Jajb)
-> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
-> Lines: 4
-> References: <[e-mail]>
-> NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
->
-> What I've been told throughout the years and by some history from the
-> maufacturers is that it means "Baby 'N' Connector". A smaller version
-> the grand-daddy 'N' connectors used earlier for VHF and UHF Military
-> radios.

Amphenol, one of the companies that has made this connector and the
'n' connector for years and has made them for the military described
both the BNC and the N connectors.  They were developed for the Navy
ships and are waterproof.
Someone has said they are named after a Bell labs person, however,
the BNC was made after the N connector for bulk head patch panels
on ships in WWII. The N connector was too big for the patch panels,
and the N stood for NAVY connector.  So came the BNC connector for
the Bulk head patch panels BULK NAVY CONNECTOR.  Amphenol, in one
of their older technical catalogs described this.
I beleive it!
Jim, WA6OFT
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.moneng.mei.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.ptd.net!dxis!k2ph
From: [e-mail] (Bob Schreibmaier)
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: QRM Central, Kresgeville, PA
References: <412t8g$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 02:33:00 GMT
Lines: 19

From article <412t8g$[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Gordon Pritchard):
> [e-mail] (Jose Rivera) wrote:
>
>>Does BNC (from BNC connector) stands for something ?
> Yes.  Bayonet-Nut Coupling (from the push-and-twist outer nut which
> couples the connector together).

Didn't we decide the last time this thread was discussed that it was Bayonet
Neill Concilmann (sp?) after the Bell Labs engineers who invented it?

73,
Bob K2PH

--
+------------------  \-\-\-\  -----------------------------+
| Bob Schreibmaier K2PH | INTERNET: [e-mail] |
| (a.k.a. "The QRPer")  | ICBM:     40o55'N 75o30'W        |
| Kresgeville, PA       | Euthanize the Limbaugh Loonies.  |
+----------------------------------------------------------+


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ?
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 95 08:27:42 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <413sl6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (BUDDY10) wrote:

>What is a WINDOM antenna ?  What is the difference between a Windom &
>a dipole ?

A Windom antenna is an *unbroken* horizontal wire fed off-center with
a *single-wire* feeder.  The horizontal section is 1/2 wavelength and
the feeder is connected at a point 0.36 wavelength from one end.  This
is a very old design, going back to sometime around the 30's.

More recently, antennas that are fed off-center, but with a standard
two-wire feedline, have become popular.  The so-called "Carolina
Windom" is an example of this type.

Finally, a good ole' dipole is center-fed with a two-wire feeder.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:39 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou.iglou.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <413sl6$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 14:27:18 GMT
Lines: 15

BUDDY10 ([e-mail]) wrote:
: What is a WINDOM antenna ?  What is the difference between a Windom & a
: dipole ?
This was invented by Mr. Windom back in the 30's. It resembles a dipole
but is fed 1/3 wavelength off center. This feed point is supposed to
present about 300 ohms on the fundemental and multiples. Using high
impedance feeder or a 6 to 1 balun, a fair match to coax can be realized
on several bands i.e. 80,40,20, 10 meters. Probelms with RF on the feeder
are common since the system is rather unbalanced. Any ARRL handbook or
Antenna manual can give a much better description. 73
--
  Steve
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Aug 21 17:59:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ?
Date: 19 Aug 1995 21:20:55 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <415kjn$[e-mail]>
References: <413sl6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <413sl6$[e-mail]>, BUDDY10 <[e-mail]> wrote:
>What is a WINDOM antenna ?  What is the difference between a Windom & a
>dipole ?

The original Windom was a 130 ft horizontal section fed 14% off center
with a single-wire feeder often resulting in RF in the shack. The modern
Windom is a horizontal off-center-fed dipole (two poles) fed about 33%
off center with 300 ohm ladder-line or other transmission line. It is
advertised as all-band but IMO needs an antenna tuner. The long pole
radiates more RF than the short pole.

Hams have been careless with the English language and when they say
"dipole" they are often referring to a half-wave center-fed dipole
resonant at one fundamental frequency. Low impedance resonant dipoles
are often hard to load on double the resonant frequency because the
impedance may be sky high.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!nic.wat.hookup.net!fortnum.wat.hookup.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Rich Fortnum)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1000 KHz Length
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 14:53:00 -0400
Organization: F & M Breweries Limited
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41aluv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fortnum.wat.hookup.net

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

>Dave Stuart ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>I have figured around 150 for a dipole using the 300 / (freq MHz) method.
>
>The formula is 468/fMHz, which in this case would be 468 ft. 300/fMhz
>gives the Meters which would be 300 meters so a dipole would be half of that
>or 150 meters minus 5%.

I don't quite understand.  468 feet per 300/fMHz?

--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rich Fortnum (aka BeeRich)
F & M Breweries Limited
Guelph, Ontario, CANADA
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:34:52 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 207
Message-ID: <41jues$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: Newsgroup:,rec.radio.amateur.antenna

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   hc@primene>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
t.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:36:11 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 207
Message-ID: <41juhb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: :,rec.radio.amateur.antenna

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   hc@primene>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
t.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:39:47 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 207
Message-ID: <41juo3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: netscape,-[Newstroup:rec.radio.amateur.antenna]

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   hc@primene>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
t.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:44:59 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 207
Message-ID: <41jv1r$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: netscape

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   hc@primene>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
t.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:46:17 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 207
Message-ID: <41jv49$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: all

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   hc@primene>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
t.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:49:33 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 207
Message-ID: <41jvad$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   hc@primene>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
t.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:51 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: Tom WB4iUX <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (TSKELTON)
Organization: ATT GIS
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.0 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <41jvad$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 19:54:15 GMT
Lines: 29


==========Phil Diaz, 8/24/95==========
i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   hc@primene>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

tons of wasted B/W deleted

1.  Don't know what a gizmachi antenna is
2.  Why would you want to try to double the output of a rig which
was obviously not designed for it?  Yes, in some tube rigs you can
increase the plate voltage to get a few more watts. Some of the Kenwood
rigs have internal pots than can adjusted to give a few more watts
output.  I'm sure you can tinker in other radios to increase the output
power.......BUT TO DOUBLE THE OUTPUT POWER??????
If you need more output power, use an amplifier but don't try to
incinerate your TS-50. 73, tom WB4iUX




****************************************
DX IS!!!! BE A BELIEVER !!!!!!
****************************************


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 95 14:50:42 GMT
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41jvad$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Gizmachi also makes remote control lawn mowers.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:52 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newsflash.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!cs.dal.ca!ccn.cs.dal.ca!ai557
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey A. Harvey)
Subject: Re: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: ccn.cs.dal.ca
Organization: Chebucto Community Net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <41jvad$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 05:12:12 GMT
Lines: 10

Phil Diaz ([e-mail]) wrote:
: i would like...
[about 64 Mbytes snipped, five copies no less]
: ...Chester Bowles (48)...

Phil,
        You **MUST** be running Windows-95!  That is the only
possible explanation for the huge, multiple posting.  What other
software could have such disregard for computer space?   :^)!
-Jeffy


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:31:27 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <41ju8f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: anyone,who,might,know

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   [e-mail]
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:32:28 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <41juac$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   [e-mail]
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!usenet
From: Phil Diaz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 gizmachi and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 25 Aug 1995 07:33:06 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <41jubi$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip198.prc.primenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: Newsgroup:,rec.radio.amateur.antenna

i would like to find any one who might be familiar with and have the
specifications to build a gizmachi antenna. secondly i am looking for a
modification to make the ts-50 hf kenwood rig put out 200 watts. i was
told there is such a mod. would appreciate any info on either one.
thank you very much  phil.   [e-mail]
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
>
>      (Earliest articles...)
>      (Earlier articles...)
>
>    * Re: G5RV antenna inquiry. - Curt Phillips (38)
>         o [e-mail] (28)
>    * Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN - Steve Ellington (43)
>         o Steve Ellington (43)
>    * Re: What is a WINDOM antenna ? - Ted Zateslo (12)
>         o Steve Ellington (26)
>    *  Experience with SGC ?
>         o Mark G. Salyzyn (33)
>         o [e-mail] (26)
>    * Re: Baluns, Should they be used? Conclusions!!! - Jim Wooddell
>      (17)
>    *  SWR - how good is good????????
>         o Jim Wooddell (56)
>         o [e-mail] (30)
>    * RE:BNC - Jim Wooddell (7)
>         o Ted Viens (22)
>    * Re: GAP Verticals - Tom Skelton (59)
>         o Grant Youngman (22)
>    * Re: baluns, should they b - [e-mail] (19)
>         o W8JI Tom (37)
>    * Re: HELP! R7 Tuning? - PeterJS (16)
>         o [e-mail] (19)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - W8JI Tom (15)
>         o Ted Viens (26)
>    * Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems? - LarryFinch
>      (54)
>    *  What BNC means ?
>         o PTracy (12)
>         o W. Chew (32)
>              + WB3U (11)
>         o Joe Pfeuffer (10)
>         o Murray Kelly (11)
>         o Butch Magee (7)
>    * EZNEC G5RV Model? - "George L. Hiscox" (11)
>    * How good is an antenna????? - Dave Kirkby (51)
>         o [e-mail] (35)
>         o [e-mail] (16)
>    * What BNC means ? - Muenzler, Kevin (23)
>    * JPS ANC-4 antenna noise phasing unit - [e-mail]
>      (12)
>    * Program To generate tests for General class theory ? - BUDDY10
>      (4)
>    * 1000 KHz Length - Jim Wooddell (28)
>    * Re: What BNC means ? - Jim Wooddell (53)
>         o Ian G3SEK (29)
>    * Re: SWR - how good is good???????? - Jim Wooddell (47)
>    * Re: SWR how good is good?????? - Peter Somlo (16)
>    * Small Loop Antenna Design (ARRL Antenna Handbook) - Joe
>      Pfeuffer (10)
>    * Antenna Design Engineer Position - Steve Jarvis (12)
>    * **FS** HF Log Periodic antenna,tower&rotator - spam (18)
>         o WB3U (6)
>              + WB3U (21)
>                   + [e-mail] (11)
>    * Hull 5150 ssb tranceiver - [e-mail] (5)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Re: MFJ "no matter what warranty", what a deal? - Joe Pfeuffer
>      (16)
>         o The Great Pumpkin (28)
>    * Velocity factors needed - The Great Pumpkin (18)
>    * RE: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #364 - Hansen, James K (FL40 (33)
>    *  Baluns, Should they be used?
>         o Roy Lewallen (18)
>              + W8JI Tom (21)
>         o Gary Coffman (44)
>    * Quadrifiler Antenna - JKenny809 (8)
>    * KT-34XA windload? - Juha Kupiainen (5)
>    * (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73 - Thomas J. Farish (20)
>         o [e-mail] (7)
>    * How do you feed HF multiband quad? - Mike, KN6IS (20)
>    * (none) - Robert Adams (2)
>    * RE: quad building - D.Ray East (10)
>    * 1.5 Ghz Quadrifilar Antenns - Howard Udoff (12)
>    * Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS - Roy Lewallen (25)
>    * Alpha delta sloper directionality ? - Pat Wright (2)
>    * Mounting of VHF/UHF Antennas - Mark Riley (49)
>    * Re: 20/40M mobile vertical question/problems - Butch Magee (8)
>    * Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point? -
>      Kevin Shea (25)
>    * Re: HF Log Periodic Beams - Curt Phillips (25)
>    * RE: Government Restricts Internet!! - Luke Hamaty (2)
>    * Looking for HF Vertical antenna project for HF nautical band -
>      [e-mail] (5)
>    * Best Vertical HF Antenna ?? - WB3U (46)
>    * Re: Antenna/coil design program - BUDDY10 (8)
>    * Aircraft control cable for dipole? - Patrick Tatro (10)
>         o WB3U (11)
>    * Re: RE: 70' Rohn Crank-up and Fold-over Tower, need info -
>      Chester Bowles (48)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!dialup53.azstarnet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Mandaville)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 40 mb antenna in limited space?????
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 19:24:44 +0600
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41is2i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup53.azstarnet.com


> there a cheaper alternative to one of these?

You've mentioned the cheapest of all, and that's the one to try first if
single-band operation will suffice:  Just bend the ends off to the sides
as space allows, trying to keep away from attic wiring and other metal.
The middle section will do most of the radiating in any case.  Other
options: Use loading coils to electrically lengthen your 40-ft wire (but
probably won't be  much better than the bent dipole)  or:  Treat the 40-ft
dipole an a non-resonant radiatior and feet it in the middle with latter
line from the balanced output of an antenna tuner.  Then you could work 40
and higher bands with the one antenna.  73  Jim, KG5KP


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:48:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BillV21572)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 40 mb antenna in limited space?????
Date: 25 Aug 1995 12:43:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41kuis$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hey Jim,

Thanks for your response to my post.  I already have a great 10 mb dipole
in the attic (SWR 1.15:1) fed with coax from my shack in the basement up
to the attic over the second floor.  Since my novice priviledges (and my
pre-WARC Kenwood TS-520S) limit me to 80, 40, and 10 meters, I had been
thinking of putting up some sort of 40 mb wire antenna in the attic.  Your
comment about single-band operation has got me thinking though, I
shouldn't neglect having something to use on 80 meters too, as long as I'm
up there (the attic) anyway and antenna construction weather isn't that
bad right now.  As I see it, I have several options.  Would you be able to
advise me on which one you think would be the best compromise?

a.)  Use an antenna tuner on my current 10 mb dipole for the 40 and 80 mb
also?
b.)  Put up a 40 foot dipole and use the antenna tuner to get on 40 and 80
meters?
c.)  Any other suggestions to get both 40 and 80 meters too?

Can you also suggest a reasonably cheap antenna tuner for 200 watts or
less?  Any experience with the inexpensive MFJ-901B "Versa tuner''? (55
bucks, about as cheap as I've seen.)  Although I'm not crazy about this
idea, I might not have any other choice.

I really appreciate the advice.  Thanks alot,

Sincerely,
Bill


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!sprite165.azstarnet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Jim Mandaville)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 40 mb antenna in limited space?????
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 12:47:46 +0600
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41kuis$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite165.azstarnet.com

In article <41kuis$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(BillV21572) wrote:


>
> a.)  Use an antenna tuner on my current 10 mb dipole for the 40 and 80 mb
> also?
> b.)  Put up a 40 foot dipole and use the antenna tuner to get on 40 and 80
> meters?
> c.)  Any other suggestions to get both 40 and 80 meters too?

The 10 m dipole would be too short to work well on 40 or 80 even with
ladder line and a tuner.  I would suggest just putting the longest dipole
you can up there, with ends bent to make maximum use of space, and feeding
it with window line and a tuner.  That should work on both 40 and 80 and
also on higher bands such as 20, 15 and 10.  I have seen some commercial,
multi-band, shortened dipoles for sale that cover 80 on up with a length
of not much more than 50 feet, but that would cost more money.  Sorry I
don't have much useful experience with antenna tuners.  I would however
suggest getting one with a power rating well in excess of your immediate
needs.  Used ones can be pretty cheap. And for window or ladder line make
sure, of course, that it has a balanced output.  Good luck.  I'm about to
move to a new house with antenna restrictions, so I'll be facing the same
problems soon!  73  Jim, KG5KP.


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!globe.indirect.com!slip171.indirect.com!tracker
From: [e-mail] (Mark Saunders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 40 mb antenna in limited space?????
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995 09:55:05 LOCAL
Organization: Amateur Radio Station KJ7BS
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41is2i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip171.indirect.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #1]

Hi Bill,

I've been following this thread and have a few comments for you.

First, the idea someone gave you of using a 40M dipole center fed with 450 Ohm
ladder line is great.  I too have a small lot, but was able to get an 1/2 wave
40M dipole between 2 trees.  I center fed it with ladder line and worked
80-10M on me TS-520S.

Second,  if you don't mind running several radiating elements in your attic,
try what I call a spider dipole.  It is nothing more than a parallel dipole
with each element separated at the end by about 1 1/2 foot.  I built one for
80, 40 & 20 meters, and with a tuner was able to pick up 15 & 10 meters, too.

Third, be aware if you choose to use a loaded (shortened) dipole, your band
width will be more narrow than a standard length dipole.  This MAY cause
you to miss some weak stations.  I've not had any problems working stations
with a shortened dipole.  If I can't hear them, I can't work them.

Finally, on the tuner, I purchased a used FMJ-948.  It handles 300 watts, does
not have a built-in dummy load, has 30/300 watt selection, cross needle
meeters, supports 2 antennas, is switchable between bypass and tuned modes, it
does have a selection and connection for an external dummy load.  I got mine
for $75 and it was still under warranty, only 3 month old.  KB7VPY, Harry, got
a new rig with a tuner built in and did not need it any more.  Lucky me!

I hope this helps.



Mark Saunders - KJ7BS
Glendale, AZ

INTERNET: [e-mail]
          [e-mail]

Amateur Radio Station - KJ7BS
PACKET:   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aircraft control cable for dipole?
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 95 04:18:10 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41j2us$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Mike Keitz) wrote:

>Use nylon rope rather than polypropylene.  Nylon will last for a long
>time, just one season in the sun can ruin polypropylene.  I don't
>know about polyester.

Polyester (Dacron) supposedly has a much greater resistance to UV than
either nylon or polyproylene.  It's difficult to find, but The Radio
Works does sell various sizes.  They also have a Dacron/Kevlar blend.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aircraft control cable for dipole?
Date: 25 Aug 1995 00:52:37 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <41j6sl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41j2us$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite213.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Mike Keitz) wrote:

>Use nylon rope rather than polypropylene.  Nylon will last for a long time,
>just one season in the sun can ruin polypropylene.  I don't know about
>polyester. [snip]

In Arizona, polypropylenen will last about two months, nylon about six. I haven't tried
polyester, but it's supposed to hold promise.

73, Wes -- N7WS




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!olivea!wetware!nss.mag-net.com!atha!rwa
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aircraft control cable for dipole?
Date: 25 Aug 1995 18:15:42 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <41l40e$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41j2us$[e-mail]> <41j6sl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aupair.cs.athabascau.ca
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #10 (NOV)

Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:

>In Arizona, polypropylene will last about two months, nylon about
>six. I haven't tried polyester, but it's supposed to hold promise.

What do you folks down there use for air?  Must be nasty stuff.  I've
got a 330' span of 3/8" polypropylene hung at 85' supporting an 80m
inverted delta and some other bits.  It's been up for two years now
and there's not a thing wrong with it.  Ditto the 350' span of 1/4"
poly that holds up my 160m loop.  The big trees that I'm using for
supports really whip in high winds, so it's not like this rope is
living on Easy Street.

regards,
Ross ve6pdq
54o 45' N 113o 20' W
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:03 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!ghiscox
From: "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Aircraft control cable for dipole?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41j2us$[e-mail]> <41j6sl$[e-mail]> <41l40e$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 19:47:05 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Lines: 17

I think it might be more a matter of uv radiation than it is air
quality.  I have read about some experiments done on parachute
nylon for the Apollo program.  A surprisingly short exposure to
uv radiation resulted in a 50% reduction in the strength of the
material!

Now if you were going to hang anything up in the air here in the
Los Angeles Basin the air would probably eat it in short order.
I think the guy who brought this topic up is from AZ where the
air is still clean and the sun is strong.

--
| George L. Hiscox                 | Very funny Scotty... Now |
| [e-mail]               | beam down my clothes !!! |
| WA6RIK @ WB6YMH.#socal.ca.usa.na | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aircraft control cable for dipole?
Date: 26 Aug 1995 00:38:54 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <41lqeu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41j2us$[e-mail]> <41j6sl$[e-mail]> <41l40e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite98.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Ross Alexander) wrote:

>What do you folks down there use for air?
[snip]

It's called sunshine <g>. These materials are very susceptible to degradation
due to UV. No worry about mildew tho...
>
>regards,
>Ross ve6pdq
>54o 45' N 113o 20' W
>--
>Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


73, Wes



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aircraft control cable for dipole?
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 12:28:56 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 18

->
->    [e-mail] (Mike Keitz) wrote:
->
-> >Use nylon rope rather than polypropylene.  Nylon will last for a lon
-> >time, just one season in the sun can ruin polypropylene.  I don't
-> >know about polyester.
->
-> Polyester (Dacron) supposedly has a much greater resistance to UV tha
-> either nylon or polyproylene.  It's difficult to find, but The Radio
-> Works does sell various sizes.  They also have a Dacron/Kevlar blend.

    I am using a jute rope on a couple of dipoles I have up here in
    Arizona and they are in fine shape and have been up for over a
    year.  It was cheap and what I had on hand.  Here in Parker, AZ.,
    we get alot of sun!
    Jim, WA6OFT
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Soderling, Greg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Modelling Software
Date: 24 Aug 95 16:39:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <303CABBA@gvnsmtp>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


Has anyone used AWAS for Windows? sold by Artech House.

How does it compare to Elnec, Eznec or Antenna Optimizer.

73 de Greg VE7SOD, Vancouver B.C.


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.cerf.net!ni1.ni.net!xband.ni.net!user
From: [e-mail] (J. L. Blanton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Axial Mode Helix Antenna feeding a Parabola: Focal Point?
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 14:26:53 -0800
Organization: Network Intensive
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41fpom$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xband.ni.net

In article <41fpom$[e-mail]>, Kevin Shea
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> I'm building a backfire helix antenna to feed a 1 meter dish for 1700 MHz
> (weather satellites.)  I found some good articles and I have Kraus's book
> but I haven't been able to figure out where the antenna should be in
> relation to the dish focal point.  I've seen some references to the fact
> that the phase center is not the tip(or end) of the antenna but further
> down.

Several of things you should take into account:

1. The beamwidth of the helix needs to be wide enough to illuminate the
reflector.  This means that the helix should probably be relatively short
(maybe 2 turns or so depending on the focal length).  A side benefit is
that a short helix has a broader bandwidth than a longer helix (if you're
interested in using this setup for any other applications besides weather
satellites).

2. Remember that the sense of circularity will reverse upon reflection
from the dish.

3. Positioning the helix at the focal point shouldn't be too critical.
Allow provisions for adjustment of the feed position and experiment a
little to optimize it.  I'd probably start with the longitudinal center of
the helix at the focal point and work from there.

Best of luck,

Lee Blanton, WA8YBT/6
Temecula, CA


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!dircon!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Julian Maples)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: B&C Coil Whip Radio antenna: 168 -174 mhz
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995 10:09:27 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: The Direct Connection (Call 0181 297 2200 for info)
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <41pclc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ad008.pool.dircon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.38

Does anyone know where I can get one of these for a Pye Pocket Phone
70?



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!DIALix!brisbane.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Murray Kelly)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: baluns, should they b
Date: 27 Aug 1995 23:01:11 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Brisbane, Australia.
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41pqan$mjj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

OK. Here's a wild card. To all those who don't like or need a
balun Ignore this.

If you want to suppress the feed-line radiation. Why not incorporate
the 'choke' effect into the coax itself? Add a little (1-2% ferrite)
into the outer jacket of the cable plastic? A little would go a long way here.

What better way to stop RF currents flowing on the outside 'skin'
of the shield? You can't get any closer to the place where the RF flows
and the cost would be minimal.

Murray Kelly. vk4aok.



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: baluns, should they b
Date: 27 Aug 1995 11:37:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41q3g4$[e-mail]>
References: <41pqan$mjj$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


>If you want to suppress the feed-line radiation. Why not incorporate
>the 'choke' effect into the coax itself? Add a little (1-2% ferrite)
>into the outer jacket of the cable plastic? A little would go a long way
here.

Hi Murray,

I can think of several things that may be potential problems. 1.) The best
mix depends on impedance of the parallel current source 2.) If the "core"
is too long resonance effects take place that can change the impedance and
make things worse 3.) The balun needs to be placed at the most stragic
spot and not randomly distributed 4.) The core material is more effective
when concentrated in one spot

Why not just use a cheap air wound choke?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 15:17:51 GMT
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41fup2$[e-mail]> <41g6ul$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

This thread has been mostly concerned with 50 ohm *resonant* antennas,
particularly relating to the use of choke baluns.  So the point isn't
lost on anyone who came in late, I want to mention that choke baluns
may not be appropriate if the dipole's feedpoint reactance is very
high, such as occurs when using non-resonant lengths.  Under these
conditions, the impedance of the balun may not be sufficient to block
the RF on the shield, and the balun can incur significant loss as a
result of currents flowing through it.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.iii.net!iii2.iii.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Thomas C Sefranek)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 26 Aug 1995 19:19:19 -0400
Organization: iii.net
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <41oa5n$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41brf1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: iii2.iii.net

Time for Tom to step in (it).

Is it too simple, or am I missing something?

A ZERO impedance feed cannot have an exciting voltage node...
with NO excitation voltage there is NO current introduced...
A zero impedance feed refelect PERFECTLY the power applied...

O.K. Tom?  (I know you know this, I'm hoping this help others!)

I Tom (Forest Gump) think it's time to get back to Cecil's
vertical with 1000 SWR...  (Cecil you forgot the ground resistance term!)
(You just can't get it that high [fortunately])

Tom, Cecil say's Gary's mother wears...
(Ducking out the bar room door)


--
Thomas C. J. Sefranek  WA1RHP  Work: 508-425-2200


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.iii.net!iii2.iii.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Thomas C Sefranek)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 26 Aug 1995 19:23:58 -0400
Organization: iii.net
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <41oaee$[e-mail]>
References: <40qikf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: iii2.iii.net

Aw Shucks Roy,
                Now you done it, you posted a factual, helpfull, non-humorous
answer.  Confusing the heck out of us (Gumps).

Personally I like the others better...

I still want dibs on the royalties of the power producing antenna's.

Tom

--
Thomas C. J. Sefranek  WA1RHP  Work: 508-425-2200


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 27 Aug 1995 18:54:38 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <41qf1e$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx08-52.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
;  This thread has been mostly concerned with 50 ohm *resonant* antennas,
;  particularly relating to the use of choke baluns.  So the point isn't
;  lost on anyone who came in late, I want to mention that choke baluns
;  may not be appropriate if the dipole's feedpoint reactance is very
;  high, such as occurs when using non-resonant lengths.  Under these
;  conditions, the impedance of the balun may not be sufficient to block
;  the RF on the shield, and the balun can incur significant loss as a
;  result of currents flowing through it.

True. And "voltage" baluns can be worse yet, since they place an impdance
across the terminals. When the terminal impedance is high, this shunt
balun impedance can be a major cause of loss and/or mismatch.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Ted Viens)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BCB Interference on HF
Date: 25 Aug 1995 05:45:17 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <41jo1d$[e-mail]>
References: <41jbk5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-hou8-14.ix.netcom.com

In <41jbk5$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Elekktron1)
writes:
>
> I have a 70-ft. horizontal antenna strung about 15-20 ft, up between
a
>tree and my roof. The downlead is a 20-guage hook-up wire about 50 ft.
to
>my receiver. The reception is much louder than before when I was using
a
>too-low too short horizontal. The problem is that now I also get a lot
of
>Broadcast band interference-both AM and FM. How can I reduce
this--maybe
>switch to coax for downlead? Use a better grounding system? Right now
I'm
>using a thin wire connected to a cold water pipe. Please share your
ideas
>on this.
----
This is what I did...  First, I bought three little boxes from I. C. E.
Engineering:  a long wire balun, a low pass filter and a BCB bandstop
filter.  Ignoring the rampant discussions of Baluns, I used the long
wire balun to conveniently adapt the antenna to coax.  Inside, I ran
the coax into the VHF low pass filter (cut-off somewhere above 30 mHz)
to remove local FM and TV signals.  Then I run the signal through the
Broadcast Band bandstop filter.  This attenuates the MW locals to near
the strong DX signals.  Now most signals are near the same level, AGC
works well and no local leviathan signals are mixing from DC to
microwave...
--
Bye...  Ted..
Deep in the Heart of the Armpits of Houston, Texas...


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Elekktron1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BCB Interference on HF
Date: 24 Aug 1995 22:13:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41jbk5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Elekktron1)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

 I have a 70-ft. horizontal antenna strung about 15-20 ft, up between a
tree and my roof. The downlead is a 20-guage hook-up wire about 50 ft. to
my receiver. The reception is much louder than before when I was using a
too-low too short horizontal. The problem is that now I also get a lot of
Broadcast band interference-both AM and FM. How can I reduce this--maybe
switch to coax for downlead? Use a better grounding system? Right now I'm
using a thin wire connected to a cold water pipe. Please share your ideas
on this.


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:12 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ddi2.digital.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Russ Leblanc)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BCB Interference on HF
Date: 27 Aug 1995 18:29:00 GMT
Organization: Hurricane DX Club
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <41qdhc$[e-mail]>
References: <41jbk5$[e-mail]> <41jo1d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @204.215.242.151
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.90.4

In article <41jo1d$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ted Viens) says:
>
>In <41jbk5$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Elekktron1)
>writes:
>>
>> I have a 70-ft. horizontal antenna strung about 15-20 ft, up between

<snip>


>This is what I did...  First, I bought three little boxes from I. C. E.
>Engineering:  a long wire balun, a low pass filter and a BCB bandstop
>filter.  Ignoring the rampant discussions of Baluns, I used the long
>wire balun to conveniently adapt the antenna to coax.  Inside, I ran
>the coax into the VHF low pass filter (cut-off somewhere above 30 mHz)
>to remove local FM and TV signals.  Then I run the signal through the
>Broadcast Band bandstop filter.  This attenuates the MW locals to near
>the strong DX signals.  Now most signals are near the same level, AGC
>works well and no local leviathan signals are mixing from DC to
>microwave...

Likewise not to start a balun argument <g>, you can do the above three
for quite cheaply with a handful of cheap inductors, caps, a ferrite
core, and some wire.  The plans for the filters appear in the "Using
Your Phone Line as an Antenna" post that frequently appears on rec.radio.
shortwave, and John Doty has posted plans for a simple transformer for
matching a longwire to coax, likewise on r.s.s.  I can look them up
on my hard drive and post them for you if you'd like.  I live 1 mile
from one AM tower, and 2 miles away from another, and the highpass
filter works fine on killing the overload/intermod problems.

Going back to the dials,

Russ


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:13 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!news
From: Your_Name_Here <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 01:06:13 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspkts.spk.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 22

Hello.

I'm using the HF6V and the AP8A.  I have them both elevated approximately
15 feet, using a simple two per band 1/4 wave radial system.

My ground stinks here (rocky)...I've found that raising the verticals
really helped me.  In my experience, the AP8A outperformed the HF6V. The
HF6V APPEARS to hold up better in the wind, but really neither have ever
caused me troubles.  I do read that the GAPs buckle in the center...they
require extensive guying.

I phase the two together and get multihop performance comparable to my
friends (three blocks away, same terrain) 80' tower and three element
wide spaced 20 meter beam.


God, I hope that you don't have power lines near by, 'cause if you do,
your ears will cringe from the high noise!


Marc



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!octel.com!usenet
From: Peter Slocum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: 25 Aug 1995 15:32:42 GMT
Organization: Octel Communications Corp
Lines: 83
Message-ID: <41kqeq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: guinness.eng.octel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
        boundary="-------------------------------254961388113432"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-URL: news:[e-mail]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------------------254961388113432
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Marc,

Can you email me directly on the attached.
I tried to reply to you but e-mail to "Your_Name_Here
<[e-mail]>" gets understandably returned
as not deliverable.

Thanks ... Peter, KE6VMJ
[e-mail]

============================================================


Your_Name_Here <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Hello.
>
>I'm using the HF6V and the AP8A.  I have them both elevated approximately
>15 feet, using a simple two per band 1/4 wave radial system.
>
>My ground stinks here (rocky)...I've found that raising the verticals
>really helped me.  In my experience, the AP8A outperformed the HF6V. The
>HF6V APPEARS to hold up better in the wind, but really neither have ever
>caused me troubles.  I do read that the GAPs buckle in the center...they
>require extensive guying.
>
>I phase the two together and get multihop performance comparable to my
>friends (three blocks away, same terrain) 80' tower and three element
>wide spaced 20 meter beam.
>
>
>God, I hope that you don't have power lines near by, 'cause if you do,
>your ears will cringe from the high noise!
>
>
>Marc
>


---------------------------------254961388113432
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain

From: Your_Name_Here <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 01:06:13 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Hello.

I'm using the HF6V and the AP8A.  I have them both elevated approximately
15 feet, using a simple two per band 1/4 wave radial system.

My ground stinks here (rocky)...I've found that raising the verticals
really helped me.  In my experience, the AP8A outperformed the HF6V. The
HF6V APPEARS to hold up better in the wind, but really neither have ever
caused me troubles.  I do read that the GAPs buckle in the center...they
require extensive guying.

I phase the two together and get multihop performance comparable to my
friends (three blocks away, same terrain) 80' tower and three element
wide spaced 20 meter beam.


God, I hope that you don't have power lines near by, 'cause if you do,
your ears will cringe from the high noise!


Marc


---------------------------------254961388113432--


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!psuvm!bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: 25 Aug 1995 01:45:25 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41j9vl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs3-11.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jack:

I have had an AP8 up for over five years in the ice, snow, heat, etc with
no problems and pretty good performance (for a vertical).

73




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!w2xo.pgh.pa.us!durham
From: [e-mail] (Jim Durham)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: 25 Aug 1995 15:47:32 GMT
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <41krak$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: w2xo.pgh.pa.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

WB3U ([e-mail]) wrote:

(Questions about commercial verticals snipped..no experience with these)

Just an overall comment about verticals. Anthing which reduces the current
flowing into the ground system is usually good (excepting ohmic resistance!).
Center or top feeding/loading may accomplish this. The idea is that the
ground system is not perfect but has ohmic losses. More current=more loss.
The current in the antenna does the radiating. Raising the current maximum
higher off the ground by top loading does two things..keeps down the ohmic
losses in the ground system and gets the radiated field up away from
lossy stuff like dirt, trees, etc.

: Finally, I seem to remember reading about a trick concerning laying
: radials in the ground.  It had something to with with the use of a
: certain tool (edger?) to make the job easier.  Anyone know?

This may be overkill for a ham installation, but the way I have put in
radials for AM broadcast towers is with a subsoiler, a kind of plow that
has a narrow blade that slits the soil, ending in a larger "bulb" that
plows an underground "tunnel" of sorts (maybe 2 inches in diameter. You
weld or fasten a pipe to the back of the subsoiler, bending the bottom
of the pipe toward the rear and cutting it off even with the "bulb" part
of the plow. Then you feed the wire in the top of the pipe. You can rig
up a bracket to hold a wire spool on the tractor. It lays a radial slick
as can be. A small stake to fasten the end of the wire to is driven at
the center of the radial system (under the antenna center). I used an
old '32 Ford Tractor. I guess a large garder tractor would work. Doing
it by hand would be rough work!

-Jim Durham




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.netins.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: 26 Aug 1995 02:22:06 GMT
Organization: INS Information Services, Des Moines, IA USA
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ins.netins.net

Since I have only ever used verticals, (and a few odd dipoles, zepps and random length
wires) I have an opinion on this one! One of the best verticals I ever used was an onl
....oops...I meant old Hygain 18V or whatever they call their all band vertical with the
little coil at the base. It was free from a friend of mine who took pity on a poor, new
novice with no antenna. I stuck it in the ground so that it was just 5-6 inches from the
rain gutters on the house. (When we had no wind, otherwise it touched the gutter at times)
That was before I had the concept of "radials" quite figured out so I grounded it to a
8 INCH (wow!) pipe in the ground. Then I hooked up my 75 watt Hallicrafters HT-40 xmtr
and Heath reciever. On 40meter novice cw band in the summer, at night, one of the first
stations I worked was PY8NBO. Of course this kind of thing can only be done by a 19 year
old novice. Now that I am older and wiser and have a rig with more computers built in
than the old Apollo spacecraft I can prove that IT CAN'T BE DONE1111
Surely there must be some hams out there with an even better story than this. I would
love to hear it!!!Really!
73 from WB0FDJ


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 95 15:36:11 GMT
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41ncl8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Just wanted to mention that I've found a location for the dipole that
will get me through the winter, so I've won a reprieve (until spring).

Many thanks to everyone who posted advice and sent me e-mail.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: 26 Aug 1995 10:55:36 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41ncl8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I always thought the best HF vertical was the Hygain Hytower. I always
envied people that had them. But all verticals really need a good ground
system. The ground independent verticals never seem to work as well as a
conventional vertical the same size with a modest ground. I have a ground
mounted top loaded 35 foot vertical with 80 radials on 80 meters. It ties
my dipole (at 130 feet) into Europe from the Atlanta area. Think about
that!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:18 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Martin)
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Mr Usenet Himself)
Nntp-Posting-Host: world.std.com
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: WK1V
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995 17:35:37 GMT
Lines: 31

[e-mail] sed:

:>...One of the best verticals I ever used was an onl....oops...I meant old Hygain
:>18V or whatever they call their all band vertical with the little coil at the base...

Yup, that was THE antenna.  I used an 18V from 1981 till 1983 and achieved
WAS/CW with it.  It was a great antenna.  I even by-passed the coil and used a
transmatch in the shack and it still worked greatly.

The only radials I had for my 18V was my double-bazooka dipole.  The antenna
was installed on a 50' pushup mast...should have kept the thing but I went to a
mini-quad...remember the HQ-1?  Worked great on 6...oops I'm digressing...then
I went to my current Rohn 25G and a tri-band Mosely TA-33.  Sure wish I could
put my tower up...I'm using an R5 right now and a G5RV.

I really like the R5.  My only problem now is I live in the city.  The noise is
horrendous at times so I switch back and forth between the R5 and the G5RV.  My
DSP-59+ helps a lot too...mainly on cw...it is mediocre (sp?) on fone.

My $.02 worth.

Cheers & 73


--------------------------------------------------------------
|Jim Martin, WK1V              |  I speak for no one...Not   |
|Lowell, Massachusetts         |       even for myself!      |
|USAF (Ret)ained               | #include "std_disclaimer.h" |
|ex: KA5MWD/N1CLS/KB1LW/HL9ZF  |   Intentionally Left Blank  |
--------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (bill davidson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best VHF antenna analyzer ; archives
Date: 24 Aug 1995 20:43:28 -0600
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organi[sz]ation
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <41jdcg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx.cs.du.edu


I'm sure there must be an archive somewhere with volumes on the various
antenna tuning gadgets out there.  Can someone point me at them?

Oh, while you're here, if you have a favorite way to tune & test primarily
2m antennas, I'd love to hear of it.  Occasionally 440 & higher comes up
as well.

Thanks in advance.  /s/ Bill



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best VHF antenna analyzer ; archives
Date: 25 Aug 1995 16:03:49 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <41ks95$[e-mail]>
References: <41jdcg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>Oh, while you're here, if you have a favorite way to tune & test primarily
>2m antennas, I'd love to hear of it.

Bill,

Whereas it makes a lot of sense to use a antenna analyzer for HF (the impe-
dance of your antenna is affected by the surroundings) there is not
much point in using anything than a SWR meter on VHF.

My favoured way of tuning VHF antennas is to get a good and accurate
description and to adhere closely to the dimensions given. The SWR
meter is really only needed to check if something went wrong. Remember
that no analyzer tells you if the antenna achieves the desired gain.

73, Moritz DL5UH






From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!senior.nectec.or.th!news.mahidol.ac.th!mucc!srwhm
From: [e-mail] (Wanna Hemasuk - SRNS)
Newsgroups: alt.cellular-phone-tech,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,alt.radio.digital,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cell Phones & RFI affecting computer systems?
Followup-To: alt.cellular-phone-tech,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,alt.radio.digital,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 25 Aug 1995 15:18:56 GMT
Organization: Mahidol University, Thailand
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <41kpl0$[e-mail]>
References: <41a84t$[e-mail]> <41b9hb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.14.162.1
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net alt.cellular-phone-tech:5837 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:10196 alt.radio.digital:988 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13312

LarryFinch ([e-mail]) wrote:
: >Hi,
: > Does anyone have information on Cell Phone RFI, and how it might affect
: large
: >computer systems utilizing VLSI and high density SMT designs?  There was
: >
: If it is truly a cellular repeater it is very unlikely to be the problem.
: Cells are low power -- typically 100 watts or less. More than a few feet
: away the energy level will be lower than what comes out of the microwave
: in the cafeteria.

        I use 1 watt 900mhz cellular and 5 watts 145mhz HAM handy 2-3 hours
 a day for 5 years. Dose anyone have information about eyes and brain
effect .

thanks
wanna H.
--
        *************************************************************
        * Wanna Hemasuk      Siriraj Hospital      Bangkok Thailand *
        * [e-mail]               Mahidol University *
        *************************************************************



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:21 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.ptd.net!news
From: Dave Skarbowski <[e-mail]>
Subject: Computer model these for me please...
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: cs1-15.hol.ptd.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Master)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: ProLog - PenTeleData, Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 13:35:36 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; Linux 1.2.1 i486)
X-Url: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Lines: 26

I presently have a full size 75 meter dipole fed with 450 ohm line at 65 feet
broadside to Europe.  I can easly work into most of Europe using 1 kw and
listening on a 600 ft beverage.  I'd like to see if a delta loop or a ground
plane verticle (both full size, of course) would out perform the dipole.  Could
some with a good modeling program help me out?  I have an old version of
mininec that doesn't deal with antennas close to the ground (or so I'm told)
too well.  Here's the comparison I'd like:

1.  Dipole at 65 feet.
2.  Elevated ground plane with four radials; feedpoint at 15 feet.  Radials
droop to 10 feet.
3.  Delta loop; equalateral, bottom up at 15 feet, feed at bottom corner and/or
feed half way up one side.

I'm interested in radiation at 20 deg above horz (or at the angle YOU think is
best for DX...lots of discussion on this..).  My ground would be considered
poor here in eastern PA.  And, oh yeah, I'm only interested in 75/80 meters.
DX on the higher bands just isn't much of a challange :)

I know this is a tall order but TIA.

Any other comments on these antennas and their performance is definetly
welcomed.  After all the DX season is almost here!

Dave, n2fam



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:22 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!ghiscox
From: "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Computer model these for me please...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 17:21:51 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Lines: 18

W7EL (who reads and posts to this newsgroup) offers an easy to
use and economical version of NEC-2 called EZNEC that will run on
a 386 or better PC with a numeric processor.  His email is
[e-mail] if you want to talk to him about obtaining your
own copy of the software.  It's VERY absorbing if you like to
play with antenna parameters.  I would like to take on your
project myself, but work doesn't permit it right now.

73 and good luck!

George

--
| George L. Hiscox                 | Very funny Scotty... Now |
| [e-mail]               | beam down my clothes !!! |
| WA6RIK @ WB6YMH.#socal.ca.usa.na | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!sislnews.csc.ti.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Copper Tube "J-Pole"
Date: 27 Aug 1995 16:09:12 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <41q5b8$[e-mail]>
References: <41etrr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mcarson.sc.ti.com
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.09

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (STEPHEN KING) writes:
>I have a copper tube "J-Pole" dual band antenna for 2 meter/70cm.
>
>I would like to know what the maximum power and what the gain is for
>this type of antenna.
>
>73s
>KE6WEZ
>---

Not meaning to change the subject here, but I have a question regarding your
2m/70cm j-pole design.

Does this antenna require two feedlines (i.e. 1 for 2m and another for 70cm)?
If not, would you mind posting the plans?  I have several plans I've
accumulated over time but none of them address combining the two feedlines
into one.  Guess I could use a duplexer to accomplish this -- but only if it's
necessary.

Thanks and 73
Mitchell KC5MKW

Std. disclaimer:  I speak only for myself.



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Discone Mounted Upside Down?
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 23:54:56 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41oo77$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <41oo77$[e-mail]>
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13345 rec.radio.scanner:31229 alt.radio.scanner:21056

Gary,
There are many types of conical antennas, the discone being an example of
a very efficient broadband conical vertical.  As you correcty point out,
a discone has the disk at the top!  Several manufacturers, such as TCI
and Granger sell cone antennas that may match the brief description you
provided.  Their theory of operation differs from the discone, and they
are probably somewhat less efficient.

73!
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]

On 27 Aug 1995 [e-mail] wrote:

> Hi
>
> I recently drove past a building in town with what looks like a discone on
> the roof.  It appears to be mounted upside down.  The 'disk' being at the
> bottom and the open end of the cone at the top.
>
> I'm just curious whether this has any effect on performance.
>
> ..Gary


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Discone Mounted Upside Down?
Followup-To: rec.radio.scanner
Date: 27 Aug 1995 03:19:03 GMT
Organization: Cyberstore Systems, Inc.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <41oo77$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: yvr-ppp-44.cyberstore.ca
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.09
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13352 rec.radio.scanner:31244 alt.radio.scanner:21060

Hi

I recently drove past a building in town with what looks like a discone on
the roof.  It appears to be mounted upside down.  The 'disk' being at the
bottom and the open end of the cone at the top.

I'm just curious whether this has any effect on performance.

..Gary


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!gatech!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.sas.ab.ca!fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca!morganp
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Does anyone have a design for an antenna rotator?
Date: 26 Aug 1995 04:21:20 GMT
Organization: Edmonton Freenet, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41m7g0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.3]

Does anyone have a design for a rotator?

--
73 & ttyl     Morgan Patterson
       \\///  Internet: [e-mail]
       (o o)  Ham Radio: VE6MRP
        (_)   "Your Computer will self destruct in..5..4..3..2..1..KABOOM!!!"
----oOO-----OOo---------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!satisfied.apocalypse.org!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Experience with SGC ?
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 95 01:39:11 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <3vch53$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41ad0u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41eh4i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1g.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>I have a metaphysical question that I don't know the answer to:

Metaphysics yet? Well, where is the dividing line between "marketing hype"
and just plain old BS? On your two inches of wire, if each day you cut it
in half, how long will it take for there to be no more wire?    regards.


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!sanjuan.amtsgi.bc.ca!salmon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Half-square antenna performance?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 12:34:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
References: <418nog$[e-mail]>
Lines: 29


J>I am looking to improve my 40 meter DX sig to Europe.  Am considering a
J>half-square. I have several 55 ft pine trees to support it.  Any
J>experience with this type of antenna?

You only need 2 trees to support it.  I have one built, I just have to
get one end up in the air.  I got my Dacron rope yesterday, so maybe
this weekend.   Do you have the formulas for the lengths?  I'll give
them to ya anyways...

                   492/F
        ------------------------------------- <----feedpoint.  Centre of
        |                                   |                  the coax
        |                                   |                  goes to
        |                                   | 240/F            the
        |                                   |                  horiz.
        |                                   |                  wire.
        |                                   |

I hung lead weights from the vertical wires.

     ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
     ║    Clinton Peebles  VE7-KNL                          ║
     ║    SYSOP - Salmon Siding Saloon BBS - 604-357-9942   ║
     ║    Internet: [e-mail]        ║
     ║    Packet Radio: VE7KNL@VE7CW.#SEBC.BC.CAN.NOAM      ║
     ╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ We're all just crash-test dummies...


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:27 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: TSKELTON <>
Subject: Re: Half-square antenna performance?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To:  (TSKELTON)
Organization: AT&T Global Information Solutions, Columbia SC
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.0 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <418nog$[e-mail]><[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 19:21:38 GMT
Lines: 62


==========Clinton Peebles, 8/24/95==========

J>I am looking to improve my 40 meter DX sig to Europe.  Am considering a
J>half-square. I have several 55 ft pine trees to support it.  Any
J>experience with this type of antenna?

You only need 2 trees to support it.  I have one built, I just have to
get one end up in the air.  I got my Dacron rope yesterday, so maybe
this weekend.   Do you have the formulas for the lengths?  I'll give
them to ya anyways...

                   492/F
        ------------------------------------- <----feedpoint.  Centre of
        |                                   |                  the coax
        |                                   |                  goes to
        |                                   | 240/F            the
        |                                   |                  horiz.
        |                                   |                  wire.
        |                                   |

I hung lead weights from the vertical wires.

     ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
     ║    Clinton Peebles  VE7-KNL                          ║
  <del>
-------------------


I've finally gotten around to learning ELNEC (v 3), and this is one
of the first antennas I've been modeling.  The numbers Clinton showed
are great to start.  Using ELNEC, making a single pass that showed the
resonant freq around 7.3 MHz when I calculated it with 7.000 MHz, and
then lengthening the vertical wires by 1 foot and the horizontal phasing
line by 2 feet gave me the following SWR vs freq values (YES, I KNOW
SWR IS NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT INDICATOR OF ANTENNA
PERFORMANCE BUT MY DESIGN GOAL WAS TO HAVE A FLAT MATCH
TO 50 OHM COAX IN ADDITION TO THE PATTERN/TAKEOFF ANGLE):

7.000 MHz, SWR 1.87
7.050 MHz, SWR1.18
7.100 MHz, SWR 1.35
7.150 MHz, SWR 2.10
7.200 MHz, SWR 3.12
7.250 MHz, SWR 4.44
7.300 MHz, SWR 6.05

It looks like the 2:1 SWR bandwidth is about 150 Khz on 40 meters.  I modeled
it with the ends of the vertical elements 10 ft off the ground over 'real
ground'.  The gain was around 5.5 dBi (don't start that thread again, pse)
with
a take-off angle of less than 20 degrees.

I will be constructing this antenna in the next couple of weekends and will
report what I find.  Since the antenna in my previous QTH (we just moved)
was a 2 element Cushcraft 402CD at 75 ft, I'm trying not to have my
expectations set too high..

If anyone DOES have some performance comparisons (A vs B, not just
'it worked' or 'I could work Europe with 50 watts) please let us know.
thanks!



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:28 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: Tom WB4iUX <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Half-square antenna performance?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (TSKELTON)
Organization: ATT GIS
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.0 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <418nog$[e-mail]><[e-mail]><[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 19:46:34 GMT
Lines: 73


==========TSKELTON, 8/25/95==========

==========Clinton Peebles, 8/24/95==========

J>I am looking to improve my 40 meter DX sig to Europe.  Am considering a
J>half-square. I have several 55 ft pine trees to support it.  Any
J>experience with this type of antenna?

You only need 2 trees to support it.  I have one built, I just have to
get one end up in the air.  I got my Dacron rope yesterday, so maybe
this weekend.   Do you have the formulas for the lengths?  I'll give
them to ya anyways...

                   492/F
        ------------------------------------- <----feedpoint.  Centre of
        |                                   |                  the coax
        |                                   |                  goes to
        |                                   | 240/F            the
        |                                   |                  horiz.
        |                                   |                  wire.
        |                                   |

I hung lead weights from the vertical wires.

     ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
     ║    Clinton Peebles  VE7-KNL                          ║
  <del>
-------------------


I've finally gotten around to learning ELNEC (v 3), and this is one
of the first antennas I've been modeling.  The numbers Clinton showed
are great to start.  Using ELNEC, making a single pass that showed the
resonant freq around 7.3 MHz when I calculated it with 7.000 MHz, and
then lengthening the vertical wires by 1 foot and the horizontal phasing
line by 2 feet gave me the following SWR vs freq values (YES, I KNOW
SWR IS NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT INDICATOR OF ANTENNA
PERFORMANCE BUT MY DESIGN GOAL WAS TO HAVE A FLAT MATCH
TO 50 OHM COAX IN ADDITION TO THE PATTERN/TAKEOFF ANGLE):

7.000 MHz, SWR 1.87
7.050 MHz, SWR1.18
7.100 MHz, SWR 1.35
7.150 MHz, SWR 2.10
7.200 MHz, SWR 3.12
7.250 MHz, SWR 4.44
7.300 MHz, SWR 6.05

It looks like the 2:1 SWR bandwidth is about 150 Khz on 40 meters.  I modeled
it with the ends of the vertical elements 10 ft off the ground over 'real
ground'.  The gain was around 5.5 dBi (don't start that thread again, pse)
with
a take-off angle of less than 20 degrees.

I will be constructing this antenna in the next couple of weekends and will
report what I find.  Since the antenna in my previous QTH (we just moved)
was a 2 element Cushcraft 402CD at 75 ft, I'm trying not to have my
expectations set too high..

If anyone DOES have some performance comparisons (A vs B, not just
'it worked' or 'I could work Europe with 50 watts) please let us know.
thanks!

---------
Sorry ya'll...my system crashed when this was sending.. my .sig
didn't get sent ... 73, Tom WB4iUX

will it work this time??? :

****************************************
DX IS!!!! BE A BELIEVER !!!!!!
****************************************


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Half-square antenna performance?
Date: 26 Aug 1995 10:51:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41nce0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

> The gain was around 5.5 dBi (don't start that thread again, pse)
>with a take-off angle of less than 20 degrees.

Tom,

Gee that's not much gain. What does a dipole the height over the same soil
model? Where is it fed at?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (tim woo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #370
Date: 25 Aug 95 16:27:55 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9508250955.A20271-0100000@netcom21>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

unsubscribe Ham-Ant [e-mail]





From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:35 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!olivea!bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP! R7 Tuning?
Date: 25 Aug 1995 01:43:05 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <41j9r9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41ebib$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs3-11.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

I had a simillar problem which was corrected by replacing the 30 meter
trap.

73

#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!express.ior.com!news
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: 25 Aug 1995 01:45:25 GMT
Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41j9vl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs3-11.ior.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jack:

I have had an AP8 up for over five years in the ice, snow, heat, etc with
no problems and pretty good performance (for a vertical).

73


#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!camco!sonoma!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-ma
From: [e-mail] (Cyronwode)
Newsgroups: alt.christnet.sex,alt.polyamory,alt.religion.sexuality,alt.sex.swingers,alt.sex.wizards,alt.sex,alt.sex.safe
Subject: Re: Coercing women into forgoing safe sex procedures
Date: 23 Aug 1995 12:46:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41fm1h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Cyronwode)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: bunker alt.polyamory:17791 alt.religion.sexuality:2659 alt.sex.swingers:2291 alt.sex.wizards:20607 alt.sex:120262 alt.sex.safe:725

[e-mail] (Lutz Heinrichs) writes:

>Andrew Laurence <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>teelok <[e-mail]> writes:

>>>Why do so many people say HIV virus.  The V stands for virus.

>>For the same reason they say UPC code, ATM machine, and PIN number.
Because
>>they're imprecise.

>dont forget the very popular ASCII code...

>- Lutz -

or the La Brea Tar Pits...or The KLa Fonda Hotel.

catherine
#! rnews 0
Path:   bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!news.bmi.net!camco!sonoma!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!wcern
From: [e-mail] (William Cernansky)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.sex,alt.sex.services,alt.sex.brothels,soc.men,soc.women,soc.culture.israel,alt.current-events.net-abuse
Subject: Re: !SICK BIBLICAL VALUES: Here's some more!
Followup-To: alt.censorship,alt.sex,alt.sex.services,alt.sex.brothels,soc.men,soc.women,soc.culture.israel,alt.current-events.net-abuse
Date: 23 Aug 1995 16:56:17 GMT
Organization: Primenet [phone]
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <41fmjh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <415k79$[e-mail]> <418fiu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr1.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: bunker alt.censorship:29128 alt.sex:120263 alt.sex.services:3662 soc.men:103787 soc.women:109534 soc.culture.israel:11769 alt.current-events.net-abu

[ONCE AGAIN, followups removed from alt.homosexual and
alt.politics.homosexuality]

Steven Etienne Buehler ([e-mail]) wrote:
: [e-mail] (William Cernansky) wrote:
: >I get really tired of hearing the following diatribes:
: >    1) "If you want proof of God, just look around you."
: You'll note that I have not used such "diatribe" in this discussion.

I was referring to a general collection of diatribes (hoping to avoid
getting hit with one of them again by a followup - pre-answering the
followups, if you will), not you specifically.

: >       [I have read the Bible and I understand that it is chock-full
: >        of scientific errors. It contradicts itself in many places,
: >        and describes the eradication of over 20 million people by the
: >        Jews alone. It describes and demands sexism. I understand PLENTY.]
: The Bible makes no claim to be a science textbook, nor should it be
: read as such.  I frequently hear the "contradiction" concerning a
: round vessel for the Temple whose measurements do not exactly conform
: to the mathematical formula for diameter relative to circumference.
: Big deal.

Well, since the Bible is the supposedly the word of the Supreme and
Perfect Being (who, um, admitted that the great flood was a mistake.. oh
dang, so admittedly imperfect), any inaccuracy or downright falsehood
makes the entire text SUSPECT.

: >       [Look, you can't prove that the Bible is the Holy Word using its own
: >        claims that it's the word of God. That's like me saying "I am God.
: >        Of course I must be, because I am God and I say so."]

: But you believe, I assume, that your best friend is your best friend
: because he says so.  Do I see a double standard?

Who says I believe that? I judge my friends on my own terms. My best
friends are my best friends because *I* say so. Would that Christians let
me choose my path so easily!

: >No other religious group outside of Judeo-Christendom has ever offended
: >me. I guess that's because the Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists don't demand
: >that my government pick my religion for me. Thank Odin for that.

: On the contrary, I have great umbrage that the government chooses to
: subsidize and give freedom for every religion to be expressed in the
: public arena *except* Christianity.  A simple review of the ACLU
: guidelines could present that very easily.

So ACLU guidelines specifically deny Christianity from publicly funded
institutions but allow, say, Muslims to force their public schools to
hold Muslim services? This appears to be what you are saying; please
elucidate. As far as I've seen, no religion may be foisted upon students
in a public school. You're free to practice any religion you want - at
home, in church, or even school, if you keep it to yourself.

The ACLU doesn't prevent Christian kids from praying at lunchtime, does it?

--
Bill Cernansky     | "I do not find in orthodox Christianity
[e-mail] |  one redeeming feature." -- Thomas Jefferson
#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!camco!sonoma!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-ma
From: [e-mail] (MsSeraphim)
Newsgroups: alt.sex.services,alt.sex.brothels,alt.sex.prostitution,alt.sex.wizards,alt.feminism,alt.sex.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sex Workers Demand End to "Wars on Whores"
Date: 23 Aug 1995 13:01:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41fmtp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (MsSeraphim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: bunker alt.sex.services:3663 alt.sex.wizards:20608 alt.feminism:65204 alt.sex.advocacy:174

<< SEX WORKERS RIGHTS ORGANIZATION DEMANDS END
TO "WARS ON WHORES" THROUGH DECRIMINALIZATION>>

  I'm glad to see and hear that women are taking a stand against a
misguided and immoral national philosophy.

****
    MsSeraphim
      "These are very confusing times.  For the first time in history a
woman is expected to combine: intelligence with a sharp hairdo, a raised
consciousness with high heels, and an open, nonsexist relationship with a
tanned guy who has a great bod." -- Lynda Bary
#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!islander.whidbey.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!torn!nott!bcarh18
Date: 23 Aug 1995 16:17:17 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Joe Martini)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.sex,alt.sex.erotica.marketplace,alt.sex.erotica.market.place,alt.sex.services,alt.sex.escorts.ads,alt.sex.masterbation,alt.sex.wanted,alt.
Subject: cmsg cancel <[e-mail]>
Control: cancel <[e-mail]>
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 1

Spam cancelled by [e-mail]
#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!news.telebyte.com!multiverse!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!caen!crl.dec.com!bloom-beacon.mit.ed
Newsgroups: alt.sex
From: [e-mail] (Carmen Deturse)
Subject: Usenet Ads
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Internet Direct, Canada
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: 23 Aug 95 00:15:03 GMT
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11a
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: doom.idirect.com
Lines: 8

There seems to be a raging debate on the subject of ads in usenet.
I am compiling comments.  Do you agree or disagree with advertising in
usenet, and why.
--
Carmen F. Deturse -- [e-mail]
Check out our free XXX ADULT PRODUCT Catalog.
E-Mail for details.

#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!news.telebyte.com!multiverse!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.e
From: [e-mail] (Barrie)
Newsgroups: alt.celebrities,alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities,alt.supermodels,alt.models
Subject: Re: REQUEST:  CAROLINE MUNRO (LAMBS NAVY RUM & BOND GIRL)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 95 15:10:57 GMT
Organization: home
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41eurs$[e-mail]>
References: <411qtn$[e-mail]> <418o7p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 132.146.29.98
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: bunker alt.celebrities:2367 alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities:9624 alt.supermodels:13388 alt.models:2200

She was really sultry and had a fantastic body. If anyone has any pictures
from here calenders, please post in one of these groups. I'm not sure if she
did any nude modelling, but if she did and anyone has some, please post them.


In article <418o7p$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Max gorky) wrote:
>She was also the evil sorceress in Oliver Stone's film "Siezure" Wow!
#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!islander.whidbey.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newstf01
From: [e-mail] (Joe 3 joe)
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.d
Subject: cmsg cancel <415ve5$[e-mail]>
Control: cancel <415ve5$[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Aug 1995 10:40:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <-415ve5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Joe 3 joe)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newstf01.news.aol.com

  Please cancel this posting
#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!islander.whidbey.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newstf01
From: [e-mail] (Joe 3 joe)
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.d
Subject: cmsg cancel <415ve6$[e-mail]>
Control: cancel <415ve6$[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Aug 1995 10:40:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <-415ve6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Joe 3 joe)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newstf01.news.aol.com

  Please cancel this posting
#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!news.telebyte.com!multiverse!hookup!torn!nott!bcarh189.bnr.ca!bcarh8ab.bnr.ca!news
From: Stephen Kunc <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.portuguese,soc.culture.canada,alt.sex,alt.wired,can.politics,alt.censorship,alt.politics.media,tor.general,can.general,bc.general,
Subject: Re: POLICE ANUS RAPED BY BLACK MAN
Date: 23 Aug 1995 17:08:51 GMT
Organization: bbelt2
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <41fnb3$[e-mail]>
References: <40v2gp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bcarh2d3.bnr.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.05 9000/712)
X-URL: news:[e-mail]
Xref: bunker soc.culture.portuguese:12697 soc.culture.canada:45749 alt.sex:120265 alt.wired:10533 alt.censorship:29129 alt.politics.media:2008 alt.recover

[e-mail] (Steven Meece) wrote:

>
>> Your antics are a prime example of the kind of strains a misdirected
>> individual (or interest group) can put on a society and it's services.   You
>> proudly waste resources, but produce no marketable output.  You and those
>> like you make me sick.
>>
>>                (Want a better Canada?  http://www.reform.ca)
>
>It doesn't surprise me that you would be sickened by the thought of
>democracy in action. Just another Reform Party scumbag, I suppose.


Gee, well I for one am glad to know that this is where my tax dollars go: into
wasted fax paper, deliberately misused government services, financial
compensation to fraudulent brain disorders. I'd be horrified if some of the
money I pay actually found its way into the educational system or economic
projects rather than being petered out providing crack babies like Joe Baptista
with the time and resources to waste even more of the money. In fact, I wish
there were more people out there whose only source of self-calidation is
harrassing the low levels of government so that they can hike my taxes even
higher.

#! rnews 0
Path: bunker!cnn.isc-br.com!krel.iea.com!nwfocus.wa.com!islander.whidbey.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02
From: [e-mail] (Ventura T)
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.warez.mac,alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc,alt.2600,alt.security,comp.security.misc,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica
Subject: Re: K00l!  Warez FTP SITEZ!  31337, d00dZ!
Date: 23 Aug 1995 12:56:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41fmjp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ventura T)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: bunker alt.binaries.warez.mac:272 alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc:2243 alt.2600:51716 alt.security:12769 comp.security.misc:13030 alt.binaries.pictures.er

>Hey, you little toad, get the hell off the net.  I am sick and tired of
>your bullshit.  No one here wants your lame-ass posts.  I'd killfile, if
I
>could.

I usually lurk through the jumble of nonsense, but had to comment on your
post.
I think that you were out of line with this reply.  I figure you are kid
who has to much time on your hands!  Get a life or jump back into reality
and get the big picture.  THE EARTH DOESN'T REVOLVE AROUND YOU!!!!

Enigma


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!world!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Martin)
Subject: Re: HELP! R7 Tuning?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Mr Usenet Himself)
Nntp-Posting-Host: world.std.com
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: WK1V
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
References: <[e-mail]> <41ebib$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995 17:34:35 GMT
Lines: 46

[e-mail] (Bruce W. Forsberg) wrote:

:>I have an R7 vertical and before this I had a R4 vertical. I have
:>always had problems tuning it when I place it on a metal mast. I have
:>mine now on a mast that is about 12 feet high. Before I used to have
:>it chimeny mounted and had no problems. It seems that the metal mast
:>detunes it. I just use it as it is and use an antenna tuner.

I wonder if you pushed the metal mast up too far into the R7?  That, in
essence, would short the base of the antenna with the radiating portion and
would put everything at the same potential as the mast. It would also by-pass
the matching network in the process...Can't do it that way.  That is the only
way, I know of, that a metal mast would have any affect on "detuning" the R7.

I can almost guarantee you that if I set up your R7 that problem would not
exist.  Keyword is almost. :-D

The only way to detune these antennas would be to mount them too close to
something metalic or to try to guy them with metalic guys...of course you can
also adjust the lengths of the various sections of the antenna and be off also.

I run an R5 currently.  It is resonant smack dab where it's  supposed to be on
each band...used my MFJ-259 analyzer after the antenna was put together in its
entirety.  I went by the instructions to put the R5 together.  Used a
screwdriver, a crescent wrench, my wife's car (something to support the antenna
during setup), and a measuring tape.  I was pleasantly surprised to see that it
required no further tweaking...I mean it was done, first time!

One thing I didn't like was the way the 10 meter coil was wound for
27.8-something.  A call to Ken Albertson at Cushcraft gave me instruction on
how to tune the antenna up into 10 meters...not that it really mattered.  I
didn't ask why that type of instruction wasn't placed in the
literature...hmmmm.  I'm sure there are those with the R7 who would like their
favorite 40 meter frequency tuned as the center freq on their antenna.

Tomorrow I will call Ken and let him know about this thread and see what kind
of support he may have to offer.  This is interesting though.

Cheers!
--------------------------------------------------------------
|Jim Martin, WK1V              |  I speak for no one...Not   |
|Lowell, Massachusetts         |       even for myself!      |
|USAF (Ret)ained               | #include "std_disclaimer.h" |
|ex: KA5MWD/N1CLS/KB1LW/HL9ZF  |   Intentionally Left Blank  |
--------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger A. Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Log Periodic Beams
Date: 25 Aug 1995 20:37:26 GMT
Organization: Telex Communications, Inc.
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <41lca6$1o4$[e-mail]>
References: <41h1u6$[e-mail]>

Log-Periodic Dipole Arrays have been over-rated in gain for
years.  Take a look at the 17th edition of the ARRL Antenna
Handbook.  On page 10-3 in Figure 4, gain is graphed vs. TAU and
SIGMA.  This graph has been changed to reflect the current
calculations on LP gain.  For an example, an 8 element 13-30 MHz
LP on an 18 foot boom has a TAU of 0.85 and a SIGMA of 0.05, this
should be a gain of no more than 6 dBi!!  Guess who makes such an
antenna, and what they say the gain is.

73, Roger  WB0DGF


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (BUDDY10)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How do i find out my exact Longitude/latitude ?
Date: 27 Aug 1995 10:48:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41q0jb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

How do i find out my exact longitude & latitude , so i can use a beam
heading program ?
Thanks !


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:38 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!frank_reid.electronics.indiana.edu
From: [e-mail]  (Frank Reid)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i find out my exact Longitude/latitude ?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995  10:19 EST
Organization: Indiana University
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <19950827101931.reid@frank_reid.electronics.indiana.edu>
References: <41q0jb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: frank_reid.electronics.indiana.edu
X-Newsreader: FTPNuz (DOS) v1.0

In Article <41q0jb$[e-mail]> "[e-mail] (BUDDY10)" says:
> How do i find out my exact longitude & latitude , so i can use a beam
> heading program ?
> Thanks !
>

1)  Buy a topographic map of the place where you live.  They're available
    from state geological surveys and some "outdoor" stores.

2)  Buy an Aeronautical Sectional Chart at your local non-airline airport,
    or get an old one from a pilot.

3)  Buy a GPS receiver.

4)  The nearest degree of lat/lon is probably adequate for a beam-heading
    program.  See a road atlas.

--

Frank     [e-mail]     W9MKV


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How do you feed HF multiband quad?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <mike_cash-2208950827170001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 21:28:17 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:mike_cash-2208950827170001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil
Lines: 10

I have a used a homebrew 3 el 20M, and 5 el 15&10 mtr for some time.
I feed the square elements with a 1:1 balun and on 20 and 15 this works
well without any other matching. (the impedance came in at 48 ohm and 44
ohms respectively.)  On 10 the impedance was up about 90 ohm and I used
a 75 ohm matching section between the balun and the 50 ohm feedline. Of
course each antenna is fed separately through a remote switch.
Very good results!
73, Al




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!aimnet.com!news2.aimnet.com!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Andy Brandt, KE6SKH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: J-pole antennas question
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 19:39:33 -0700
Organization: NextStep
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <anb-2408951939330001@204.118.173.33>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.118.173.33

As a relatively new amateur operator, I was wondering if someone could
briefly explain the theory behind the j-pole antenna, and why it is able
to get such high gain compared to whips.

The reason I ask is that I'm considering a new antenna purchase, and was
wondering if the j-pole is even worth it, since it has to remain inside my
ground-floor residence.  If I can't mount it outside, will I still benefit
from the increased performance?

Please e-mail replies, as well as posting them here.

Thanks for your help!

--A


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!lfheller.demon.co.uk!Leon
From: Leon Heller <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Jamming LW Radio
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 95 17:25:16 GMT
Organization: Home
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: lfheller.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13292 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9162

In article <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "David Lees" writes:

> Anyone any idea how I could Jam a radio Long Wave radio station
> (Atlantic 252 to be accurate)............
>
> Please help if you can!

To start with, you'll need a big garden for the antenna! Plus lots of money
for the electricity bill. 8-)

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM                | "Do not adjust your mind, there is
E-mail [e-mail]  |  a fault in reality": on a wall
Phone: [phone]         |  many years ago in Oxford.


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:40 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: David Lees <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Jamming LW Radio
Date: 25 Aug 1995 14:34:01 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]>
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13309 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9167

Anyone any idea how I could Jam a radio Long Wave radio station
(Atlantic 252 to be accurate)............

Please help if you can!


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.ksu.ksu.edu!hptemp1.cc.umr.edu!dstuart
From: [e-mail] (Dave Stuart ([e-mail]))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Jamming LW Radio
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Date: 25 Aug 1995 20:11:59 GMT
Organization: UMR Missouri's Technological University
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <41laqf$[e-mail]>
References: <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.cc.umr.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13321 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9176

David Lees ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Anyone any idea how I could Jam a radio Long Wave radio station
: (Atlantic 252 to be accurate)............

: Please help if you can!

Isn't that kind of un amatureish?


--
-- Dave Stuart
[e-mail]
University of Missouri -- Rolla

KB0SLY



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:42 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!newshost.uwo.ca!irus.rri.uwo.ca!ppicot
From: [e-mail] (Paul Picot)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Jamming LW Radio
Date: 25 Aug 1995 20:46:52 GMT
Organization: U.N.C.L.E.
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <41lcrs$[e-mail]>
References: <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: oort.irus.rri.uwo.ca
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13322 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9177

In article <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]> David Lees <[e-mail]> writes:
>Anyone any idea how I could Jam a radio Long Wave radio station
>(Atlantic 252 to be accurate)............

How about an air drop?  I was always quite fond of black currant myself.
It should stain the building nicely, but you'll need a 45-gallon drum
of it... :-)

But seriously: why would you want to interfere with a LW station?  It
is a navigation aid, isn't it?  The penalties for doing such a thing
should dissuade you.

But to give an answer: the most effective way to interfere with its
transmissions would be to drive a large truck into the transmitter


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ladder Line Loss
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 95 15:40:48 GMT
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

My new 200' dipole is now up but there's a problem on one band.  Maybe
someone will have some advice on this.

After erecting the antenna, I found that my tuner matches it well on
all bands except 160M. I ran the antenna through MiniNEC, which claims
it has a feedpoint impedance of 1.26 ohms, -489j.  I have a technique
that allows the tuner to match impedances outside its usual range,
which in this case would be to insert a toroidal step-down transformer
between the tuner and the rig.  However, even if I do this, and even
if I overlook increased losses in the tuner that result, there's
another problem.

According to a transmission line program I use, the input SWR at the
transmission line is approximately 340:1.  With this SWR, losses in
the ladder line will be greater than 3.5 dB.

Ironically, I ran these programs for an antenna that I used until five
years ago when I went inactive.  That antenna was about 60' long total
length.  Losses aren't nearly as bad with the shorter antenna.

What would really help me at this point would be for someone to verify
my calculations and post the results here.  It's a simple antenna,
200' total length, elevated 20' everywhere, center fed with 100' of
450 ohm ladder line.

If results agree with mine, suggestions will be appreciated.  I was
hoping to take advantage of the additional gain this antenna might
offer on 20M and up, but not at the expense of 160M.

Thanks and 73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:43 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder Line Loss
Date: 26 Aug 1995 16:44:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41o12q$[e-mail]>
References: <41nsal$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Wes wrote:

>For your assumption of Zl = 1.26-j489: load SWR = 779; input SWR = 114;
>input Z = 4.8=j209 and total line loss = 8.34.

Wes, Unless I missed something that input impedance seems way off. Wasn't
Jack using a quarter wave line to feed the antenna with a 450 ohms Zo? I
didn't run it on a Smith chart but intuition tells me the input R on 160
should be real high, unless I missed something. 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder Line Loss
Date: 26 Aug 1995 21:18:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41oh5n$[e-mail]>
References: <41o12q$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

OOps, never mind, I missed something. Hee hee.Jack, that looks like it
should tune. 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!usenet
From: Super-User <root>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: LARGE resonators
Date: 24 Aug 1995 15:12:28 GMT
Organization: Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <41i4ss$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shadow.mc.duke.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; IRIX 5.3 IP19)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Anybody have any experience with resonators in the 400 MHz range?
Any thoughts, references?

thanks

steve

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Major patent approved - but need antenna help.
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 95 04:07:36 GMT
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell) wrote:

>Again, everyone had to assume many things on the original post by the
>fellow to ask the question.  It was hard to determine anything
>without assuming. I'll stick to my real world experience and agree
>with Karl.
>In my corrected calculation, I added an actually lower path fath
>number due to the fact the path was short and portable.  Normally, to
>an amateur radio operator, having 40 db built into a path is
>unreasonible.
>In the professional world, 30 to 40 db of added signal is a "must"
>to achieve a reliability factor.  Most all path work I have been
>involved with, requires 99.99998 % reliability.
       << snip >>

Jim, this was an excellent summary and a good way to finish this
thread.  There is one aspect of all this that I'd like a little more
info on though.

The numbers you mention for path fade are certainly necessary at 6 GHz
and above (the examples you cited).  However, path fade is not a
significant factor in the industry I work in (2.5 GHz).  In fact, it
isn't even figured into calculations for path lengths of 50 miles and
less.  Just so I understand this, are you certain that a *line of
sight* path at 220 MHz needs fade margins similar to the higher
frequencies you mentioned?  Line of sight isn't really the way most
Hams use 220 MHz, so I'm just trying to be sure we're talking about
the same thing.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ddi2.digital.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Russ Leblanc)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MININEC users
Date: 25 Aug 1995 19:57:45 GMT
Organization: Hurricane DX Club
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <41l9vp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @204.215.242.151
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.90.4

I'm using the Artec House version of this antenna analysis program.

Has anyone had any luck using the network matching subroutine?




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dns.crocker.com!wizard.pn.com!news.zeitgeist.net!news.pixi.com!vine
From: [e-mail] (BBS Login)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Mobile HF Antennas
Date: 27 Aug 1995 08:18:05 GMT
Organization: INTERACT! - Hawaii's Premier On-Line Service
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <41p9nt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: oahu.ohana.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I'm looking for available HF mobile antennas for a comparison test and
possilbe write up.

Thanks,
J.W.


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Sergei Kulyov)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need help with Super super Dentron tuner
Date: 27 Aug 1995 13:38:59 -0400
Organization: The Greater Columbus FreeNet
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41qajj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: acme.freenet.columbus.oh.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Hi gang. I have a Super super Dentron antenna tuner with one missed
part inside. There are one air vary capacitor, balun, couple air core
coils.
Does anybody could help with schematic or suggestion about missed part?
Thanks,

73! Sergei AA8OT, UA3AP


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ddi2.digital.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Russ Leblanc)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: phased array receiving antennas
Date: 26 Aug 1995 02:34:42 GMT
Organization: Hurricane DX Club
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <41m182$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @204.215.242.151
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.90.4
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13324 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9178

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Byan) says:


>My next problem is designing a high-input-impedance, high-dynamic-range
>differential RF amp for the output of the phase shift network.

And don't forget low noise, Steve ;-)  I work on such ...

>I've noticed the new JPS antenna noise canceling unit (which is a
>phased-array receiving antenna, intended to null locally-generated RFI

I wouldn't quite call it a phased array.  You simply either pickup
(radio) or synthesize the offending signal, flip the phase 180
degrees, sum the signals, and voila!  Noise reduction.  An old dog
learning new tricks...<g>

>noise) must use some kind of wideband phase-shift network, since it covers
>at least 3 to 30 MHz with only a two-position bandswitch: low band and
>high band. Has anyone opened one of these up? What does the phasing
>network look like? Is it a polyphase network? What does JPS use for an
>amplifier?

According to info leaked out, its a hybrid combiner, and accounts for
some loss of the desired receive signal.  My guess is that it's
transformer based, the noise signal being fed 180 out from the main
antenna.  The phase shift network compensates for phase error due
to parasitics in the network which might cause the noise channel to
deviate from desired 180 degrees as a function of frequency.

I'm guessing here, but WILL find the eventual answer.

I've played with one at a local ham store, and on first trial it did
eradicate some local power line noise.  My original desire was for
a wideband antenna phaser for far-field null-steering apps as well
as diversity reception.

Russ






From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: portable longwave antenna kit
Date: 24 Aug 1995 23:33:17 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41jg9t$[e-mail]>
References: <40p74u$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


:I have a 'like new' antenna kit for 1.8 to 30 megahertz, in the canvas
carrying bag.


Is there a military designation for the kit you have ?? there should be
something stamped on the roll bag or on the antenna kit itself somewhere..
  :-)

Would be interested if I knew which antenna kit you have there!

Patricia Gibbons -<[e-mail]>

[e-mail] "The Vertical Skywave Girl"


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN
Date: 25 Aug 1995 10:40:47 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <41k9bf$[e-mail]>
References: <41asr3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

Rob,

Many thanks for the description of the GAP antenna. Surely the Manufacturer
will give you a discount next time.

>For comparison, I used to have a 20m and 40m inverted vee dipole in
>this same location.  The apex was at about 20 feet, and the ends at
>about 5 feet.  I was able to work only a couple of people SSB over the
>months, and a few people on CW.

When direct side-by-side comparisions are made over longer times,
even than the results are ambigous. So jujung a antenna by results on a
contest weekend is pretty meaningless.

>It turns out the NA QSO Party contest was this weekend, so I was able
>to make a fair number of contacts Saturday evening.

>I could hear plenty of people
>on 80, some as far as central Canada, but was unable to talk to any of
>them (previously I couldn't even hear people on 80).

If you can't hear someone on 80 while the band is open, your receiver must
be dead and there must be no antenna connected. With a receiver that works
you can hear plenty of people with anything tied to the antenna socket.

So, enjoy your antenna, but don't get carried away, the dipole should
normally be equal or better, unless there is something wrong with it.

73, Moritz DL5UH






From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Putting up an HF Yagi either vertically or semivertical...
Date: 25 Aug 1995 05:22:10 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <41jmm2$[e-mail]>
References: <41brf1$[e-mail]> <41fup2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup92.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Your_Name_Here <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Hello.
>
>I'd like to put up a Cushcraft A3 beam either vertically or at a 45
>degree angle from the earth because I'll only be able to put up the
>(center of the) beam 30 feet off the ground.
>
>Any one have an opinion on this?  Any experiences?
>
[snip]

No experience, only an opinion: don't do it.  I can see no advantage
to doing this. The mounting will be complicated and the interaction
with the supporting structure will be great. There is no advantage
to vertical polarization at the frequencies this antenna covers.

73, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:51 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!news
From: Your_Name_Here <[e-mail]>
Subject: Putting up an HF Yagi either vertically or semivertical...
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 00:47:14 GMT
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
References: <41brf1$[e-mail]> <41fup2$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspkts.spk.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 14

Hello.

I'd like to put up a Cushcraft A3 beam either vertically or at a 45
degree angle from the earth because I'll only be able to put up the
(center of the) beam 30 feet off the ground.

Any one have an opinion on this?  Any experiences?


Thanks in advance,


Marc DePaul



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Putting up an HF Yagi either vertically or semivertical...
Date: 27 Aug 1995 18:49:32 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <41qens$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx08-52.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   Your_Name_Here <[e-mail]> writes:
>  Hello.
>
>  I'd like to put up a Cushcraft A3 beam either vertically or at a 45
>  degree angle from the earth because I'll only be able to put up the
>  (center of the) beam 30 feet off the ground.
>
>  Any one have an opinion on this?  Any experiences?
>
>
>  Thanks in advance,
>
>
>  Marc DePaul
>
>
>>>>

I'm not sure what band(s) the A3 is for. On 20 meters, over average
ground, a vertically-mounted beam up 30' at the center is about the
same as a horizontally-mounted one at elevation angles up to about
8 degrees. At 10 degrees, the horizontally-mounted one is better by
more than 3 dB, and at 15 degrees more than 5 dB. There's no elevation
angle at which the vertical one is better than the horizontal one.

This assumes that you don't have anything metallic like a tower
interfering with the antenna when it's mounted vertically.

At this point, a shameless plug for antenna modeling programs. This
is just the kind of thing they're really good for.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!nntp.atlanta.com!news
From: [e-mail] (kb8rjy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: QSL cards
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 20:28:49 GMT
Organization: Marquette Senior High School
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <41ntdp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm039-04.dialip.mich.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13334 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:10215 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:16238 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9186 rec.radio.amateur.misc:85542 rec.radio.amateur.policy:29118 rec.radio.amateur.space:4671

Check this out - QSL cards!



With your own custom graphics, and text...



only $5.95 for 50!...



Custom design your cards with up to 80 Characters of text, and Your
own scanned
graphic / or antenna graphic.



Just fill out the following form, and send with total (check or money
order) to:
Shaun Qualheim, KB8RJY

QSL cards

Dept. BBS

224 Cherry Creek Road

Marquette, MI 49855



(Print, and cut here:)

________________________________________________________________________________
Order Form: QSL Cards

________________________________________________________________________________
Front Text:
____________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
(up to 80 characters on front) - back will have standard QSL reply
fields.
Is a graphic/photo to be scanned included? (yes/no) ____

Do you wish to have the antenna included on your qsl card instead?
(yes/no) ____
Number of sets: (50 in a set, $5.95 a set)     ____ times $5.95 = ____

Plus Shipping and handling: ($1.50 per set)    ____ times $5.95 = ____

Plus Scanning fee ($1.00)                                         ____



                                TOTAL (sets + s & h + scan fee)
=____

________________________________________________________________________________
(cut here)





Thank You

Shaun Qualheim, kb8rjy

Internet: [e-mail]









From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!nntp.atlanta.com!news
From: [e-mail] (kb8rjy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: QSL cards - qslad.txt (1/1)
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 19:25:06 GMT
Organization: Internet Atlanta
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <41npm9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm039-04.dialip.mich.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13333 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:10214 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:16235 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9185 rec.radio.amateur.misc:85538 rec.radio.amateur.policy:29116 rec.radio.amateur.space:4668

begin 644 qslad.txt
M0VAE8VL@=&AI<R!O=70@+2!14TP@8V%R9',A("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@#0H@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"E=I=&@@>6]U<B!O=VX@8W5S=&]M
M(&=R87!H:6-S+"!A;F0@=&5X="XN+B`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@(`T*("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@#0IO;FQY("0U+CDU(&9O<B`U,"$N+BX@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"B`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@(`T*0W5S=&]M(&1E<VEG;B!Y
M;W5R(&-A<F1S('=I=&@@=7`@=&\@.#`@0VAA<F%C=&5R<R!O9B!T97AT+"!A
M;F0@66]U<B!O=VX@<V-A;FYE9"`-"F=R87!H:6,@+R!O<B!A;G1E;FYA(&=R
M87!H:6,N("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@(`T*("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M#0I*=7-T(&9I;&P@;W5T('1H92!F;VQL;W=I;F<@9F]R;2P@86YD('-E;F0@
M=VET:"!T;W1A;"`H8VAE8VL@;W(@;6]N97D@;W)D97(I('1O.@T*4VAA=6X@
M475A;&AE:6TL($M".%)*62`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@#0I14TP@8V%R9',@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"D1E<'0N($)"4R`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@(`T*,C(T($-H97)R>2!#<F5E:R!2;V%D("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@#0I-
M87)Q=65T=&4L($U)(#0Y.#4U("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"B`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@(`T**%!R:6YT+"!A;F0@8W5T(&AE<F4Z
M*2`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@#0I?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7PT*3W)D97(@1F]R;3H@45-,($-A<F1S("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@#0I?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7PT*1G)O;G0@5&5X=#H@
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U\-"E]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?#0HH=7`@=&\@.#`@8VAA<F%C=&5R<R!O;B!F<F]N
M="D@+2!B86-K('=I;&P@:&%V92!S=&%N9&%R9"!14TP@<F5P;'D@9FEE;&1S
M+B`@("`-"DES(&$@9W)A<&AI8R]P:&]T;R!T;R!B92!S8V%N;F5D(&EN8VQU
M9&5D/R`H>65S+VYO*2!?7U]?("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@(`T*1&\@
M>6]U('=I<V@@=&\@:&%V92!T:&4@86YT96YN82!I;F-L=61E9"!O;B!Y;W5R
M('%S;"!C87)D(&EN<W1E860_("AY97,O;F\I(%]?7U\-"DYU;6)E<B!O9B!S
M971S.B`H-3`@:6X@82!S970L("0U+CDU(&$@<V5T*2`@("`@7U]?7R!T:6UE
M<R`D-2XY-2`](%]?7U\@("`@("`@(`T*4&QU<R!3:&EP<&EN9R!A;F0@:&%N
M9&QI;F<Z("@D,2XU,"!P97(@<V5T*2`@("!?7U]?('1I;65S("0U+CDU(#T@
M7U]?7R`@("`@("`@#0I0;'5S(%-C86YN:6YG(&9E92`H)#$N,#`I("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("!?7U]?("`@("`@
M("`-"B`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@(`T*("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("!43U1!3"`H<V5T<R`K(',@)B!H("L@<V-A
M;B!F964I("`@("`@(#T@7U]?7R`@("`@("`@#0H@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"E]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]?
M7U]?7U]?7U]?#0HH8W5T(&AE<F4I("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-
M"B`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@(`T*("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@#0I4:&%N:R!9;W4@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"E-H875N(%%U86QH96EM+"!K8CAR:GD@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@(`T*26YT97)N970Z(&MB.')J>4!M+6YE="YA<F)O<FYE="YO<F<@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@#0H@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"B`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
6("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@(`T*&O__
`
end


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (ENeed81834)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QSL cards - qslad.txt (1/1)
Date: 26 Aug 1995 19:19:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41oa60$[e-mail]>
References: <41npm9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <41npm9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (kb8rjy)
writes:

>Subject:       QSL cards - qslad.txt (1/1)
>From:  [e-mail] (kb8rjy)
>Date:  Sat, 26 Aug 1995 19:25:06 GMT
>
>begin 644 qslad.txt
>M0VAE8VL@=&AI<R!O=70@+2!14TP@8V%R9',A("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
>M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@#0H@("`@("`@("`@
>M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@
>M("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`@("`-"E=I=&@@>6]U<B!O=VX@8W5S=&]M

     Could we please refrain from putting binary files in the newsgroup?

Earl
KD5XB
Cannon AFB
Clovis, NM


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:56 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: quad building
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <41dcpu$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 21:37:33 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:41dcpu$[e-mail]
Lines: 10

The quagis in the ARRL antenna handbook work very well.  For Oscar,
there is an article in QST a few years ago about using baluns to get
circular polarization with a single quad driven element.  I built it and
it works excellent.  I can work Oscar 13 at 4500km with 6 wats output on
435 with it.
The article was written by a VK I think.  Contact me if you cannot find
it and I can mail or FAX it to you.
73, Al




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!redstone.interpath.net!cphillips
From: [e-mail] (Curt Phillips)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rohn HBX Info Wanted
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 95 20:35:16 GMT
Organization: North Carolina Division of Energy
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <41o0v0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cphillips.pdial.interpath.net
Keywords: Rohn Tower HBX Information Antenna Windload
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #2

   I'm looking at a Rohn HBX tower (approx. 64 ft) to purchase to put
a Hygain TH7 on.
   a) Does anyone have the data on the max antenna area that this
tower is rated for?  Though it is supposed to be a free standing tower,
how much might guying it add to the acceptable windload area?
   b) What should a 64' Rohn HBX sell for used?  It's "on the ground"
and in good, but not great shape (some rust spots that need to be
painted, a couple of bent spots that will need to be straightened
and reinforced).
   Thanks for any input.

=========Opinions expressed are solely those of the author============
Curt Phillips, KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)      | INFO OVERLOAD: Reading Usenet
[e-mail]   | while listening to 2 meters,
Chairman, Tarheel Scanner/SWL Group   | and both my scanner & SW receiver,
ARRL Life; QCWA; Raleigh Am Radio Soc | with the TV on in the background.



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rohn HBX Info Wanted
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 23:46:25 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41o0v0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <41o0v0$[e-mail]>

Curt,

You were very wise to inquire on here before proceeding with the purchase
of a Rohn BX tower for use with a long boom beam like the TH7!

The Rohn BX series consists of light (BX), mid-rated (HBX) and "heavy
duty" (HDBX) towers.  The 64 foot tower is available only in the light
duty rated series BX.  The maximum height of the HBX is 56 feet and the
maximum height of the HDBX is 48 feet.

You should be aware of the following warning on Rohn sales brochures and
engineering drawings for the BX, HBX and HDBX towers: "Antenna types for
BX, HBX and HDBX should be limited to those having a maximum boom length
of 10 feet.  No engineering data related to the use of boom lengths in
excess of 10 feet is available and the use of such boom lengths is not
recommended.   These towers use aluminum rivets which cannot safely
handle the torque produced by large beams.

Rohn rates the BX series towers for the following antenna areas, subject
to the 10 foot boom restriction:
BX-64:    6 sq ft at 20 psf (70.7 MPH)
HBX-56   10 sq ft at 20 psf (70.7 MPH)
HDBX-48  18 sq ft at 20 psf (70.7 MPH)

Many local building codes require the application of EIA specification
RS-222 in the design of antenna towers.  You should be aware, however, that
the latest version of EIA Standard RS-222, Structural Standards for
Steel Antenna Towers and Antanna Supporting Structures, requires the use
of 30 psf wind loads in virtually every area of the U.S. (and 40 psf or
more in some areas!)  If you apply the 30 psf requirement to the Rohn
BX, HBX and HDBX you will discover that only the HDBX is safe and only
with a very small antenna!

The Rohn BX, HBX and HDBX towers cannot be safely guyed, because the legs
are incapable of bearing the compressive loads resulting from the use of
guys.

The only safe way to repair bent tower sections for this tower is to
replace them.  You should be able to purchase new sections from Rohn.
Rust can be safely repaired if no significant amount of steel has been
lost.  I'd suggest the Rustoleum products for galvanized steel repair and
preservation.

remember: safety first!

73
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]


On Sat, 26 Aug 1995, Curt Phillips wrote:

>    I'm looking at a Rohn HBX tower (approx. 64 ft) to purchase to put
> a Hygain TH7 on.
>    a) Does anyone have the data on the max antenna area that this
> tower is rated for?  Though it is supposed to be a free standing tower,
> how much might guying it add to the acceptable windload area?
>    b) What should a 64' Rohn HBX sell for used?  It's "on the ground"
> and in good, but not great shape (some rust spots that need to be
> painted, a couple of bent spots that will need to be straightened
> and reinforced).
>    Thanks for any input.
>
> =========Opinions expressed are solely those of the author============
> Curt Phillips, KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)      | INFO OVERLOAD: Reading Usenet
> [e-mail]   | while listening to 2 meters,
> Chairman, Tarheel Scanner/SWL Group   | and both my scanner & SW receiver,
> ARRL Life; QCWA; Raleigh Am Radio Soc | with the TV on in the background.
>
>
>


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:49:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SG230 component value <R51>
Date: 24 Aug 1995 23:36:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41jgfc$[e-mail]>
References: <40j9jd$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WA6UBE)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

:Looking at a schematic drawing ( revision "T", April, 93 ) R51 is
:connected across the emitter and base of Q4 with the emitter being
:grounded.  The value of R51 is 7.5k Ohms (7500).

:R50, on the other hand, connects to the base of Q4 and is shown as 10k
:Ohms.

:Del, KD4B  Raleigh, NC


Well - at least I am not confirmed as being color-blind!!
thanx and 73 -
Trish <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] "The Vertical Skywave Girl"


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jack Glidden)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Tinted Window Question
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 19:41:11 GMT
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <41l9ml$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: glidden.greene.pgh.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13296 rec.radio.shortwave:57555

I have been told told that the tinting that comes from the factory on
newer model veh. is actually a metal that is inside the glass.  This
has the effect of really screwing up any type of thru the glass
antenna.  Is this true?  Where or who should I call to confirm this?
I have a 92 Jimmy with factory tint on all glass except the front.  I
need to mount some antennas and don't want to drill or use mag mounts.
I am planning to mount a 2 meter and a 10 meter antenna.
If you hav any answers please send e-mail.

Thanks






From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: "James A. Storm" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Tinted Window Question
Date: 26 Aug 1995 02:41:13 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <41m1k9$[e-mail]>
References: <41l9ml$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sf5-10.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1PE (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13326 rec.radio.shortwave:57592

[e-mail] (Jack Glidden) wrote:
>I have been told told that the tinting that comes from the factory on
>newer model veh. is actually a metal that is inside the glass.  This
>has the effect of really screwing up any type of thru the glass
>antenna.  Is this true?  Where or who should I call to confirm this?
>I have a 92 Jimmy with factory tint on all glass except the front.  I
>need to mount some antennas and don't want to drill or use mag mounts.
>I am planning to mount a 2 meter and a 10 meter antenna.
>If you hav any answers please send e-mail.
>
>Thanks

I was told by Larsen Antenna that oridinary factory tint should be no
problem. You don't want to put it in an area where you can't even see
through the glass. Mine is mounted on the tinted side window of an
extra-cab truck and works quite well.

                     73, WB6LWS Jim in Pacifica, CA




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!convex!cnn.exu.ericsson.se!news
From: [e-mail] (Mike Groves)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Tinted Window Question
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 02:41:16 GMT
Organization: Ericsson North America, Inc.
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <41m1ei$[e-mail]>
References: <41l9ml$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc125011.exu.ericsson.se
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13327 rec.radio.shortwave:57593

[e-mail] (Jack Glidden) wrote:

>I have been told told that the tinting that comes from the factory on
>newer model veh. is actually a metal that is inside the glass.  This
>has the effect of really screwing up any type of thru the glass
>antenna.  Is this true?  Where or who should I call to confirm this?
>I have a 92 Jimmy with factory tint on all glass except the front.  I
>need to mount some antennas and don't want to drill or use mag mounts.
>I am planning to mount a 2 meter and a 10 meter antenna.

Thru-glass on 10M?  You'ld have to have a patch area the size of a
door-mat.  2M is marginal at best.  I like trunk-lid mounts, but in
the case of a Jimmy...    Good luck  ---Mike



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jack Glidden)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Tinted Window Question
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 1995 00:27:11 GMT
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <41oequ$[e-mail]>
References: <41l9ml$[e-mail]> <41m1ei$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: glidden.greene.pgh.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13350 rec.radio.shortwave:57625

[e-mail] (Mike Groves) wrote:


>
>>need to mount some antennas and don't want to drill or use mag mounts.
>>I am planning to mount a 2 meter and a 10 meter antenna.

>Thru-glass on 10M?  You'ld have to have a patch area the size of a
>door-mat.  2M is marginal at best.  I like trunk-lid mounts, but in
>the case of a Jimmy...    Good luck  ---Mike

I don't want to drill a hole, and a mag mount is out of the question
due to the clearance (or lack of it) from the gararge.  I am
considering use a thru the glass 11 Meter and cutting/tuning for 10.

The antenna for my scanner AND the AM/FM antenna already bang the
gararge door, so any thing else that goes higher is really in for it.
And since it's a newer vehicle, there are nor *REAL* bumpers to mount
anything to. So I thought I would try this

Just keep repeating, "It's only a hobby...it's only a hobby"

PS, Thanks for the response.





From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: UHF antenna tuner - ideas?
Date: 25 Aug 1995 10:17:14 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <41k7va$[e-mail]>
References: <41il2k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

In article <41il2k$[e-mail]>,
Tsachy Lindenbaum <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hi
>I'm looking for a schema of a reliable UHF ant. tuner.

At these frequencies usually no antenna tuners are employed,
instead the antenna is designed resonant and such that it
gives the correct impedance, e.g. 50 Ohms.

The reason is that any matching device which is not directly inherent to
the antenna itself will cause avoidable losses.

However, if for some experimental purpose a tuner is called for, it might
be an idea to use a device similar to a "stub tuner". if three
small (10 pf or so) low loss trimmers are mounted in an coax line,
1/4 wl apart from each other, they should transform Impedances
quite well. Alternatively one might transform to a 200 Ohms paralell
line and implement a stub tuner:

           ____________________________________________________
           _________________ ___________ __________ ___________
                           I I         I I        I I
                           I I         I I        I I
                           I I         I I        I I
                           I I         I I        I I
                           I_I         I_I        I_I


The stubs are again separated by 1/4 wl and tuned by varying their
length (shorting bars).

73, Moritz DL5UH


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Uni-Hat CTSVR Short Vertical
Date: 26 Aug 1995 16:51:31 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41o1gj$[e-mail]>
References: <41nksf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Paul:

>Does anyone have any experience with a Uni-Hat Corporation CTSVR
>Multi-band short vertical for 160-80-40-17 meters?  I live on a small
>suburban lot on horrible desert soil and would like to get a reasonable
>signal on 160 and 80 this winter.

I looked at that antenna when I got a QSL from a guy on 160 with a ton of
advertising stuff for it. The claims were wild and technically unfounded,
but they backed off on all of them now. Lew McCoys stuff was way off base,
and Los Alamos doesn't even have an antenna test range. The initial theory
about the thing magically improving the rad resistance and efficiency was
all BUNK.

I think when the do-do finally cleared, the antenna is a good top loaded
35 foot (or whatever) vertical, but it is not magical. I'm sure it is
better than a Gap, but not as good as a good home brew top loaded single
band vertical.

It looks very well constructed, and the large hat should help on 160 and
it will work good if you have a fairly good ground.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (PaulS90212)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Uni-Hat CTSVR Short Vertical
Date: 26 Aug 1995 13:15:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41nksf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (PaulS90212)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Does anyone have any experience with a Uni-Hat Corporation CTSVR
Multi-band short vertical for 160-80-40-17 meters?  I live on a small
suburban lot on horrible desert soil and would like to get a reasonable
signal on 160 and 80 this winter.

The price is a tad off-putting!

73 - Paul, N6DN


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Velocity factors needed
Date: 27 Aug 1995 19:00:12 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <41qfbs$[e-mail]>
References: <41ekcm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx08-52.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

;   [e-mail] (The Great Pumpkin) writes:
;
;  Plan on making 2m, 1 1/4m, and 70cm J-poles from different types of
;  twin-lead. Want to incorporate velocity factor for each type of twin-lead
;  into the length calculations.
;
;  Need the velocity factors for:
;
;       1.  450 ohm windowed twin-lead (ladder line)
;       2.  300 ohm windowed twin-lead (ladder line)
;       3.  300 ohm TV twin-lead
;
;  I do not have references which give this information...
;
;  Thanks for your help...     Dave....  KB0TEG

I've measured flat 300-ohm twinlead at quite close to 0.8, although it varies
a bit from lot to lot. Haven't measured the others.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!ledge!darryl.linkow
From: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WANTED: Saturn 6 antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 95 09:55:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Organization: The Ledge PCBoard: Lake View Terrace, CA: USA: 818-896-2007
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.21
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.10
Lines: 15


I am looking to buy a Hi-Par Saturn 6 antenna.  This is the halo
antenna made in the mid-sixties or so for 6 Meters.  I am planning
on being a rover on the Sept. 9 VHF contest and would love to get
my hands on a Saturn 6 for the contest. If you have
one that you would like to sell, please leave me private Email.

              73, Darryl KE6IHA

      Internet Email: [e-mail]
                           OR
                      [e-mail]

---
 * OLX 2.2 * Darryl Linkow [phone]  9 am - 5 pm PDT


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 19:48:13 GMT
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <412c68$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41aopc$[e-mail]> <chew-2308951154170001@137.79.6.214> <41idjf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

From what I've seen lately, BNC and TNC must refer to the country
(city) of origin:

     BNC = Beijing N Connector

     TNC = Teipei N Connector

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!warp.cris.com!voyager.cris.com!Mnbc
From: [e-mail] (Dkhg Dhgfd)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WHAT IS THE BEST TNC?
Date: 26 Aug 1995 17:13:09 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <41nkn5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: voyager-fddi.cris.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

WHAT IS THE BEST TNC THAT I CAN GET FOR MY MONEY?($300-$400) :)
SOMEONE TOLD ME THAT THE KANTRONICS ARE THE BEST! ITS THAT TRUE?
I ALSO LIKE THE PK900! I AM LOOKING FOR A MULTIMODE TNC FOR VHF
THAT CAN RUN AT LEAST AT 9600! WICH IS THE BEST????



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: 25 Aug 1995 05:17:36 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <41jmdg$[e-mail]>
References: <41j6a9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup92.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] () wrote:
>I am looking for a book with info on making antenna's (VHF antenna's that
>is) & need to know where to find a book and what to look for, any suggestions
>on books?
>
[snip]

It's hard to beat the "ARRL Antenna Book" for all-around good info. $30 US from ARRL.
Another book from them has some info; "UHF Experimenter's Handbook" for $20 US, although
obviously the Antenna Book is more focused on antennas. I'm sure RSGB has something of equal
caliber (calibre?).

HTH, Regards, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!torn!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.sas.ab.ca!fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca!morganp
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: 25 Aug 1995 00:42:49 GMT
Organization: Edmonton Freenet, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <41j6a9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.3]

I am looking for a book with info on making antenna's (VHF antenna's that
is) & need to know where to find a book and what to look for, any suggestions
on books?

--
73 & ttyl     Morgan Patterson
       \\///  Internet: [e-mail]
       (o o)  Ham Radio: VE6MRP
        (_)   "Your Computer will self destruct in..5..4..3..2..1..KABOOM!!!"
----oOO-----OOo---------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!news.randomc.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: 26 Aug 1995 04:06:18 GMT
Organization: Random Access Communications
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <41m6jq$[e-mail]>
References: <41j6a9$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: zimmatore.randomc.com
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <41j6a9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] () writes:
>I am looking for a book with info on making antenna's (VHF antenna's that
>is) & need to know where to find a book and what to look for, any suggestions
>on books?

I think the best antenna book I have (although there are a few good ones
like the ARRL book already mentioned is:

Practical Antenna Handbook by  Joesph J. Carr  TAB Books


73 de John Zimmatore, AD4ZH




From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 16:50:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help with a ringo ranger"
Date: 24 Aug 95 15:59:30 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "with" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!skypoint.com!news3.mr.net!mr.net!news.mr.net!usenet
From: MRITUNJAY BANSAL <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.ham-radio,ott.jobs,ott.forsale.other,ott.forsale.computing,ont.jobs,newbridge.rec,newbridge.notice,newbridge.forsale,misc.invest.technical,misc.invest.stocks,misc.invest.canada,bc.jobs,alt.current-events.russia,ab.jobs
Subject: Re: $1,800 WEEKLY! MAILING OUR CIRCULARS
Date: 28 Aug 1995 21:23:45 GMT
Organization: General Mills, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41tc51$[e-mail]>
References: <41ii92$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41t2vt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 146.217.160.7
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:85677 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9220 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:16350 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13412 misc.invest.technical:16112 misc.invest.stocks:68042 misc.invest.canada:14674 alt.current-events.russia:10975

This is just the kind of disgusting commercial crap that we can do
without. In a high-tech world it seems, the anarchists could get away
with it!!!!!

Oh well, anxiety and pleasure I guess do go together.

Mritunjay



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!taligent!apple.com!apple.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Kok Chen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73
Date: 28 Aug 1995 13:59:51 -0700
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc., Cupertino, California
Lines: 35
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <41tao7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: apple.com

[e-mail] (Thomas J. Farish) writes:

>OK...so what's the story about the discone antenna project for 10 and 20m
>in the latest issue of '73?
>
>The author claims 3db gain over dipole omni-directionally(!) with a single
>cone and 6db with two cones connected together.  Looks easy to build, and
>cheap too.  Anybody else tried this?  This may be my weekend project....
>
>On the other hand, has Wayne started accepting articles from authors who
>write the cold fusion and telekenesis stuff in their spare time?


You could have guessed at the quality of the article by the author's
complete misuse of the term "discone."

If what was described is a discone, where the heck is the disc?! :-)
The ARRL Antenna Book has construction hints for real discones.

The balanced version of the antenna shown in the 73 article is, instead,
a biconical antenna.  Ferheavensake, even introductory antenna texts such
as Kraus' discuss at length the biconical.  Such antennas should not be
a mystery.  Some competent editor at 73 Magazine should have caught that
and jetisoned the article.

For a down-to-earth look at the gain a biconical produces, see Kraus.

Ref:  John D. Kraus [W8JK], "Antennas, Second Edition," McGraw-Hill, 1988.
ISBN 0-07-035422-7.


73,

Kok Chen, AA6TY                         [e-mail]
Apple Computer, Inc.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:11 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!punchdown.zocalo.com!usenet
From: Jeffrey Pawlan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1.5 ghz antenna needed for GPS receiver
Date: 31 Aug 1995 19:01:42 GMT
Organization: Zocalo Engineering - Berkeley, California, USA
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4250um$[e-mail]>
References: <4233er$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.135.76.232
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.4 sun4m)
X-URL: news:4233er$[e-mail]

MA/COM makes very fine and cost-effective flat antennas for GPS, most with
a built-in preamp.  I recommend not wasting your time redesigning the wheel
when it is so well done commercially. I don't know where you are but MA/COM
has regional sales offices in all parts of the country.

Jeffrey  WA6KBL
Pawlan Communications



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:12 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: 1000 KHz Length
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <41aluv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 12:47:58 GMT
Lines: 29

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rich Fortnum) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>>Dave Stuart ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>>>I have figured around 150 for a dipole using the 300 / (freq MHz) method.
>>
>>The formula is 468/fMHz, which in this case would be 468 ft. 300/fMhz
>>gives the Meters which would be 300 meters so a dipole would be half of that
>>or 150 meters minus 5%.
>
>I don't quite understand.  468 feet per 300/fMHz?

No, Armond's introduction of quaint American units (QAU) is just
confusing you. The formula 300/fMhz gives the *free space* wavelength
in meters. Half of that value gives the half wavelength in meters, or
150 meters as you determined. Now dipoles are subject to something
called "end effect", and the usual rule of thumb is to subtract about
5% from the free space figure to get the length of wire you need.
That's roughly 142.5 meters, or in QAU about 470 feet. That 5% is
just a rule of thumb, however, and you usually have to trim the
antenna to resonance, so starting a little on the long side is a
good idea because it's easier to cut wire off than to add wire back.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 28 Aug 1995 20:30:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41tn2j$[e-mail]>
References: <41qj17$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <41qj17$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (IBM Del F)
writes:

>--  obtain two 12 volt car batteries
>
>--  connect the two 12-Volt batteries in series
>
>--  connect the radio to the 24-Volt output.
>
>--  hit the power switch and key down the mike button with little delay.

>
>You'll get around 200 Watts output for as long as the radio can stand the
>overvoltage (maybe 15 seconds - based on speculation, not first-hand
>experience.)
>
>

How about dis-abling and alc / agc circuts?  Hams just run 'em wide open
any way.  Damn the transitors, Full power ahead.  Yahhooo.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:14 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (IBM Del F)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 gizmachi  antenna and kenwood ts-50 mod
Date: 29 Aug 1995 11:41:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41vcg0$[e-mail]>
References: <41tn2j$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (IBM Del F)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Yahooo indeed!   The vision of the guy riding the A-bomb out the bottom of
the jet in Dr. Strangelove comes to mind.

Whatever you do, just don't let all the smoke out of the finals.  Once it
escapes, you can't get the stuff back into them to make 'em work.

Del , KD4B
Raleigh, NC


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:15 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!world!blanket.mitre.org!linus.mitre.org!gbass.mitre.org!user
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Bass)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m - 5 element quad problems
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 08:39:35 -0400
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41am3n$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gbass.mitre.org

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

> Tom Baltz <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >The weekend project was the 5 element 2 meter quad from the January QST
> >article....& compared to my copper pipe J-pole, I'm dissapointed:
> >
> >The quad is performing about half of what the jpole is - both xmit &
> >receive!  I assumed it would be the other way around.
> >
> >Both antennas are inside the attic, both have aprox 60 feet runs of 9913.
> > The quad was built exactly to the dimensions given in QST.  SWR on the
> >quad is 1.5 compared to 1.1 on the j-pole.
>

I built the same antenna this summer and it booms out there much better
than my copper J-pole.  Are you feeding it from the side or the bottom?

Jerry

--
Jerry Bass, The MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
"Disclaim this!"


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:17 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.encore.com!dmobley
From: [e-mail] (Dennis Mobley)
Subject: Re: 2m - 5 element quad problems
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 18:36:22 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41am3n$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: maxis.encore.com
Lines: 32

[e-mail] (Jerry Bass) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

>> Tom Baltz <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>> >The weekend project was the 5 element 2 meter quad from the January QST
>> >article....& compared to my copper pipe J-pole, I'm dissapointed:
>> >
>> >The quad is performing about half of what the jpole is - both xmit &
>> >receive!  I assumed it would be the other way around.
>> >
>> >Both antennas are inside the attic, both have aprox 60 feet runs of 9913.
>> > The quad was built exactly to the dimensions given in QST.  SWR on the
>> >quad is 1.5 compared to 1.1 on the j-pole.
>>

>I built the same antenna this summer and it booms out there much better
>than my copper J-pole.  Are you feeding it from the side or the bottom?

>Jerry

>--
>Jerry Bass, The MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
>"Disclaim this!"

I built the same antenna and it works fine.

Did you use 10 ga solid copper wire without the jacket?

Dennis Mobley KE4OJB
Sunrise, Fl


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:18 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neosoft.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m - 5 element quad problems
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 13:34:46 PST
Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services   [phone]
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <422b07$[e-mail]>
References: <41am3n$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <gbass-290 <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sam-slip-j2.neosoft.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.6

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>[e-mail] (Jerry Bass) writes:
>
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>
>>> Tom Baltz <[e-mail]> writes:
>>> >The quad is performing about half of what the jpole is - both xmit &
>>> >receive!  I assumed it would be the other way around.
>
>>I built the same antenna this summer and it booms out there much better
>>than my copper J-pole.  Are you feeding it from the side or the bottom?
>
>>Jerry

Side for vertical polarization - - fm repeater & simplex work
>
>I built the same antenna and it works fine.
>
>Did you use 10 ga solid copper wire without the jacket?
>
>Dennis Mobley KE4OJB

12ga stranded copper - uninsulated I had laying around

Thanks Jerry & Dennis
KC5HEG de Tom



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwfocus1.wa.com!news1.halcyon.com!coho!ki7zd
From: [e-mail] (Randy Seacat)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m and 10m dipole on same feedline???
Date: 29 Aug 1995 22:25:58 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <42045m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coho.halcyon.com


Question for the gurus:

I know this will work, what I am after is how well it will, and what to
expect if I try it.

I have a vertical dipole for 10 meters pulled high into a tree. I would
like to add 2 meter elements to the same feedpoint, and use a  a switch
to change radios in the shack. What I need to know is:

By adding the 2meter elemets (dipole) to the same feedpoint as the
10meter, will I throw the swr for a loop?

Will I need to make adjustments to the already perfect 10 meter ant?

And, WILL THIS WORK, I mean really work the same as doing it seperate?

Thanks for ANY and ALL help! Before I mess things totaly up! heheh

73

Randy
[e-mail]

--
/-/-/  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  | Amateur Radio Station                       Inet: [e-mail]
  | KI7ZD
  | WWA  CN87  73's    _._ .. __... __.. _..   "If RST > 519, Reduce Power!"


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:20 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m and 10m dipole on same feedline???
Date: 31 Aug 1995 06:44:56 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 11
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <423lp8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, David Feldman <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I'd just try driving your 2M rig right into the 10M dipole and see what
>gives. My guess is that the feedline loss will cut down existing SWR on
>2M and your rig should be happy.

Unfortunately, verticals don't respond as well to length as horizontal
antennas. Anything over 3/4 wavelength will cause a very high angle
of radiation maybe good for satellites but not so good for repeaters.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!news.supernet.net!vivaldi.inoc.dl.nec.com!seas.smu.edu!news.eng.convex.com!hermes.oc.com!news.unt.edu!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m and 10m dipole on same feedline???
Date: 30 Aug 1995 12:38:48 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 44
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

[e-mail] (Randy Seacat) writes:

>Question for the gurus:
>I know this will work, what I am after is how well it will, and what to
>expect if I try it.
>
>I have a vertical dipole for 10 meters pulled high into a tree. I would
>like to add 2 meter elements to the same feedpoint, and use a  a switch
>to change radios in the shack. What I need to know is:
>By adding the 2meter elemets (dipole) to the same feedpoint as the
>10meter, will I throw the swr for a loop?

>Will I need to make adjustments to the already perfect 10 meter ant?

>And, WILL THIS WORK, I mean really work the same as doing it seperate?

>Thanks for ANY and ALL help! Before I mess things totaly up! heheh

>73

>Randy
>[e-mail]

You should have no problem doing this.  The only time you have
problems adding elements like this is when two bands are harmonically
related.  The longer wavelength can detune the shorter one.
For example 15 meters and 40 meters.  You can use a 40 meter
dipole on 15 meters.  If you add a 40 meter dipole to an existing
15 meter dipole and the 40 meter dipole doesn't match closely to
15 meters (3/2 wavelength) it can detune the 15 meter dipole.

ie. if the 15 meter dipole matches at 21.150MHz then the
40 meter dipole would have to match at 7.050MHz (21.150/3)
If it matches at 7.125 then it will detune the 15 meter dipole
slightly or at least look like it does.  Since 2 meters and 10 meters
are not harmonically related you should have no problem.


Hope this helps

Kevin, WB5RUE
[e-mail]
"I am Voltohm of Borg, resistance is E/I, power is EI, you will
be attenuated!"


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:22 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!dgf
From: [e-mail] (David Feldman)
Subject: Re: 2m and 10m dipole on same feedline???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Organization? Me?
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:48:06 GMT
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin) writes:
>[e-mail] (Randy Seacat) writes:
>
>>Question for the gurus:
>>I know this will work, what I am after is how well it will, and what to
>>expect if I try it.
>>
>You should have no problem doing this.  The only time you have
>problems adding elements like this is when two bands are harmonically

29.2 MHz * 5 = 146.0 MHz.

I'd just try driving your 2M rig right into the 10M dipole and see what
gives. My guess is that the feedline loss will cut down existing SWR on
2M and your rig should be happy.

73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:23 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rand.org!colvin.rand.org!user
From: [e-mail] (Tim Colvin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 5/4 wave center-fed dipole
Date: 28 Aug 1995 23:53:00 GMT
Organization: RAND
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: colvin.rand.org

Anyone out there using a 5/4 wave center-fed dipole? It's not something
I've seen much mention of, although I admittedly haven't looked *that*
hard. According to some calculations I just did, the 5/4 wave center-fed
dipole has the greatest directivity of all center-fed dipoles ( D = 3.28
(5.16 dBi), compared with D = 1.64 (2.15 dBi) for a 1/2 wave). The
radiation resistance of the 5/4 wave is 106.5 ohms. Anyone have any
practical experience with this antenna, or any comments? I realize, by the
way, that you pay for the increased directivity with four sidelobes. Maybe
some curious soul can build one and let me know how well the damn thing
works! Thanks in advance for any information...

Tim


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:24 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rand.org!colvin.rand.org!user
From: [e-mail] (Tim Colvin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/4 wave center-fed dipole
Date: 29 Aug 1995 20:30:17 GMT
Organization: RAND
Lines: 38
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41vdr4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: colvin.rand.org

In article <41vdr4$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
> Tim Colvin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >Anyone out there using a 5/4 wave center-fed dipole?
>
> Hi Tim, I am using one on 20m. It is 2*5/8 wavelengths long and
> 30 ft. high. I feed it with 300 ohm ladder-line. Works great.
>
> >the 5/4 wave center-fed
> >dipole has the greatest directivity of all center-fed dipoles ( D = 3.28
> >(5.16 dBi), compared with D = 1.64 (2.15 dBi) for a 1/2 wave).
>
> ELNEC agrees that it has about 3dbd gain.
>
> >The radiation resistance of the 5/4 wave is 106.5 ohms. Anyone have any
> >practical experience with this antenna, or any comments?
>
> ELNEC says the radiation resistance is 163-j761
>
Yeah, I didn't tell the full story. The radiation resistance is 106.5 ohms if
fed at a current maximum; it's 213 ohms when center-fed (ignoring any
inductive reactance).

> >I realize, by the
> >way, that you pay for the increased directivity with four sidelobes.
>
> This is not true. The gain over a half-wave dipole occurs because the
> *two* broadside dipoles are more narrow and more focused. By 6/4
> wavelengths the pattern has become cloverleaf so my antenna gives me
> broadside gain on 20m and cloverleaf lobes on 17m thereby covering
> most of the world's land masses on the two presently best DX bands.
>
> 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

There are indeed 4 sidelobes for the 5/4 wave center-fed dipole, but the
directivity is improved over the 1/2 wave version because the main lobe is
much more narrow.  Tim


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/4 wave center-fed dipole
Date: 29 Aug 1995 17:11:38 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <41vhoa$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Colvin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Anyone out there using a 5/4 wave center-fed dipole? ...The
>radiation resistance of the 5/4 wave is 106.5 ohms....I realize, by the
>way, that you pay for the increased directivity with four sidelobes.

Hi again Tim, It just dawned on me (duuhhh) that you are describing
a 3/2 wavelength resonant dipole which does have a resistive impedance
of around 106.5 ohms and four sidelobes. My previous statements were
about the 5/4 wavelength dipole that I thought you were talking about.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:26 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.cerf.net!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/4 wave center-fed dipole
Date: 29 Aug 1995 21:37:45 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <4201b9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mgate.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Tim Colvin) wrote:
>Anyone out there using a 5/4 wave center-fed dipole? It's not something
>I've seen much mention of, although I admittedly haven't looked *that*
>hard. According to some calculations I just did, the 5/4 wave center-fed
>dipole has the greatest directivity of all center-fed dipoles ( D = 3.28
>(5.16 dBi), compared with D = 1.64 (2.15 dBi) for a 1/2 wave). The
>radiation resistance of the 5/4 wave is 106.5 ohms. Anyone have any
>practical experience with this antenna, or any comments? I realize, by the
>way, that you pay for the increased directivity with four sidelobes. Maybe
>some curious soul can build one and let me know how well the damn thing
>works! Thanks in advance for any information...

Its no longer up, but I had a 20 meter open wire fed extended double
zepp aimed at Europe that did quite well. The ARRL Antenna book talks
about this type of antenna on page 8-34.  Another minor problem is
the input impedance--you usually need some sort of matching network,
as there is also a reactive component.

However, it is incorrect that the directivity is the highest for center
fed dipoles.  You can increase it even more by bending the antenna,
though admittedly this is a bit impractical fo HF wire dipoles.
Certainly not a problem for someone modeling a wire on a computer :-).


Zack Lau KH6CP/1
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!warwick!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hp-cv!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/4 wave center-fed dipole
Date: 30 Aug 1995 05:36:25 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 11
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <420tcp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41vdr4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Tim Colvin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>There are indeed 4 sidelobes for the 5/4 wave center-fed dipole, but the
>directivity is improved over the 1/2 wave version because the main lobe is
>much more narrow.  Tim

Sorry Tim, I erroneously inferred that you were saying that it had
a total of 4 lobes.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6 Meter Portable without Ground Plane
Date: 31 Aug 95 16:24:10 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I have been playing with 6 Meters.  I have a Ham Stick and a center loaded
mobile whip, as well as an Cushcraft AR-6.  I have a need for an antenna
that is shorter than the AR-6, but the Ham Stick and the mobile wip give
poor performance due to lack of ground plane.  Location is the balcony
of a condo at the beach.  What kind of antenna should I use.  I have about
6 verticle feet to work with and no hope of a good ground plane.

Also, how does one check the vswr.  I got a HF antenna matcher which does
not cover 6M and a UHF/VHF VSWR meter that does not either.  I there a
meter to match at 6M?  The very crude indication on my Xmtr says I have
very high VSWR, but really does not provide much info.



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:29 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!depaul
From: [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
Subject: Re: A low height BEAM or medium hgt. WINDOM ?
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 19:45:51 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspksa.spk.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Lines: 20

At such a low height put up the vertical.  It will probably outperform
the beam at such low heights.  Don't put up the vertical so high though,
unless you want to start introducing higher angle lobes.

I had a two element delta loop up 35ish' and a vertical and made
side by side comparisions...The loop was quieter, but there was
usually no difference on the other end.  Through on the air experiences,
I either hear the vertical beating a low beam or comparing close to it.
Low = 35ish' or less.

Use a elevated vertical with two 1/4 wave radials cut for each
working band...Actually, using 1/8 radials make little difference.

If you can space TWO verticals 5/8 wave apart and 0 phase them...
Then, you'll pick up 1 to 3 S units of gain broadside to the verticals.

Email me if you want more details...

Marc



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aircraft control cable for dipole?
Date: 28 Aug 1995 22:27:45 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <41tft1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41j2us$[e-mail]> <41j6sl$[e-mail]> <41l40e$[e-mail]> <41lqeu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip02.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

In article <41lqeu$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>[e-mail] (Ross Alexander) wrote:
>
>>What do you folks down there use for air?
>[snip]
>
>It's called sunshine <g>. These materials are very susceptible to
degradation
>due to UV. No worry about mildew tho...
>>
>>regards,
>>Ross ve6pdq
>>54o 45' N 113o 20' W
>>--
>>Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]
>
>
>73, Wes
>
Hi Wes

By the replies I've seen, I must have misunderstood your original post, I
though you were questioning whether braided stainless was suitable for an
antenna.  The kind you fly model airplanes with!

I have used it as guy wires with insulators separating dipole elements from
the tower with no problem for years, more than I care to mention thank you.

Gary



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:31 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!rand.org!colvin.rand.org!user
From: [e-mail] (Tim Colvin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna directivity of turnstile antenna's
Date: 28 Aug 1995 17:52:39 GMT
Organization: RAND
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41rpsl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: colvin.rand.org

In article <41rpsl$[e-mail]>, Burt Wilson
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> A difficult one. I am looking for the theoretical calculation for the
> antenna directivity for a turnstile antenna. To make it even more
> difficult the array consists of 64 turnstile antennas arranged in an 8 by
> 8 matrix configuration. Frequency I am using is 38.4 MHz. Are there any
> books or publications available on this matter.
>
> Any help greatly appreciated
>
> Burt Wilson
> University of Potchefstroom
> South Africa

See Antennas by John D. Kraus, pages 726-729. If an individual turnstile
is 1/2 wavelength, then its directivity is not much greater than 1, since
its field pattern differs from a circle by only 5%. If the elements in
your 8x8 array are in phase, then the total pattern won't be much
different. Hope this helps.

Tim


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!ix.netcom.com!howland.reston.ans.net!lamarck.sura.net!news.uky.edu!news
From: [e-mail] (Terry Fugate)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna directivity of turnstile antenna's
Date: 30 Aug 1995 12:14:28 GMT
Organization: IT
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <421kn4$[e-mail]>
References: <41rpsl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.163.13.56
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6

In article <41rpsl$[e-mail]>, Burt Wilson <[e-mail]> says:
>
>A difficult one. I am looking for the theoretical calculation for the
>antenna directivity for a turnstile antenna. To make it even more
>difficult the array consists of 64 turnstile antennas arranged in an 8 by
>8 matrix configuration. Frequency I am using is 38.4 MHz. Are there any
>books or publications available on this matter.
>
>Any help greatly appreciated
>
>Burt Wilson
>University of Potchefstroom
>South Africa
>
While I don't know of any books that could sovle your problem, I suspect
that even the bes model would lie to you.  To many minute varialbes will
bais a real object and push the performance away from what the math might
say.  I suspect that you will have to build the antenna and then map the
pattern.  I think our FCC requires actual measurement as opposed to
calcuted antenna patterns for FM radio and all bradcast Tv stations.
I use a simple turnstile for NOAA low orbital weather sats.  There are
some nulls in the vertcal pattern that do not show up in any models that
I have seen.  With my antenna, shifting the reflector elements up or down
by even 1/2" really changes the null pattern.  I have two trees, each
about 50 ft from the antenna, and about the same height, and when the
wind moves the trees the antenna null pattern also shifts. Rain and fog
also cause the nulls to shift.(I can not wait until our first snow or ice
storm)
Good luck
:)
.............................................................................
Terry Fugate
UKTV
University of Kentucky
"The opinions expressed herein are mine, and soley mine.  They do not
represent the official view of the University of Kentucky,
the State of Kentucky, or any agency of any government.
If you do not like my opinion, just get on with your life.
I will not change your mind and you damn sure can not change mine."


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:33 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!anat3d1.anatomy.upenn.edu!alex
From: [e-mail] (Alex Shrom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: antenna matching with handhelds?  Is it critical for transmitting?
Date: 30 Aug 1995 00:06:08 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <420a1g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: anat3d1.anatomy.upenn.edu

I have a realistic htx-202 HT.  I have the original rubber duck type
antenna, but I get stronger reception with other antennas (e.g., this
...thing... I have, not positive what it is, but it has a 19 inch
vertical element with two 3-inch elements about 20 deg off vertical,
and a 3-element ground plane, and a cb-type whip antenna).  Does the
HT automatically tune these (possibly mismatched) antennas for
transmitting, or will I screw something up if I try to transmit with
them?


--

Alex Shrom  -  [e-mail]  -  Major: History of Cat Art
Princeton '98 http://www.princeton.edu/~ajshrom  Minor: Yes, unfortunately



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:34 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <418pd6$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 00:55:45 GMT
Lines: 73

In article <418pd6$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
>>   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>  In article <40qikf$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>> [much deleted]
>>  Well, that's almost true. Assuming adequate skin depth, no transmisson
>>  line forward currents flow on the outside of coax. And forward transmission
>>  line currents are always 180 degrees out of phase on inner and outer unless
>>  there is an unbalanced reactance in series with one of the conductors but
>>  not the other causing a phase lead or lag. This is all *inside* the coax,
>>  thanks to skin effect, and has no effect on coax radiation, or lack thereof.
>>
>The only condition necessary for equal and phase-opposite currents on the
>outside of the inner conductor and the inside of the outer conductor is
>that no field penetrates the shield (a good assumption for this analysis,
>providing the conductor is several skin depths thick). This follows from
>Ampere's Law, one of Maxwell's equations.

Yep, we agree. A coax is a balanced line, and the Faraday shield effect
of the outer keeps it that way no matter what's happening on the outside
of the line.

>> [much deleted]
>>
>>  So-called voltage baluns and current baluns will *not* do this, unless
>>  they also happen to function as choke baluns (which fortunately most
>>  do). A current balun can force equal currents into two antenna legs,
>>  but unless those legs are physically symmetric with respect to each
>>  other, and to the coax, this will not stop induction field imbalances
>>  from causing radiation currents to flow on the coax outside.
>>
>
>As the person who coined the terms "current balun" and "voltage balun",
>I've regarded "choke balun" to be the same as "current balun". Can you
>point to an example of a balun which is a "current balun" and not a
>"choke balun"?

Nope. I didn't think I claimed otherwise, but rereading the above
that could be the interpretation.

>> [more deleted]
>
>>  It should be obvious that a balun is useless for an asymmetric antenna
>>  like a coax fed vertical monopole. There is nothing balanced about the
>>  antenna to "bal" to. All you can do in such cases is attempt to shield
>>  the coax from induction fields. It's already self-shielded against
>>  radiation due to unbalanced currents *inside* the coax.
>
>This isn't obvious to me. You can show by modeling or measurement that,
>for example, a ground plane antenna with four radials will have
>significant current flowing on the outside of the feedline due to
>coupling between the feedline and vertical radiating element. This
>current can be greatly reduced by placing two "choke" or "current" baluns
>at the feedpoint and 1/4 wave below it.

All that's saying is that 4 radials make a poor shield. Now assume a
metal autobody with a center of roof mounted monopole instead. The
coax is well shielded from the antenna fields, and doesn't have induced
currents flowing on its outer surface, and can't radiate. No balun
needed.

I think we are unnecessarily arguing at cross purposes here. I don't
claim that an RF choke won't be useful in cases where the feedline
is poorly shielded from the antenna fields. What I am suggesting is
that it is the *choke* action and not the *balun* action that's why
it's useful. This should be particularly apparent when you position
it at other than the feedpoint.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:36 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <419pnt$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 00:58:56 GMT
Lines: 33

In article <419pnt$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>Gary wrote:
>
>>And it's also the source of advice to use a feeder that's a multiple
>>of 1/2-wave, because the end of a 1/2-wave wire will present a very
>>high impedance, thus not loading that leg of the antenna and
>>virtually disappearing in regard to antenna resonance and feedpoint
>>impedance. Ain't science wonderful?
>
>Jack replied:
>
>:Not to nit pick (well, maybe a little), I thought this was the result
>:of the belief that the impedance at the feedpoint of the antenna will
>:be repeated at the transmitter.  Thus, the VSWR reading will be that
>:of the antenna, not the (unknown) result of the antenna plus feedline.
>
>Absolutely Jack, The main flaw in Gary's logic is that the VP of the cable
>is the inside electrical length is different that the outside. Most people
>I know of follow your logic. So the line length is a multiple of a 1/2
>wave *inside* the cable, and that is usually considerably different than
>the electrical *length* outside the cable that controls parallel current
>line impedance.

Consider hardline or rigid airline. However, that wasn't my point.
I suspect most amateurs who subscribe to the wives' tale would measure
the coax physical length and not its internal electrical length anyway.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:37 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <419pnt$[e-mail]> <419qc3$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 01:02:09 GMT
Lines: 25

In article <419qc3$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>Gary wrote:
>>And it's also the source of advice to use a feeder that's a multiple
>>of 1/2-wave, because the end of a 1/2-wave wire will present a very
>>high impedance, thus not loading that leg of the antenna and
>>virtually disappearing in regard to antenna resonance and feedpoint
>>impedance. Ain't science wonderful?
>
>And woops, I almost missed it. If it were a 1/2 wave it would be the
>*worse* length desired in most cases. A half wave "repeats" the impedance
>at the far end, so the 1/2 wl would present a low impedance and maximum
>undesired loading to the feedpoint if the feedline terminates in a ground
>or low impedanceat the transmitter. Often times a 1/4 wl outside length is
>selected and the cable grounded at that point to insure minimal unwanted
>currents. 73 Tom

That'd be true if the shack was effectively RF grounded, which I doubt,
otherwise they wouldn't be resorting to voodoo.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <41b97c$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 01:11:33 GMT
Lines: 40

In article <41b97c$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>>>>>Simple, a halfwave resonant wire has voltage maximums and current
>minimums at each end. From Ohm's Law, R=E/I, so when E is high,
>and I is low, R is large. The coax isn't acting as a transmission
>line here, where a halfwave would simply repeat the impedance at
>one end to the other end. Its outside is just acting as an end fed
>wire element. The impedance of such an end fed wire is typically
>2,000-3,000 ohms. Meanwhile, the impedance of the end fed quarterwave
>that is one leg of the dipole is on the order of 25-35 ohms. So
>the currents will divide in inverse proportion to the impedances,
>and roughly 10 times as much current will flow in the antenna leg as
>on the coax shield, which is what we want the current to do.
>
>Gary<<<<
>
>Phew, this is degenerating fast. So now a hunk a feedline routed through
>heaven knows what connected at the far end to something unspecified has an
>impedance of 2-3k ohms? Gary, the traditional length of cable used to
>minimize unwanted currents is a 1/4 wave on the outside of the cable and
>the cable is grounded at the 1/4 wave distant point. In order for the half
>wave to have a useful impedance for this it would have to be isolated from
>other objects and totally de-coupled at the far end. Think about it a bit!

More than think about it, I've seen it. Second floor shack, no effective
RF ground. The transmitter is just a box floating on the end of the coax.
The end feed impedance of a halfwave wire *is* roughly 2000-3000 ohms
give or take a bit. The point being that its much higher than the
impedance of the quarterwave antenna leg to which it's physically
attached at the feedpoint. The halfwave is at a voltage node while
the quarterwave is at a current node.

Remember, a dipole is ground independent, nothing needs to be grounded
for it to work.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:39 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <412uuv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 01:21:11 GMT
Lines: 22

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>
>But don't the currents/voltages on a wire antenna repeat every
>half-wave?  I would agree with you if the "far" end of the wire was
>open - that would present a high impedance that would be seen at the
>driven end as well.  However, in this case the far end is at the
>transmitter, connected to the common side of the power source that's
>driving the antenna system.  This means both ends of a half-wave
>length of shield are at a low impedance point.

What's the phase at the far end when the wave reaches it?
The power up and back traverses a full wave, equal potentials,
no current flow. Now if the radio is effectively RF grounded
(rare), then the radio common won't be floating and you'd be
right.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:40 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <412pbl$[e-mail]> <412uuv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <417trq$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41bcfb$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 01:25:09 GMT
Lines: 19

In article <41bcfb$[e-mail]> Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:
>Well, you're neglecting to consider the other end. Most transmitters are
>(or should be) connected to ground. Rather than think too hard about this <g>
>I constructed it in EZNEC. I find a nice current minimum half way down the wire
>(coax) and nice maximums at the feed end and ground. Depending on the ground
>type, with perfect ground being the worst, there is some pretty significant
>pattern distortion and vertical radiation.

Maybe "should be", but few are effectively RF grounded. Rerun the
simulation with the transmitter floating. Everyone says a dipole is
ground independent, so no grounds are needed (except for safety of
course, but safety grounds are rarely good RF grounds).

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!emory!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <41brf1$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 01:34:18 GMT
Lines: 35

In article <41brf1$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>Gary Wrote:
>>I'll get to the rest of your post another time, however I want to
>>address this point right away. It's true "di" means two, two *poles*,
>>which is electrical speak for nodes of maximum voltage, and conversely
>>two zeros of current, and a dipole has exactly two voltage nodes and
>>two current zeros, one at each end. That's true whether it is physically
>>broken for center feed or not.
>
>Sorry Gary, Page 24-7 and 8 of Jasik show dipoles as having multiple
>nodes, they are called full wave dipoles. Page 327 of  Electromagnetic
>Waves and Radiating Systems shows dipoles as antennas with a feeder that
>seperates two halves. Can you please name a reference book that shows a
>gamma matched or T matched antenna and calls it a dipole?

Sure can, the ITT Radio Engineer's Handbook. Trusty thing. And lo,
even the dictionary agrees, and Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia
too, that a dipole has two electrical poles. They also mention things
like the dipole moment of molecules, which I don't think are cut in
the center either.

>And what about that "magic" length that has zero volts feedpoint voltage?
>Has anyone ever seen a dipole with zero ohms feedpoint impedance? Still
>waiting for that answer!

Examine any plumber's delight beam. If you don't think the geometric center
of the dipole elements are at zero volts, try to light a light bulb with
the voltage you find there.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:44 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <41co6s$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 02:10:13 GMT
Lines: 105

In article <41co6s$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>
>I can site examples of antennas of infinitesimal length to several
>wavelengths long being called dipoles in antenna engineering specific
>texts, but that wasn't my puzzlement. The real question I had was
>*where can I find the definition Gary gave*. I was merely trying to

You could try a good dictionary.

>illustrate how bantering of terms and numbers is used to make things
>sound more "official" or factual, such as "a half wave long feedline
>presents 2000-3000 ohms to the antenna". My point is it *sounds* very
>technical, but that doesn't make it a true or accurate description or even
>a "more often than not rule".

So tell us great guru, what is the typical impedance of an end fed
halfwave wire? It you deviate far from 2000-3000 ohms I want to see
some justification.

>The wishful thinking that letting the feedline radiate always or even
>often improves performance by "filling in the nulls" or adding low
>angle radiation.

I didn't make that claim, but I'd posit that for many low horizontal
dipoles it's probably more true than not.

>The false claim that a conventional center fed dipole has zero voltage
>at the feedpoint and thus doesn't need a balun. Please tell me how to
>build a center fed antenna with zero volts at the feedpoint.

See plumber's delight in your nearest ARRL Antenna Book for a dipole
with zero voltage at its geometric center. I never claimed that there
was zero voltage at the *feedpoint*, which is never precisely at the
geometric center, though it may, or may not, be symmetric about the
geometric center.

>The false claim that tuning of a dipole antenna is altered (mistuned) to
>achieve a 50 ohm (or whatever) feedpoint impedance and the mistuning
>causes feedpoint voltage to appear.

I didn't make that claim at all, and agree it's false.

>The false claim that non-resonance of an antenna causes balance to
>vanish.

I didn't make that claim either, but I did say a non-resonant antenna
won't have a voltage zero at the geometric center. That should be
obvious since it won't support a standing wave at the frequency.

>The claim that transmission lines radiate without unequal or non-180
>degree out of phase currents (referenced between the conductors)
>appearing on the conductors, or that there is any way to confine the RF
>field in a coaxial transmission line without having equal and 180 degree
>out of phase currents appear on the center conductor and the shield.

Well that was *your* false claim. A coax with adequate skin depth
will *always* have equal and phase opposite currents flowing inside.
That's completely unrelated to any currents that may be flowing on
the *outside* of the coax.

>The claim radiating (parallel) currents do not move to the outer surface
>of the coaxial transmission line.

They don't move *through* the shield, though if they're going to
radiate they do have to be flowing on the outside. How they get
there is a separate issue. They may turn the corner at the feedpoint,
or they may be the result of an unbalanced induction field.

>The claim that the only cause of feedline radiation is induced fields
>from mutual coupling between the radiator and the feedline.

I said that feedline radiation could also be the result of an
electrical imbalance caused by currents turning the corner at
the feedpoint. I also suggested that a RF choke could prevent
that.

>The claim that antenna non-symmetry is the only or most common
>cause of feedline radiation when a balanced antenna is fed with a
>coaxial line.

Predominant is the word I used.

>The claim that the feedline of an asymmetrical antenna can not have it's
>radiation substantially reduced or eliminated with the addition of a
>current or choke balun.

I didn't claim that. I said that a balun doesn't have anything to
"bal" to when attached to an unbalanced antenna. Of course a choke
is a choke and does what a choke does (presents a high impedance to
RF), but a balanced to unbalanced transformer has nothing to do
with it.

>The claim that current or choke baluns can not eliminate or
>substantially reduce the primary causes of feedline radiation (induced
>and directly conducted currents).

Didn't claim that either, a choke is a choke, and does what chokes
do. Transformer action has nothing to do with it.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:45 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <41brf1$[e-mail]> <41oa5n$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 02:20:31 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <41oa5n$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Thomas C Sefranek) writes:
>Time for Tom to step in (it).
>
>Is it too simple, or am I missing something?
>
>A ZERO impedance feed cannot have an exciting voltage node...
>with NO excitation voltage there is NO current introduced...
>A zero impedance feed refelect PERFECTLY the power applied...

Since I never said anything about ZERO impedance feeds, I won't
comment on that. However, this has given me a thought (painful
thing). Does a shorted coax radiate? The inside is connected to
the outside at that point, but the net voltage is zero. Does
the wave bounce back down the inside or the outside of the coax?
And are the currents on the inner and outer in the reverse
wave in or out of phase? After all, they're coming from an
equipotential point now.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:47 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!w2xo.pgh.pa.us!durham
From: [e-mail] (Jim Durham)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 29 Aug 1995 03:39:29 GMT
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <41u25h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41qf1e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: w2xo.pgh.pa.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


OK...you guys have got me suckered into this thread..so here goes...

I think it was Tom who posted the multi-claim listing. I agree with
your disagreement with all of them.

On the outside shield thing, one thing to consider is that you *can*,
as several have mentioned, eliminate the current by grounding the
feedline 1/4 wave from the antenna feedpoint. HOWEVER...what the
average ham calls "ground" may not be GROUND, so , to that extent, it may
not work quite as expected, and a balun would be good insurance.

Yes, the 1/2 wave thing is *real*. I suggest doubters take  130
feet of rg8, ground the far end to a reasonable ground, and then
measure the impedance of the near end to a reasonable ground at 80m. It
will be low, probably less than 50 ohms if the cable is laying on
the ground. If there were no radiation from the cable, it would be zero.
Why is it not zero? Because the wire will radiate! The current
flows from the exciting generator to the far end, reflects at
the ground (hopefully entirely if the ground is good), then flows
back to the sending end, arriving out of phase with the generator.
It doesn't completely cancel the voltage because *part of the energy
has radiated* . So, a 1/2 wave wire won't completely repeat impedances,
but..sorta...


Now, there are a couple of interesting things that zoomed right
by in this thread. Somewhere it was alluded that the center of
a dipole will not be symetrical to ground, voltage wise. It was
claimed that no one knows what ground in different parts of the
world, etc.. I think this is more true in the static DC world
than RF. Consider this argument... a half wave dipole is
72 ohms in free space, right? A vertical 1/4 wave is 36 ohms
to ground, if a good ground system is available,etc. Now, take
two of these, pick up the fed ends until they are horizontal and pointing
away from each other,connect the feedline *between* them...Isnt' that
strange..hmmm... 36 in series with 36 is ...VOILA!  72 ohms.
I think the sucker is balanced to ground! Make it a "V" (not inverted)
with the feedpoint on the ground and work your way up to the
dipole case, it *stays* balanced to ground, if both ends are
in the same kind of environment.

BTW, the driving resistance of a 1/4 wave is 36 ohms and not zero
for the same reason that the 1/2 wave grounded on the far end is
not zero, radiation dissapates the reflected wave, causing it to
not completely cancel the input voltage, and E/I is 36 ohms.(ideally).

Now, here is the part that is really interesting that I'd like to hear
some comments on..

At one point in the thread someone was talking about zero voltage at
the center of a plumber's delight beam. Common sense tells you that
this is so, because at any given instant, the two halves of the
antenna element are 180 deg out of phase, so if like points are
connected together, such as the two inner ends of each 1/4 wave
element, the voltage is zero. This sorta proves that the halves
of a dipole are balanced to ground, or the boom would be hot with RF.

Now, this is the interesting part of this. How can something
with no voltage have power? If the voltages are nicely balanced
to ground, then you connect them together, there's no voltage
to ground, but it still works.

We would have to say that "ground" is a very convenient measuring
point and does provide a neutral connection for one lead of our
measuring devices, but in some cases, it can be elusive. There
obviously must be voltage present, but voltage referenced to what?

I would love to hear some comments on this. Sounds like ground
is elastic!

I'm sure that there is some physics guru that can explain all
this. I'm ready to learn!

Let me comment on one more thing from this thread..then I'll shut
up (whew...!)

Regarding the zero ohm antenna element caused by the power received
from the other elements of the array exactly cancelling the
power fed to the antenna element.. This is a horrible condition that occurs
as a result of bad antenna design in early AM broadcast directional
antenna systems..usually multi-tower designs from the pre-computer
days where the mutual impedances were just too complex for the
old slip stick to calculate. It's *murder* to get a tower of
less than about 5 ohms or so to work at all. THe ground system
probably has a couple ohms impedance, even with 120 radials.
If the tower is 1 ohm, you're lost 66% of your power! The other
problem is that the matching sectio Q will be so high that you
will produce SSB, DSB, or some awful thing depending on how you
tune the matching network..you'll actually null out parts of the
signal in certain directions. One of the AMers here in town
has this very problem. Sounds just like 75 meter duck squaking
at some places in town.


73
-Jim , W2XO




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usenet
From: Wes Stewart <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 29 Aug 1995 05:27:44 GMT
Organization: Arizona Daily Star - AZSTARNET
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <41u8gg$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <412pbl$[e-mail]> <412uuv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <417trq$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41bcfb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sprite36.azstarnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b2 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>In article <41bcfb$[e-mail]> Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:
>>Well, you're neglecting to consider the other end. Most transmitters are
>>(or should be) connected to ground. Rather than think too hard about this <g>
>>I constructed it in EZNEC. I find a nice current minimum half way down the wire
>>(coax) and nice maximums at the feed end and ground. Depending on the ground
>>type, with perfect ground being the worst, there is some pretty significant
>>pattern distortion and vertical radiation.
>
>Maybe "should be", but few are effectively RF grounded. Rerun the
>simulation with the transmitter floating. Everyone says a dipole is
>ground independent, so no grounds are needed (except for safety of
>course, but safety grounds are rarely good RF grounds).
>
I would run the simulation with the transmitter "floating", but I see no way,
in the real world, to have it so. *Somewhere* at some distance, there is *some*
ground, however poor. If you are on the second story, then it's that much
further away. (OK, before you begin to pick nits, I know we could place the
system on a balloon or spacecraft, etc) Let us say for the sake of discussion
(argument?) that the additional distance to "ground" is a half wavelength.
What changes about your hypothesis? Or mine? Nothing.

What if the "grounding" is due only to the capacitance of the transmitter
to ground. Then there is some other "optimum" feeder length. The point is,
we are dealing with an uncontrolled situation here. Unless of course, we
install a current balun at the feedpoint. I thought that was general
consensus here. The question was, "Should a balum be used?" The answer is,
"Generally speaking, yes."

SK N7WS





From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 29 Aug 1995 20:35:03 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <41vtln$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx05-06.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

>  . . . Does a shorted coax radiate? The inside is connected to
>  the outside at that point, but the net voltage is zero. Does
>  the wave bounce back down the inside or the outside of the coax?
>  And are the currents on the inner and outer in the reverse
>  wave in or out of phase? After all, they're coming from an
>  equipotential point now.

In an ideal world, a shorted coax won't radiate, regardless of the
length. Because of the shield, the current on the inner conductor
is equal and opposite that on the inside of the outer conductor.
If we connect the two conductors together, all the current on the
inner conductor is used to supply the current on the inside of the
outer conductor, so there's none left to flow on the outside. In
fact, it looks like this condition will occur so long as there's
no path from the center conductor to the cable shield at any point
farther down along the cable. (When a dipole is fed by coax,
there's a finite impedance from the lower part of the shield to
ground and from the center-conductor-connected dipole half to
ground, and directly between them. This the path for the dipole
case.) Never really thought about this before. Thanks for asking it.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:50 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 05:52:58 GMT
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <418pd6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

[e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:

>As the person who coined the terms "current balun" and "voltage
>balun", I've regarded "choke balun" to be the same as "current
>balun". Can you point to an example of a balun which is a "current
>balun" and not a "choke balun"?

Roy, for the sake of common terminology, what would you call the
transformer at the input of my tuner?  As you know, it's bifilar wound
and the schematic looks like a conventional transformer.

It's not a choke-type device, but as we discussed elsewhere, it forces
equal currents in the line.  Maybe this is outside the group of
devices you're referring to, but it's the main example that has caused
me to make the distinction between a choke balun and a current balun
in this thread.

73,

Jack


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 30 Aug 1995 07:52:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 109
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <421jd2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

(Gary Coffman) writes:

>[The following thought experiment is physically impossible
<snip>
>leads, allowing for those effects.]
>
>We need to remember that a voltage is a potential difference
>between two points. If you choose those two points to be the
>far ends of a dipole, you'll measure a maximum voltage since
>they are voltage nodes 180 degrees out of phase with respect
>to each other. If you move the probes in toward the center
>in equal amounts, the potential difference declines. When
>you reach the geometric center, the potential difference is
>zero.

Gary, are you actually saying that if I measure the voltage at each end of
the center insulator of my forty meter dipole it will be zero volts? That
would mean the coax has zero volts across it also, wouldn't it? That seems
almost idiotic!

> You could do the same thing with a resistor connected
>across a voltage source, as the probes approach the geometric
>center of the resistor, the voltage reading goes to zero.
>That doesn't mean power isn't dissipated in the resistor,
>nor does it mean that power isn't radiated by an antenna.
>This has nothing to do with ground. It's just the result
>of the physical self-symmetry of the system.
>
But is the antenna the equilivent of a single resistor? I don't think so.
It
is split (in the cases that most people in this world would call a dipole)
in
the center and fed, or fed between a continious center and a point further
out (what Gary calls a dipole). In the case of the center fed resistor,
the
probe would read voltage at the feedpoint. In the Gary dipole (incorrectly
called a gamma matched half wave element by most of us) equivilent the
voltage at the center would be zero, but across the feedpoint there would
definately be voltage!

>If we try to make the measurement with one probe connected to
>ground, and the other moving along the dipole element, we'll
>get readings that are site and configuration dependent. The
>antenna fields will induce currents in the ground below them
>that will form an image antenna. Depending on the symmetry
>of the system, the distance of the antenna above ground,
>and the conductance of the various bits of soil under the
>antenna, that image will be distorted in various ways.
>
This has nothing to do with unbalance at the feedpoint! The unbalance will
occur even if the antenna is removed from earth and fed by a small
generator
floating in space. The electrical mass of the feedline can be enough to
cause
parallel current flow if the antenna is a normal center fed dipole. For
example, even if a very small mass generator was floating in space with
the
dipole, and if the coaxial feedline was 1/4 wavelength long, the feedline
radiation will be maximized and be very apparent.

>For example, the further the antenna is above ground, the
<SNIP>
>we probe.
>
>Another example is to consider the two cases where a dipole
<snip>
>voltage measured.
>
>But now lets look at the case where the dipole is perpendicular
<snip>
>points on the real antenna, at varying distances, are different,
>so the voltages you measure will not be just the result of antenna
>height.
>
>So it's the physical self-symmetry of the antenna that controls
>what voltage you'll see when measuring the antenna vis itself,
>but it's the physical symmetry of the *system* of antenna and
>ground that determine what you'll measure when using a ground
>reference for the meter. Since the factors of that symmetry
>change with each installation, there isn't much useful in
>general we can say about such readings.
>
That certainly is another cause of feedline currents or unbalanced antenna
currents, but it is not the only one. If the shield of a coaxial cable is
connected to a non-zero voltage point (as referenced to the electrical
mass
or parallel impedance of the cable) current will flow. This is because the
antenna tries to stay "balanced" (remember each half of a common dipole
has a
25-35 ohm impedance with respect to any neutral electrical mass). Since
the
feedline has a finite parallel impedance and is also (a coaxial line)
inherently "unbalanced" with respect to the "balanced" antenna voltages,
the
feedpoint voltage can cause parallel current flow in it.

Gary is incorrect in stating feedpoint terminal voltages are not a major
source of concern. He is correct non-symmetry can cause problems, but it
is
certainly not the ONLY cause of feedline radiation in most dipole (the
common
center fed kind) installations.

A current balun can eliminate or reduce all three major sources of
feedline
radiation or unwanted current problems. They are non-symmetry, field
coupling, and conducted currents.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!news.belwue.de!News.Uni-Marburg.DE!news.th-darmstadt.de!fauern!lrz-muenchen.de!news.informatik.uni-muenchen.de!news.muc.de!news.space.net!news.ecrc.de!news.forth.gr!news-ath.forthnet.gr!news.compulink.gr!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Zacharias Liangas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: beam antenna project: HELP
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 12:44:58 GMT
Organization: ME!!!!!
Lines: 62
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Expires: 10 days
Message-ID: <421pjo$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena.compulink.gr
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:57827 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13495



Dear friends


I have a big doubt so I post this masage here

   First lemme tell you my system configuration fr the moment before I
   advise you my problem :
   I use a SONY ICF 7600D , a Lowe HF150 and a Philips Magnavox 2395
   all are digital
   - wire antennas - of 6m sloped 60 deg paralel to az 120 deg - and a
   hor wire 13 m [aralel to 15 deg az .Both are  TV antenna mast
guides
   -home brewn ATU operating 2- 7 mHz for 20 - 5 dB respectively
   Palce of Reception ; Thessaloniki 40N 23E

   Due to my interest in SEA  I have the particular interest for
   listening to the folowing radio stations and under the condidtions
   as below :

   - STM / V o Malaysia ( dir 120 dg az) in 15295 at mean levels of 2-
   3 with QRMers as
   R Liberty  fgrom 15290  at levels S4-5 ( abt 15-25 dB more)
   R F I  from 15300 at nearly same as R L
   from varius hand made account-ments I understood that a great
   amount of signal abt 50-60% is lost due to possible reflexions
   coming from the city's mountains at an angle of 270-025 deg az

-RRI Jakarta in 9680  at mean levels (not always receivable) of S1-2
   Only V of Turkey is QRMer at 9675 but not always QRMing due to very
   low mod

- R Singapore  in 6000 at mean levels  of S2to 3 with
   Deutschlandfunk in 6005 (S4) as the only QRMer or sometimes
   Radio Dubai at 6000  but at verylow level

   I asked  the experts  of my city for making a common antenna
constru
   ction for  these 3 freqs of a antenna individual per band , I also
   read  many boks abt antennas found solutions  but most of them  are
un-
   suitable  for  my  place ( they were quad - X beam  for example) as
I
   have minimal  room in  the 7  level building and possibly can use
only
   small constructions  of  no more than 4 x 4 sqm

   PLease help me , and suggest a good protype fr beam antenna(s)
under
   the above conditions
   Thank you in advance

   [e-mail]
PLEASE ADIVSE ME YOUR OPINIONS BY EMAIL ONLY !

======
test for 8-bit
µß≈ß±Θß≥ δΘ▄πΩß≥
Zakaria Liang!
(namanya untuk kawan sahaja!)



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Date: 29 Aug 1995 10:04:25 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <41uon9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41t85v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>I must say that I believe the R5 is one of the more underrated antennas
>in use by hams. I've had one up at two different QTHs and have worked more
>than 100 countries per band on 20, 15, and 10 with it. I do put it up quite
>high (about 50') and run an amp.

John,

Just what is your point? If you run 1 KW into *any* antenna 50' up,
you can expect to work lots of countries on 10 to 20. Try three loops,
inverted vees or dipoles at the same height as the top of your R5.

Apart from this the R5 is generally not underrated. For the type of
compromize it is, most agree that it works quite well.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:57 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!caen!night.primate.wisc.edu!relay!relay2!relay-wo!dtix.dt.navy.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil!user
From: [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS)
Subject: Re: Best Vertical HF Antenna ??
Message-ID: <mike_cash-2408951401580001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Organization: nawc
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 21:00:23 GMT
Lines: 67

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:

> After several days of hard work, I am now the proud owner of a 200'
> dipole up 40'.  However, for reasons I won't go into, the antenna must
> come down. :(
>
> It appears that I'm going to be restricted to using a ground-mounted
> vertical for 80-10M, although there's a possibility of also putting up
> a random wire for 160M.  The 160M wire would be 200-400' long,
> supported by trees, and I would need to homebrew a tuning unit for use
> at the feedpoint (so I can feed it with coax).
>
> The standard trap verticals I'm considering are the Hy-Gain DX-88
> (188S) and CushCraft AP8A.  The Butternut HF9VX and GAP Titan DX are
> also in the running, but I would be using the latter at ground level
> with radials rather than as elevated, ground independant verticals.
> The GAP Voyager DX covers 160M but not the spectrum through 10M, so
> I'm not considering this antenna at this time.
>
> Perhaps someone familiar with the construction of these antennas can
> answer a few questions.
>
> First, which of these products is the most rugged?  The GAP appears to
> eliminate traps and coils, but all those stubs and tuning sections
> hanging off the radiator look pretty fragile.  Also, do the GAP
> and/or the others require guying?
>
> Second, is there any truth to several manufacturers' claims of
> improved performance as a result of feeding the vertical at the
> center, or at the top?
>
> Also, the area that's cleared behind my house will allow installation
> of radials about 50' long (100' diameter).  However, the edges of the
> clearing are lined by trees about 60' tall.  How much of a detriment
> is this likely to be to antenna effectiveness on the higher HF bands?
>
> Finally, I seem to remember reading about a trick concerning laying
> radials in the ground.  It had something to with with the use of a
> certain tool (edger?) to make the job easier.  Anyone know?
>
> Any opinions on these issues (or alternate approaches) will be greatly
> appreciated.  Installing the radials and burying the coax will have to
> be done before winter sets in, so I need to make a decision quickly.
>
> 73 and Thanks,
>
> Jack  WB3U

Jack, I have been using the Cushcraft AP8A for three years.  It is ground
mounted with 32 radials, four at .25wl for each band.  Just like the
directions say.  However, I did make one mod.  I connected the end of the
80 meter radials to my chainlink fence.  About 2000' long.  I live on 2.5
acres in the desert.  The antenna is about 100' from my house, no
obstructions.

The reports that I get on all bands are excellent.  I also work a lot of
DX with no problem.  The antenna has survied 90 to 100 mph winds with no
problem.  I am very happy with the antenna.  My four element quad only
gets about two "s" units better report on a good day, sometimes much less.

I used a hoe for digging a trench for each radial.  You can use a garden
trowel but I did not have one.  My radials are about three to four inches
below ground level.  Hope this helps.

--
Mike, KN6IS


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best VHF antenna analyzer ; archives
Date: 29 Aug 1995 13:48:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41vju1$[e-mail]>
References: <41upil$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <41upil$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] () writes:

>
>He mentioned that it is very difficult to measure an antenna
>pattern anywhere near to the accuracy it can be calculated by NEC 2,
>and would also require a proper test site.
>
>Therefore he concluded that one is not too far off by building the
antenna
>to the dimensions given by NEC2.
>
>

Hi Mortz,

Naturally I would like to place my 2 cents in this. With any model, it
should be confirmed when built. It is foolish not to, since the transition
from a perfect world of models to the real world can result in many
errors.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:49:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best VHF antenna analyzer ; archives
Date: 31 Aug 1995 07:57:12 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <423q0o$[e-mail]>
References: <41upil$[e-mail]> <41vju1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>Hi Mortz,
>
>Naturally I would like to place my 2 cents in this. With any model, it
>should be confirmed when built. It is foolish not to, since the transition
>from a perfect world of models to the real world can result in many
>errors.

Only too true, Tom

and OM Rainer had his antennas tested (thats why he concluded that the NEC 2
results are accurate).

But if someone tried to optimize an antenna on a trial and error basis,
without a real test site, he will not get very far, no matter how many
digits his field strength meter has.

73, Moritz DL5UH





From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:00 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!ghiscox
From: "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bobtail Curtain Anyone?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:10:37 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Lines: 12

I forgot to add that I have posted the top fed bobtail curtain
model (cleverly named TOPBOB40.EZ) at emclab.ee.umr.edu in
/pub/aces/NEC for anonymous ftp.

73/George

--
| George L. Hiscox                 | Very funny Scotty... Now |
| [e-mail]               | beam down my clothes !!! |
| WA6RIK @ WB6YMH.#socal.ca.usa.na | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:01 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!ghiscox
From: "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bobtail Curtain Anyone?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 19:06:39 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Lines: 32

Have been having alot of fun modeling antennas since I got the
new EZNEC software.  Last night I started playing with the
bobtail curtain antenna using EZNEC.  Also did some reading on
the bobtail curtain in both Devoldere and the ARRL Antenna Book.
Both those references and the the BOBTAILC.EZ file that came with
the EZNEC software had the antenna feedpoint at the lower end of
the middle vertical wire.  The feedpoint impedance was high, on
the order of several thousand ohms, requiring a parallel tuned
circuit at the feedpoint.

Having just finished modeling a half-square which is fed at one
top corner, I decided to see what would happen if I fed the
bobtail at the top of the middle vertical wire instead of at the
bottom. Modeling the (40 meter) bobtail in this fashion over a
Mininec VG ground it was possible to achieve gain of over 8dbi
with a takeoff angle of 19 degrees while feeding the antenna
directly with 50 ohm feedline.  Azimuth beamwidth was 44 degrees.

Does anyone have any experience feeding a bobtail curtain in this
manner?  What are the drawbacks aside from the obvious one of the
weight of the feedline at the center of the antenna?  Is the
bobtail curtain fed in such a fashion still considered a bobtail
curtain, or is it another "Real McCoy?"

73/George

--
| George L. Hiscox                 | Very funny Scotty... Now |
| [e-mail]               | beam down my clothes !!! |
| WA6RIK @ WB6YMH.#socal.ca.usa.na | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com!news
From: [e-mail] (x)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: build micpre for recording project
Date: 29 Aug 1995 16:43:52 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41vg48$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: jake-5o.aip.realtime.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

Any one know a souce for designs of audio pre amps . I want to try my hand a building some mic preamps
for recording applications. Old manuals or sourches of schematics would be
perfect.
Thanks
Ed Guinn
kb5ruf
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Copper Tube "J-Pole"
Date: 28 Aug 1995 00:28:00 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <41r2ig$[e-mail]>
References: <41etrr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <41q5b8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip53.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Hi Mitch
I don't know what happened, but something crashed, so to make sure you get
the reply, I have copied from my mail.log.
Gary


From [e-mail] Sun Aug 27 19:25:01 1995
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Copper Tube "J-Pole" - 2 Attachments [1/1]
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Organization: Inlink
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 95 19:24:54 PST
X-Mailer: WinVN 0.99.5
In-Reply-To: <41q5b8$[e-mail]>
References: <41etrr$[e-mail]>
<[e-mail]>
<41q5b8$[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
     Boundary="*-*-*- Next Section -*-*-*"

--*-*-*- Next Section -*-*-*
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

>
>Not meaning to change the subject here, but I have a question regarding
your
>2m/70cm j-pole design.
>
>Does this antenna require two feedlines (i.e. 1 for 2m and another for
70cm)?
>If not, would you mind posting the plans?  I have several plans I've
>accumulated over time but none of them address combining the two feedlines
>into one.  Guess I could use a duplexer to accomplish this -- but only if
it'
>s
>necessary.
>
>Thanks and 73
>Mitchell KC5MKW
>
>
Hi Mitch

I am enclosing the plans for my copper cactus antennas.
Your question on combining the coax, There are three ways to do this, you
already mentioned the first.

The second is to connect a coax of 1/4 or 1/2 wavelength to each connect
point and join them using a T-connector to connect your feed in coax of any
length.  Make sure both coaxes are either 1/4 or 1/2 wavelength not one of
each both 1/4 or both 1/2 wavelengths.

The third way, on my copper cactus plans anyhow, is to use the proper coax
for the highest band, since you mentioned 2-meter, 440, I would suggest
a minimum of semi-rigid hardline for the 440s sake.
This coax gets connected to the 2-meter part of the antenna.  At the 440
part, connect a shorting wire, like 14 guage copper, between the normal
connect points for the coax.  This will make the antenna much easier to
tune.

OK in the tuning stub cap drill a hole and install a brass machine screw and
wind it all the way in.  Now tune up the 440 antenna first by unwinding the
screw, it usually takes about 1/2 inch out.  Then tune the 2-meter the same
way, but that one should end up about 1/4 inch out.  Then go back to the 440
and recheck that, for every two turns out on the 440 from this point, you
may have to turn the 2-meter back in about 1/8 turn.

The connect points of the coax are fairly accurate, do not use an swr meter
for changing the location of the connect points as it will shift the
impedance of the connect point sometimes as high as 700 ohms.

The dimensions and connect point shown in my plans, depending on
construction methods, should be right at 50 ohm impedance, down 1/2 inch is
like 300 ohms and up 1/2 inch is like 500 ohms.  So get it close to the
measurements shown.

Gary

Two Attachments, Copper Cactus and Stacked J

NOTE:  I will send each page separate, that may be where it crashed.
Gary



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger A. Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Discone Mounted Upside Down?
Date: 30 Aug 1995 02:11:15 GMT
Organization: Telex Communications, Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <420hc4$fed$[e-mail]>
References: <41oo77$[e-mail]>

Gary,

Sometimes inverted discones are constucted at HF because of their
size.  I assume that since it is on a roof, it probably is VHF or
possibly above 20 MHz.

In HF inverted-discones, they are usually mounted on the ground
with the disc part forming the ground radials.  The cone part is
a broadband monopole, which sometimes looks like a HUGE bicycle
wheel suspended from a central tower.  I have seen these operate
from 3 to 30 MHz, broadband.

73, Roger WB0DGF


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!news.nic.surfnet.nl!tuegate.tue.nl!usenet
From: ESRAC Eindhoven Student Radio Amateur Club <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FB33 + UFB13..??
Date: 31 Aug 1995 10:50:48 GMT
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <424468$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc3.esrac.ele.tue.nl
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; Linux 1.2.9 i486)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Is there someone who has tried the combination of the Fritzel FB33
and UFB13 WARC dipole on the SAME boom? Is there any interaction
to expect?

Please mail your experiences to [e-mail]

73 de Aurelio at PI50TUE



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:06 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground-mounted vertical quirks
Date: 30 Aug 1995 11:59:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 35
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4221sd$[e-mail]>
References: <421pr1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Bill,

I don't know if you say the earlier reply I gave to you, so let me repeat
it. First of all I used to live in South Amherst at the corner of Russia
and Quarry roads. I had the 140 foot tower with stacked 40 and 20 meter
antennas, and a smaller 85 footer near the house if you ever remember
seeing them. I loved that area.

There are two likely sources of RFI from your antenna. Direct radiation
from the antenna can be getting into your neighbors stuff. If this is the
case, there is very little you can do about it at your end without
relocating the antenna or reducing power. The most reliable solution would
be RFI proofing the neighbors equipment. If this is the problem adding
radials will likely make the problem worse because antenna efficiency and
field strength will certainly increase!

The second problem source could be radiated fields or conducted RF
currents getting back into common wiring paths and winding up at the
neighbors. If this is the case, adding more radials and/or adding a choke
balun in the feedline between the antenna and the affected wiring may
help.

A choke balun will "choke off" unwanted currents flowing down the outside
of the coax and reduce or eliminate interference if this is the problem.

Adding radials will divide the base current of the vertical between more
wires, reducing the level of RF unintentionally radiated by the radials.
More radials will also reduce "pumping" of the ground side of the
feedpoint with RF, and lower unwanted parallel feedline currents.

Unfortunately the vertical concentrates your transmitters signal along the
horizon. I hope you won't be stuck using low dipoles in your location to
cure the RFI. I hope this helps, RFI can be exasperating.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ground-mounted vertical quirks
Date: 30 Aug 1995 13:41:53 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <421pr1$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu

I will be using my Butternut HF6V once again as my
primary antenna instead of my G5RV when Yaesu
returns my FL7000 autotuner/amp after repairs.
Although the ground-mounted HF6V loads well on
most WARC bands and accepts the 500w from the amp
I come back to the problem of causing my neighbors'
appliances to sing and dance whenever I use the
amp.  Is this an unavoidable result of using a
ground-mounted vertical, or is there some trick
to putting rf out to the horizon without activating
my neighbors' electronics?  I am using a ground rod
and four 50' ground radials at the moment.  I am also
open to recommendations of a multiband antenna that
can be handled by an autotuner that can only handle
up to a 3:1 SWR, which rules out using the G5RV.
I'm thinking of trying a couple 1/4 wave counterpoise
wires for each band, and just laying the insulated
wires on top of the ground into the ravine behind our
rental.  Thanks for your help.  --Bill KB8USZ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!news.rcinet.com!sally.dma.org!millersg
From: [e-mail] (Steve Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Half-square antenna performance?
Date: 28 Aug 1995 17:08:42 GMT
Organization: Dayton Microcomputer Association; Dayton, Ohio, USA
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <41st6q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41nce0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dmapub.dma.org

In article <41nce0$[e-mail]>,
W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> The gain was around 5.5 dBi (don't start that thread again, pse)
>>with a take-off angle of less than 20 degrees.
>
>Gee that's not much gain. What does a dipole the height over the same soil
>model? Where is it fed at?

You'd have to have a tall support to get a horizontal antenna with
similar gain at low take off angles.

We used a half square on 80m at W8LT (Ohio State U) about 10 years ago.
It was suspended between flagpoles of Ohio Stadium (horseshoe shaped)
with the top over 100 feet high. The performance for long haul DX was
excellent. It outperformed our 600 foot longwire at 90 feet for most DX
paths (The LW was also a good DX performer) - sometimes by a substantial
margin, 5 dB or more. Some of the difference may have been due to polarity.

My best experience was working YB0WR longpath through a big east coast pile.
One call with 100 watts (the amp hadn't warmed up yet). I'd highly the
half square as a simple antenna for low band DX.
--
Steve Miller
[e-mail]
WD8IXE - Ridin' the aethereal waves


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:09 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Half-square antenna performance?
Date: 29 Aug 1995 09:45:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <41v5m2$[e-mail]>
References: <41st6q$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I modeled a half square and this is the program I use said happens over
the same type of grounds. The gain is roughly 3 dB better than a single
vertical element, and 1.5 dB weaker than a pair of regular verticals
phased. A dipole over the same ground needed to be 50 feet high compared
to 35 feet or so for the half square for the same gain at 22 degrees (on
40 meters).

How does this agree with other programs?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:10 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!ghiscox
From: "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Half-square antenna performance?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <41st6q$[e-mail]> <41v5m2$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 20:39:15 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Lines: 21

After seeing the discussion here in rec.radio.antennas, I modeled
a 40 meter half-square using EZNEC. The results looked very
promising to me.

Modeled with the bottom ends of the vertical wires 10' above a
Mininec vg ground, the takeoff angle was 16 degrees! Beamwidth on
the elevation plot was 27 degrees with a azimuth plot beamwidth
of 74 degrees.  Gain figures were in line with those already
posted and perhaps a little bit better.

I posted the model for anonymous ftp at emclab.ee.umr.edu in
/pub/aces/NEC.

George

--
| George L. Hiscox                 | Very funny Scotty... Now |
| [e-mail]               | beam down my clothes !!! |
| WA6RIK @ WB6YMH.#socal.ca.usa.na | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:11 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: Tom WB4iUX <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Half-square antenna performance?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (TSKELTON)
Organization: AT&T GIS
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.0 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <41st6q$[e-mail]><41v5m2$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 16:34:06 GMT
Lines: 42

I just re-checked my 40m half square versus 40m 1/2 wave
dipole.  The half square is modeled with the ends 10 ft off the
ground over 'real ground'.  I had to raise the 40m dipole to
125 ft above 'real ground' to get a 16 degree takeoff angle,
which is what I get with the half square.  I'm using ELNEC/MaxP
version 3.0.

At 125 ft above 'real ground', the half wave dipole
exhibited about 1.5 dB more gain than the half square.
However, how many dB are lost in the extra 80 to 90
feet you'd need to get to the dipole versus the half
square?  YMMV,but it's around 1 to 2 dB depending on
your coax (don't have the charts here with me now)..

Good discussion...good points.  I just can't wait to
get this beast up in the air.  Heard Island is coming
and I need it on 40!

Cheers and DX,  friends....

73, Tom WB4iUX
[e-mail] ( at least till the RIF!)



==========W8JI  Tom, 8/29/95==========
I modeled a half square and this is the program I use said happens over
the same type of grounds. The gain is roughly 3 dB better than a single
vertical element, and 1.5 dB weaker than a pair of regular verticals
phased. A dipole over the same ground needed to be 50 feet high compared
to 35 feet or so for the half square for the same gain at 22 degrees (on
40 meters).

How does this agree with other programs?

73 Tom

****************************************
DX IS!!!
BE A BELIEVER!!!
BE ONE OF THE DESERVING!!!!
****************************************


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:16 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!skypoint.com!news3.mr.net!mr.net!news.mr.net!timbuk.cray.com!equalizer!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Postmaster)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #377 (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 95 21:22:51 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 486
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Forwarded message follows:

> From [e-mail]. Mon Aug 28 13:21:14 1995
> Received: by ms.n7nei.ampr.org (JNOS1.10k) with POP3
>       id AA98528 ; Mon, 28 Aug 95 13:21:14 PDT
> Received: from ucsd.edu by rs6a.wln.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.06)
>           id AA25116; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 08:31:44 -0800
> Received: by mail.ucsd.edu; id EAA25917
>       sendmail 8.6.12/UCSD-2.2-sun
>       Mon, 28 Aug 1995 04:30:22 -0700 for ham-ant-list
> Errors-To: [e-mail]
> Sender: [e-mail]
> Precedence: List
> Received: by mail.ucsd.edu; id EAA25902
>       sendmail 8.6.12/UCSD-2.2-sun
>       Mon, 28 Aug 1995 04:30:19 -0700 for ham-ant-ddist
> Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 04:30:17 PDT
> From: Ham-Ant Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
> Errors-To: [e-mail]
> Reply-To: [e-mail]
> Precedence: List
> Subject: Ham-Ant Digest V95 #377
> To: [e-mail]
> Status: O
> X-Status:


Ham-Ant Digest              Mon, 28 Aug 95       Volume 95 : Issue  377

Today's Topics:
                   (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73
              A low height BEAM or medium hgt. WINDOM ?
                 Alpha delta sloper directionality ?
                        G5RV antenna inquiry.
                      Ladder Line Loss (2 msgs)
                Looking for April '92 CQ reprint . . .
                       Prelim Review: GAP TITAN
                         Rohn HBX Info Wanted
                        Tinted Window Question
                What antenna would you use??? (3 msgs)
                      What is a WINDOM antenna ?
               Which is the best antenna book? (2 msgs)

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

Archives of past issues of the Ham-Ant Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-ant".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 24 Aug 1995 00:14:49 -0400
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Subject: (Dis)Cone Antenna in Recent '73

>On the other hand, has Wayne started accepting articles from authors who
>write the cold fusion and telekenesis stuff in their spare time?
;^)
--
>Thomas J. Farish

Thomas,

Did you ever trust 73 magazine for accuracy?

Tom

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 05:30:41 GMT
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Subject: A low height BEAM or medium hgt. WINDOM ?

   [e-mail] (BUDDY10) wrote:

>What would be better ?    A Triband BEAM(10-15-20m) at about 25'  or
>a Multi-band Windom at about 40'  ?  The Beam would have a rotator to
    << snip >>
>OR ....   How about this...
>A BEAM at about 25' or a VERTICAL (GAP,R5,Butternut) on a pole at
>about 40'(NO ground radials).

In order of preference, I'd take the beam first, then the Windom, then
the vertical.

Of course, with the beam, you lose access to the lower bands.  Also,
10-15-20M are in pretty bad shape due to the sunspot cycle.

Why not put up the beam *and* the Windom?

73,

Jack  WB3U

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 95 21:43:14 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Pat Wright)
Subject: Alpha delta sloper directionality ?

Is my alpha delta sloper S.W.L. antenna directional ? If so in what manner and
 how strong .Mahalo's

------------------------------

Date: 24 Aug 1995 15:52:31 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: G5RV antenna inquiry.

In article <[e-mail]>, Anonymous  <> wrote:

>  If you've got a "real" antenna tuner, you'll be better of feeding
>however much antenna you can put up (102' or more is better) with
>ladder-line and use it that way.

Whether more or less than 102 ft is better depends on the desired
radiation pattern. Between 10/8 WL and 12/8 WL, the radiation
pattern becomes multi-lobed with almost no broadside pattern.

Years ago, I put up my first antenna in AZ which was a G5RV. I
thought it wasn't working until I obtained Antennas West technical
paper on G5RVs and found I was radiating most of my 20m RF over
the oceans. I had turned it broadside to Europe and never heard a
European station. After reading the tech note, I rotated the G5RV
to place one of the cloverleaf lobes aimed at Europe and European
stations started pouring in. Signal reports improved again when
I got rid of the coax entirely. Signal reports improved again
when I shortened it to 88 ft and returned it broadside to Europe.
88 ft is 2*5/8 on 20m with about 3dbd gain.

If one replaces coax with ladder-line and the measured
SWR at the transmitter site increases, that is good news.
Why? Because to a certain extent, the lossy coax is acting
like a dummy load and power is being wasted as heat thus
lowering the SWR.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC   (not speaking for my employer)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Aug 95 21:27:09 GMT
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Subject: Ladder Line Loss

Wes,

Many thanks for taking time to run this antenna through EZNEC for me.

There are two primary differences in our results.  The first is the
"flat" line loss.  I didn't see the charts you mentioned, but I'm
using TL.EXE for this and it assumes 0.01 dB / 100'.  This is not an
insignificant difference, but relative to my antenna, this isn't the
primary cause of the loss difference we calculated.

As I stated in the earlier post, Mininec shows an antenna feedpoint
impedance of 1.26-j489 for this antenna.  This is the most significant
discrepancy in our results.  I went back and played with the program
again after reading your post, and I discovered something I hadn't
noticed before.  No matter what numbers I plug in for ground "Relative
Dielectric Constant" and "Conductivity", the feedpoint impedance stays
the same.  Only height above ground causes it to change.  My
conclusion is that Mininec doesn't use conductivity in calculating
feedpoint impedance, although it might for radiation patterns.

Anyway, the results you obtained for feedpoint impedance translate to
a worst-case transmission line loss of 0.89 dB.  I can live with that.
<g>

Thanks again for your help with this.  BTW, being off the air for the
last five years, I sure wasn't prepared for the poor band conditions.
It's almost unbelievable to me that 15M is closed practically the
entire day. :(

73,

Jack  WB3U

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Aug 95 21:33:17 GMT
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Subject: Ladder Line Loss

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>OOps, never mind, I missed something. Hee hee.Jack, that looks like
>it should tune.

Yes, it should.  My tuner has been modified to a PI configuration and
I might change it back to T to see it it relieves this problem.
Othersise, I'll just use an external transformer between the rig and
tuner.  I've done that before and it works quite well for matching
antennas that would normally be outside the tuner's range.

BTW, you sent e-mail to me about 4 or 5 days ago and I replied, also
by e-mail.  Our local POP server is really messed up right now though
- if you got my reply, would you mind posting a short confirmaiton
here in this thread for me?  Sorry to waste bandwidth with this, but I
can't get return receipts anymore and a number of us here suspect that
our mail isn't getting out.

Thanks & 73,

Jack WB3U

------------------------------

Date: 27 Aug 1995 18:37:56 GMT
From: Joe Pfeuffer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking for April '92 CQ reprint . . .

 . . on PVC vertical. My library doesn't go back thaat far.

Any help appreciated.

73 -

Joe KW1K
4838 S. Bella Vista Dr.
Veradale, WA  99037
Fax [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 02:05:39 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Prelim Review: GAP TITAN

Relax, I was just being objective. I think we all get 599 reports in
contest no mater how weak we are. The dipole may skew your results a
little but not much. If you take QST, check the sept 95 issue page 36,
last paragraph in the article called A receiving Antenna that Rejects
Local Noise. There is a lot of truth to it. Aren't antennas fun?


Robert S. French ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>,
: Steve Ellington <[e-mail]> wrote:
: >Great, but you can't compare the Gap with something that isn't there.

: No, but I can compare general experience over a period of months.  If
: I have previously been unable to call anyone on 20m SSB and now am
: able to do it repeatedly to various parts of the country, I think it's
: an observable difference.  I never claimed this was a perfect
: double-blind test.  Maybe the ionosphere was particularly friendly
: that one night.

: >Contest results never count. Signals are stronger due to huge amplifiers etc.

: Oh, I see.  People can hear me better because they're transmitting
: stronger signals.

: >Hmmm!! I can hear signals on 80 meters by touching the antenna input
: >of my HQ129 with my finger! This must be a bad location indeed.

: Maybe you're just REALLY tall :-)

: >Could you stick up a dipole and compare them? This is the only thing that
: >means anything.

: I wish I could, but the only way I can realistically do this is by
: having the dipole cut across the top of the GAP, which will of course
: then skew the results.  I can try to do something, but I have a
: feeling you'll consider my results just as invalid.

:               Rob
--
  Steve
[e-mail]



------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 04:03:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (John S. Hill)
Subject: Rohn HBX Info Wanted

In article <41o0v0$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Curt Phillips) wrote:
>   I'm looking at a Rohn HBX tower (approx. 64 ft) to purchase to put
>a Hygain TH7 on.
>   a) Does anyone have the data on the max antenna area that this
>tower is rated for?  Though it is supposed to be a free standing
tower,
>how much might guying it add to the acceptable windload area?
>   b) What should a 64' Rohn HBX sell for used?  It's "on the ground"
>and in good, but not great shape (some rust spots that need to be
>painted, a couple of bent spots that will need to be straightened
>and reinforced).
>   Thanks for any input.
Curt, I've had an HBX-56 up for 10 years now with a TH5MK2 and 2M
vertical on it. Though I can honestly say I've never gotten a 70MPH
blow here in the city, I decided to take the chance. You certainly
don't want to put a load like mine on the BX-64. I've been up on top
of both and the HBX-56 is all the lighter you would want to go. A
better choice would be the HDBX-48 and even then it's against the
recommendations of Rohn, though I think they're a bit conservative
as far as boom length and the twisting element associated with it.
YMMV. Good Luck...John

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 19:41:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Jack Glidden)
Subject: Tinted Window Question

I have been told told that the tinting that comes from the factory on
newer model veh. is actually a metal that is inside the glass.  This
has the effect of really screwing up any type of thru the glass
antenna.  Is this true?  Where or who should I call to confirm this?
I have a 92 Jimmy with factory tint on all glass except the front.  I
need to mount some antennas and don't want to drill or use mag mounts.
I am planning to mount a 2 meter and a 10 meter antenna.
If you hav any answers please send e-mail.

Thanks

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 01:43:02 GMT
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Subject: What antenna would you use???

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

> . . . I have a substantial number of trees that are probably about
>40-50 feet up and somewhere near 100 feet or more apart. If you,
>fellow hams, were going to put up something you could build with,
>say, a soldering iron, some ladder line, and a bunch of wire, what
>would you build?    <snip>

I just installed my favorite antenna two days ago - it's a 200'
dipole fed with ladder line.  Bear in mind though that you can't feed
an antenna like this with the typical tuner that has a balun at the
output.  You *must* either move the balun to the input of the tuner
(that's what I did), or use a link-coupled Matchbox type tuner.

73 & Gud Luck,

Jack

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 05:52:26 GMT
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Subject: What antenna would you use???

   [e-mail]   (Joe Subich) wrote:

>You CAN use a balun on the output if it is a W2DU-type (ferrite
>choke) 4:1 current balun.  Check the QST article on them by John
>Belrose two years or so ago.

With all due respect to the author of that article, choke baluns have
a finite impedance at each frequency of operation.  If the
feedpoint impedance is excessive due to antenna reactance, the
impedance of the balun may not be sufficient to prevent excessive
current flow and power loss in the ferrite.

IMO, the only way to feed a non-resonant dipole with *any* balun is to
run a program that calculates the feedpoint impedance at the tuner for
each band of operation.  Then, that impedance can be compared to the
capabilities of the balun.

73,

Jack  WB3U

------------------------------

Date: 28 Aug 1995 03:31:23 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Joe Subich)
Subject: What antenna would you use???

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>
>I just installed my favorite antenna two days ago - it's a 200'
>dipole fed with ladder line.  Bear in mind though that you can't feed
>an antenna like this with the typical tuner that has a balun at the
>output.  You *must* either move the balun to the input of the tuner
>(that's what I did), or use a link-coupled Matchbox type tuner.
>

You CAN use a balun on the output if it is a W2DU-type (ferrite choke)
4:1 current balun.  Check the QST article on them by John Belrose two
years or so ago.

      ... Joe Subich, AD8I
         ([e-mail])


------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 01:58:38 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: What is a WINDOM antenna ?

About one third the way through the town is a large resturant where local
school band members all eat. This is why the town of Windom was named
after the antenna. Indeed, a multiband feeder system.





Ted Zateslo ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Luke Hamaty) writes:
: >I drove through Windom, North Carolina last weekend. It's on Hwy. 19
: >just north of Burnsville up in the mountains. Didn't see much besides
: >the sign. I wonder whether the name of the town has anything to do
: >with the antenna, or vice-versa?

: The Windom antenna was invented in the 30s by Loren Windom, W8GZ,
: who is still in the Callbook (he's 90 now).  Of course, it's
: always possible that he's related to the founders of Windom, NC...

: Ted Zateslo, W1XO

--
  Steve
[e-mail]



------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1995 04:06:18 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Which is the best antenna book?

In <41j6a9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] () writes:
>I am looking for a book with info on making antenna's (VHF antenna's that
>is) & need to know where to find a book and what to look for, any suggestions
>on books?

I think the best antenna book I have (although there are a few good ones
like the ARRL book already mentioned is:

Practical Antenna Handbook by  Joesph J. Carr  TAB Books


73 de John Zimmatore, AD4ZH

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 17:55:51 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Steven Swift)
Subject: Which is the best antenna book?

[e-mail] writes:

>In <41j6a9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] () writes:
>>I am looking for a book with info on making antenna's (VHF antenna's that
>>is) & need to know where to find a book and what to look for, any suggestions
>>on books?

>I think the best antenna book I have (although there are a few good ones
>like the ARRL book already mentioned is:

>Practical Antenna Handbook by  Joesph J. Carr  TAB Books

I don't know about his Antenna book, but I have Joseph Carr's book
"Secrets of RF Circuit Design" which is loaded with errors, mistakes
and complete misunderstanding of RF circuit design.  I would be wary
of other books written by him.  At least in this book, he ignores
reality.  Besides the technical errors, it is badly written.

>73 de John Zimmatore, AD4ZH


--
Steven D. Swift, P.E.           ( [e-mail] )
NOVATECH INSTRUMENTS, INC.      1530 Eastlake Avenue East, Suite 303
206.322.1562, FAX [phone]  Seattle, Washington 98102 USA

------------------------------

End of Ham-Ant Digest V95 #377
******************************




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:17 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onr.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help -- what to use for AM antenna???
Date: 30 Aug 1995 00:19:42 GMT
Organization: Onramp Access, Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <420aqu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: onramp2-15.onr.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

 I have a Yamaha stereo receiver in my office through which I often listen to AM
talk radio broadcasts.  The little "loop" AM antenna that came with it is
amazingly useless.  I have run a single insulated wire from one of the two AM
antenna inputs out the window and along the roofline.  That pulls in some (not all)
local stations pretty well, but for the most powerful station, there is little
selectivity -- always another faraway station playing behind it.
 What should I do, within reason, to get better AM reception through this
receiver?  Thanks!

  Gary

--
*********************************************
Idealism, once armed, becomes totalitarianism.
        ---- Patrick E. Kennon
*********************************************




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:18 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!world!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Martin)
Subject: Re: HELP! R7 Tuning?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Mr Usenet Himself)
Nntp-Posting-Host: world.std.com
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ham Radio Outlet-NH
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
References: <[e-mail]> <41ebib$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 22:21:29 GMT
Lines: 17

In a previous post I sed:

:>Tomorrow I will call Ken and let him know about this thread and see what kind
:>of support he may have to offer.  This is interesting though.

And so I did.  The R7 "Guru" at Cushcraft is Ray Lajoie, N1SIX.  Ray is also
the Tech Services Manager.  You can ask for him by calling [phone].

Cheers!

--------------------------------------------------------------
|Jim Martin, WK1V              |  I speak for no one...Not   |
|Lowell, Massachusetts         |       even for myself!      |
|USAF (Ret)ained               | #include "std_disclaimer.h" |
|ex: KA5MWD/N1CLS/KB1LW/HL9ZF  |   Intentionally Left Blank  |
--------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:19 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!world!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Martin)
Subject: Re: HELP! R7 Tuning?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Mr Usenet Himself)
Nntp-Posting-Host: world.std.com
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ham Radio Outlet-NH
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
References: <[e-mail]> <41ebib$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 00:36:31 GMT
Lines: 18

I had seen someone post a while back that he used a tuner to get his R7 to work
on 80 meters.  For those who do not know....DO NOT USE the R7 on bands it is
not designed for.

REASONS:

80 meter operations will damage the matching network

6 meter operations will blow the 17 meter trap.

I do not represent any manufacturer or dealer here on the net.
--------------------------------------------------------------
|Jim Martin, WK1V              |  I speak for no one...Not   |
|Lowell, Massachusetts         |       even for myself!      |
|USAF (Ret)ained               | #include "std_disclaimer.h" |
|ex: KA5MWD/N1CLS/KB1LW/HL9ZF  |   Intentionally Left Blank  |
--------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:19 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!alfa02.medio.net!netnews.nwnet.net!news.alaska.edu!orion.alaska.edu!auchd
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: help: problems with R7
Date: 30 Aug 95 22:47:31 AST
Organization: University of Alaska
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: orion.alaska.edu



Hi...

Had a strange thing happen to me ysterday with my R7.  Everything was running
smoothly, then pop, loss of signal strength and SWR's through the roof. So, I
did the standard .... Check the coax and the connections.  Everything looked
fine.  I even looked inside the matching unit for problem spots.  I did not
find anything.

So, I wondering if I blew a trap in the antenna... Any ideas or help that
people can offer would be greatly appreciated.  Also, if you have the number to
Cushcraft that would be great also.  Thanks....


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:20 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!tecsun1.tec.army.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil!user
From: [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS)
Subject: How to feed HF Quad??
Message-ID: <mike_cash-2808950924070001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Organization: nawc
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 16:22:33 GMT
Lines: 22

I am building a multiband (10-20 mtr) quad.  I think that I have read all
of the books and articles on the subject.  The quad will be at 70╣ on a
40╣ boom.  Four elements on 20 & 17, five elements on 15-12-10.  This is
my third quad, my first multiband.  The other two quads, 2 el 10 mtr and 4
el 12 mtr, were feed with rg-8 direct.  They seem to work well.

I have a 300╣ run from the TX to the antenna.  I will be using 9913 to a 5
way switch box mounted on the mast.  Not sure if I will use a box
configuration or a diamond.

My requirement is to get the most signal (gain) out of the quad as I can.
F/B is less important than gain to me.

Questions;   Should I use a gamma match, balum, 1/4 wl 75 ohm stub,
transformer, run the 9913 direct, or other?  Ladder line or twin lead is
out of the question.  Which of these, using 9913 coax transmission line
will do a better job of getting my signal out to the other guy (or gal)?

Can anyone Help????

--
Mike, KN6IS


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:21 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to feed HF Quad??
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 05:19:12 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <mike_cash-2808950924070001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS) wrote:

>Questions;   Should I use a gamma match, balum, 1/4 wl 75 ohm stub,
>transformer, run the 9913 direct, or other?  Ladder line or twin lead
>is out of the question.  Which of these, using 9913 coax transmission
>line will do a better job of getting my signal out to the other guy
>(or gal)?

It's sure hard to beat the simplicity of a balun.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:22 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!newsdist.tc.umn.edu!dawn.mmm.com!news
From: [e-mail]  (Gary Hosler - KN0Z)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to feed HF Quad??
Date: 31 Aug 1995 12:48:38 GMT
Organization: 3M - St. Paul, MN  55144-1000 US
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <424b36$[e-mail]>
References: <mike_cash-2808950924070001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil> <[e-mail]> <mike_cash-3008950802340001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil> <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 32bit)

Not sure I understand why you would recommend a 1:1 balun.
Most of the quads I have built exhibit a feedpoint of about 90
- 120 ohms (depending on vairables such as single band vs
multi band, height above ground, etc.).  I would recommend
measuring the feedpoint and making a balun in the proper ratio
(or purchase one from Palomar, Amidon, etc.)



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:24 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: J-pole antennas question
From: [e-mail] (Clint Bradford)
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!wwswinc!clint.bradford
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 09:28:00 -0500
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc. - 516-736-6662
Lines: 65

Subject: J-pole antennas question

>>briefly explain the theory behind the j-pole antenna, and why it is
>>able to get such high gain compared to whips.

Someone else will give you the THEORY behind 'em, all I know is that the
simple J-Pole described below sure works well for me!


     === 2m/70cm Dual Band J-Pole made from 300 ohm twin lead ===

              _____      _______       ___
                |       |       |       |
                |       |   O   |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
             54-1/4"    |       |    38-1/2"
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |      _|       |
                |       |   N |_       _|__
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |       |
                |       |       |    15-3/4"
                |       |       |       |
                |       |_______| ___   |
                |       |       | 1/4"  |
               _|_      |       | ___  _|__
                        ^       ^
                        |       |
                    Coax Inner  Coax Outer
                    Conductor   Conductor


         SWR is 2:1 across the 2m band and from 435mhz to
                     450mhz on the 70cm band.


1.  Use good quality TV twin lead.
2.  Strip insulation at the solder point for coax feedline.
3.  Cut out and remove the 1/2" long notch N.
4.  Feed with a length of 50 ohm coax and terminate with the
    appropriate connector.  Tape coax at feedpoint to the twin lead,
    or use heat shrink, and make sure the joints are insulated from
    each other.
5.  Antenna may be sleeved inside 1/2" PVC for outside mounting or
    hung on a loop of string run thru hole O.

Clint Bradford
---
 * TLX v4.00 * ATTENTION to Details AMATEUR RADIO BBS - 909/681-6221
 ■ wcECHO 4.1 ≈ AR-Net: ATTENTION to Details ■ Mira Loma, CA ■ 909-681-6221


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:25 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!news.iaf.nl!idn!dnc!rik.van.riel
From: [e-mail] (Rik Van Riel)
Date: 28 Aug 95 21:43:00
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Jamming LW Radio
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: IDN Internet Gateway
Lines: 51

 PP> From: [e-mail] (Paul Picot)
 PP> Date: 25 Aug 1995 20:46:52 GMT
 PP> Organization: U.N.C.L.E.

 PP> In article <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]> David Lees
 PP> <[e-mail]> writes:
 PP> > Anyone any idea how I could Jam a radio Long Wave radio station
 PP> > (Atlantic 252 to be accurate)............

 PP> How about an air drop?  I was always quite fond of black currant
 PP> myself. It should stain the building nicely, but you'll need a
 PP> 45-gallon drum of it... :-)
Why not, at least this is the least expensive method...

 PP> But seriously: why would you want to interfere with a LW station?  It
 PP> is a navigation aid, isn't it?  The penalties for doing such a thing
 PP> should dissuade you.
It's an Irish broadcast station mainly aimed at the UK. In
Europe we use 150-183 kHz for broadcast, and 1630-1700 kHz
for utility (hardly used, so pirates usually take over :-)
It uses a 500kW transmitter located near Wicklow, Ireland.
Between 19h00 and 06h00 they transmit with only 100kW, and
the longwave-transmitter from (I think) Algeria is just as
strong as LW252, well, in Holland that is the case. In the
pre-Linux days, when my PeeCee wasn't up 24h / day, I used
to listen to 252 in the afternoon and to something else in
the evening (usually MW-'dx' or SWL, I _only_ have a cheap
worldradio receiver (Grundig YB-206) and an old lamp radio
for MW/LW and a bit 49m and FM (quite good, 120km to 200km
depending on interference and weather) so broadcast is the
only thing remaining, but I once picked up Radio Diffusion
du Mali (15kW!) on my cheapo receiver, using a longwire).

 PP> But to give an answer: the most effective way to interfere with its
 PP> transmissions would be to drive a large truck into the transmitter
Yes, jamming 500kW is quite impossible (except when he's
working for Virgin1215, and they 'sponsor' his noble and
brave idea). But if you just want to jam your neighbours
reception, the most effective way is to either build any
kind of transmitter on 255 kHz (irritating), or to use a
babyphone 'adjusted' to that frequency (we have a set of
those; I don't know if they drifted or harmonics are the
cause of the interference).

Good luck (you'll need it) and succes,

Rik.

... Linux: release the workstation in your PC...   for free!
--
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:26 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!pendragon.jsc.nasa.gov!ames!news.hawaii.edu!uhunix3!dholmes
From: Daniel J Holmes <dholmes@uhunix3>
Subject: Re: Jamming LW Radio
In-Reply-To: <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: uhunix3.its.hawaii.edu
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.950830074253.17368B-100000@uhunix3>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Hawaii
References: <41kn0p$phu$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 17:44:11 GMT
Lines: 10
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13491 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:9253

Jamming is illegal under US regulations. Find another past-time!:(

On 25 Aug 1995, David Lees wrote:

> Anyone any idea how I could Jam a radio Long Wave radio station
> (Atlantic 252 to be accurate)............
>
> Please help if you can!
>
>


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:27 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder Line Loss
Date: 28 Aug 1995 16:58:46 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <41ssk6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx06-46.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>  Wes,

>  . . .

>  As I stated in the earlier post, Mininec shows an antenna feedpoint
>  impedance of 1.26-j489 for this antenna.  This is the most significant
>  discrepancy in our results.  I went back and played with the program
>  again after reading your post, and I discovered something I hadn't
>  noticed before.  No matter what numbers I plug in for ground "Relative
>  Dielectric Constant" and "Conductivity", the feedpoint impedance stays
>  the same.  Only height above ground causes it to change.  My
>  conclusion is that Mininec doesn't use conductivity in calculating
>  feedpoint impedance, although it might for radiation patterns.

This is correct, and is one of the chief advantages NEC-based programs
have over MININEC-based ones. Unless the antenna has one or more wires
which are nearly horizontal and lower than about 0.2 wavelength, the
MININEC approximation doesn't make much difference. But it can make
quite a difference in both impedance and gain for low horizontal
antennas.

Oh - Yes, MININEC does use the ground characteristics for the radiation
patterns.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:28 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!tcsi.tcs.com!agate!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
From: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder Line Loss
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 08:42:00 -0300
Distribution: world
Organization: Central Core BBS, 201-575-8991
Reply-To: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.22
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.20
Lines: 22

WW> the same.  Only height above ground causes it to change.  My
WW> conclusion is that Mininec doesn't use conductivity in calculating
WW> feedpoint impedance, although it might for radiation patterns.

Jack, Your conclusion is correct on both counts.

NEC does a much better job with ground conditions
and is fairly accurate with single element antennas.
There is a PC version called NEC-2.  At the moment
I have forgotten where it may be ftp-ed.  Perhaps
someone in this forum can provide that info.
I believe the source in C is available.

Even NEC-2 is not to be trusted for accuracy with
all types of arrays.  There are variations of NEC
which have been modified to accurately model specific
types of arrays, but they are not available to the PC
to my knowledge.

--k2bt

 * RM 1.3 02583 *  * Reward for a job well done: more work. *


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:29 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Duller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking for a good beginers book.
Date: 30 Aug 1995 01:39:18 GMT
Organization: A & W Internet Inc.
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <420fg6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pmef19.microage-ll.awinc.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.3

I'm new to the radio world and I would like to know what a good beginers
book would be to learn the basics of radios. I'm mostly interested in the
workings of radios and making your own transmitters/recivers. Any
suggestions are welcome.

Mark



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:30 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!tgold.dialup.access.net
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking for DJ2UT type HF beam.
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 23:00:16 GMT
Organization: Myorganisation
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: tgold.dialup.access.net
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "KOMATSU Toshiki" writes:

>    Hello, OMs.
>
>    I'm looking for DJ2UT type HF beam. Once I asked postdoctral fellow
> from Germany, but he couldn't obtain any information.
>    I heard ads for US CQ printed about 10 years ago, and I saw report in
> Ham Journal (CQ-Japan) 5 years ago. And last year, he brought no
> information.
>    I want to know whether it is sold out, or not. If not, I also want
> shops which can accept orders from JA.
>
>    Thanks for any input.


The best source of DJ2UT type antennas is DJ2UT.  He moved to the USA to
solve the $ versus DM problem and sells these in a wide range of prices
and sizes from Florida.

Walfried Sommer DJ2UT
Sommer-Antennas
395 Osceola Road, P.O. Box 710
Geneva, FL 32732, USA
Telephone: [phone]
Fax:       [phone]

Regards,
--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:31 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <41b90u$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 12:51:16 GMT
Lines: 23

In article <41b90u$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>>>>A very low impedance source driving a high impedance load can have an
>efficiency near 100%, but that's not the point of absolute maximum power
>transfer. Conversely, a high impedance source driving a low impedance
>load can have really lousy efficiency, easily less than 1%, but that's
>also not the point of absolute maximum power transfer. It's only when
>source and load impedances match that absolute maximum power transfer
>can occur, but efficiency is then only 50%.
>
>Gary<<<
>
>Of course Gary, and like you said a tube is a negative resistance ;-)
>Who can argue with that?

Certainly not anyone who knows what the term means.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:32 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!anat3d1.anatomy.upenn.edu!alex
From: [e-mail] (Alex Shrom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Maxwell's REFLECTIONS
Date: 30 Aug 1995 16:22:48 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <42238o$[e-mail]>
References: <41fvmm$[e-mail]> <421jgm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: anat3d1.anatomy.upenn.edu

Thevenin's and Norton's theorems (which are essentially the same,
though the former uses a voltage source and the other a current source),
help you predict the loading effects of a following stage (voltage
droop).  It's rather interesting; check the ARRL handbook, chapter 5.

Anyway, for minimum voltage droop, you want to connect low impedance
outputs to high impedance inputs, and this is independent of the model
you use.  Doing this prevents loss of the voltage gain produced by
preceeding stages and is one type of efficiency (the type Gary was
talking about).

However, that doesn't have anything to do with power transfer.  To
maximize that, you actually want to match the impedances of the two
stages (as in AF and RF amplifiers).  That's also an issue of
efficiency, but a different quantity is involved.

Don't burn your books yet!  Get _The Art of Electronics_ by Horowitz
and Hill.  Not much on RF, but it's more readable than the ARRL
handbook.



--

Alex Shrom  -  [e-mail]  -  Major: History of Cat Art
Princeton '98 http://www.princeton.edu/~ajshrom  Minor: Yes, unfortunately



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:33 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need HB9CV and ZL-Special Design parameters
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <41r0kd$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 23:38:58 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:41r0kd$[e-mail]
Lines: 7

You can find designs for Adcock arrays in some old antenna handbooks.
The ZL special is kinda big for 2 mtrs and the HB9CV works well but not
as well as the adcock.
Adcock arrays are use for aircraft direction finding.
Regards, Al




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:34 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need help.
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 23:32:55 GMT
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41t3s0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Chris Farmer <[e-mail]> wrote:

>We live in a small dorm room on the bottom floor in a town with no
>really good radio stations.  I don't know if this is a good place to
>ask, but I need some information on building a good FM antenna.

Yep, I seem to remember, everytime I drove through College Station,
that's when I broke out the tapes. <g>

Chris, the general idea is to A) use an antenna with as much gain as
possible, and B) position it as high in the air as you can.  Both of
these goals will present limitations that are more mechanical
in nature than electrical.

Why not take a RS directional FM antenna (yagi) up to the roof and see
how it does?  Any stations that are so far down in the noise as to be
difficult to hear probably won't see significant improvement without
resorting to extraordinary means.  However, stations that are just
below the point of satisfactory reception can probably be brought up
with a larger antenna.

If that doesn't get you started in the right direction, you'll just
have to build a digital audio microwave link to Austin.  <g>

Take care,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:36 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Willian Harmon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Request for Help on RF Ground
Date: 28 Aug 1995 14:10:51 -0400
Organization: The Greater Columbus FreeNet
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <41t0rb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: acme.freenet.columbus.oh.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]



I use a long wire antenna.
1.  How do I know if I have an adequate RF ground?
2. MFJ sells a device to provide a RF Ground for random wire antennas.
Does this device solve the need for adequate RF grounding or does it
simply mask the problem?  What I am asking is - Should I buy the MFJ RF
ground device?

Please e-mail reply to  [e-mail]

Thanks for help   Bill Harmon  WB8BVM
--
Bill Harmon
willhar@freenet,columbus,oh.us>




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:37 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Request for Help on RF Ground
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 23:46:20 GMT
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41t0rb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Willian Harmon) wrote:

>I use a long wire antenna.
>1.  How do I know if I have an adequate RF ground?
>2. MFJ sells a device to provide a RF Ground for random wire
>antennas.  Does this device solve the need for adequate RF grounding
>or does it simply mask the problem?  What I am asking is - Should I
>buy the MFJ RF ground device?

There have been a lot of threads here on this subject lately, so I'll
keep this short.

First, feeding a longwire almost guarantees that you'll experience RF
on the chassis of the rig whenever the ground is inadequate.  This in
turn leads to "mic bite" and perhaps irratic operation of equipment,
especially digital circuitry.  In addition, this condition can create
significant RFI if the shack ground radiates a fair amount of RF.

The need for the MFJ "artificial ground" will probably depend on the
degree to which you experience the above symptoms.  Devices like this
operate on the principle of tuning a second wire to balance the
antenna.  This places the chassis of the rig at the exact center of
the two, or zero RF volts.  Unfortunately, the second wire radiates
when this is done, so if it's inside the building you reside in, this
technique won't do much for RFI problems.

I know random longwires are mechanically convenient, but they're a
real pain in the butt from every other standpoint.  Before you install
one, do your absolute best to figure out a way to install a dipole (or
other balanced antenna) instead.

73,

Jack  WB3U

--- Copy forwarded via e-mail ---


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:37 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Request for Help on RF Ground
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <41t0rb$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 23:47:17 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:41t0rb$[e-mail]
Lines: 6

The MFJ probably will not help your signal but is good for keeping RF
out of the shack.  Don't think you will need it unless you get RF
bites/burns off your equipment.
73, Al




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:38 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!depaul
From: [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
Subject: Re: Request for Help on RF Ground
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:13:43 GMT
References: <420haj$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspksa.spk.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Lines: 4

MFJ has a money back guarantee anyway...get the Artifical Ground; if
it doesn't work send it back!

Marc


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:39 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!news-rocq.inria.fr!athena.inria.fr!skubi
From: [e-mail] (Skubiszewski Marcin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Request: books about Yagi antennas
Date: 30 Aug 1995 17:48:37 GMT
Organization: INRIA * Rocquencourt BP 105 * F-78153 LE CHESNAY CEDEX* France
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <42289l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena.inria.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Can you recommend an excellent book about Yagi antennas ?

My objective is to understand in depth what happens (with all the
physics and maths necessary). For example, why are directors shorter
than the active dipole, and why are reflectors longer ? Why do thick
directors make wide-band antennas ? How do I compute the radiation
pattern of a given antenna ?

I already have the ARRL Antenna book, bot it does not go very much in
depth.

Thanks in advance for any help.

                                Marcin (not a ham yet, but maybe one day...)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:41 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!nwfocus.wa.com!krel.iea.com!comtch!n0dh
From: [e-mail] (D.C. Henderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rohn HBX Info Wanted
Date: 29 Aug 1995 18:00:46 GMT
Organization: CompuTech
Lines: 55
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <41vkke$[e-mail]>
References: <41o0v0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: comtch.iea.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Curt Phillips ([e-mail]) wrote:
:    I'm looking at a Rohn HBX tower (approx. 64 ft) to purchase to put
: a Hygain TH7 on.
:    a) Does anyone have the data on the max antenna area that this
: tower is rated for?  Though it is supposed to be a free standing tower,
: how much might guying it add to the acceptable windload area?

The 64' tower is only good for about 6Sq feet, and boom lengths less than
10', this definitely rules out something as big as a TH7.

The problem is two fold. with the HBX series. The self supporting nature
reduces the square footage compared to guyed Rohn 25. and the
construction is more suspectable to torque damage which is why they limit
it to 10 foot booms. I have often thought that the torque problem could
be solved by running a mast all the way down and putting the rotator at
the base. In my mind this would remove the torque vector from the tower
entirely. I put this query out a while back but no one responded. I'm not
entirely sure what addtional (if any) compression loading the fulllength
mast would provide. If this would solve the torque problem then you could
probably put up a TH7 on the 56' version (i.e.) leave off last top section.
and it would sure make servicing the rotor a breeze. You would need a
couple of thrust bearings at intermediate heights as well I think.

I just put up a used HBX56 last weekend. I was not comfortable with the
amount of movement you get by the time you get to the top section, would
much rather be working on a guyed tower anyday :-). Also the "X" cross
braces are damned uncomfortable to climb and stand on compared to the
standard guyed  style towers.

:    b) What should a 64' Rohn HBX sell for used?  It's "on the ground"
: and in good, but not great shape (some rust spots that need to be
: painted, a couple of bent spots that will need to be straightened
: and reinforced).


If the bent spots are in the cross braces then I would say the thing is
worth $250 to $300 bucks (A little more on a newer one withouit rust).
Expect to pay $50 to $200 more if you have to buy a base mounting kit (
there are 3 differnt styles). If the legs themlselves are bent then save
your money, Its not a deal at anyprice.

 By the way it cost me $300 bucks in concrete just to pour the nearly 5
yards of cement that it takes to hold one of theses babies down. The hole
for a 64' is about 6' x 6' x 4' deep as I recall!

E-mail me direct if you want to talk more. By the way the standard gin
pole that your local radio club loans around wont work on an HBX series
tower either, But I built an adapter  in order to use the round leg gin
pole on the non round leg HBX tower..just one more hassle.

Been there done that :-)

Dave
N0DH/7
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:42 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Separate Receive Antenna
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 23:44:41 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 9

I suppose you could use a PIN diode T/R switch between the linear and
the exciter.  It's fast and should work fine.  Be careful to find one
with adequate carrier lifetimes.  (Hewlett Packard has some for about 3
bucks that ought to handle 100 watts or so.I think Penstock or Hamilton
Hallmark carry them.  If you need the p/n, let me know and I'll dig it
out.
73, Al




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:43 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Separate Receive Antenna
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: akoblinski.nsc.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 23:44:50 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 9

I suppose you could use a PIN diode T/R switch between the linear and
the exciter.  It's fast and should work fine.  Be careful to find one
with adequate carrier lifetimes.  (Hewlett Packard has some for about 3
bucks that ought to handle 100 watts or so.I think Penstock or Hamilton
Hallmark carry them.  If you need the p/n, let me know and I'll dig it
out.
73, Al




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:44 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.Traveller.COM!adtran.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Tony Goodloe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Tinted Window Question
Date: 28 Aug 1995 17:34:05 GMT
Organization: Adtran
Lines: 16
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <41sumd$[e-mail]>
References: <41l9ml$[e-mail]> <41m1ei$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: adtrn-ep127.adtran.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13417 rec.radio.shortwave:57714

In article <41m1ei$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mike Groves) says:

>Thru-glass on 10M?  You'ld have to have a patch area the size of a
>door-mat.  2M is marginal at best.  I like trunk-lid mounts, but in
>the case of a Jimmy...    Good luck  ---Mike
>

I am in the market for a mobile antenna for 2M. Is the opinion
about the effectiveness of thru-glass mounting concensus?
(no offense intended for Mike's opinion). What about
different lengths - 1/4 wave, 5/8, etc? I'm new, so any opinions
are greatly appreciated. email appreciated to conserve bandwidth,
unless comments are of general interest. Thanks!

tony



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:45 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!news3.digex.net!usenet
From: Allen Hansen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Tinted Window Question
Date: 30 Aug 1995 15:52:04 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, USA
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <4221f4$[e-mail]>
References: <41l9ml$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dcc05226.slip.digex.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13504 rec.radio.shortwave:57835

[e-mail] (Jack Glidden) wrote:
>I have been told told that the tinting that comes from the factory on
>newer model veh. is actually a metal that is inside the glass.  This
>has the effect of really screwing up any type of thru the glass
>antenna.  Is this true?  Where or who should I call to confirm this?
>I have a 92 Jimmy with factory tint on all glass except the front.  I
>need to mount some antennas and don't want to drill or use mag mounts.
>I am planning to mount a 2 meter and a 10 meter antenna.
>If you hav any answers please send e-mail.
>
>Thanks

I have been told by customers who have researched this for me
that GM does use metalized tinting on side windows (usually rear).
Our store manager wanted to put an on glass antenna on his new
mini van but the dealer told him that the tint on his vehicle
is metalized.

I would suggest contacting your car dealer and see what he
says about your specific vehicle.

Allen
--
*********************************************************************
*ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT BANK                       Sales- 800 368 3270*
*323 Mill St. N.E.                               Fax-   703 938 6911*
*Vienna, VA  22180                               BBS-   703 938 3781*
*                  Internet: [e-mail]                   *
*                     Compuserve: 73424,1345                        *
*********************************************************************




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:46 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!news.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!mac78.franklin
From: [e-mail] (Nelson P. Moyer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tower
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 16:50:24 -0600
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Lines: 6
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Nelson P. Moyer)
NNTP-Posting-Host: mac78.uhl.uiowa.edu
X-Newsreader: InterCon TCP/Connect II 1.2.1

I'm considering a Universal aluminum tower, model 21-70. I would like to hear
any praises or problems before I buy. Anyone out there have one of these?






From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:47 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz!depaul
From: [e-mail] (Marc DePaul)
Subject: Re: Uni-Hat CTSVR Short Vertical
Sender: [e-mail] (News )
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:16:54 GMT
References: <41o1gj$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpspksa.spk.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Lines: 4

And it's VERY expensive!


Marc


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!interlog.com!news
From: Kevin Cazabon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Using Cable TV amps and splitters for scanning?
Date: 29 Aug 1995 00:11:17 GMT
Organization: InterLog Internet Services
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <41tlv5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kcazabon.interlog.com

I wonder if anyone can help me out...

I've been researching the best way to get an amplified signal (at a reasonable
cost) so I can split one antenna for both a RS Pro-43 and Bearcat 760XLT.

I've been told by a couple people that a cable TV amp works well, and the
cable splitters are just as good as the antenna splitters that cost MUCH more...

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Does anyone know of a cable TV amplifier that will run on 12 Volts?

Thanx!!



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:48 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.tcd.net!pagesat.net!niia.net!usenet
From: rikoski <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Using Cable TV amps and splitters for scanning?
Date: 30 Aug 1995 02:07:54 GMT
Organization: Northern Indiana Internet Access, Inc.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <420h5q$[e-mail]>
References: <41tlv5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm2-13.niia.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1 (Macintosh; U; 68K)
To: [e-mail]
X-URL: news:41tlv5$[e-mail]

There are a few "it all depends" here. The first is, "how insensitive
are the front ends of the scanner and the other device that you will be
using?" The second is "What frequency?"

For frequencies below 70 cm (400mHz), you probably don't have to use an
amp at all. Doubt the you would see any positive difference if you did.

If you insist on using one, try a broadband Radio Shack mast mounted
type. It comes with a power supply, runs on 12v and costs about $20. But
if you are in a high signal area, it will overload and you will get
intermodulation distortion and will be worse off than before.

Advanced Receiver Research of Connecticut has good tuned amps with low
noise figures at reasonable prices. They advertise in the back of QST.
Talk to them.

Good Luck.

Rick Rikoski
N9YIC
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:49 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!racebbs.com!jim.wooddell
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wooddell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Using Cable TV amps and splitters for scanning?
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 10:40:55 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: racebbs  Parker, Az.
Distribution: world
Lines: 37

-> NNTP-Posting-Host: kcazabon.interlog.com
->
-> I wonder if anyone can help me out...
->
-> I've been researching the best way to get an amplified signal (at a
-> reasonable
-> cost) so I can split one antenna for both a RS Pro-43 and Bearcat 760
->
-> I've been told by a couple people that a cable TV amp works well, and
-> cable splitters are just as good as the antenna splitters that cost M
-> more...
->
-> Does anyone have any suggestions?
->
-> Does anyone know of a cable TV amplifier that will run on 12 Volts?
->
-> Thanx!!
->
Your friends are probably right...in general terms.  Remember, you get
what you pay for!
TV type splitters, the kind you can buy at a TV store, are cheap junk
for the most part and vary in losses from unit to unit.
Mast mount TV amplifiers would work ok, but you are not going to save
much money comparing good quality ones over a radio type preamp, but
they will work. Just watch the bandwidth when you buy. Why not just try
the splitter first, without the preamp?  Typical loss will be about 5
db with these cheapy splitters and your scanners may never notice it.
Then, if you need a preamp, get one. The preamps you can buy for your
TV, that are designed to be "boosters" in a cable system, are not
designed to amplify weak signals or "off the air" signals. Using these
types of amps may actually increase the noise and not help much. For
receiving, the best place to amplify the signal is at the antenna. Just
think of it as designing a mini-cable system. Start with a quality
signal, and you can take it just about anywhere you want it to go!
 Jim Wooddell
[e-mail]
RACEBBS 1-520-669-9225   Low Cost Internet Access  QWK Internet Provider


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:51 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What antenna would you use???
Date: 29 Aug 1995 08:12:18 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <41ui52$[e-mail]>
References: <41srar$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx04-06.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] writes:
>  In article <[e-mail]>,
>  WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>  >IMO, the only way to feed a non-resonant dipole with *any* balun is to
>  >run a program that calculates the feedpoint impedance at the tuner for
>  >each band of operation.  Then, that impedance can be compared to the
>  >capabilities of the balun.
>
>  Hi Jack, how does one know the capabilities of the balun? I know my
>  impedances - highest is 1800+j2100 and lowest is 26-j120.
>
>  thanks and 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
>
>>>>

If you're using a ferrite-bead (W2DU) balun, you need to know the Z per
bead. This info can be had from the ferrite manufacturer (or from some
distributors) or can be measured with a Z meter. Most W2DU baluns are
designed for a Z of around 500-1000 ohms. It takes a lot of ferrite beads
to get much more than this.

You can get several k ohms from an air-core coiled-coax balun, but only
on a single band. It might be difficult to get this sort of value
repeatably and reliably. Again, around 1 k ohm is a reasonable maximum
value to expect. So a balun wouldn't be effective at the output of your
tuner on the bands where you have the high impedance you report.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What antenna would you use???
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 05:05:14 GMT
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41srar$[e-mail]> <41ui52$[e-mail]> <41vqh7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:

>So my question is, what does the HBHT200 do to my 1793+j2085
>impedance at 100w? (that is the impedance predicted by ELNEC and
>MicroSmith).
>
>If I had a 300 ohm balanced SWR meter, I could make some
>measurements.  Can anyone point me toward a build, buy, borrow, or
>rent 300 ohm balanced forward/reverse power meter? What I want to do
>is measure the efficiency of the HBHT200 under extreme conditions.

Cecil, I think you're on the right track because I don't believe that
balun heating is the only symptom, or that it will always occur.

Not to be too simplistic here, but imagine if you removed the core, so
that all that remained was an air-core coil with insufficient
reactance.  Its input/output coupling would be poor, and it probably
wouldn't maintain balance very well (if at all).  However, it may not
heat up significantly, depending on the resistance of the windings,
transmitter power and winding reactance.

Incidentally, I believe that too low an input/output impedance will
also cause efficiency problems, but that's another issue.  At
any rate, the major symptoms (other than heating) are loss of
impedance transformation, loss of coupling, and loss of balance.

Wish I could tell you how to measure any of this with readily
available gear, but I can't.  What I do know is that the winding
impedance (input *and* output) should be 4 to 5 times the impedance of
the circuit it's looking into.  Anything less is insufficient, whether
the symptoms are measurable or not.

Looking through Radio Works' catalog, their voltage and current baluns
have winding Z specifications ranging from about 1K to 4K at 3.5 MHz.
None of these values would be sufficient for your antenna's
*resistive* loading, let alone the reactive component.

Again, it's not necessarily the core that's to blame, at least not
because of saturation.  In fact, Amidon claims that most core losses
occur well before saturation takes place, but that's another issue
too. <g>

It's just darn difficult to design a balun that will provide a
sufficiently high Z to handle high impedance loads, won't decouple
when fed to low impedance loads, and won't rolloff its response
from 160-10M.  That last one is the real killer, IMO.

73,

Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What antenna would you use???
Date: 29 Aug 1995 19:41:27 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <41vqh7$[e-mail]>
References: <41srar$[e-mail]> <41ui52$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <41ui52$[e-mail]>,
Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> wrote:

>So a balun wouldn't be effective at the output of your
>tuner on the bands where you have the high impedance you report.

Hi Roy, this is an area not covered well in the ARRL Handbook and
Antenna Book. I was having trouble with the MFJ outboard current
balun when I read the Nov '93 CQ article by Jerry Sevick. Based
on that article, I bought the Amidon HBHT200 10kw voltage balun
and it *seems* to work well with no detectable temperature
increase on any of the bands. So my question is, what does the
HBHT200 do to my 1793+j2085 impedance at 100w? (that is the impedance
predicted by ELNEC and MicroSmith).

If I had a 300 ohm balanced SWR meter, I could make some measurements.
Can anyone point me toward a build, buy, borrow, or rent 300 ohm balanced
forward/reverse power meter? What I want to do is measure the efficiency
of the HBHT200 under extreme conditions.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!gatech!taco.cc.ncsu.edu!sparc01bilt.unity.ncsu.edu!jwprice
From: [e-mail] (James Warren Price)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What antenna would you use???
Date: 30 Aug 1995 00:08:58 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <420a6q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sparc01bilt.unity.ncsu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:
: a tower. I have a substantial number of trees that are probably about 40-50 feet up
: and somewhere near 100 feet or more apart. If you, fellow hams, were going to put up

I just moved from a house where I had a 20m groundplane antenna with four
radials.  Although the tree was higher, it fed at about 54' (making the
top at 70'), and I was able to work Australia, Kuwait and Svalbard
Island with 75w SSB.  Make it 10x as big as a 2m groundplane, and have a
rope support it at the feed point, with the top of the vertical element
attached to keep it upright.

73

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Price, ARS N3QYE                         Don't blame me.
[e-mail]                  I voted for Emma Goldman.



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!vegas.ch.intel.com!cmoore
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What antenna would you use???
Date: 31 Aug 1995 18:55:30 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 38
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4250j2$[e-mail]>
References: <41srar$[e-mail]> <41ui52$[e-mail]> <41vqh7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vegas.ch.intel.com
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Cecil, I think you're on the right track because I don't believe that
>balun heating is the only symptom, or that it will always occur.

Hi Jack, it's obvious if the balun heats up, it's turning RF energy
into heat. It's not so obvious what's happening if the balun doesn't
heat up. Where is the power being lost?

>Not to be too simplistic here, but imagine if you removed the core, so
>that all that remained was an air-core coil with insufficient
>reactance.

And this would cause other portions of the system, e.g. tuner, to heat
up? If the air-core coil is not heating up, then it must be reflecting
energy rather than passing it?

>It's just darn difficult to design a balun that will provide a
>sufficiently high Z to handle high impedance loads, won't decouple
>when fed to low impedance loads, and won't rolloff its response
>from 160-10M.  That last one is the real killer, IMO.

See what you think of the following setup: Xmtr into an SWR/Power meter
into a piece of 50 ohm coax with ferrite beads into 4:1 Amidon HBHT200
balun into a piece of 450 ohm ladder-line into a piece of 50 ohm coax
with ferrite beads into an SWR/Power meter into a 50 ohm dummy load.

There would be a 1:1 SWR on the coax on the load end with no RF on
the shield. There would be a 9:1 SWR on the ladder-line. With a 0.234
wavelength piece of 450 ladder-line, the impedance seen by the 4:1
balun would be about 2250+j2250. I could measure the power into the
balun and the power delivered to the load and get an idea of the
balun efficiency. With a 0.266 wavelength piece of ladder-line, the
balun would see 2250-j2250. I have the equipment to do this experiment.
What do you think?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!quack!pagesat.net!niia.net!usenet
From: rikoski <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: 30 Aug 1995 18:54:20 GMT
Organization: Northern Indiana Internet Access, Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <422c4t$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm1-15.niia.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1 (Macintosh; U; 68K)
To: [e-mail]
X-URL: news:[e-mail]

I don't think that your interpretation of the initials BNC is correct.

The BNC connector was invented by my old colleague Octavio Salati, an
electrical engineering professor of the Moore School of Electrical
Engineering of the University of Pennsylvania. So how could those guys
that you mentioned have their initials memorialized as you have
suggested?

Rick Rikoski
N9YIC
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!ifwtech.demon.co.uk
From: Ian G3SEK <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What BNC means ?
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 07:37:15 GMT
Organization: IFWtech
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <422c4t$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
X-Broken-Date: Thursday, Aug 31, 1995 07.37.15
X-Newsreader: Newswin Alpha 0.7

In article: <422c4t$[e-mail]>  rikoski <[e-mail]> writes:
:
: I don't think that your interpretation of the initials BNC is correct.
:
: The BNC connector was invented by my old colleague Octavio Salati, an
: electrical engineering professor of the Moore School of Electrical
: Engineering of the University of Pennsylvania. So how could those guys
: that you mentioned have their initials memorialized as you have
: suggested?

Can we see some dates, details and evidence, please?

--
73 from Ian G3SEK            Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
                            'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Professionally:
IFW Technical Services       Clear technical English - anywhere.



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!alumina.rutgers.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Punisher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What is best antenna for BC2500XLT?
Date: 28 Aug 1995 21:31:25 -0400
Organization: Rutgers University
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <41tqld$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alumina.rutgers.edu

I just got  the portable scanner with the original rubber antenna.
Reception is a little noisy.  Any suggestions for the best antenna
for home/mobile use for the whole spectrum (25-1300 MHz)?
Rubber duck?  What length?  Collapsible?

Thanks for any and all.

Shai ([e-mail])


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What series cap for inverted L?
Date: 30 Aug 1995 19:00:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <422qi0$[e-mail]>
References: <4225r8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4225r8$[e-mail]>, pete brunelli <[e-mail]>
writes:

>
>What would be a good choice for the series capacitor in an inverted L?
>A transmitting type a-la a transmatch?  Any help in designing an inverted

>L would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Pete Brunelli
>N1QDQ

Pete,

The size of the capacitor varies with the length to thickness ratio and
the length of the antenna. Even the location of the antenna affects the
answer. It is a tough question.

I've used several different inverted "L's" for 160. With thick (cage type
wires) the capacitor had to be over 3000 pF, and with thin longer (3/8 wl)
wires the capacitor only needed to be a few hundred pF.

I would like to add a personal observation. Do not place the current peak
at the top of the L, like some articles suggest. I've found best
performance occurs when the antenna is a quarter wave long, and lots of
other people I've talked to have found the same thing.

Use a good radial system if you can.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:50:59 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!connix.com!news
From: pete brunelli <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What series cap for inverted L?
Date: 30 Aug 1995 17:06:48 GMT
Organization: Connix - The Connecticut Internet Exchange
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4225r8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pcb.connix.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

What would be a good choice for the series capacitor in an inverted L?
A transmitting type a-la a transmatch?  Any help in designing an inverted
L would be greatly appreciated.

Pete Brunelli
N1QDQ





From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:51:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: 29 Aug 1995 14:52:14 GMT
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41j6a9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of 25 Aug 1995 00:42:49 GMT


I would suggest that Kurt Rothammel's Antennenbuch is best value for
the money. It is written in German.

                                                        -Jari
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:51:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!satisfied.apocalypse.org!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 95 02:08:59 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41j6a9$[e-mail]> <41tfjp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr. <[e-mail]>

Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr. <[e-mail]> writes:

>I can't help you with which one's the best, but I can steer you away from
>the worst.  The ARRL Antenna Book!

Hmmmmmmm. Would appreciate examples of what brings one to such a conclusion.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:51:02 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!wa2ise
From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: Windows J Pole antenna program posted in binaries groups
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 15:46:02 GMT
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]

I posted, in groups alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc and alt.binaries.pictures.
utilities a windows program for calculating the dimensions of twinlead
based J pole antennas,  also using ladderline instead of twinlead if
desired.

It's way too big a file to post here.


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:51:03 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!ledge!darryl.linkow
From: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB: Saturn 6 antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 11:31:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Organization: The Ledge PCBoard: Lake View Terrace, CA: USA: 818-896-2007
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.21
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.10
Lines: 16



Hello all and thanks for reading this.  I am looking to buy a
"Saturn 6" halo antenna made by Hi-Par.  I have seen several for
sale here, but others beat me to them.  I know that there are new
halo antennas being made by people, but I am kind of a nostalgia
buff and would like to get one of the Saturn's.  If you have one
that you are not using and would like to sell, please send me
private Email.  73, Darryl KE6IHA

   Internet Email: [e-mail]
                         OR
                   [e-mail]

---
 * OLX 2.2 * Darryl Linkow [phone]  9 am - 5 pm PDT


From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:51:04 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!news.usafa.af.mil!usenet
From: Aaron Hartzler <hartzleral@[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Yagi mobile mounting
Date: 29 Aug 1995 16:53:43 GMT
Organization: DFAS
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <41vgmn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dfas62.usafa.af.mil
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b1 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Oops,  I've created confusion!

The balloon end of the system will have a GPS receiver, TNC, and
transmitter with an output of about 5w.  At the ground station, mounted
in a van, a laptop will record the data (position, velocity, altitude).
From there, the data will be sent to another GPS receiver in the van as a
waypoint, from which a direction and distance to the balloon can be
calculated based on the current position of the van.

Right now, we are tasked to mount a Yagi on the van with a bicycle rack
configuration.  It won't be too difficult, but does anyone know of
potential problems?

Thanks,
Aaron



From [e-mail] Thu Aug 31 16:51:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.eng.convex.com!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!bubba.ucc.okstate.edu!gcouger
From: [e-mail] (Gordon Couger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Yagi mobile mounting
Date: 29 Aug 1995 23:12:29 GMT
Organization: Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <4206st$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41vgmn$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Gordon Couger <[e-mail]>=
NNTP-Posting-Host: jsun.agen.okstate.edu

In article <41vgmn$[e-mail]>,
Aaron Hartzler  <hartzleral@[e-mail]> wrote:
>Oops,  I've created confusion!
>
>The balloon end of the system will have a GPS receiver, TNC, and
>transmitter with an output of about 5w.  At the ground station, mounted
>in a van, a laptop will record the data (position, velocity, altitude).
>From there, the data will be sent to another GPS receiver in the van as a
>waypoint, from which a direction and distance to the balloon can be
>calculated based on the current position of the van.
>
>Right now, we are tasked to mount a Yagi on the van with a bicycle rack
>configuration.  It won't be too difficult, but does anyone know of
>potential problems?
>
You probably need a good omini directional antenna with a high angle
of radiation. Something like crossed folded dipoles mounted high enough
off the cab so the impeadance matches 50 ohms. Or maybe crossed dipoles
high enough off the cab that the cab acts as a reflector.

I would probably carry a 5 element or so beam in case I got too far away
from the balloon and lost it or the gps packet failed.

Since the balloon has a GPS and the van have a GPS you know where the
ballon and the van are. If you plot three positions of the balloon about
ten minutes apart you will have a real good estimate of speed and direction
and should have a very easy chase.

Good luck
Gordon
AB5DG


Gordon Couger - 624 Cheyenne, Stillwater, OK 74075
[e-mail] 405-624-2855 evenings
    I do not speak for my employer


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:15:52 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: 28 Aug 1995 22:22:49 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <41tfjp$[e-mail]>
References: <41j6a9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip02.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

In article <41j6a9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>I am looking for a book with info on making antenna's (VHF antenna's that
>is) & need to know where to find a book and what to look for, any
suggestions
>
>on books?
>
>--
>73 & ttyl     Morgan Patterson
>       \\///  Internet: [e-mail]
>       (o o)  Ham Radio: VE6MRP
>        (_)   "Your Computer will self destruct
in..5..4..3..2..1..KABOOM!!!"
>----oOO-----OOo------------------------------------------------------------
--
>-
I can't help you with which one's the best, but I can steer you away from
the worst.  The ARRL Antenna Book!
Gary



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:15:53 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mid.net!news.dra.com!news.starnet.net!wupost!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: 29 Aug 1995 21:48:50 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <420202$[e-mail]>
References: <41j6a9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip11.inlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>
>I would suggest that Kurt Rothammel's Antennenbuch is best value for
>the money. It is written in German.
>
>                                                        -Jari
>--
>Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
>Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474

Hmmmmmm, mine furher, is dat a problem?
Gary Deutschmann



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:15:54 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!netcomsv!uucp3.netcom.com!tksbbs!stephen.king
From: [e-mail] (STEPHEN KING)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Copper Tube "J-Pole"
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 15:10:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Organization: The Kandy Shack BBS/Garden Grove, CA/[phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (STEPHEN KING)
References: <41q5b8$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.22
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.20
Lines: 35

  >>I have a copper tube "J-Pole" dual band antenna for 2 meter/70cm.
  >>
  >>I would like to know what the maximum power and what the gain is for
  >>this type of antenna.
  >>

ON>Not meaning to change the subject here, but I have a question regarding your
  >2m/70cm j-pole design.

ON>Does this antenna require two feedlines (i.e. 1 for 2m and another for 70cm)
  >If not, would you mind posting the plans?  I have several plans I've
  >accumulated over time but none of them address combining the two feedlines
  >into one.  Guess I could use a duplexer to accomplish this -- but only if it
  >necessary.

I have one feedline going to the J-Pole. I bought the J-Pole at a local
HAM swap and with it being up on ht roof at the moment, it wouldn't be
easy for me to even take measurements of it for you. I use an ICOM
IC24-AT dual band HT with it. I do recall that using the MFJ-259 HF/VHF
SWR Analyzer that I borrowed from a friend, that the SWR at both the
antenna feed point and at the HT cable feedline point were very flat
across the 2 meter band, just barely above 1:1.

I don't have a SWR meter for the 70cm band, so I can't say just what the
reading for that is. I have had very good results with the J-Pole on 2
meter and have had very good results on the 70cm as well. This is based
on by own observations of being able to clearly hit various repeaters in
the area.

Some good news is that I am moving soon and will be taking down the
antenna. I will try to remember to get the name/address of the person I
bought it from off the antenna. I do recall that he lives in Apple
Valley, Ca. but don't remember the street or anything.
---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:15:55 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: Howard Udoff <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 1.5 ghz antenna needed for GPS receiver
Date: 31 Aug 1995 01:32:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4233er$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-prn1-02.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b5 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Any brave soul in this group that's able to design a good passive or
active receiver for 1.5 ghz satellite work for a GPS receiver?. I got the
satellite experimenter's book but the quadrifillar design was too
complex. Perhaps someone can recommend something else? Can be active if
the parts can be readily obtained. Don't have any test equipment at that
freq. That's the cahllenge.
Thanks & 73's
Howard
K2PYY
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:15:56 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 31 Aug 1995 02:00:39 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <423547$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-52.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>  [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:

;  >As the person who coined the terms "current balun" and "voltage
;  >balun", I've regarded "choke balun" to be the same as "current
;  >balun". Can you point to an example of a balun which is a "current
;  >balun" and not a "choke balun"?
;
;  Roy, for the sake of common terminology, what would you call the
;  transformer at the input of my tuner?  As you know, it's bifilar wound
;  and the schematic looks like a conventional transformer.
;
;  It's not a choke-type device, but as we discussed elsewhere, it forces
;  equal currents in the line.  Maybe this is outside the group of
;  devices you're referring to, but it's the main example that has caused
;  me to make the distinction between a choke balun and a current balun
;  in this thread.
;
;  73,
;
;  Jack

Jack,

I agree that calling this a "choke" is stretching it, even though it does
have the effect of stopping current flow on the outside of the line. And
it does perform the function of a "current balun". So I guess this is
an example of one which isn't quite the other.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:15:57 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which is the best antenna book?
Date: 31 Aug 1995 08:39:30 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <424ai2$[e-mail]>
References: <41tfjp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <41tfjp$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary V.
Deutschmann, Sr.) writes:

>>-
>I can't help you with which one's the best, but I can steer you away from

>the worst.  The ARRL Antenna Book!
>Gary
>
>

Gary, I wonder why you say that. IMO it is either the stuff in Bill Orr's
books or Lew McCoy's crap. The ARRL Compendiums are full of weird science,
but the regular handbook seems ok to me. Have I missed some changes lately
(my copy is about 20 years old)?
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:15:58 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Baluns, Should they be used?
Date: 31 Aug 1995 08:40:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 35
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <424aj3$[e-mail]>
References: <421jd2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Gary Coffman wrote:
>>If we try to make the measurement with one probe connected to
>>ground, and the other moving along the dipole element, we'll
>>get readings that are site and configuration dependent. The
>>antenna fields will induce currents in the ground below them
>>that will form an image antenna. Depending on the symmetry
>>of the system, the distance of the antenna above ground,
>>and the conductance of the various bits of soil under the
>>antenna, that image will be distorted in various ways.
>>

I think this is something that needs clarified also.

This is a poor application of an image antenna. The image antenna really
doesn't physically exist! It is only a "tool" used to calculate antenna
patterns. The image is an *imaginary* antenna place a certain distance
below the real antenna. The placement of this "imaginary" antenna is
usually determined by ground effects several wavelenths in each direction
from the real antenna.

For example: The "image antenna", as applied to a half wave horizontally
polarized radiator is traditionally placed a half wave below ground level.
But if we dug a tunnel and took measurement equipment into the earth,
there would be very little (if any) current in the ground at that depth.

Another example would be the "image antenna" of a vertical. Directly below
the antenna the fields quickly go to zero, the image is actually "formed"
by what happens several wavelengths out from the radiator. This is also
the reason "the ground" several wavelenths from a vertical determines the
low angle radiation pattern, and not the ground directly below or very
close to the radiator. Again, taking a sensitive instrument into the earth
below the antenna would reveal the image really does NOT physically exist
below the radiator.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:00 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntpgate.primenet.com!nntpdist.primenet.com!ip053
From: [e-mail] (Scott Townley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder Line Loss
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 95 11:34:19 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <4246np$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <41nsal$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip053.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <41nsal$[e-mail]>,
   Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>I ran your antenna in EZNEC using the high accuracy ground model for both
>"good" ground and "poor" ground. (200' dipole, 20' high, 1.9 MHz)
>
>The feed-point impedances were for good gnd:  24.65-j366
>and poor gnd: 34.85-365j.
>
>Using the following assumptions: Line Zo=450+j0; Loss = 0.065dB/100 ft; Er =
1.08
>
>for the good gnd case: load SWR = 30.4; input SWR = 24.7; input Z = 25.9+j292
>total line loss = .89 dB.
>
>For the poor gnd case: load SWR = 21.5; input SWR = 18.5; input Z = 34.5+j291
>total line loss = .65 dB.
>
>For your assumption of Zl = 1.26-j489: load SWR = 779; input SWR = 114;
>input Z = 4.8=j209 and total line loss = 8.34.
>
>Note, my line loss data is higher than you probably used, particularly if you
>used the chart in the ARRL publications.  This chart is WRONG for ladder
line.
>I have discussed this with Dean Straw and he agrees; it will be changed in
>future issues. Other items of interest: in this months QST, Technical
>Correspondence column, there is discussion of the effects of small amounts
>of reactance in the line Zo. My loss computations agree with their results
>but I have yet to completely understand how to determine the reactive part
>of the line impedance without measuring it.  Unless I missed something
(highly
>probable <g>), the derivation of the equation for Xo isn't obvious to me.
>
>All of the above does not shed any light on why you can't tune this thing.
>Must be something else wrong. Because the dipole isn't too far away from full
size,
>one would intutively expect the real part of Zl to be much higher than
>you conputed, so the EZNEC answers seem correct. Good luck.
>

Wes--
I've been exchanging info with Dean Straw for the past several weeks regarding
the Technical Correspondance article you mention.  We've been discussing some
technical refinements to some of the calculations, primarily applicable in
high-Q cases.  As I don't want to short circuit that process, I won't
elaborate on the matter yet (I imagine Dean will when he's satisfied), but let
me state the following:
1) Yep, the line loss quoted in the ARRL Antenna Book for ladder line bears no
resemblance to reality.
2) The equation Dean gave for Xo is a typo: he said
Xo=-j*alpha/beta
where alpha is the attenuation constant in nepers/meter
beta is the phase constant in radians/meter
The correct equation is
Xo=-j*alpha/beta*ZO
I can send you a derivation of this equation if you want.  It didn't look
right to me at first so I rederived it myself (it's not dimensionally
consistent, for one) and checked it against some references I have.
3) Keep your eyes peeled for further discussion regarding this topic in QST!


Scott Townley
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:01 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Uni-Hat CTSVR Short Vertical
Date: 31 Aug 1995 11:55:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <424m1s$[e-mail]>
References: <424916$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <424916$[e-mail]>, Grant Youngman
<[e-mail]> writes:

>
>If you were to consider the cost, time, and tribulation of building
something
>with a
>17' diameter top hat from scratch -- well, its a heck of a lot simpler to
>write a
>check.
>
>(Not an argument in favor of the antenna, just a point of view )  :-)
>
>Grant/NQ5T
>
>

And it looks like a WELL constructed antenna. My *only* objection was to
the outlandish performance claims (especially how the radiation resistance
and efficiency were improved by the skirt wires) the company initially
used, and Lew McCoys obvious dribble about it. As far as other verticals
go, I'm sure it would kill a GAP (another company that uses false
technical claims of eliminated ground loss) on all bands of operation and
it should beat a Butternut on 160 and 80. That big hat will help a lot on
those bands. The rest of it is "just an antenna", like any other antenna.

I doubt anyone could build an identical antenna cheaper, even if a home
made antenna could be made to perform a bit better.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:02 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: Grant Youngman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Uni-Hat CTSVR Short Vertical
Date: 31 Aug 1995 12:13:26 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <424916$[e-mail]>
References: <41o1gj$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip164.dallas2.tx.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b6 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Marc DePaul) wrote:
>And it's VERY expensive!
>
>
>Marc

If you compare its price with that of a GAP Voyager, or the linear loaded verticals
from Force 12, it isn't all that far out of line.  They can be had for less than
list.

If you were to consider the cost, time, and tribulation of building something with a
17' diameter top hat from scratch -- well, its a heck of a lot simpler to write a
check.

(Not an argument in favor of the antenna, just a point of view )  :-)

Grant/NQ5T



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:03 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!warwick!yama.mcc.ac.uk!thor.cf.ac.uk!news
From: sce2038.ac.uk
Subject: Help needed - Direction finding Aerial
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 12:31:04 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: d108.coll.cf.ac.uk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Organization: Cardiff University of Wales
Lines: 11


I wish to construct a "homing device" to work over short range (up to a
mile - possibly more). Does anybody know where I could find a design for
the receiving aerial (and receiver if possible)?

Thanks



Bert



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:04 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dorite!ts03-ind-1
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Croft)
Subject: Re: Bobtail Curtain Anyone?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Admin)
Organization: IQuest Network Services
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #2.1
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 13:43:38 GMT
Lines: 15

"George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I forgot to add that I have posted the top fed bobtail curtain
>model (cleverly named TOPBOB40.EZ) at emclab.ee.umr.edu in
>/pub/aces/NEC for anonymous ftp.
>
>73/George
>
>--
>| George L. Hiscox                 | Very funny Scotty... Now |
>| [e-mail]               | beam down my clothes !!! |
>| WA6RIK @ WB6YMH.#socal.ca.usa.na | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
>
>
George - see what your program shows on the bobtail when fed as a half-sq.(top corner end element).  Would sure ease installation!  Would like to know you
Thanks much & keep plotting.   Patrick / WB9IQI


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:05 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!miltf
From: [e-mail] (Milt Forsberg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna on Fiberglass Vehicle
Date: 31 Aug 1995 14:07:29 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <424fn1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux1.cso.uiuc.edu

Can anyone make suggestions for antennas on a fiberglass topped vehicle?
I particullar, a high-top van.  I have used NMO mounts on previous vans,
but with no steel for ground plane, I suspect I might have problems with
SWR.  I have been using a Larson 2m/440 antenna along with a cellular phone
antenna permanently mounted.  Also, I put a couple others on with a mag
mount for 6 meters and a scanner.  My HF antenna mounts on the rear on the
trailer hitch, so that should be fine as it has been.  Any suggestions are
greatly appreciated.

                                        Milt, K9QZI
                                        Champaign, IL



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:06 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!galen.med.Virginia.EDU!sem2r
From: [e-mail] (Stacey E. Mills)
Subject: U.S. Towers Crank-up Question
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: galen.med.virginia.edu
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: uva
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 14:20:02 GMT
Lines: 23

I want to purchase a 72 ft. crank-up tower, probably a U.S.
Towers model.  They have a "standard" model, good for 18 sq.
ft. at 50 MPH and a "heavy duty" model, good for 30 sq. ft.
I'll be mounting a log periodic (about 10 sg. ft), maybe a
terrestrial 2 m. beam, a VHF/UHF vertical, and maybe one day a
6 mtr.  beam.  The area will definitely be less than 18 sq.
feet, but maybe not a whole lot less.  I live on the side of a
mountain, relatively sheltered from high winds, in central
Virginia, but we still get occasional good stiff "breezes."

Is there any advantage to going with the heavy duty tower?
Does the standard model perform well "under load" when fully
extended with 15+ sq. ft. of wind load?  Any other thoughts
greatly appreciated.

Please E-mail direct to:
[e-mail]

Thanks!!
--
-73's de WB4QKT
Stacey E. (Chuck) Mills
E-mail: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:07 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Bobtail Curtain Anyone?
Date: 31 Aug 1995 17:10:17 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <424qdp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-09.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

;   "George L. Hiscox" <[e-mail]> writes:

; . . .

;  Having just finished modeling a half-square which is fed at one
;  top corner, I decided to see what would happen if I fed the
;  bobtail at the top of the middle vertical wire instead of at the
;  bottom. . . .

;  Does anyone have any experience feeding a bobtail curtain in this
;  manner?  What are the drawbacks aside from the obvious one of the
;  weight of the feedline at the center of the antenna?  Is the
;  bobtail curtain fed in such a fashion still considered a bobtail
;  curtain, or is it another "Real McCoy?"

You might have difficulty keeping the feedline from becoming part of
the antenna and goofing up the pattern, because of coupling between
antenna and feedline. Include in your model a wire
representing the outside of the coax, placed about where it will
actually be routed. Include the path from your rig to earth ground
(a guess is better than nothing for this). Use 500-1k ohm loads to
simulate current baluns and see how many you'll need and where they
have to be placed to get the current down to a reasonable level on
the outside of the coax.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:08 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What antenna would you use???
Date: 31 Aug 1995 17:55:10 GMT
Organization: ELNEC/EZNEC Software
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <424t1u$[e-mail]>
References: <41vqh7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-37.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] writes:
>  In article <41ui52$[e-mail]>,
>  Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>  >So a balun wouldn't be effective at the output of your
>  >tuner on the bands where you have the high impedance you report.
>
>  Hi Roy, this is an area not covered well in the ARRL Handbook and
>  Antenna Book. I was having trouble with the MFJ outboard current
>  balun when I read the Nov '93 CQ article by Jerry Sevick. Based
>  on that article, I bought the Amidon HBHT200 10kw voltage balun
>  and it *seems* to work well with no detectable temperature
>  increase on any of the bands. So my question is, what does the
>  HBHT200 do to my 1793+j2085 impedance at 100w? (that is the impedance
>  predicted by ELNEC and MicroSmith).
>
>  If I had a 300 ohm balanced SWR meter, I could make some measurements.
>  Can anyone point me toward a build, buy, borrow, or rent 300 ohm balanced
>  forward/reverse power meter? What I want to do is measure the efficiency
>  of the HBHT200 under extreme conditions.
>
>  73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
>
>>>>

I agree with Jack's answer. One of the things a 1:1 voltage balun does is
to put windings across the feedpoint. (Z-transforming current baluns
do this too.) If the Z of the windings isn't large compared to the feedpoint
Z, substantial current will flow through them in addition to the current
going to the antenna. If the winding Z has a reasonably high Q, the loss
may not be great, and it just looks like an inductor hooked across the
terminals.

Your tuner may or may not be able to tune this additional reactance out. In
fact, it may help your tuner effect a match. However, if you do a simple
analysis of the currents involved, you'll find that if your antenna is
perfectly balanced, one feedline wire will get a current which is larger
than the other by an amount 2 * Iw, where Iw is the current drawn by the
windings across the feedpoint. So insufficient winding impedance will lead
to feedline imbalance even if your antenna is perfectly balanced with
respect to ground. What I don't know how to do is to get an impedance that's
large relative to 1 or 2 k ohms over a reasonable range of frequencies. I
can do it with a resonant circuit, but don't think I can with a broadband
transformer. Maybe the RF power guys can comment. It looks like the Z
requirements are about the same as for a plate choke, but you've got to
make a transformer with good coefficient of coupling out of one. I doubt
if any of Sevick's transformers pull this off either, but if someone has
any measurements to offer, I'd be interested in what they show.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:09 1995
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!col.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!news1.boi.hp.com!news
From: Your_Name_Here <????@gr.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Tinted Window Question
Sender: [e-mail] (Boise Site News Server)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 19:47:55 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
References: <41l9ml$[e-mail]> <4221f4$[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpgreck.gr.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
Lines: 13
Xref: grape.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:13537 rec.radio.shortwave:57884

YES, MANY OF THESE COATINGS ARE CONDUCTIVE.  SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS
INVOLVED IN THE RF ELECTRONIC ID INDUSTRY, WE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM
GETTING RF ENERGY IN AND OUT OF THE VEHICLE CAB TO POWER/READ OUR TAGS.
AS I REMEMBER, THE FORD VEHICLES HAD A GOLD OR YELLOW/BRONZE LOOKING
COATING THAT WAS A VERY GOOD SHIELD FOR 915 MHZ AND 2450 MHZ.  IN
ADDITION, MANY OF THE WHOLE-GLASS DEFROSTERS ARE RESISTIVE METALLIC
COATINGS WHICH HEAT WHEN A CURRENY (12 VDC) IS PASSED THROUGH THEM.
CHECK BEFORE YOU SPEND MONEY ON GLASS-MOUNTED ANTENNAS!


DAVE ECKHARDT  W6LEV
[e-mail]        (I think)



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:10 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.cyberstore.ca!news.bctel.net!news.island.net!ham!rsmits
From: [e-mail] (Robert Smits)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to feed HF Quad??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 20:11:00 PST
References: <mike_cash-2808950924070001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil> <[e-mail]> <mike_cash-3008950802340001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil> <[e-mail]> <4258s5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Organization: The Curmudgeon's Cottage
X-Newsreader: Rnf 0.79b6
Lines: 31

[e-mail] (Gordon Pritchard) writes:

>[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>
>>   [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS) wrote:
>
>>>Jack (or anyone else), if I use a balun, should it be a 1:1 or 4:1
>>>and should it be a voltage or current balun (chock W2DU)?
>
>>You'll want a 1:1 to match the feedpoint impedance of a quad to your
>>coax.
>
>       For a quad, you'll want a **2:1** balun to match the 93 - 100 ohm
>feedpoint impedance (50-ohm co-ax, standard sort of antenna height).

Doesn't this rather depend on your element spacing? I was under the
impression that as you reduced the spacing, you also decreased the
antenna impedance. According to Orr, the radiation resistance of a two
element quad varies from 40 ohms to 140 ohms as the element spacing varies
from 0.07 wavelength to .25 wavelength. He suggests further that at around
0.08 wavelength spacing, the impedance is about 50 ohms.

What your actual impedance is will thus depend on height above ground,
element spacing and number of elements.

Some of my acquaintances have successfully fed a Gem Quad directly with
coax, with no balun at all.

--
[e-mail] (Robert Smits)



From [e-mail] Sun Sep 03 18:16:13 1995
Path: grape.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!ifwtech.demon.co.uk
From: Ian G3SEK <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best VHF antenna analyzer ; archives
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 20:57:14 GMT
Organization: IFWtech
Lines: 115
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <41jdcg$[e-mail]> <41sp3m$[e-mail]> <41upil$[e-mail]> <424e35$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
X-Broken-Date: Thursday, Aug 31, 1995 20.57.14
X-Newsreader: Newswin Alpha 0.7

In article: <424e35$[e-mail]>  Zack Lau <[e-mail]> writes:
:
: DL5UH [e-mail] () wrote:
: >>The reason: almost NOONE owns a good signal strength meter that they can
: >>go out and take readings with.  Given that antennas are one area of
: >>amateur radio where people still do a lot of experimenting, I'm surprized
: >>someone like MFJ hasn't come out with a good signal strength meter.
: >
:
: Joe Reisert, W1JR, brought the one he uses at work to the VHF/UHF
: conference antenna range this year.  No, I don't remember the HP model
: number...  Maybe next year we will have more antennas to compare.

Probably some version of the HP415, which is actually a calibrated
*audio* level meter, intended to be used with a square-law diode
detector and a 1kHz modulated signal source.

It can be very accurate, but the signal strength measurement is
almost the least of the problems compared with setting-up a test
range to avoid spurius reflections and give really accurate results.

: >He mentioned that it is very difficult to measure an antenna
: >pattern anywhere near to the accuracy it can be calculated by NEC 2,
: >and would also require a proper test site.

Measuring the pattern is the most difficult thing of all, because
low-level sidelobe structure can be totally masked by even minor
reflections from the main beam pointing the other way. To avoid this
you need a very, very big site, clear of reflecting features for a
long way all around, or a very large anechoic chanber such as the one
used by DL6WU for his original series of measurements on long yagis.
These are still a benchmark for computer modeling - and they're also
very good, reliable yagi designs.

On HF, accurate gain and pattern measurements are almost
impossible for amateurs, so the technique that gives the least
errors is computer modeling.

On the other hand, simple comparative gain measurements between
VHF/UHF antennas of similar gain and beamwidth are much less
difficult. The narrower beamwidth makes it easier to avoid
problems due to stray reflections, and it's always easier to
compare tow antennas that are very similar.

: >
: >Therefore he concluded that one is not too far off by building the antenna
: >to the dimensions given by NEC2.

I'd agree with that. Handled properly, NEC2 or even something
simpler such as K6STI's MN or YO can give results at least as
accurate as anything you'd be able to measure. (The original
MININEC is trickier to use and requires some arbitrary
corrections for VHF/UHF yagi elements.)

Even so, you should always make some practical checks. If you
have a computer prediction to check against, the levels of
the first sidelobes relative to the main lobe are a very good
indicator that the antenna is working as you'd expect. Since
you cannot practically model the feed method, it's also
essential to make swept VSWR measurements, and check that the
levels of the first sidelobes are exactly equal - a quite
sensitive test of feedpoint unbalance.

:
: Does someone have known good NEC2 models for popular methods of
: mounting antennas on metal booms?  NEC2 is probably just fine
: for wooden and plastic booms, but many people prefer the higher
: strength to weight ratio of aluminum.

You don't use a computer model for that. Whatever your proposed
boom material and mounting method, you always model the antenna as
if the elements were floating in free space. Then you apply a
simple correction to the element lengths to compensate for the boom
and mounting. For HF antennas, see W2PV's book on Yagis; for VHF/UHF
see K1FO's chapter in the ARRL Antenna Book, DL6WU in the VHF/UHF
DX Book, or DJ9BV in DUBUS.


: I think a comparison on
: an antenna range is a good idea.  Even a poor range will indicate
: whether something is seriously wrong.

Yes, and if possible a head-to-head comparison with a very similar
antenna. This can be very embarrassing, but it's better to know!

: A test I've devised for people without proper ranges is to measure the
: frequency at which the pattern of a beam degrades to more or less
: omnidirectional.  You can go back to the computer model and see if it
: matches reality.  This might even work at HF with broadcast stations
: if you do enough averaging to reduce the effect of varying propagation.
:

In principle it's better to test the antenna at the frequency
it's intended to work on. With short yagis (less than say 10 ele)
the whole shape of the pattern can change very rapidly with
frequency, so this is a good diagnostic tool. For example you can
usually identify the frequency where the F/B ratio passes through its
maximum, and compare that against the frequency predicted by the
model.

The whole idea is to verify that the yagi that you modeled is also
the yagi that you built. If you can confirm that using performance
features that may not be important but you can easily measure,
you can also be quite confident about more important aspects of
performance that aren't so easy to measure.



--
73 from Ian G3SEK            Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
                            'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Professionally:
IFW Technical Services       Clear technical English - anywhere.