World of Ham Radio 1997/WOHR97_AmSoft_(1997-02-01).iso/usenets/1996_02/_antenna.txt

Text File | 1997-02-01 | 951KB | 23,949 lines

The World of Ham Radio CD-ROM



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:34 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: Joe Fitter   BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rain "static" on a dipole ... what causes it
Date: 1 Feb 1996 01:33:00 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments Asia, Taipei TAIWAN R.O.C.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <4ep58c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.167.36.115
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)


Been meaning to ask this question for a while now..

I notice that my 2 element spider quad, and a 20 meter dipole both
exhibit s-9 rain induced static.  The static is not like static
crashes, but a constant s-9 noise.  No NB is able to cure this
problem.  The 3 element, aluminum yagi does not experience this
kind of static.  It makes no difference whether the clouds are
charged electrically, or, if it is just a constant steady rain.

When the rain stops...so too does the noise.

So, now for the $2 question:  why does this happen?

I suspect the HF yagi is matched via gamma match or some other approach
that puts the entire driven element at dc ground.  I know the dipole is
not shunt to ground, nor is the quad.  Am I getting close?

or,  some other near vicinity item is creating the static only when
the rain falls and getting into the quad and dipole but not effecting
the aluminum yagi.


Any ideas?

Joe



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:35 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!wrdis02.robins.af.mil!lakeith
From: [e-mail] (Larry Keith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 3x3x1/4 aluminum angle stock??
Date: 1 Feb 1996 02:24:03 GMT
Organization: Robins AFB, GA
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4ep883$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wrdis01.robins.af.mil
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL0L1]



Does anyone have a good source for small (less than 3 ft) pieces of
3x3 aluminum angle stock, 1/4 in thick?

73,

Larry Keith, KQ4BY
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:36 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary Myers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why is man-made RFI vertically polarized?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 02:36:36 GMT
Organization: Self
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <4ep91h$[e-mail]>
References: <4e8qfj$[e-mail]> <4e98jh$[e-mail]> <4egojl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gmyers.pr.mcs.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Emarit Ranu) wrote:

>Gary Myers ([e-mail]) wrote:

>: Gauss' law requires that the electric field must always be
>: perpendicular to a conductor. Since manmade rfi usually arrives by
>: ground wave (as opposed to skip), the electric field is perpendicular
>: to the conducting earth, i.e., vertically polarized.


>       Actually Gauss' Law for electric fields states that the electric
>       flux through any close surface equals the charge enclosed (remeber
>       the closed integral around a surface of the scalar product of flux
>       denisty and differential surface is equal to Q enclosed).
>       Conversely Gauss' Law states nearly the same for magnetic quantities
>       except the quanty of the intergal is zero (no such thing as a
>       magnetic charge).  Where the electric flux density D is replaced
>       by the magnetic flux density B.  Maxwell's equations state the same
>       thing by use of the del operator.

>: Ok, ok, that's more than 25 words...

>: Gary K9CZB
>: [e-mail]


>--
>       -Emarit, KG0CQ  73's   [e-mail]
>       Electrical Engineering, Colorado State Univeristy
>       Packet:                KG0CQ@KF0UW.#NECO.USA.NOAM
>       All generalizations are bad.  Censorship:  ######
>       _._  __.  _____  _._.  __._

You are right, of course. It would have been more accurate (and more
grammatically correct) for me to say, "As a consequence of Gauss's
Law..." Perhaps WA3WDR said it best.

-- 73, Gary K9CZB



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:37 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!xpat.postech.ac.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!taebaek.nowcom.co.kr!imci3!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!ferengi.prismnet.com!usenet
From: rew5808 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: WTB: lafayette, allied electronics & heathkit catalogs
Date: 1 Feb 1996 05:12:37 GMT
Organization: PrismNet - (512)-418-1568
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <4epi45$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ehl14$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-1-14.reallink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:69533 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18802 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24425 rec.radio.amateur.misc:97589 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13069

I am looking for some lafayette radio, allied electronics, and heathkit
catalogs from 1957 thru 1965.
would appreciate any help and/or any leads you can give me.

thanks
bobby  wb5wur



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:38 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!aimnet.com!news.exodus.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!ferengi.prismnet.com!usenet
From: rew5808 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: WTB: lafayette, allied electronics & heathkit catalogs
Date: 1 Feb 1996 05:51:45 GMT
Organization: PrismNet - (512)-418-1568
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4epkdh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ehl14$[e-mail]> <4epi45$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-1-14.reallink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:97615 rec.radio.shortwave:69565 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18825 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24451 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13080

I am looking for some lafayette radio, allied electronics, and heathkit
catalogs from 1957 thru 1965.
would appreciate any help and/or any leads you can give me.

thanks
bobby  wb5wur





From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:39 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.comm.net!imci3!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!ferengi.prismnet.com!usenet
From: rew5808 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: wtb: allied, lafayette, heathkit catalogs
Date: 1 Feb 1996 06:06:59 GMT
Organization: PrismNet - (512)-418-1568
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <4epla3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-1-14.reallink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.swap:56499 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18793 rec.radio.amateur.misc:97578 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13062

i would appreciate any help i can get in locating some spare lafayette
radio/electronics, heathkit, or allied electronics catalogs from 1957
thru 1965.

thanks
bobby  wb5wur



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:40 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.localnet.com!ub!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!wizard.pn.com!brighton.openmarket.com!decwrl!waikato!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: nec documentation
Date: 1 Feb 1996 09:42:21 GMT
Organization: The University of Waikato
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4eq1tt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 166.83.104.17
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)


        Is there any documentation describing the use etc of NEC available
via the internet?




From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:41 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ionospheric models and simulations
Date: 1 Feb 1996 09:46:09 GMT
Organization: The University of Waikato
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4eq251$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 166.83.104.17
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)


        Is there any freely available software that will simulate ionospheric propoga
tion of a given hf signal

        I.e. you give it a time series of data, a modulation scheme and a frequency a
nd it models
the signal over a given path (tx and rx positions given) for various times of
day/year/sunspot number
etc.

        Idea is to simulate reception for various modulation schemes.



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:42 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!news2.ee.net!news.ee.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!citi2.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!surfnet.nl!newshost.vu.nl!cs.vu.nl!sun4nl!rnzll3!sys3.pe1chl!rob
From: [e-mail] (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City/Repeater Use
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: PE1CHL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4efpb3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4elgqo$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 10:20:31 GMT
Lines: 45
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.policy:32990 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18873 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24534 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13113 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:13948

In <4elgqo$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark Fellhauer)
 writes:

>[e-mail] (Rob Janssen) wrote:

>>In <[e-mail]> Eddie Caffray <[e-mail]> wri
tes:

>>> On the 146.85 repeater here in Central NY we had trouble with one user als
o. He made it that
>>>no one would even monitor the reapeater anymore. The club voted to ban him
and we did. The
>>>reapeater is a great place to be again.

>>How do you manage to effectively ban malicious users from a repeater?
>>Of course this problem is known all over the world, but at least over
>>here we have not yet found an effective way of stopping them.  How do
>>you do that?

>Go to the Arizona Repeater Association's Home Page to see how this is
>done.  It involves actively pursuing people who engage in such
>activity.  The ARA, as a matter of routine, has an interference
>committee dedicated to tracking these people down.

>Despite reports to the contrary, the FCC does frown on this activity,
>and will enforce sanctions.  Just ask the people here in Phoenix about
>that.  An NAL, Notice of Apparant Liability, carries a stiff monetary
>fine, about $20,000 (US) worth and forfeiture of ALL broadcasting
>equipment and license(s).

Hmmm...   it looks like HDTP (or equivalent of the FCC) does not put
out such drastic sanctions.
Normally one will lose the license for a year or so, and one could get
a fine of maybe $500.

This does not seem to stop some people...   when you have been reading the
BBSes, you can see that the wellknown person that causes havoc on the
local packet network is still active.  He is fully known by name,
ex-callsign, and address.
(he just uses callsigns of other people, mainly VERON officials, to
post offensive messages.  he was also active on the phone repeater sometime,
transmitting over those same people, but I think he has lost interest in that)

Rob
--
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen         [e-mail] | BBS: [phone] (2300-0730 local) |
| AMPRnet:       [e-mail] | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:44 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!oleane!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: Transformer for Screwdriver type antenna
Date: 1 Feb 1996 10:22:09 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 56
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4eqlr1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "C. J. Hawley"
<[e-mail]> writes:

>. I find that multiple taps are
>necessary when the efficiency of the antenna is improved on the low
bands. As
>
>the losses are eliminated, then the impedance of the short antenna say on

>160M begins to get down to a few ohms (if you're lucky). The antenna rad
>resistance of the short antenna on 160M is well below an ohm, the rest of
the
>
>ohms being due to losses. This should give you a clue as to the
efficiency of
>
>the commercial screwdriver antenna on the low bands if only one tap is
>necessary for a match. Some of my friends have gone to the parallel cap
for
>the match in an attempt to improve the efficiency of the method of the
match
>adjust over the tapped toroid, but I haven't found my tproid to be too
much
>of a detriment.

I measured the ground resistance of my F-250HD Supercab long bed truck and
it is around 15-20 ohms (depending on soil) in series with a several
hundred pF on 160. It is impossible to get down to a "few ohms" unless
your vehicle is .4 wl in radius.

Going from the worst coil I had (Q ~150) to the best (Q ~ 350) there is
almost NO difference in feedpoint impedance, bandwidth, or system
efficiency. The ground losses swamp out the effect of changes in coil
resistance! It's better to concentrate on increasing radiation resistance
by making the current distribution linear over the entire radiator than
messing with coils and matching systems.

Going from base loading to top loading can increase efficiency by a factor
of four, while it took a coil Q change from 50 to 350 to make an
efficiency improvement of only 2.3 times! Remember the formula for
efficiency, Rrad/Rrad+Rloss * 100 and that R loss always contains ~17 ohms
of ground loss on my BIG truck.

So with a coil reactance of 3000 ohms (big hat used) and Q of 350 the ESR
of the coil is 8,6 ohms, with a Q of 50 coil ESR is 60 ohms. If Rrad is
0,1 ohms the efficiency is 0,3% for a coil Q of 350, eff is 0,13% for the
Q of 50.

I want a big signal, so I quit messing with the coil and matching methods
and concentrated on installing the tallest top loaded antenna I could on
the truck.

By the way, the bandwidth on 160 is more dependent on the L/C ratio than
the efficiency of the system.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:45 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!news2.ee.net!news.ee.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!citi2.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!surfnet.nl!newshost.vu.nl!cs.vu.nl!sun4nl!rnzll3!sys3.pe1chl!rob
From: [e-mail] (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: PE1CHL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4efpb3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 10:22:49 GMT
Lines: 23
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.policy:32994 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18882 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24545 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13120 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:13951

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Donald
 I. Baker) writes:

>Technical solutions do exist.  Using a "TX-ID" board, which uniquely
>fingerprints each transmitter and a PC one can "slectively" include or
>preclude individual users.

>The board was not meant for that purpose, but with just a little Basic of C
>codes, it workd just fine.  It is especially easy if you have a single or
>limited number of receive site.

Is that using some public key encryption technique?
If not, what is preventing the malicious from cloning one of the
apparently valid codes?

Also, what is preventing the malicious user from just keying up over
other people's transmissions, thus rendering the repeater useless?

Rob
--
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen         [e-mail] | BBS: [phone] (2300-0730 local) |
| AMPRnet:       [e-mail] | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:46 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!caen!usenet.cis.ufl.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!pirates!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!swrinde!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: EWE Antenna
Date: 1 Feb 1996 11:06:11 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4eqodj$[e-mail]>
References: <4eoneu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4eoneu$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(dick sander) writes:

>
>I also was given the name of Industrial Comm Engr, LTD.
>at 1-800-423-2666 for impedance xfmrs and preamps.
>I called and ordered a 180A xfmr @ $39 and a 123B preamp @ $45.
>The preamp is protected so there's no need to ground the antenna
>while xmting. It is 22 to 25 dB gain w/1.4dB NF from 1.8 to 2 Mhz.
>
>I've got 150 ft in which to run the receiving ant, so I'm
>going to try 10 ft high X 150 ft long. My fingers are crossed
>
>73, Dick - K5QY

The pre-amp seems reasonable but the transformer sure is expensive. What
active device does the pre-amp use?

The responses highlight the need to test antennas when they are modeled
close to the ground. The performance is much worse than the computer
indicates. Several of the comments I received were that even very short
"Beverages" worked much better than the Ewe.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:48 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!news2.ee.net!news.ee.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!zetnet.co.uk!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WANTED :  GREAT 80 METER DX ANTENNA
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 13:24:09 +0000
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 43
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4elaj2$[e-mail]>
 <4ep8v4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.11 <9qI82xurdT5+z2vSgnCPFcKgQL>

In article <4ep8v4$[e-mail]>, W2FOE wrote:
>I think the 1/2  wave vertical is ideal for the really long haul dx.
>Unfortunately I don't think there is that much "really long haul" dx.  I
>just ran a quick plot (using Beezley's AO) on a 4 square - the maximum
>elevation angle for 1/4 wave elements is 24 degrees; for 1/2 wave elements
>is 16 degrees.

Unfortunately AO won't give you the right answer, because it's a MININEC
derivative and ignores ground losses when calculating the gain. It does
take account of ground losses when calcuating the far-field pattern, but
that still does not include the efficiency penalty. The pattern will
have about the right shape, but the maximum gain figure needs to be
scaled-down by several dB.

ON4UN points out that contrary to what you might imagine, the gain and
vertical pattern of a half-wave vertical are *more* dependent on ground
quality than they are for a quarter-wave. Using NEC, he estimates that
even over "good" ground there may be a loss of 6dB compared with the
ideal situation.

Because the current loop is high above ground level, ground reflection
from a half-wave vertical takes place over a larger radius than it does
for a quarter-wave, so a much larger area of ground is involved. If you
tried to "condition" the ground using radials, they would need to be at
least two wavelengths long to achieve similar efficiency to a quarter-
wave using 0.25wl radials. Because of the greater length there would
also need to be a lot more of them (maybe 8 times more, based on
maintaining the same separation between the ends of the radials).

Bottom line: a half-wave vertical may have too low an radiation angle
for the low bands, and it will also be less efficient. ON4UN's
calculations  estimate that with practical radial systems the quarter-
wave scores by several dB at the wave angles required for DX.

Surprising? It certainly surprised me... but it does make sense when you
stop and think about it.


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] Mon Feb 05 21:22:49 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!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: WANTED :  GREAT 80 METER DX ANTENNA
Date: 1 Feb 1996 13:46:58 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4er1r2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "Ian White, G3SEK"
<[e-mail]> writes:

>
>Bottom line: a half-wave vertical may have too low an radiation angle
>for the low bands, and it will also be less efficient. ON4UN's
>calculations  estimate that with practical radial systems the quarter-
>wave scores by several dB at the wave angles required for DX.
>
>Surprising? It certainly surprised me... but it does make sense when you
>stop and think about it.
>
>
>73 from Ian G3SEK

And another bottom line is also that, to my knowlege (and I've been
looking at this for almost a year now),  NEC has never been verified for
real world ground systems or low horizontal wires! So be careful with any
low wire parallel to the earth, the results may vary wildly from full
blown NEC models!

My own tests, tests of a low dipole done for the US Military, and
commercial BC station data indicates there can be a 4-6dB shortfall in
signal from NEC predictions on low wires like elevated radials or low
dipoles. So caution is advised....

73 Tom




From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:50 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bison.alfred.edu!kato.theramp.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-45.teleport.com!user
From: [e-mail] (PjB)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rooftop ant. for radio?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 16:20:38 -0800
Organization: thornyvinemusic
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-45.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0b30

Hi gang.....I just moved into a new apartment bldg.  It was built in the
50's and it is a rather large structure 12 stories tall. The original TV
antenna system is on the roof and I am told it still works. There is a
jack on the wall in the living room. I am wondering if I might utilise
this with my scanner. I'd need to find out what kind of connection is in
the wall (its about 1/2 inch wide, circular, kind of looks like a little
crown, with indentations around the circumference) and then rig a BNC
connector on the other end going into the scanner.  Questions:  Would this
work?
The antenna is placed so well I'm very anxious to try it. Also, what kinds
of reception could I expect? I assume UHF/VHF, but anything else? Could
this damage my scanner in any way?
Thanks for reading this. I'm fairly new to radio so I apologize for what
are probably obvious things.
Rgds
Tvine


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:51 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!news2.ee.net!news.ee.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.ios.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]@fwi.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help calculating transmission power
Date: 1 Feb 1996 16:32:36 GMT
Organization: Internet Online Services
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <4eqpv4$[e-mail]>
References: <4ehf8e$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]@fwi.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.235.86.126
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <4ehf8e$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Acadimie du Savoir)
writes:
>
>|----(-------------------------------------------------------------10 km-----
---------------------------------------------->)----|
>|                                                                                                       |
>|                              frequency=10 Ghz                                |
>|                                                                              |
>|                                                                              |
>|                                                                              |
>___                                                                            ___
>Transmitting                                                                   Receiving
>
>Gain= 10db                                                                     Gain=40 db
>
>What is the transmitting power if the signal is recieved at -80 dBm?
>
>Please give me an answer in dBm and in Watts
>
>Thanks is advance, an answer would be very welcomed
>
>P.S. If you could answer before monday 29 4 p.m. it would be great
>
>Brad Wilson
>Canada
>

Brad, you gave no transmitter output power. You will have to start with some v
alue.
Pull down TEEREV.ZIP off the ARRL BBS. It'll get you started.

                                      Jim WD9AHF


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:52 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!uw-coco!uw-beaver!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.flint.umich.edu!news.gmi.edu!msunews!netnews.upenn.edu!dsinc!newsfeed.pitt.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!news.sesqui.net!compassnet.com!usenet
From: Spencer Petri <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Finco 6&2
Date: 1 Feb 1996 16:49:22 GMT
Organization: Compass Net, Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4eqqui$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial55.e-tex.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Any of you fellows have an old Finco 6&2 antenna out in your
garage or down in the basement?

73 de Pete WA5JCI EM-21



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:53 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com!realtime.net!nntp4.mindspring.com!news.mindspring.com!snooze.ser.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!nntp2.cerf.net!news.claremont.edu!drivel.ics.uci.edu!news.service.uci.edu!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 "faq"
Date: 1 Feb 96 17:05:24 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Index of Frequently Asked Questions
hem-onc_seminars
iamslic
info-hams
kelptank
mmc
nel
novell
packet-radio
qigong
socal-raves-calendar
socal-raves-digest
socal-raves
soul


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:56 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mounting a Cushcraft R5
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: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 17:16:08 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:[e-mail]
Lines: 14

I have used the R4 (similar) at 8ft above ground (1ft above roof eave)
and 40 ft above ground (6 ft above 3rd floor roof) with excellent DX
results
in the San Francisco bay area.
There seem to be certain heights above ground that are not recommended
due to far field cancellations (ground reflections).  I have had poor
results at the 15 - 20 ft above ground (on 40 mtrs) but did not research
it much.
For mounting, I used a TV mast from radio shack in both installations.
There is very little wind loading so it doesn't have to on be a
fencepost sized base  (unless it makes you feel better).
Regards, Al




From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:57 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc.gsl.net!news-paris.gsl.net!news-lond.gsl.net!Tagada.grolier.fr!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!citi2.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!surfnet.nl!howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!news
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Loops!!!!
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: <4eh0ck$[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 17:28:55 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-Url: news:4eh0ck$[e-mail]
Lines: 12

I would appreciate a little detail on your horizontal loop. Band/ and a
little design info.
I built the K6STI loop from QST and have been unimpressed.
I can get a good match to 50 ohm line, I can get it to resonate, I can
get low SWR (low power) but it doesn't improve the signal to noise on
either 40 or 80 meters.  (I did build it half size and possible that is
the problem although the original article alludes to smaller sizes would
improve SNR...and work the same).
I would appreciate your response and comments.
Regards, AL




From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:22:58 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!saluki-news.wham.siu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Pat Hamilton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V96 #43
Date: 1 Feb 96 17:41:58 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


> I believe the state of Florida passsed a law that was suposed to
> prevent local zoning from preventing ham towers, anyone have any
> info on it??? If so I would like to get a copy.
>
> thanks
>
> Dave hand wb4hyp
> dhand @ microdes.com

Greetings Dave,

Yes, Florida did indeed enact such a law. Unfortunately it did not
stop the problems. I lived in Florida (Tampa) for a bit over three
years and there was at least one case where some folks put up a
couple towers in a rural area and literally went through hell over
it.

I cannot provide particulars on Florida's law but I think a note to a
fellow I know down there would get you some answers.

His name is Warren and his call is WA1GUD. A really decent guy and
well informed on new developments in that neck of the woods.

His internet address is or not too long ago was  [e-mail]

He can also be reached via packet at [e-mail]

He may have some printed matter he could send you. Tell him I said
hello.

Good luck and 73

Pat


                       Pat Hamilton, WF9H
                          [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:00 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: Tom Skelton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: WANTED :  GREAT 80 METER DX ANTENNA
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (skeltt)
Organization: NCR
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.5.1.3 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <4eo1lk$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 18:26:24 GMT
Lines: 74


>==========W8JI  Tom, 1/31/96==========
>
>Hi Paul,
>
>In article <4elaj2$[e-mail]>, Paul Christensen
><[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>Tom:
>>
>>I would think that a 1/2 al vertical would be tough to beat for the
>>really long-haul DX on 160.  I had always envisioned my dream
>antenna for
>
>>160 as a 190-degree Pi-Rod tower, guyed with Phillystran, and
>mounted on
>>a three-foot concrete base pier with a Blaw-Knox glass base insulator.
>>Of course, the foundation for the 190 degree radiator found its
>>beginnings with Ballantine's 5/8 wl radiator in 1923, but I believe it
>>was Brown, Lewis, et. al., who then optimzed the length to 190
>degrees in
>
>>an effort to maximize ground-wave radiation (through the ubiquitous
>>multi-wire ground system) and minimize skywave radiation with the 190
>>degree radiator.  The problem as I see it, we as amateurs
rarely have a
>>need to maximize ground wave radiation.  A byproduct of this
>however, is
>>that an extremely low launch angle can be taken advantage of for the
>>mega-long DX.
>
>I have limited experience with half wave and 5/8 verticals on 160. We
>tested some BC towers for contest use, and "horse raced" against my 1/4
>wave at home several nights. They never worked well at all,
even into EU.
>So I quit.
>
>Now 80 is another story. I could A/B an 80 1/4 wl against my 160
>insulated
>tower (1/2 wl on 80) and night after night the 1/4 wl was better
>everywhere except across town.
>I attributed it to too low a launch angle, and the uncontrolled ground
>losses some distance from the antenna eating up the low angle signal.
>
>Another problem also exists. If the incident angle is too low far when
>transmitting well below the OWF or MUF, the signal skims along the
>ionosphere and losses are very high. The losses are much lower at a
>sharper angle, its a cleaner hop.
>
>>Back to reality: There was an interesting article in the August, 1994
>>issue of QST, entitled "The 160-Meter Sloper System at K3LR"
>-pp. 36-38.
>>This antenna system takes
>>.snip>
>
>Best 160 antenna I ever used was a dipole at 330 feet or so. I want one
>again. It beat my 1/4 wl vert by 10 dB into Eu night after
night, and out
>received my Beverages by a bunch! Thats all I want, I'm not greedy.
>
>73 Tom
>
>

How the heck did you get a dipole for 160 meters at a height of 330 ft?

It would be interesting with the recent openings on 160m to
Japan to do an
A/B with a high dipole (i.e., >100m above ground, broadside
NW/SW] and the
1/4 wl vertical.

73, Tom WB4iUX



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:01 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!alterdial.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: "Thomas L. Gaines, Sr." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELP!!DOUBLE BAZOOKA
Date: 1 Feb 1996 19:22:03 GMT
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4er3sr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.251.143.110
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

I need information on a double bazooka antennae.  IE; formula for cutting
and feeding information(matching stubs, etc).

73 N5ISE/Tom Gaines



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:02 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.cris.com!news
From: "R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: 1 Feb 1996 19:40:29 GMT
Organization: winco
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4er4vd$[e-mail]>
References: <ericr.823020273@access2>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cnc04577.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Eric, you can get some info and plans from: Antennas West - PO Box 50062
Provo, UT 84605.  I just ordered their TNT 160. Also check with Radio
Works Box 6159 Portsmouth, VA 23703. They make them as well. You can also
buy the plans from Antennas West. I personally chose the TNT over the
Radio Works Carolina Windom because I liked the insulated wire that they
use vs the open copper-clad wire. The open copper-clad wire will corrode
eventually along it's entire length. The corrosion acts as millions of
little capacitors that gain minute static charges and make the antenna
increasingly noisy as time passes. 73  KC8ARO Bruce



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:03 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.cris.com!news
From: "R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Selection Advice Sought
Date: 1 Feb 1996 19:49:39 GMT
Organization: winco
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <4er5gj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cnc04577.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Jim,
After having experienced a couple of tower crashes over the years I will
tell you that the use of the common 1 and 2 bolt towers at the height you
designated - without the use of guy wires - is flirting with disaster. I
won't go over 30 feet without guys. 73 KC8ARO Bruce



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:03 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.cris.com!news
From: "R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: 1 Feb 1996 20:04:19 GMT
Organization: winco
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4er6c3$[e-mail]>
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cnc04577.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

I disagree. What you are looking for is a time-proven antenna called a
WINDOM. There is a danger of in-shack RFI if you attempt this OCF. The
feedline becomes a radiator when you have an unbalanced line. You have to
control it. You MUST use an in-line Isolation Balun (Line Isolator). This
will turn your feedline into a Vertical Radiator and add another
dimension to your antenna!!! It will also virtually eliminate RFI
problems. Write for catalogs from Radio Works, Box 6159, Portsmouth,VA
23703  and   Antennas West, PO Box 50062, Provo, UT 84605 for antennas,
pieces/parts and plans. 73 KC8ARO Bruce



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:05 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.cris.com!news
From: "R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: 1 Feb 1996 20:14:06 GMT
Organization: winco
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4er6ue$[e-mail]>
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <4eoa8b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cnc04577.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Cecil,
The antenna is called a WINDOM. Check the ARRL Antenna Handbook and write
to Antennas West, PO Box 50062, Provo, UT 84605  and   Radio Works, Box
6159, Portsmouth, VA 23703 for catalogs of pre-built antennas,
pieces/parts, and plans. Don't try to run an unbalanced line without
using a feedline isolator/balun to stop the RFI. Without a line isolator
the RFI will reset your alarm clock at 100 yards. 73  KC8ARO Bruce



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:05 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!caen!msunews!netnews.upenn.edu!dsinc!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.eas.asu.edu!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Bazooka Antenna Design
Date: 1 Feb 1996 20:26:32 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4er7lo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


        N9puf said
Does anyone have a design for a Bazooka antenna?
I'm told their good on 160 M.

        I could ask, good in what way?
        Since the loss in the quarter wave sections is a function of
the square root of frequency and the length it seems to me that the
loss will be higher on loweer frequency bands such as 160.  Tales of
immunity to height etc... are not valid.  The increased bandwidth
is more a product of the diameter of teh coax shield forming the
antenna than the small compensation of the shunting stubs.

Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:06 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.cris.com!news
From: "R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Safe distance between dipole feedpoint and metal mast?
Date: 1 Feb 1996 20:26:52 GMT
Organization: winco
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4er7mc$[e-mail]>
References: <4eo55l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cnc04577.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Hi,
The only info I have found on this topic is from the Radio Works antenna
catalog. They recommend using a tower stand-off of 6 to 10 feet of PVC
pipe of 2 or 3" dimension; at the apex. Further comment is given to the
location of the feedline take-off point. For the T.O.P., they recommend
that it be at least 15 feet from the tower. This is for Windom antennas.
If you are running a center-fed wire, it would be my guess that the 15
foot dimension would hold true. At your present 5-6" setting you are
nearly shunted to the tower.  73 Bruce KC8ARO



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:07 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.kreonet.re.kr!taebaek.nowcom.co.kr!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!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: Rain "static" on a dipole ... what causes it
Date: 1 Feb 1996 20:29:59 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 32
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4erpen$[e-mail]>
References: <4ep58c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Joe,

In article <4ep58c$[e-mail]>, Joe Fitter   BV/N0IAT
<[e-mail]> writes:

>So, now for the $2 question:  why does this happen?
>
>I suspect the HF yagi is matched via gamma match or some other approach
>that puts the entire driven element at dc ground.  I know the dipole is
>not shunt to ground, nor is the quad.  Am I getting close?

If the noise is a high pitiched sizzle that gets worse and the pops and
disappears when lighting flashes, it is from corona discharge. Tiny
streamers trail from your antenna into the air. This is most noticable
with high antennas using thin or pointed conductors. Sharp point increase
the charge concentration and increase the occurance of streamers (or
corona) in a storm.

The cure is blunt, thick conductors and keeping the antenna close to the
ground. Thick unbroken insulation will also help distribute the charge.


>or,  some other near vicinity item is creating the static only when
>the rain falls and getting into the quad and dipole but not effecting
>the aluminum yagi.
>

That's possible, or perhaps it's because the yagi is a thicker and
smoother conductor. Less voltage gradient (charge concentration at sharp
points), less corona.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:09 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!news2.ee.net!news.ee.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!iglou!n4lq
From: Steve Ellington <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
X-Sender: n4lq@iglou
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960201150610.19455A-100000@iglou>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 20:37:11 GMT
Lines: 65

I have Radio Works silly catalog with all the antennas that are
Austonding, Amazing, Unbleivable etc. Yes even the buck of string with a
weight on it for only $$$. The amazing but little know DOUBLE BAZOOKA
that bost signals to strangely heafty levels that even buffalos the
engineers. bla bla bla etc. Balderdash!

The Windom in it's original form was fed with a single wire. I tried it
once and put a nice burn on my lip from the microphone. Now, we have this
so -called Windom using balanced line, 300 ohm or 450 or whatever,
feeding a very unbalanced antenna. YES, the feedline will radiate like
crazy! Is this what we desire?

On 20 meters and above we end up with a very directional antenna with
some gain in certain directions and deep nulls in others. Does anyone
care?

Line Isolators..... Well depending on feeder length and freq. of
operation you may get a really hot choke with lots of power loss. I know
this because I tried it. You will end up cranking on an antenna tuner
before it's all over anyway so why bother with feeding an antenna
off-center when we know it's asking for trouble?

He just wants 80 and 40 meters anyway. With parallel dipoles, there is
little concern for RF on the rig, no tuner needed and no baluns required.

This Windom stuff reminds me of the G5RV hype. Same old thing. A crummy
compromise antenna that can be made to work on all bands using a tuner
and enough lossy coax with a high swr to make tuning easy. Package it as
an  all-band antenna kit, charge $49.95 and they sell like hotcakes.

Time does not prove anything except that...Given enough time, people will
try anything over and over even when it doesn't make good sense.

1. Use a balanced antenna
2. Feed it with a matched feeder
3. Enjoy operating

1. Use a balanced antenna
2. Feed it with balanced open wire line
3. Use a tuner
4. Enjoy operating but cranking the tuner

1. Use an unbalanced antenna
2. Feed it with anything
3. Use a tuner, line isolator etc.
4. Anything might happen. Have fun




> I disagree. What you are looking for is a time-proven antenna called a
> WINDOM. There is a danger of in-shack RFI if you attempt this OCF. The
> feedline becomes a radiator when you have an unbalanced line. You have to
> control it. You MUST use an in-line Isolation Balun (Line Isolator). This
> will turn your feedline into a Vertical Radiator and add another
> dimension to your antenna!!! It will also virtually eliminate RFI
> problems. Write for catalogs from Radio Works, Box 6159, Portsmouth,VA
> 23703  and   Antennas West, PO Box 50062, Provo, UT 84605 for antennas,
> pieces/parts and plans. 73 KC8ARO Bruce
>
>
>

Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:10 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FAQ
Date: 1 Feb 96 20:39:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


 [e-mail] (Luckleslie) writes:
 -Does anyone know where I can get a FAQ file on Antennas.

The ARRL Antenna Book or The ARRL Amateur Radio Handbook.
Those are a good start for almost everything you ever wanted
to know about antennas and feedlines.

Kevin, WB5RUE
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:11 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.cris.com!news
From: "R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rain "static" on a dipole ... what causes it
Date: 1 Feb 1996 20:39:08 GMT
Organization: winco
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4er8dc$[e-mail]>
References: <4ep58c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cnc04577.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

Joe,
I'd be willing to bet that the wire on your quad and dipole are of the
open stranded variety. The corrosion along the length of the wire will
increasingly worsen and the corrosion becomes a zillion little capacitors
that stores static energy from friction and atmospheric
electrical activity. When this discharges, you get noise. The rain may
have a different ionic polarization and this makes the entire situation
worse. Recommend you go to solid enameled wire on your quad and an
insulated wire on your dipole. This stops the corrosion effect. RF does
not "see" the insulation or enamel. 73 KC8ARO Bruce



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:11 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.interport.net!usenet
From: Michael Neidich <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Patch antenna
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 20:44:58 -0800
Organization: Interport Communications Corp.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: neidich.port.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (Win16; I)
To: Jean-Yves Perrier <[e-mail]>

Patch antennas are described in modern antenna design books.  They are
primarily useful at microwave frequencies and arrays of them can give
gain and directionality.  Not much application to lower freq bands.  Very
difficult to make unless you know what you are doing.
73, K2ENN


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:12 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.interport.net!usenet
From: Michael Neidich <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rooftop ant. for radio?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 20:48:15 -0800
Organization: Interport Communications Corp.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: neidich.port.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (Win16; I)
To: PjB <[e-mail]>

Some of the apartments used a plate with an RCA plug available in some
repair shops.  Trouble is that the amplifier between the antenna and the
coax may be dead, or the wiring not intact.  You would be better off with
a whip sticking out the window.  If you put a .01 uf capacitor between
the scanner and the house wire you will protect it, anyway.


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:13 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1!ind-004-236-177
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Croft)
Subject: Re: FAQ
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ind-009-237-107.iquest.net
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]>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 21:40:24 GMT
Lines: 14

[e-mail] (Muenzler, Kevin) wrote:
>
> [e-mail] (Luckleslie) writes:
> -Does anyone know where I can get a FAQ file on Antennas.
>
>The ARRL Antenna Book or The ARRL Amateur Radio Handbook.
>Those are a good start for almost everything you ever wanted
>to know about antennas and feedlines.
>
>Kevin, WB5RUE
>[e-mail]


Just remember that because something is in print, it isn't the perfect bible.
 Some excellent info, some BS too.


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:14 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!ni1.ni.net!xband.ni.net!user
From: [e-mail] (J. L. Blanton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted V or long wire?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 22:14:04 -0800
Organization: Network Intensive
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xband.ni.net

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

> ...I am considering putting up an inverted V at about 50' then moving to
a full dipole...

An inverted v is a full dipole (except for the shape).  I think the V
shape reduces the nulls off the ends that a normal linear dipole would
have.  In that respect the inverted V has a slight advantage over a dipole
if you want coverage in all directions.

73,

Lee, WA8YBT/6


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:15 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!globe.indirect.com!imci4!imci3!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.mci.newscorp.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!usenet
From: Richard Hulse <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCD antennas
Date: 1 Feb 1996 23:13:02 GMT
Organization: Radio New Zealand
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <4erhdu$[e-mail]>
References: <4eh2m9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kgill.dialup.netlink.co.nz
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]

Bob, Thanks for the info. I'll seek out those books asap

Regards
Richard Hulse
ZL2AJC



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:16 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bison.alfred.edu!kato.theramp.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Jim Keesler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: My vote for best 80M Antenna
Date: 2 Feb 96 00:18:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Bext 80M DX antenna I've seen is a 4-square design with 4 quarter-wave
verticals, each having good radial ground system (32 +) and fed thru
matching and power divider circuits like broadcast AM systems.  With the
symmetry, you can switch the feedline sequence and "rotate" the pattern in
each of the four major directions.

When adjusted correctly, the front-to-back ratio can be better than 20
db--enough to give you four different 80-meter bands at the flip of a switch!

The design was in a series of magazine articles a few years back--try
contacting Maury, W8EMD---an old AM Broadcast engineer and antenna whiz.  He
built one at age 70+ and measured its pattern with an AM Broadcast field
strength meter (read expensive and accurate!) .  I'd suggest a letter to his
callbook address and arrainge for a phone call QSO.  Tell him I gave you his
name!

73,                        Jim, K8EXF

Running 10KW to a 10-db gain superturnstyle antenna at 1000 feet near
6M--also known as TV Ch. 3  in Kalamazoo, MI  !



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:17 1996
Path: news.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: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: 2 Feb 1996 01:37:39 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4esbfj$[e-mail]>
References: <4er6c3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960201150610.19455A-100000@iglou>, Steve
Ellington <[e-mail]> writes:

>
>The Windom in it's original form was fed with a single wire. I tried it
>once and put a nice burn on my lip from the microphone. Now, we have this

>so -called Windom using balanced line, 300 ohm or 450 or whatever,
>feeding a very unbalanced antenna. YES, the feedline will radiate like
>crazy! Is this what we desire?
>

The two wire line doesn't have to radiate. If you install a choke balun at
the antenna terminals it won't radiate if the source feeding the line is
balanced. If the line is coax and the balun is used the source has to be
ground independent or a typical unbalanced output.

Lot's of variables apply when things are mixed and matched!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:18 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!news.tamu.edu!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WANTED :  GREAT 80 M
Date: 2 Feb 1996 02:24:53 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <4ersll$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.194.44.221
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (FORREST
 GEHRKE) writes:
>MM> Whole array is fed with DX Engineering phase box a-la Collins style.
>
>MM> Tune each tower to exactly the same format with an MFJ combo SWR
>MM> and impedance bridge.  They all are perfect matches size wise tower
>MM> tower.  Hook up the phase delay lines,  hook up the line to the shac
>
>This array requires equal current to each element.  If you
>measured it, I'd be very interested in what you see for range
>of current at each element as you switch the array thru its
>four directions.
>
> * RM 1.3 02583 * I'm having a deja vu experience, just like last time

As the time permits, I'm going to set up to do exactly this.

The actual performance of the thing on the 40 Meter version shows about
25DB F/B and what I think to be about 6DB gain, it is uniform, or
seems to be so, around the compass through its pattern.

As with most folks, in that it seems to work more or less like the book
says it should work, once I get that far, I lose interest in fooling any
more with it to get the precise figures down.

I'm inadequate as a researcher, I guess and might as well admit it.

Mike W5WQN as a guest at leviathan.tamu.edu



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:19 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.accessone.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Ed Mitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: February edition of Ham Radio Online available on the Net
Date: 2 Feb 1996 03:27:46 GMT
Organization: Virtual Publishing Co.
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <4es0bi$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vbook.accessone.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:97617 rec.radio.amateur.policy:32951 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:13911 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24455 rec.radio.scanner:44858 rec.radio.shortwave:69567 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18827 alt.radio.scanner:27128 alt.radio.pirate:13346


The February 1996 edition of Ham Radio Online is available at
http://www.accessone.com/~vbook/hronline.htm

New articles are available now and we will be adding 1 to 2 new articles
each week.

Ham Radio Online has up-to-date news about Amateur Radio from around the world
,
feature stories, real-time propagation and auroral condition reports, real-tim
e
earthquake and severe weather conditions for emergency communications planning
,
online humor section and the Ham Radio Online Library with fully indexed (find
any section with just a mouse click) Part 97 rules and regulations.

And we plan to offer some totally cool new services during the coming month. A
s
always its free and free of ads.

Thanks to you, we had over 10,000 readers stop by during January!

Please enjoy!

73, Ed Mitchell
KF7VY
[e-mail]
http://www.accessone.com/~vbook/hronline.htm

------------------------
personal email to [e-mail]
Visit Ham Radio Online, it's free, at
http://www.accessone.com/~vbook/hronline.htm



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.encore.com!psoper
From: [e-mail] (Pete Soper)
Subject: Insulated elements
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 04:16:38 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: sysgem1.encore.com
Lines: 37

Hello,
        I need some help understanding how to adjust for the
capacitance of insulated antenna elements. The popular
literature suggests the electrical shortening caused by element
insulation is 2-3%. However my recent (trivial) experiments suggest
this might be a too low estimate for my situation. Using #10 "THHN"
single conductor stranded house wire (the type here in the States
with a thin clear plastic sheath over a thicker pvc insulation) I
measured around 12% shortening of the electrical length of the
elements of a dipole (that is 12% shorter than the common 468ft/fmhz
rule of thumb for dipoles made of uninsulated wire. The frequency
involved was 15mhz)
        I want to conclude from this that for my models I would
simply adjust the element lengths by 12% when going between the
model and "real world" elements made with this wire. However the
difference from the shortening effects I've read about are bothersome.
        Is the 12% figure reasonable? Are there any hard figures
for actual types of insulated wire I could consult? If I could
determine the capacitance per unit length could I compute the effect
on its electrical length? And are there any subtle factors that would
keep the above "model to real world" translation of element
lengths from being valid?
        Finally, one antenna I'm investigating uses 450 ohm insulated
ladder line as one of its driven elements. I assume this balanced
feeder (driven from a short on one end) will be electrically shorter
than it would be if it wasn't insulated. The question is, how much?
Is it simply equivalent to the velocity factor of the line? And if
it is, could I perhaps measure the velocity factor of two pieces of
THHN laying next to each other and then compute the value for a
single conductor somehow? (I have an Autek RF-1)

Regards,
Pete

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Soper  ([e-mail])    KS4XG        1+ 919 481 3730,  481 3868/FAX

Encore Computer Corp  901 Kildaire Farm Rd  Cary, NC 27511  USA


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:22 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!chaos.aoc.nrao.edu!newshost.nmt.edu!rutgers!fdurt1.fdu.edu!xyzzy.bubble.org!newshost.cyberramp.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: Joe <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rain "static" on a dipole ... what causes it
Date: 2 Feb 1996 06:57:32 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4escks$[e-mail]>
References: <4ep58c$[e-mail]> <4er8dc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.167.36.115
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]

"R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Joe,
>I'd be willing to bet that the wire on your quad and dipole are of the
>open stranded variety. The corrosion along the length of the wire will
>increasingly worsen and the corrosion becomes a zillion little >capacitors
>that stores static energy from friction and atmospheric
>electrical activity. When this discharges, you get noise. The rain may
>have a different ionic polarization and this makes the entire situation
>worse. Recommend you go to solid enameled wire on your quad and an
>insulated wire on your dipole. This stops the corrosion effect. RF does
>not "see" the insulation or enamel. 73 KC8ARO Bruce

Hi Bruce,  Thanks for the tip.  Actually, the Quad and the Dipole are
both made from insulated stranded copper wire.   Interesting bit on
the stranded versus solid wire, though.  Perhaps this is occuring even
though the wire is insulated by black and red pvc.  I'll try changing
the wire and see what happens.

Thanks,


Joe



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:23 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.localnet.com!ub!csn!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!ieunet!news.tcd.ie!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Help calculating transmission power
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (TCD News System )
Organization: Teltec, MEE, Trinity College Dublin
X-Newsreader: <WinQVT/Net v3.9>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 09:28:38 GMT
Lines: 52


>In <4ehf8e$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Acadimie du Savoir)

writes:
>>
>>|----(-------------------------------------------------------------10
km--------------------------------------------------->)----|
>>|
                                 |
>>|                             frequency=10 Ghz
        |
>>|
        |
>>|
        |
>>|
        |
>>___
        ___
>>Transmitting
        Receiving
>>
>>Gain= 10db
        Gain=40 db
>>
>>What is the transmitting power if the signal is recieved at -80 dBm?
>>
>>Please give me an answer in dBm and in Watts
>>
>>Thanks is advance, an answer would be very welcomed
>>
>>P.S. If you could answer before monday 29 4 p.m. it would be great
>>
>>Brad Wilson
>>Canada
>>

Received Power (at receiver) = -80 dBm
Receive antenna Gain = 40 dB
Therefore Received power at receiver antenna = -120 dBm.
For distance 10 km and frequency 10 GHz, assuming free space path,
the loss is 132.44 dB  (32.44+20*log10(10000)+20*log10(10)).
Therefore EIRP of Transmitter antenna = 12.44 dBm.
Transmitter output power =  12.44 - 10 =  2.44 dBm = 1.75 mW.

Above assumes no losses in the feeders, which are not already included in the
Tx and Rx antenna gains.  Also note that the free space path assumes no
atmospheric absorption or diffraction/refraction losses.

Dr. Gerry Butler,  CEng. MIEE. [[e-mail]]
TELTEC-TCD (Radio Propagation Planning), Trinity College,Dublin 2,Ireland
Dept. of Electronic and Electrical Engineering,
[ Dublin+Wicklow Mountain Rescue / EI0CH / EMT-D ]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:24 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.uoregon.edu!mars.efn.org!haus.efn.org!jbowman
From: John Bowman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Safe distance between dipole feedpoint and metal mast?
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 10:11:08 -0800
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4eo55l$[e-mail]> <4er7mc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: haus.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <4er7mc$[e-mail]>

Am running G5RV off 45 ft. metal mast w/out standoffs, except it (feedline)
is out away from mast at apex at about 40-45 degree angle. It works great.
Windom--plan to put one up at my summer place and would appreciate any
info. (specs) on the one you are using or plan to use. Length, suggested
height, what type of feedline--open latter or other? Concerns about RF into
the shack, etc. I have a friend (silent key now) who had one in a community
mobile home court--he worked Paris, Berlin etc. with it.  Just purchased a
book entitled, "Your Ham Antenna Companion" by Paul Danzer, N1ll. published
by the ARRL.  It's a great little book--cuts through alot of misconceptions
and is user friendly. But, I was surprised to read on 3-57 (HF antennas)
that the WINDOM is NOT recommended for use today. The article goes on to
state that hams using this antenna often had problems with RF floating
around in their shack. And they go on to say--if you want to use a single
wire feed, just put up an end fed long wire w/a good ground system.
Back to you--john N7RVW


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:25 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!primus.ac.net!news.cais.net!xara.net!peer-news.britain.eu.net!yama.mcc.ac.uk!caesar!david
From: [e-mail] (David Tait)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: nec documentation
Date: 2 Feb 1996 13:09:33 GMT
Organization: Manchester University
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4et2ed$[e-mail]>
References: <4eq1tt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: caesar.ee.man.ac.uk
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:

:       Is there any documentation describing the use etc of NEC available
: via the internet?

There is the start of something here:

http://www.cici.com/~richesop/nec/index.html

David
--
David Tait,                       Tel:   [phone]
Electrical Engineering Dept,      Fax:   [phone]
The University,                 Radio:   G0JVY
Manchester,  M13 9PL,  UK.     E-mail:   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:26 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.exodus.net!aimnet.com!netserv.com!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Testing co-axial filter
Date: 2 Feb 1996 15:06:41 GMT
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <4et9a1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4eh1de$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zlau.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) wrote:

this line=RG-8

>> why would I want to use a 16" piece of this line
>> to make a resonator with that Q, when I could just
>> as well wind a coil half an inch in diameter and
>> half an inch long and get just as high a Q?

(reformatted)

Coaxial resonators have a nice properly of being
self shielding.  Thus, you can often get acceptable
results without spending a lot of time building
metal shields or spending a fortune in die cast
boxes.

Even if you do have a nice metal shop for making
shields, they often aren't practical for quick
experimental lashups--you have to take things apart
to make the necessary modifications.

The coax may be easier to add to a piece of
existing equipment--it might be bent to fit the
existing space.

That said, I might look around hamfests for semi-rigid
coax and sections of Hardline to use instead of RG-8.
It also makes a bit more sense on 70/33cm, as opposed
to 2 meters.

Zack KH6CP/1



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:27 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!vulcan.netdepot.com!thebe04.netdepot.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Charlie Fortner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: opinions on Diamond antennas??
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 19:17:07 -0500
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: thebe04.netdepot.com
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.1.3

I'm thinking about buying a Diamond 2m/440 mobile along with the hideaway
trunk mount.  Is Diamond a reputable company, and if so, is the mount and
antenna worth the $120 AES wants?


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:28 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!cougar.olivet.edu!tiger.olivet.edu!mhaydon
From: Michael Haydon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EWE Antenna
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 19:33:53 -0600
Organization: Olivet Nazarene University
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4elpgt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tiger.olivet.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <4elpgt$[e-mail]>

Spoke with Floyd Koontz abt 6 mos prior to publication of his ewe
article, as he was finishing testing. the transformer is a 3:1 TURNS
RATIO therefore a 9:1 IMPEDENCE RATIO best route would be to order small
(1/2 inch) toroidal cores from amidon associates (no minimum order) they
will guide you to proper style based on you r operating freq. Built one
of these antennas, the 160/80m compromise, found results to be good when
used with 15db preamp.


On 30 Jan 1996, dick sander wrote:

> Has anyone built and tested the EWE 160m receiving
> antenna described in an article by WA2WVL in Feb '95 QST?
>
> How well does it work?
>
> Are there any sources for the 3:1 transformer (kits)
> and any suggestions on a preamp?
>
> 73, Dick - K5QY
>
>
>
>
>


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:29 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!cougar.olivet.edu!tiger.olivet.edu!mhaydon
From: Michael Haydon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EWE Antenna
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 19:40:46 -0600
Organization: Olivet Nazarene University
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4eo236$[e-mail]> <4eoneu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tiger.olivet.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <4eoneu$[e-mail]>

The 150 lenght is a mistake, the ewe antenna is actually a pair of
extremely short VERTICAL antennas, the top wire being used for phase
delay, NOT a receiving element.


On 31 Jan 1996, dick sander wrote:

> >Has anyone built and tested the EWE 160m receiving
> >antenna described in an article by WA2WVL in Feb '95 QST?
> >
> >How well does it work?
> >
> >Are there any sources for the 3:1 transformer (kits)
> >and any suggestions on a preamp?
> >
> >73, Dick - K5QY
>
> /Hi Dick, I did a survey on Topband net with users.
> /
> /Responses 11. Good or OK 4, poor or no good 7.
> /
> /Most comments indicate the EWE was better than a tx antenna, unless the tx
> /antenna was directional or in a rural location. Even short Beverages
> /always
> /seemed to beat the EWE. F/B results ranged from poor to good, but there
> /was
> /no way to tell the reason for this from the responses. I suspect proximity
> /to
> /other antennas, soil conditions, or failure to de-couple the feedline from
> /the antenna was the cause.
> /
> /73 Tom
>
> Thanks Tom,
>
> I found one local 160m DXer and one response via email.  Both said the
> beverage for them was better than the EWE.
>
> I also was given the name of Industrial Comm Engr, LTD.
> at 1-800-423-2666 for impedance xfmrs and preamps.
> I called and ordered a 180A xfmr @ $39 and a 123B preamp @ $45.
> The preamp is protected so there's no need to ground the antenna
> while xmting. It is 22 to 25 dB gain w/1.4dB NF from 1.8 to 2 Mhz.
>
> I've got 150 ft in which to run the receiving ant, so I'm
> going to try 10 ft high X 150 ft long. My fingers are crossed
>
> 73, Dick - K5QY
>
>
>
>
>


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:31 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!globe.indirect.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!cougar.olivet.edu!tiger.olivet.edu!mhaydon
From: Michael Haydon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 19:49:57 -0600
Organization: Olivet Nazarene University
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <Pine.SOL.3.91.960201150610.19455A-100000@iglou>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tiger.olivet.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960201150610.19455A-100000@iglou>

OR---
  put up as long a "dipole" as you have space for.

  use open wire line.

  don't worry about the SWR if your radio will load into it.

  judge how well your antenna works by how many people you can talk to.

  note that i said "TALK TO!!!", not "you are 59 please qsl goodbye.


On Thu, 1 Feb 1996, Steve Ellington wrote:

> I have Radio Works silly catalog with all the antennas that are
> Austonding, Amazing, Unbleivable etc. Yes even the buck of string with a
> weight on it for only $$$. The amazing but little know DOUBLE BAZOOKA
> that bost signals to strangely heafty levels that even buffalos the
> engineers. bla bla bla etc. Balderdash!
>
> The Windom in it's original form was fed with a single wire. I tried it
> once and put a nice burn on my lip from the microphone. Now, we have this
> so -called Windom using balanced line, 300 ohm or 450 or whatever,
> feeding a very unbalanced antenna. YES, the feedline will radiate like
> crazy! Is this what we desire?
>
> On 20 meters and above we end up with a very directional antenna with
> some gain in certain directions and deep nulls in others. Does anyone
> care?
>
> Line Isolators..... Well depending on feeder length and freq. of
> operation you may get a really hot choke with lots of power loss. I know
> this because I tried it. You will end up cranking on an antenna tuner
> before it's all over anyway so why bother with feeding an antenna
> off-center when we know it's asking for trouble?
>
> He just wants 80 and 40 meters anyway. With parallel dipoles, there is
> little concern for RF on the rig, no tuner needed and no baluns required.
>
> This Windom stuff reminds me of the G5RV hype. Same old thing. A crummy
> compromise antenna that can be made to work on all bands using a tuner
> and enough lossy coax with a high swr to make tuning easy. Package it as
> an  all-band antenna kit, charge $49.95 and they sell like hotcakes.
>
> Time does not prove anything except that...Given enough time, people will
> try anything over and over even when it doesn't make good sense.
>
> 1. Use a balanced antenna
> 2. Feed it with a matched feeder
> 3. Enjoy operating
>
> 1. Use a balanced antenna
> 2. Feed it with balanced open wire line
> 3. Use a tuner
> 4. Enjoy operating but cranking the tuner
>
> 1. Use an unbalanced antenna
> 2. Feed it with anything
> 3. Use a tuner, line isolator etc.
> 4. Anything might happen. Have fun
>
>
>
>
> > I disagree. What you are looking for is a time-proven antenna called a
> > WINDOM. There is a danger of in-shack RFI if you attempt this OCF. The
> > feedline becomes a radiator when you have an unbalanced line. You have to
> > control it. You MUST use an in-line Isolation Balun (Line Isolator). This
> > will turn your feedline into a Vertical Radiator and add another
> > dimension to your antenna!!! It will also virtually eliminate RFI
> > problems. Write for catalogs from Radio Works, Box 6159, Portsmouth,VA
> > 23703  and   Antennas West, PO Box 50062, Provo, UT 84605 for antennas,
> > pieces/parts and plans. 73 KC8ARO Bruce
> >
> >
> >
>
> Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky
>
>
>


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:35 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!caen!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!inews.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: 2 Feb 1996 20:27:08 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4ets2s$[e-mail]>
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <4eoa8b$[e-mail]> <4er6ue$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmoore.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

"R. Bruce Winchell" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>The antenna is called a WINDOM.

Hi Bruce, as I said over email, the original "Windom" did not use twin-lead. T
he writeup in my
1957 ARRL Handbook shows "Windom" to be a modern misnomer for twin-lead-fed OC
Fs. But trying to
keep the language pure seems to be a losing proposition. Like G5RVs without an
y coax.

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




From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:36 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ionews.ionet.net!usenet
From: Hank Blackstock <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Transformer for Screwdriver type antenna
Date: 2 Feb 1996 20:38:33 GMT
Organization: IONet
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4etso9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: osip06.ionet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]

Paul Reedy <[e-mail]> wrote:

>as a friend of mine tried making a screwdriver ant. and went back to
>his Hustler after not being able to get his SWR down.

Your friend might as well have used a resistor in series with
the antenna for matching as go to a hustler. The reason that a
hustler is easy to get the swr down is that it has a very low Q
coil that looks like a resistor at Rf. This works good for
matching but very bad for antenna efficency. Tell him to go
back to the screwdriver and try a little harder. There are many
ways to match the base impedance of a mobile antenna some
discribed in the ARRL antenna Handbook. You can even use a
antenna tuner. Contrary to popular opinion doesn't even need to
be at the antenna end of the coax. The losses of coax with
moderate swr are very small at hf frequencies.

If you are using a old tube rig dont even be concerned with the
swr. just tune the antenna for resonance and let the pi network
take care of the mismatch.

73 Hank WA5JRH



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:36 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!oitnews.harvard.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news4.ner.bbnplanet.net!news.ner.bbnplanet.net!usenet.continental.com!usenet
From: Paul Christensen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP!!DOUBLE BAZOOKA
Date: 2 Feb 1996 22:09:47 GMT
Organization: Continental Cablevision
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <4eu23b$[e-mail]>
References: <4er3sr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.152.167.72
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]

Avoid this antenna.  It's broad bandwidth is achieved with smoke,
mirrors and wasted power in the form of stub heating.  Read the other
Bazooka newsgroup thread.

-Paul, N9AZ



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:38 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.wwa.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Len Revelle)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower Selection Advice Sought
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 02:46:13 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access (tm) - Chicagoland Internet Services (http://www.wwa.com)
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <4euigf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vh3-007.wwa.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Tell your friend to check out the U.S. Tower crank up series. I have
the 455 (55') and have been very pleased for three years now.

[e-mail] (Ron Majewski) wrote:


>Hello-

>A friend of mine is thinking about putting up a new tower and
>is looking for advice/information about tower options.  His
>desire-ments are:

>   60-80ft height
>   self-supporting to avoid guy wires
>   tilt-over or telescoping for easy installation/service
>   20 sqft wind load capacity

>Is such a combination possible to achieve?

>Please share your thoughts and experiences with him.  Please
>Email to me and I will forward things to him.

>Thanks and 73,

>Ron (wb8ruq).
>[e-mail]
>
>--

>Ron Majewski ([e-mail])

>The Environmental Research Institute of Michigan





From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:38 1996
Path: news.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 calculating transmission power (2 msgs)"
Date: 3 Feb 96 04:06:21 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "calculating" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:39 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.orst.edu!news.PEAK.ORG!billn
From: [e-mail] (Bill Nelson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted V or long wire?
Date: 3 Feb 1996 07:16:23 GMT
Organization: CS Outreach Services, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <4ev247$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ehkld$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: peak.org
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Richard MacDonald ([e-mail]) wrote:

: >I don't have my ticket, but I am listening mostly on 80M using a 160' piece
: >of wire strung from my basement window through the trees about 8' high. I a
m
: >considering putting up an inverted V at about 50' then moving to a full dip
ole.
: >Is it worth the effort for listening? The long wire runs east to west. Are
ther
: >there any easy tuner circuits that can improve the long wire performance? I
 am
: >listening on an HW101.

: I've never had any reason to go from an inverted V to a "full dipole." All o
f
: the inverted V's that UI have had were full dipoles but were shaped to match
 50
: ohm coax. I don't believe there is any real advantage to a flat dipole over
the
: V.

When you slope the legs of the "V" at about 45 degrees below horizontal, the
antenna becomes essentially non-directiona.

The obvious advantage of the "flat" dipole is the directivity - which may
reduce undesired interference off the ends of the antenna.

: A tuner will help a bit but not as much as a higher tuned antenna with some
: radials. For DX listening a vertical may work well also because of better lo
w

I never worried about a tuner on even a "flat dipole". The modest VSWR, due
to the mismatch, is not sufficient to harm the rig. You could probably feed
it with 75 ohm coax, rather than 50 ohm, to reduce that mismatch at the
feedpoint. The transmitter matching network should be able to match to the
75 ohm line without problems.

Bill


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:41 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ionews.ionet.net!usenet
From: Hank Blackstock <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Interference with lamps
Date: 3 Feb 1996 12:26:46 GMT
Organization: IONet
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4evka6$[e-mail]>
References: <4ek79r$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: osip36.ionet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Gordon Collins) wrote:
>     We have a lamp on the second floor of our home. It is one ofthose
>lights wich is operated by touching it. (trilight). Whenever I tune up
>my rig in the basement the lamp starts to turn on and proceed through
>all three cycles. It is very annoying.
>     My antenna is a centrefed dipole cut for 40M. It is strung
>between two treest at approximately the same hight asthe second floor
>but about twenty feet away.
>     Does anyone have any ideas on how to correct this problem?
>

I had a different problem with one those lamps. It caused
interferance on my hf receiver. I found a simple cure that I am
sure will work in you case also. Get rid of the lamp.

73 Hank WA5JRH



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:42 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!iglou!iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Kenny Anaskevich SLIP/PPP)
Subject: Re: G5RV
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <4eoa8b$[e-mail]> <4er6ue$[e-mail]> <4ets2s$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 16:20:18 GMT
Lines: 21

In G5RV's article which is the ARRL Ant. Compendum, G5RV recommends NO
COAX as the preferred method of using the antenna for multiple bands. The
coax was intended to be used ONLY on 20 meters where there is a
reasonable match between the twin lead and the coax.

The reason we get low swrs with the magic minimum of 70ft of coax is
because of the tremendous attenuation (loss) of coax under high swr
conditions. The swr just appears lower at the transmitter because of the
excessive loss. Coax loss can make a 10:1 swr read 1.5:1 by the time it
travels through 70ft of small coax. Try using some heavy coax like
RG-9913 and although your losses will decrease, the swr will appear much
higher.

G5RV knew this when he wrote the article but he has been ignored because
of the HYPE and the MONEY made on G5RV KITS. Oh sure. We get good signal
reports etc. Shuck, I get good 599 reports on my mobile rig using an 8ft
Hamstick antenna! That doesn't mean a thing folks. If I run inside and
fire up the 560ft loop I also get 599 but now I'm 20db stronger!

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:43 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!inquo!vyzynz!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!overload.lbl.gov!agate!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: EWE Antenna
Date: 3 Feb 1996 16:21:43 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4f0jl7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>Subject:       Re: EWE Antenna
>From:  Michael Haydon <[e-mail]>
>Date:  Fri, 2 Feb 1996 19:40:46 -0600
>
>The 150 lenght is a mistake, the ewe antenna is actually a pair of
>extremely short VERTICAL antennas, the top wire being used for phase
>delay, NOT a receiving element.
>
>
>

I wonder if anyone bothered to tell the flat top it isn't supposed to
receive? It may not know that! ;-)

What makes the flat top NOT receive substantial signal in any EWE?

If we want two short out of phase verticals, why put them up and feed them
with coax?
Or use a system that looks like a big rectangle with the short side
vertical and a 180 degree twist in the middle? From the side it would look
like two lazy triangles with the noses touching and the connection between
them transposed.

(Actually I had a system like that in 1976 that was several WL long that
employed many "loops")

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:44 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Loops!!!!
From: [e-mail] (Kg7ck)
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!worldlinx.com!clio.trends.ca!io.org!winternet.com!news.minn.net!skypoint.com!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!uniserve!news.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!news3.noc.netcom.net!prostar.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Feb 96 16:50:28 PDT
Organization: ProStar Plus Internet
Lines: 6

I have used a horizontal loop for 7years.  I feed it with 450 ladder line
and mfj 949 tuner.  Use it on all hf bands. Is about 160 Meters.  Use it
more than my th5 beam.

Bill
KG7CK


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:45 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!news.bu.edu!transfer.stratus.com!news3.near.net!monk.proteon.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Message-ID: <4f042o$[e-mail]>
Lines: 39
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: peanut.senie.com
Organization: Daniel Senie Consulting
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <4eoa8b$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 16:55:52 GMT

In article <4eoa8b$[e-mail]>,
Cecil Moore  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (Eric Rosenberg) wrote:
>>
>>I'm looking for information on hte off-center fed dipole, as mentioned by
>>Bill Orr in CQ Magazine last year and briefly written up in the ARRL
>>Antenna Book.
>
>Hi Eric, I ran one of these in college. The antenna is 180 degrees (half-wave
)
>on 80m and 360 degrees (full-wave) on 40m. Since sin(60deg) = sin(120deg), a
>point 1/3 from the end will give approximately the same impedance for 80m and

>40m. IMO, it still needs an antenna tuner but is not a bad match for 300 ohm
>ladder-line. Radiation pattern favors the long section.

I'll agree with Cecil that this antenna design can work just fine.

The one I've used was made by Antennas West, but the design is quite simple
so if I put up another one, I may just build it myself, instead.

The design of the one I use is a 1/2 wave on 40 meters, fed 1/3 of the way
from one end, rather than in the center. The feedline is coax, with ferrite
bead balun about a foot below the feedpoint, and I add another bead balun
where the antenna connects to my remote switching network. Some RF does
couple to the shield of the feedline, even with the balun at the feedpoint,
so the other choke balun helps keep from having RF come back to the shack on
the shield.

The antenna tunes within a 2:1 SWR on 40, 20 and 10. This is a GREAT antenna
for someone starting out with HF, as in combination with an auto-tuner
found in most new rigs, it will perform quite well. I do highly recommend
this approach over the "put up as long a dipole as you can" approach,
especially for newcomers. It allows for quicker and easier setup.

Dan N1JEB
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:47 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sundog.tiac.net!shore!news3.near.net!monk.proteon.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Subject: Re: EWE Antenna
Message-ID: <4f04cb$[e-mail]>
Lines: 46
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: peanut.senie.com
Organization: Daniel Senie Consulting
References: <4elpgt$[e-mail]> <4eo236$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 17:00:59 GMT

In article <4eo236$[e-mail]>,
W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <4elpgt$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>(dick sander) writes:
>
>>
>>Has anyone built and tested the EWE 160m receiving
>>antenna described in an article by WA2WVL in Feb '95 QST?
>>
>>How well does it work?
>>
>>Are there any sources for the 3:1 transformer (kits)
>>and any suggestions on a preamp?
>>
>>73, Dick - K5QY
>
>Hi Dick, I did a survey on Topband net with users.
>
>Responses 11. Good or OK 4, poor or no good 7.
>
>Most comments indicate the EWE was better than a tx antenna, unless the tx
>antenna was directional or in a rural location. Even short Beverages
>always
>seemed to beat the EWE. F/B results ranged from poor to good, but there
>was
>no way to tell the reason for this from the responses. I suspect proximity
>to
>other antennas, soil conditions, or failure to de-couple the feedline from
>the antenna was the cause.
>
>73 Tom

Did anyone else notice that the recent QST article never once gave a
translation for what "EWE" means? Is it a sheepish little antenna? If so, why
the caps. If it's an acronym, then Spell the thing out. If it's named after
someone, mention it. I was quite disappointed with the article for not
bothering to mention the genesis of the design.

Anyone here know what it is?

Dan N1JEB
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:48 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cdc2.cdc.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!mars.hyperk.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (ken durstine)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: opinions on Diamond antennas??
Date: 3 Feb 1996 17:16:54 GMT
Organization: none, if I can help it
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4f05a6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm_ras99.srv.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

In article <[e-mail]>, charlie@netdepot.c
om (Charlie Fortner) says:
>
>I'm thinking about buying a Diamond 2m/440 mobile along with the hideaway
>trunk mount.  Is Diamond a reputable company, and if so, is the mount and
>antenna worth the $120 AES wants?


I have a diamond SG2000 (I think) two meter collinear with a folding gutter mo
unt I love. It has a hal
f wave base section that gives consistent performance when I have a load
 of stuff on my roof racks. I could be setting out in the desert with 5 or 6 o
ther rigs and be the only
rig with a clear signal from a distant handheld. works for me


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:48 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!news.eas.asu.edu!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground Radials...?
Date: 3 Feb 1996 17:49:20 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4f0770$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


K8EXF wrote
Plan on at least 1/4 wavelength for the lowest band
desired.
F can only penetrate a few inches of soil.

        There is litle point in going out 1/4 wave with the 16 to
32 radials metnioned.

        At 1.9 MHz ONE skin depth is about 20 feet.  See ARRL Antenna
Book Ch 3 or Terman Radio engineer's Handbook.
Charlie, W7XC
###1
###1
--


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:49 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.uoregon.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!inews.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 3 Feb 1996 20:19:35 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 7
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmoore.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Finally got to read the auto-tuner article. Does it strike anyone
else as overkill when 17 relays and 16 tuning components are used
for only 8 bands?

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




From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:50 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.localnet.com!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!xara.net!peer-news.britain.eu.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.ios.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Free software
Date: 3 Feb 1996 21:06:22 GMT
Organization: Internet Online Services
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4f0ioe$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup24.fwi.com
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

Hi,
 I posted a similar note on rec.radio.amateur.homebrew. I placed a program on
the ARRL BBS called TEEREV.ZIP.

It's TEEREV, because the original TEE.ZIP had become corrupted on the ARRL BBS
?
Anyway, if you pulled the original, and it works, your ok. If it doesn't, the
replacement TEEREV.ZIP is out there.

The program estimates EIRP for a variety of feedline types, length of feed, po
wer
out, reflected power, indicates loss, calculates SWR, and allows you to simula
te
the settings dynamically along with imaginary antenna gains. It just about doe
s
everything but eat.

This version will run with Dos/windows 3.1.  If any one has tried it out,
I'd like some feedback. The ARRL BBS is 860-594-0306. I think the download tim
e
is like 4 seconds! It's only about 14K in size. You will need the 300K+ VBRUN3
00.DLL
that is found on the QRZ CDROM or on the ARRL BBS as well.


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:51 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Jim Storm)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole Antenna
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 23:18:54 GMT
Organization: ix.netcom.com
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4f0qgv$[e-mail]>
References: <4f0pbu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-smx-ca3-07.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat Feb 03  3:18:55 PM PST 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (David Dean) wrote:

>Where does the center conductor of the coax connect on a J-Pole
>antenna. The 19" stub or the 59" pole?  Please help. Thanks. Dave

>David Dean
>N6RHL

>Absolute Communications

>[e-mail]

Dave,

I've never used a j-pole but the Antenna Hanbook shows the center
conductor going to the long element.

                                73, Jim WB6LWS



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:52 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.dx.net!news
From: HS North Library <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loops!!!!
Date: 3 Feb 1996 23:55:00 GMT
Organization: The DataXchange Network, Inc
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4f0skk$[e-mail]>
References: <4eh0ck$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: excaliber.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

About loops- I just installed a loop, works fine on 80/40 (which is what
I wanted, as I have a beam for 20/15/10).
  A loop can be resonant or non-resonant. If non-resonant (what I did)
feed it with 450 ohm ladder line into 4:1 current balun(RadioWorks) and
then a short piece of 50ohm coax to your antenna tuner.
  In my case, I have a Dentron super tuner and an MFJ 949E, both of which
work fine. The loop is about 220 long, and it the rectangle sides are
not of equal length on opposite sides.  Anyway, I think that a
non-resonant loop is more forgiving, and can be used with a good tuner
on multiple bands with good results. 73  Joe   WR2b



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:53 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!venus.sun.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!snooze.ser.bbnplanet.com!news.mountain.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dan Ringer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rooftop ant. for radio?
Date: 4 Feb 1996 04:19:05 GMT
Organization: D. Ringer, Attorney
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4f1c3q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip21-15.mountain.net
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (PjB) writes:
>  Hi gang.....I just moved into a new apartment bldg.  It was built in the
>  50's and it is a rather large structure 12 stories tall. The original TV
>  antenna system is on the roof and I am told it still works. There is a
>  jack on the wall in the living room. I am wondering if I might utilise
>  this with my scanner.
>
>>>>

Why not try it?  It might be better than what you've got, but not as good as y
ou'd like to have.

Antennas are funny. You never know what might work - I had great success using
 a Ringo Ranger as a 20 meter vertical a few
years back. I tried it because I had it and nothing else.  A friend of mine ac
tually loaded an icicle on HF many years ago. Got his
picture in an ARRL antenna book. Ya just never know.

Dan, K8WV





From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:54 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!eskimo!localhost
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: Interference with lamps
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
References: <4ek79r$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 04:19:07 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <4ek79r$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Gordon Collins) wrote:
>     We have a lamp on the second floor of our home. It is one ofthose
>lights wich is operated by touching it. (trilight). Whenever I tune up
>my rig in the basement the lamp starts to turn on and proceed through
>all three cycles. It is very annoying.
>     My antenna is a centrefed dipole cut for 40M. It is strung
>between two treest at approximately the same hight asthe second floor
>but about twenty feet away.
>     Does anyone have any ideas on how to correct this problem?
>
------------------------------------------------
I'm pretty sure most of the RF causing the problem is being picked up not by
the lamp itself, but by the line cord and the house wiring.  If that's the
case, try isolating the lamp from the cord by using some ferrite chokes.
These come in snap-on and split versions.  Radio Shack carries both kinds and
no doubt others do too.  An added side benefit is reduction of interference
radiated FROM the lamp as well.  Place them as close as possible to the lamp
end of the cord, so the "antenna" connected to the lamp is as short as
possible.


73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:55 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!aimnet.com!news.exodus.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.chatlink.com!netaccess
Date: 04 Feb 1996 05:36:16 PST
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V96 #29
Lines: 8

look at it from an angle and at a distance

( 10-15 ft)
if it looks pink or reddish it has metal in it
and thru the glass antennas won't work on them

3s' de wayne N1OFF



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:57 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.orst.edu!engr.orst.edu!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.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: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: 4 Feb 1996 06:06:35 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 33
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4f23vr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>Where did the notion come from that openwire line radiates?  If the
SOURCE is
>balanced (as you
>indicate) it will not radiate.  Where you attach it on a dipole should
not
>matter as far as
>balance is concerned.  The center of a dipole as a feed point is no
different
>than the end as
>far as balance in the feed is concerned.
>
>73's Dave, n2fam
>
>

Hi Dave,

Proper balance or isolation at BOTH ends is required. If the source is
balanced and the load isn't, the parallel wire line will radiate. If the
load is balanced and the source isn't it will still radiate.

All lines, even coax, require equal and opposite currents on each
conductor to prevent radiation. And as Tom B pointed out, even field
coupling can make a line radiate even when we take other precautions.

Any end fed antenna *without a counterpoise at the antenna and feedline
terminal* will have feedline radiation, or you wouldn't even be able to
feed the antenna!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:58 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.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] (DeNoid95X)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Interference with lamps
Date: 4 Feb 1996 08:01:36 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4f2ang$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I understand what this man says but maybe Im wrong, These lamps in
question are touch senstive due to the potential energy when someone
touchs it.  This energy field is off balance when you transmit.  It (the
lamp itself) senses the energy and turns off and on.

The Lamp is the one to correct, the wiring will pick up some of the
energy, put the lamp itself is the one at fault.

N9RLR/2
Syracuse, NY


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:23:59 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 09:11:36 -0600
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: berlin-6.slip.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b6a (Win95; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> Finally got to read the auto-tuner article. Does it strike anyone
> else as overkill when 17 relays and 16 tuning components are used
> for only 8 bands?
>
> 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

What are you thinking...a roller inductor or var cap? The relays are
cheap and the position memory is simpler. My Ten-tec auto tuner is prone
to forgetting where the roller is. Not related, but the memory chip gets
"filled up" according to the factory. It costs about 10 or so to replace
it every 6 months. Not to mention the hassle of disassembling the whole
front of the damn thing. Has anyone solved this problem? It also does
not know where it was when you turn it on from last time....then you
have to go to a different antenna position and back. Then it remembers.
The factory says not normal but replacing the entire guts with a "new
one" from the factory does not behave any differently. The thing is
noisy and slow with the roller but improves the resolution. I wish they
would fix the bugs and then I would put up with the noise.....and the
$1100 cost.
--

Chuck, KE9UW



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:00 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!pop.gnn.com!PDelpriore
From: [e-mail] (Paul Del Priore)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: PC interferes with TV
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 10:12:53
Organization: GNN
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4f2iis$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: www-21-199.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-GNN-NewsServer-Posting-Date: 4 Feb 1996 15:15:40 GMT
X-Mailer: GNNmessenger 1.2

When I use my computer, if someone else is watching TV using off
air antenna annoying interference is present on TV, mostly channels
2,4,5.
I don't believe due to ac line path since no interference when
watching tape from VCR or if watching TV from satellite Dish, whose
signal is in the gigahertz range. In addition a portable TV running
from my car battery in the garage also shows the same interference.
Downlead from off air antenna is coax with antenna on roof three
floors up so interference not picked up by downlead.

Many thanks for any help with this problem.

                                  Paul




From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:01 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!ionews.ionet.net!usenet
From: Hank Blackstock <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Interference with lamps
Date: 4 Feb 1996 17:56:19 GMT
Organization: Internet Oklahoma
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4f2s03$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f2ang$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: osip03.ionet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 32bit)

[e-mail] (DeNoid95X) wrote:
>I understand what this man says but maybe Im wrong, These lamps in
>question are touch senstive due to the potential energy when someone
>touchs it.  This energy field is off balance when you transmit.  It (the
>lamp itself) senses the energy and turns off and on.
>
>The Lamp is the one to correct, the wiring will pick up some of the
>energy, put the lamp itself is the one at fault.
>


You are right, and like it has been said it is easily
corrected. TRASH the lamp.

73 Hank WA5JRH



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:02 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.logical.net!mserv.wizvax.net!news
From: Bill <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Info Needed on High Efficiency Loops
Date: 4 Feb 1996 19:19:07 GMT
Organization: Wizvax Communications, Troy, N.Y. 12180 USA
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4f30rb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip38.vgernet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Hi Folks ,

Good afternoon and tnx for reading this .

I'm looking into building a small loop for 160m . I presently have a
full-wave at 40' and am very pleased with it . But unfortunately it won't
fit into the backyard of the property I plan to buy .

The question is ....... has anyone had any experiences with the loop that
Robert ( Ted ) Hart W5QJR has published in the 17th edition of the ARRL
Antenna Book ? The basic design of the loop is an octagon with 12.5' sides
for a total of 100'. The construction material advised is 3/4 inch copper
tubing . At the top of the loop has a motor driven air cap. for the tuning
network ( due to the very high Q ) and a matching stub at the bottom .

The attraction to this antenna is it boasts near equal performance to a
a half-wave dipole at a quarter-wave high . Personally , I find that hard
to believe . But who knows , if what is said can be confirmed in an actual
field test , I'd be game to build one .

Thanks to all who respond , I'll be looking foward to any replies .
73 de Bill / AA1NL



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:03 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail](Al Williams )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Interference with lamps
Date: 4 Feb 1996 20:56:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <4f36hj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f2ang$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-phi4-22.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Feb 04 12:56:19 PM PST 1996

In <4f2ang$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)
writes:
>
>I understand what this man says but maybe Im wrong, These lamps in
>question are touch senstive due to the potential energy when someone
>touchs it.  This energy field is off balance when you transmit.  It
(the
>lamp itself) senses the energy and turns off and on.
>
>The Lamp is the one to correct, the wiring will pick up some of the
>energy, put the lamp itself is the one at fault.
>
>N9RLR/2
>Syracuse, NY
I have one these lamps, and also the same problem.  In keeping with
this thread, pulling the plug worked ..well!  On a more constructive
front, I read an artical..(I'm sure in a ARRL book) about fixing this
problem.  As I recall the fix was rather complex.  I just can't find
the dog-gone book.  Since "Hints & Kinks" is one that is eluding me,
I'll assume it's the one.  Like I said the fix was quite complex and
far in excess of the value of the lamp.  Might make an interesting
winter project tho.

73's es cul de n3tyd Al


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:04 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!newshost.convex.com!bcm.tmc.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Help
Date: 4 Feb 1996 22:40:06 GMT
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4f3ck6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip166-72-227-74.nj.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

I recently aquired a AOR 3000a wide coverage receiver, my question is what
is a good antenna for the 1000 to 2000 mhz range. The only commercial one
have seen advertized is the Dressler ara 2000, But it seems a little high in c
ost.
I called Gilfer for information on it but they couldn't tell me much about it.
Also what can I expect to hear in this frequency range. I have posted to the
scanner groups but got no response. Hope you folks can help.
thanks in advance.
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:05 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!paperboy.ids.net!anomaly.ideamation.com!anomaly.ideamation.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City
Date: 4 Feb 1996 23:21:25 -0500
Organization: The Ace Tomato Company
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <4f40k5$[e-mail]>
References: <4efpb3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: anomaly.ideamation.com
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.policy:33006 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18905 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24587 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13144 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:13971

In <[e-mail]>
        [e-mail] (Donald I. Baker) writes:

>Technical solutions do exist.  Using a "TX-ID" board, which uniquely
>fingerprints each transmitter and a PC one can "slectively" include or
>preclude individual users.
>
>The board was not meant for that purpose, but with just a little Basic of C
>codes, it workd just fine.  It is especially easy if you have a single or
>limited number of receive site.

I too can attest to the helpfulness of the TX-ID system. Coupled with our
Doppler Systems DF gear, the TX-ID has allowed us to bag several Drew-like
scumbags here in the RI area who have no appreciation for Part 97.

MD
--
--
-- "Who needs looks when you've got taste?"
--


From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:06 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercomm.net!raven.cybercomm.net!richg
From: [e-mail] (Rich Griffiths)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help A New Ham!
Date: 5 Feb 1996 00:28:21 GMT
Organization: CyberComm Online Services
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <4f3iv5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: raven.cybercomm.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Ryan Workman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: To All:

: Here is my situation:

: I recently upgraded to Tech Plus and bought an HF Rig. Kenwood
: Ts-450/AT. I constructed a 10 meter dipole. The dipole is reasonant at
: 28.400. But, the band seems to be flat. Is it really that dead or could
: I have done something wrong???? I also have a R7 I will be installing
: when the weather breaks.

: Any Suggestions?? Please let me know!

: 73,
: Ryan, KB2OOP
: Email: [e-mail] or [e-mail]


Yes, Ryan, it really is that dead.

Once in a while, it comes alive, though.

We're in a minimum sunspot period right now and probably will be for a
few years yet.  The minimums seem to be a little longer (broader) than
the maximums, and the next maximum is due in (something like) 2002.

If you're a patient, persistent listener, you'll occasionally catch some
great openings before the next sunspot maximum, and the quality of
10 meters may just blow you away during beginning a couple of years
before the maximum.

============================================================
Rich Griffiths                     [e-mail]
Red Bank, New Jersey               W2RG
Monmouth County  FN20wi



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:07 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!gryphon.phoenix.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bill Holbert Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source of wire and cable?
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 03:08:09 GMT
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <4f3opm$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.120.253.10
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Mike Mayer) wrote:

>Are there any good sources for wire and cable (besides Radio Shack)?
>I'm thinking of 14ga antenna wire, coax and ground wire, connectors,
>etc.

>thanks
>--
>=============================================================================
=
> Mike Mayer                     [phone]     Work: [e-mail]
m
> Technology Group, Inc. Neenah, WI                 Home: [e-mail]

Mike I would try:

The RADIO WORKS, Inc.
P.O. Box 6159
Portsmouth, VA 23703
Phone: [phone]
also 800-280-8327 (order hot line)

I have had great success ordering from them.

Bill Holbert Sr., W5BBR
101 Bluebonnet Hills
Brenham, TX 77833
Retired, No Money, No Cares



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:08 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!miwok!pacific.net!usenet
From: "Mr. Brooke Clarke" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP-Interference
Date: 5 Feb 1996 05:11:18 GMT
Organization: Rack and Stack Systems
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4f43hn$[e-mail]>
References: <4el9in$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts-22.pacific.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

You might try filtering.  The noise is getting out of the computer some
way.  If it is coming out the power line it could be filtered there.
This sounds like it since I think you said that you removed everything
else.

Have Fun,
Brooke



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:09 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!newshost.netinfo.com.au!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Rex Waite)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SG-230 Smartuner
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 12:02:09 GMT
Organization: Netinfo Pty Ltd - Canberra Australia
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <4f4o40$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: betty-p17.netinfo.com.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Has anyone had any experience with these ??
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Feb 05 21:24:10 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!vulcan.netdepot.com!thebe03.netdepot.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Ted Fortner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: J-Pole qestions
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 20:02:58 -0500
Organization: NetDepot
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: thebe03.netdepot.com
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.1.3

I have come across a 2m J-pole antenna plan.  What are the advantages of a
J-pole over, say a rubber duck on a HT or a dipole?  Does it requrie a
ground plane for good performance, and what wavelength antenna is it?
(quarter wave, half wave, etc...)  I would also appreciate any other plans
for a 2m J-pole.  Thanx in advance.

73s,
KF4GJR
Ted Fortner
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:18 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.inc.net!news.inc.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.orst.edu!engr.orst.edu!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!psgrain!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/@safe.ia.GOV
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 8 Feb 96 18:32:34 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

>From /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/ Thu Feb 8 12
:39:51 CST 1996 remote from osiint.safe.ia.gov
Date: 08 Feb 1996 12:38:10 -0600
X400-Trace: US*ATTMAIL*IADPS
        arrival 08 Feb 1996 12:38:10 -0600
        action Relayed
From: /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/@osiint.safe.
ia.gov
To: "/RFC-822=Ham-Ant(a)ucsd.edu/OU=OSI-INTERNET/O=WALLACE/PRMD=IADPS/ADMD=ATT
MAIL/C=US/"@osiint.safe.ia.gov
In-Reply-To: <"\"/RFC-822=199602062306.PAA29945(a)mail.ucsd.edu/OU=OSI-INTERNE
T/O=WALLACE/PRMD=IADPS/ADMD=ATTMAIL/C=US/\""@osiint.safe.ia.gov>
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V96 a652
Importance: normal
Autoforwarded: FALSE
Message-Id: <werl0208123654aa*/PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=at
tmail/C=us/@osiint.safe.ia.gov>
P1-Message-Id: US*ATTMAIL*IADPS;IDPS3550 werl0208123654aa
UA-Content-Id: werl0208123654aa
P1-Content-Type: P2
Priority: normal
Received: from osiint.safe.ia.gov by iadpshub.safe.ia.gov; Thu,  8 Feb 1996 12
:39 CST
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1013

> >Antennas are funny. You never know what might work - I had great success us
ing a Ringo Ranger as a 20 meter vertical a few
> >years back. I tried it because I had it and nothing else.  A friend of mine
 actually loaded an icicle on HF many years ago. Got his
> >picture in an ARRL antenna book. Ya just never know.
>
> >Dan, K8WV
>
> The strangest antenna I ever heard of was a guy I worked on CW using
> the steam radiator system in his apartment building. Obviously it
> worked, since I talked to him. Anything is worth a try...
>
>                                               73, Jim WB6LWS
Great articles, guys.  New thread?  Strangest antenna used on any ham bands.
Please post it here for all to enjoy.  Here's one to start, friend of mine
KF0HY Larry was on a trip to Chicago, stopped in an Illinois interstate rest
area, tuned up on 80m on a light pole. Worked some CW on it.

Scott N0XZY @ WA0RJT.#EIA.IA.USA.NOAM     [e-mail]  [e-mail]
m




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:19 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!globe.indirect.com!s92.phxslip4.indirect.com!tracker
From: [e-mail] (Mark Saunders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 1996 ARRL November Sweepstakes Location Needed
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 20:49:30 UNDEFINED
Organization: Amateur Radio Station KJ7BS
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s92.phxslip4.indirect.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #1]

Dan Rockhold, AB7AS and Mark Sunders, KJ7BS are looking for a location in
North Dakota from which to operate AB7AS during the 1996 ARRL November
Sweepstakes.

If you are not a contester or know someone who is not a contester, and would
be agreeable to having 2 guest operators for the contest, please respond!

We are in the planning stages for this expedition, but we need to get a
location very soon.

We are interested in the station equipment, especially the antennas.  We can
bring out own radios, power supplies, computers and interfaces, if necessary.

However, we can not bring the antenna farm, too.

The station owner is more than welcome to join us in out endevor, or just
watch, keep up awake, or what ever.  WE WANT YOU TO BE PART OF OUR TEAM.  Our
goal is NOT to win the contest, but to have a good time and gain new operating

skills.  From Dan's home QTH in Phoenix, AZ, we got all but 7 sections in the
1995 November Sweepstakes.  We do have a lot of fun with this hobby.

If you are interested, or know someone who is interested, please contact me or

Dan at one of the addresses below.

Mark Saunders, KJ7BS
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Dan Rockhold, AB7AS
[e-mail]


73 DE


Mark Saunders - KJ7BS
Glendale, AZ
PACKET:   [e-mail]
INTERNET: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:20 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail](Edward Oros )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 ele dir connect for 2 meters
Date: 6 Feb 1996 14:08:48 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <4f7ndg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-pit1-11.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Feb 06  6:08:48 AM PST 1996

This is for those who missed the dimensions for my "TINY 2" two
meter beam.

                   |               |
                   |               |
                   |               |
                   |               | <----(Feed Point)
                   |               |
                   |               |
                   |               |

                   <----- 1 ' ----->


               DIRECTOR        DRIVEN (Center Fed)
               2' 9.25"         1' 7" Each Side


GAIN ~ 4 dBd
BAND - 2 Meters

ED -- AC3L


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 2-meter Yagi
Organization: Source Internet Services North America
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 96 13:35:47 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup1117.sisna.com
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 7
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sisna.com!DIALUP1117

I just built a 2-meter yagi for my house.  If any one would like a blow by
blow account with actual measurments I will send along.  It is a six (6)
element beam, and it works GREAT!!!!

KE6WAU
e-mail to [e-mail]
73's to you all ;)


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:22 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!uw-coco!uw-beaver!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!gatech!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 440 Horizontal Mobile Ant?
Date: 3 Feb 1996 16:31:06 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4f0k6q$[e-mail]>
References: <4eo5hm$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

You have to be creative use you imagination, I have a Diamond with the
hinge base and tye it down!  does fine on atv, now!  only been doing for
short time!

N9RLR/2


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:23 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!msunews!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!night.primate.wisc.edu!nntp.msstate.edu!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news
From: [e-mail] (Robert Dengler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City/Repeater Use
Date: 2 Feb 1996 21:43:49 GMT
Organization: Image Analysis Systems Group, JPL
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <4eu0il$[e-mail]>
References: <4efpb3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4elgqo$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert Dengler)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.149.10.55
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.policy:33021 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18930 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24650 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13179 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:13998

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rob Janssen) writes:
>In <4elgqo$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark Fellhauer
) writes:
>
>>[e-mail] (Rob Janssen) wrote:
>
>>>In <[e-mail]> Eddie Caffray <[e-mail]> wr
ites:
>
>>>> On the 146.85 repeater here in Central NY we had trouble with one user al
so. He made it that
>>>>no one would even monitor the reapeater anymore. The club voted to ban him
 and we did. The
>>>>reapeater is a great place to be again.
>
>>>How do you manage to effectively ban malicious users from a repeater?
>>>Of course this problem is known all over the world, but at least over
>>>here we have not yet found an effective way of stopping them.  How do
>>>you do that?
>

Here's what a local repeater club in So. Cal. did:

-Changed the status of their repeater from 'open' to 'private', so that only
 club members are 'supposed' to use it.

-Got a restraining order prohibiting the undesired user from using the
 repeater.

The restraining order was enforced & the undesired user was forced off the
repeater, along with lots of 'good' non-member users.

Bob NO6B



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:24 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!alterdial.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Advice on B&W AP-10 antenna?
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 1996 02:03:45 GMT
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4fbllo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pppl39.rapidramp.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

This is a portable antenna with a set of loading coils, a 57" whip,
and a counterpoise wire.  It's advertised on p. 98 of the latest AES
catalog.
I'm in a very limited-space/insufficient-RF-ground situation.  Is this
antenna even worth considering for use with a first HF rig?  It seems
too good to be true.
Also, any comments on the MFJ-949E antenna tuner would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Rob KK5NI



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:25 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!ub!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!ni1.ni.net!xband.ni.net!user
From: [e-mail] (J. L. Blanton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Help
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 23:15:17 -0800
Organization: Network Intensive
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f3ck6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xband.ni.net

In article <4f3ck6$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:

> I recently aquired a AOR 3000a wide coverage receiver, my question is what
> is a good antenna for the 1000 to 2000 mhz range. The only commercial one
> have seen advertized is the Dressler ara 2000, But it seems a little
high in cost.
> I called Gilfer for information on it but they couldn't tell me much about i
t.
> Also what can I expect to hear in this frequency range. I have posted to the
> scanner groups but got no response. Hope you folks can help.
> thanks in advance.

There is a small discone available that covers that range.  I don't
remember the price.  Or you might want to try something more directional
like a small dish with a broadband feed.

Don't expect to hear the kind of activity that you hear on the VHF and UHF
bands.  There are, however, specific signal sources you might want to
point an antenna toward such as amateur repeaters in the 1.2 GHz amateur
band.  Some hobbyists also like to listen to Inmarsat satellite traffic
which is around 1.5-1.7 GHz, but you'll need a directional antenna and a
preamp for that.

Lee, WA8YBT


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:26 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.inc.net!novia!news.dpc.net!news.heurikon.com!uwvax!tricia!pendragon!ames!niven.ksc.nasa.gov!usenet
From: sarosiw (sarosiw)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Help
Date: 6 Feb 1996 20:25:16 GMT
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <4f8dfc$[e-mail]>
References: <4f3ck6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n1122503.ksc.nasa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

In article <4f3ck6$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>I recently aquired a AOR 3000a wide coverage receiver, my question is
what
>is a good antenna for the 1000 to 2000 mhz range. The only commercial
one
>have seen advertized is the Dressler ara 2000, But it seems a little
high in cost.
>I called Gilfer for information on it but they couldn't tell me much
about it.
>Also what can I expect to hear in this frequency range. I have posted
to the
>scanner groups but got no response. Hope you folks can help.
>thanks in advance.
>[e-mail]

This is my first time on this net so I hope it all goes well.
I usually moderate HAM_TECH on FIDO. This looks a bit similar
in nature so here we go...

A discone designed for 200 MHz or above will work as the discone
has a 10:1 frequency ratio for bandwidth coverage.

What to expect ... The 23cm Amateur Radio Band, some telemetry,
TACAN, and some TV uplinks. That's about it.


-WS




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:27 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news-feed.mci.newscorp.com!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!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: Bazooka Antenna Design
Date: 1 Feb 1996 16:48:56 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4ercg8$[e-mail]>
References: <4er7lo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4er7lo$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (CHARLES J.
MICHAELS) writes:

> could ask, good in what way?
>       Since the loss in the quarter wave sections is a function of
>the square root of frequency and the length it seems to me that the
>loss will be higher on loweer frequency bands such as 160.  Tales of
>immunity to height etc... are not valid.  The increased bandwidth
>is more a product of the diameter of teh coax shield forming the
>antenna than the small compensation of the shunting stubs.
>
>Charlie, W7XC

Hi Charlie,

You're right of course, but you left something else out that increases the
BW of the infamious coaxial dipole. The increased bandwidth is also a
function of the increased losses. Braided wire has more RF resistive loss
than smooth wire, plus there are additional dielectric losses.

I get a real chuckle out of an ad in the ham magazines that advertises a
"Coaxial dipole with 1.5dB gain over a regular dipole". 1.5 dB more LOSS
is more like it, hi.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:28 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.exodus.net!aimnet.com!ns2.mainstreet.net!bug.rahul.net!a2i!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CB to Ham Transformation.
Date: 5 Feb 1996 14:01:46 -0800
Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712,714-638-4133,805-294-9338)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4e9s0c$[e-mail]> <4ee9tt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com

In article <4ee9tt$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
> >   Joe Fitter   BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>  Also, on cb since i live in
> >  NY i hear alot of spanish itallian people speaking in other languages on
> >  most channels and there is alot of profanity. I am wondering is there
> >  anythink like that on HAm?
>
> Again, the answer is no.  It is against the law and 99.5% of us hams are law
 abiding.
> But profanity is the major reason that cb'ers move up to amateur radio.
>

Clarification: foreign languages is perfectly legal as long as you
identify in English but profanity is definitely out.

73,

---
Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
m
KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:29 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Comet CA HV Antenna - Any Comments?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <4f7n0s$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 18:36:10 GMT
Lines: 40

In article <4f7n0s$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (K5QQ) writes:
>I noticed that Comet is making an antenna for mobile use that covers
>40-20-15-10-6 and 2 meters.  Has anyone tried it and have any comments?
>Is it fully automatic or do you move jumpers like the outback?  Does it
>mount on a 3/8-24 thread or does Comet have their own mounting
>arrangement?

It's a pretty severely compromised antenna. I got one for my Jeep
for use with my IC-706. The antenna works on 2 and 6 via just the
mast and the base matching network. For 40-10 meters there are
4 top loading coils with stingers. You can install one, two, or
all four in a porcupine arrangement. You've probably seen these
"spyder" arrangements on Hustlers.

The mount is a Comet SO239 style. The antenna base coil has a fixed
PL259 type configuration that screws down on the Comet base. The
hardware is all nicely done, and should hold up well, and it will
even hinge over just above the base network, but as an antenna it
leaves a lot to be desired. I'd rate it as similar to a short Hustler
on HF, and just Ok on 6 and 2 meters.

You're not going to get the performance of a Bugcatcher, or probably
even a Hamstick, out of this antenna, but it will cover all the bands
without requiring you to get out of the car and make changes.

I use mine roof mounted, with just one HF coil and stinger installed
at a time (to reduce windload and for asethetics). I can hinge it down
when going into low parking structures, or to change resonators.
Frankly, I'd have been better off to just bumper mount a good HF
antenna and run separate roof mounted 6 and 2 meter antennas.

For what it is, it is nicely done, but remember what it is, a severe
compromise.

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 Feb 09 16:53:30 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx04-33
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Defective EZNEC files
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 96 10:11:01 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <4f79e6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx04-33.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

Some EZNEC files are archived on ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC (and also
mirrored on ftp.emclab.umr.edu/pub/aces/NEC). A few of these files are
defective and will cause EZNEC to crash when recalled or cause it to
display its internal "default" description. EZNEC prevents saving defective
files, but does little checking when files are recalled. Apparently these
files weren't created by EZNEC or were damaged somewhere along the way.

The defective files are:

        [e-mail]
        20RH_STK.EZ
        20RHST58.EZ
        40M_STAK.EZ
        40RHOMBI.EZ

They are being deleted from the archives and will probably be gone by the
time you read this. Please delete any copies you've downloaded.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:31 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!noc.nyx.net!nyx.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (ted kell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dummy load resistor source???
Date: 8 Feb 1996 07:02:08 -0700
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4fcvp0$[e-mail]>
References: <4fbfim$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx.nyx.net

I took 12 2W resisters, I think 620 ohms, whatever the std value is, hooked
them in parallel between two pieces of pcb, attached an so239.

Ted


In article <4fbfim$[e-mail]>,
Rob Bellville  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>I need to make a bunch of low power (< 5W) dummy loads. Where can I find
>some 50 ohm 5W non-inductive resistors? Alternatively, I could use 25 and
>100 ohm ones, too.
>
>Thanks!
>
>- Rob
>



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:32 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.zeitgeist.net!bdt.com!news.ossi.com!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!despina.neptune.com!news.atlantic.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard Zimmerman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Florida Ham Antenna Restrictions - ch125.htm (0/1)
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 15:08:06 GMT
Organization: Internet Connect Company (atlantic.net) Florida, USA [phone]
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <4f7v2j$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-oca-fl-016.atlantic.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Pat Hamilton) wrote:

>> I believe the state of Florida passsed a law that was suposed to
>> prevent local zoning from preventing ham towers, anyone have any
>> info on it??? If so I would like to get a copy.
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Dave hand wb4hyp
>> dhand @ microdes.com

>Greetings Dave,

>Yes, Florida did indeed enact such a law. Unfortunately it did not
>stop the problems. I lived in Florida (Tampa) for a bit over three
>years and there was at least one case where some folks put up a
>couple towers in a rural area and literally went through hell over
>it.

>I cannot provide particulars on Florida's law but I think a note to a
>fellow I know down there would get you some answers.

>His name is Warren and his call is WA1GUD. A really decent guy and
>well informed on new developments in that neck of the woods.

>His internet address is or not too long ago was  [e-mail]

>He can also be reached via packet at [e-mail]

>He may have some printed matter he could send you. Tell him I said
>hello.

>Good luck and 73

>Pat

I was researching this for something else so I decided to post it
here. Please look for the attached  file.

Richard, KE4RIT




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:34 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!despina.neptune.com!news.atlantic.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard Zimmerman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Florida Ham Antenna Restrictions - ch125.htm (1/1)
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 15:08:07 GMT
Organization: Internet Connect Company (atlantic.net) Florida, USA [phone]
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <4f7v5e$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-oca-fl-016.atlantic.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

begin 644 ch125.htm
M1FQO<FED82!3=&%T=71E<R`H1G5L;"!6;VQU;64@,3DY-2DZ($-(05!415(@
M,3(U#0H-"D%M871E=7(@<F%D:6\@86YT96YN87,[(&-O;G-T<G5C=&EO;B!I
M;B!C;VYF;W)M86YC92!W:71H(&9E9&5R86P@<F5Q=6ER96UE;G1S+B`-"@T*
M("`@("!.;R!C;W5N='D@<VAA;&P@96YA8W0@;W(@96YF;W)C92!A;GD@;W)D
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M:6UA=&4@<'5R<&]S92X-"@T*("`@("!.;W1H:6YG(&EN('1H:7,@<V5C=&EO
M;B!S:&%L;"!A9F9E8W0@86YY(&%P<&QI8V%B;&4@<')O=FES:6]N<R!O9B!C
M:&%P=&5R(#,S,RX-"@T*2&ES=&]R>3H\+V(^(',N(#$L(&-H+B`Y,2TR."X-
B"@T*3F]T92X\+V(^($9O<FUE<B!S+B`Q,C4N,#$X-2X-"@`>
`
end


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!iglou!iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: G5RV
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <4er6ue$[e-mail]> <4ets2s$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4f30go$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 23:26:43 GMT
Lines: 38

From the looks of these swrs, a tuner will be need for solid state rigs
anyway. A recent article in QST proved that many tuners have considerable
losses. Add that to the 2 to 4 db lost from the coax and you have even
more loss. Why is the G5RV considered  a mutliband antenna? Is there some
magic swr the qualifies it? Put up any old loop in any configeration that
is at least one wavelength around and it will have better matches to coax
then this.




: Freq.              SWR-original           SWR-W6SAI version
:                    102'/26.75' no balun   92.6'/37.25' with balun

: 3.5-4.0            6.3-5.67               7.68-4.60
: 7.0-7.3            2.65-4.50              1.72-3.00
: 10.1               8.50                   8.11
: 14.00-14.35        1.83-3.28              2.50-1.42
: 18.11              1.84                   1.11
: 21.00-21.45        5.90-5.69              4.96-4.70
: 24.95              4.52                   2.75
: 28.0-29.7          4.83-1.88              3.38-1.48-2.55

: Take the measured SWRs and use the charts at the end of Chapter 16
: in the ARRL Handbook to find the SWR at the coax/ladder-line
: junction and the additional loss caused by standing waves. For
: instance, a transmitter end SWR of 3:1 on 40m means an SWR of
: about 4:1 at the other end of the coax with a total loss of
: about 2dB in RG58, less than half an 'S' unit (Sterbie unit?).

: G5RV radiation efficiency can definitely be improved but not by
: as much as one might think. Commercial versions are way over-
: priced. But it is not bad as an all-band HF antenna.

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

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:37 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!dsinc!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ifu.net!usenet
From: Dean Marzocca <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP  Titan DX
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 21:58:49 -0500
Organization: ifu.net
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ejocb$[e-mail]> <4enm13$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip36.ifu.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)
To: KB9VU <[e-mail]>

KB9VU wrote:
>
> Dick,
>
> It works for me also.  I've checked mine against a dipole at 35' and a
> longwire (160' X 30' up at is's highest point) and there are both plus and
> minus differences.  NONE of them shows the GAP worse by more than 1 S
> unit.  75 meter performance is 1 to 2 S units better than the dipole!  40
> meter performance is equal to or better than the dipole and slightly worse
> than the longwire depending on wether working phone or CW.  The GAP is
> better in the Phone end.  20 meters is slightly worse than both the other
> antennas with the dipole working the best.  15 meters is better than the
> long wire and equal to the dipole.  10 meters is worse than both the
> dipole and the longwire (less than 1 S unit though).  On 17 meters, both
> the dipole and the long wire are better.  On 12 meters, the long wire is
> better, the GAP and dipole are equal.
>
> From my observations and those of others in the area, folks either like
> them or they don't.  There is a mind set in the Ham community that ALL
> verticals are really tall dummy loads.  I have not found that to be the
> case.  Mine works fine in my installation which is a compromise due to
> space and zoning restrictions.  My antenna is ground mounted with the 40
> meter counterpoise only 10 to 12" off the grass.
>
> Mike, KB9VUMike, I agree 100 % and couldn't have put it any better. Receptio
n might
be down a bit but so is the noise.

73,  Dean  N2TNN


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:38 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!ub!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!ni1.ni.net!xband.ni.net!user
From: [e-mail] (J. L. Blanton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help A New Ham!
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 23:05:29 -0800
Organization: Network Intensive
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xband.ni.net

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

> I recently upgraded to Tech Plus and bought an HF Rig. Kenwood
> Ts-450/AT. I constructed a 10 meter dipole. The dipole is resonant at
> 28.400. But, the band seems to be flat. Is it really that dead or could
> I have done something wrong???? I also have a R7 I will be installing
> when the weather breaks.

Look for F-layer openings for a few hours around mid-day.  The band may
also liven up a little during sporadic-E season in May through July
(although sporadic-E can also occur during other months).  10 meters is a
really interesting DX band during sunspot peaks.  Good luck.

Lee, WA8YBT/6


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:39 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!hideout.emanon.net!alpha.sky.net!winternet.com!guitar.sound.net!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ee.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Henry Hook)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help A New Ham!
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 14:35:15 GMT
Organization: eNET News Server 1
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <4f54ep$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-127.nextek.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

        Ryan Workman <[e-mail]> wrote:

>To All:

>Here is my situation:

>I recently upgraded to Tech Plus and bought an HF Rig. Kenwood
>Ts-450/AT. I constructed a 10 meter dipole. The dipole is reasonant at
>28.400. But, the band seems to be flat. Is it really that dead or could
>I have done something wrong???? I also have a R7 I will be installing
>when the weather breaks.

>Any Suggestions?? Please let me know!

>73,
>Ryan, KB2OOP
>Email: [e-mail] or [e-mail]


Ryan: 10 meters is pretty dead at this point in the sunspot cycle. It
will get better in another year or so. Keep on up-grade work and get
on to some of the lower freq. bands. They are not perfect but there is
traffic there.
 Best  Henry   KD8QA



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:40 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ee.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Henry Hook)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help A New Ham!
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 18:58:48 GMT
Organization: eNET News Server 1
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <4f5jt7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-152.nextek.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Ryan Workman <[e-mail]> wrote:

>To All:

>Here is my situation:

>I recently upgraded to Tech Plus and bought an HF Rig. Kenwood
>Ts-450/AT. I constructed a 10 meter dipole. The dipole is reasonant at
>28.400. But, the band seems to be flat. Is it really that dead or could
>I have done something wrong???? I also have a R7 I will be installing
>when the weather breaks.

>Any Suggestions?? Please let me know!

>73,
>Ryan, KB2OOP
>Email: [e-mail] or [e-mail]
Ryan:Yes, 10 meters is pretty dead right now.It will improve with the
change in the cycle in another year or so.South America may be open
about 2000UTC and some to S.Pac.
Henry  KD8QA



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:40 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!box185.ams.vt.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Ranson J. Pelt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help- 40 Meter Yagis
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 11:12:42 -0500
Organization: Virginia Tech
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: box185.ams.vt.edu

I want to purchase a 40 Meter shortened Yagi.  Currently looking at the
Cushcraft 40-2CD and the Hygain Discover 7-2.

Anyone out there using one of these antennas?  Would appreciate any input
to help me decide which one I should go with.

Thanks - 73

--
Ranson J. Pelt
[e-mail]
QST de nz4i


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:42 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!chaos.aoc.nrao.edu!newshost.nmt.edu!rutgers!fdurt1.fdu.edu!xyzzy.bubble.org!newshost.cyberramp.net!news.iadfw.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!torn!hone!informer1.cis.McMaster.CA!church.dcss!hwfn!james!aa490
From: [e-mail] (Paul Milawski)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP-Interference
Date: 5 Feb 1996 19:27:20 GMT
Organization: Hamilton-Wentworth FreeNet, Ontario, Canada.
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <4f5lmo$[e-mail]>
References: <4el9in$[e-mail]> <4f3d7s$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2-HWFN]

: [e-mail] (George) wrote:
: >I'm trying to use my AEAfax to receive FAX/RTTY.  But My computer
: >generates too much interfercne.  I know its not the
: >monitor,mouse,keyboard,&modem.  I've removed all and powered up CPU and
: >still get noise.  I've taken CPU to another room (on another electrical
: >circuit) and still get a +20dB noise level from CPU.  Now I'm on the
: >second story of a townhouse and my radios are only grounded to the
: >electrical system ground.  I'm thinking of running a ground wire from
: >second floor window and driving a rod in the ground. Will this help?  I
: >know nothing about grounding.
: >Tnx
: >George

  In my case, the interference was getting into the audio lead from
the decoder and flowing back to the receiver. It didn't matter how
far away I placed the receiver.
  What I did to eliminate allmost all of the RFI was to use two small
audio transformers "back to back" (8ohm to 1000ohm miniature versions
are widely available). Just tie the two 1000ohm sections together and
use the 8ohm sides as input/output. Of course this remedy will only
be usefull if that's where your interference is coming from.
Good luck,
Paul


--


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:43 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!service-2.agate.net!usenet
From: John Wilcox/NS1Z <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF Magnetic mount?
Date: 8 Feb 1996 20:12:28 GMT
Organization: Agate Internet Services (AIS)
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4fdlfc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ns1z.sdi.agate.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Well, they look attractive and for versatility it would appear they can't
be beat. However, if they fall off while one is careening down the
highway they might not be worth it. Anyone have any tales they would like
to relate? I am thinking of getting one to use on my old Jimmy/S15 as
well as the occaisonal rental car for a Hustler style HF mobile whip.
Your experiences would be appreciated. Thanks!

--
John Wilcox / NS1Z
INTERNET :204.117.6.48
          [e-mail]
Work     :[e-mail]
TCP/IP   :44.118.6.4
          [e-mail]
AX-25    :[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:44 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HI-Q antenna
Date: 5 Feb 96 01:46:57 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I am looking for information on antennas with extremely narrow bandwidth
for use on a dual frequency packet setup.  All antennas I have seen aim
for the maximum bandwidth possible.  I am looking for the minimum bandwidth
possible, for a single frequency.  A duplexer has been considered, but I
don't think it is a $$$ option.

I tried a full wave loop, but the bandwidth was 4 MHz, even with magnet wire.
I'm trying to run a gateway, but rx blanking occurs, even 2 MHz away.
Ideally, I'd like to run 145.07 and 145.79 together for the APRS crowd.
What I'm aiming for is 1200 baud on 145.07 and 9600 baud on 147.57 as a
dual entry gateway into internet.

I have worked with a loop antenna for hf operation(MFJ) which has a width
of only 30 khz.  All 2m antennas I have seen are at least a few MHz on
average.  The hf loop is a natural filter, and rejects all nearby signals,
even 100 khz away.  The hf loop runs a Q of 50 to 500 depending on the band.

I have considered building a scale version of the loop, but I don't know if
the capacitor is increased or decreased in value.  My ignorance is showing.

73 de Tom S.
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:45 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!luzskru.cpcnet.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Dave Mann)
Subject: Re: High Quality Dipole Antennas
Message-ID: <267cc$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 21:48:43 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
References: <4ef1rc$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 32

Jack Ray <[e-mail]> wrote:


>I am Distributor for the Fritzel antenna line from Germany.

>Fritzel builds very high quality Beams and Dipoles, like nothing else on the
market.

>These are available from your favorite dealer or direct:

>                                 Electronic Switch Company, Inc.
>                                 8491 Hospital Drive, Suite 328
>                                 Douglasville,  GA  30134   USA


I have two Fritzel 80 meter dipoles which I purchased from them whilst
posted in Germany (as DA1BB).  This was in 1980 and the antennas are
still in excellent condition.  They have a plastic covering over the
wire and stainless steel screw-on clamps.  The only complaint (if it
really is one .. hi) is that the UHF connector receptacle on the balun
is a bit too long, making it hard to completely tighten the coax plug
unless I use pliers.  Not really a problem, however.  I like the
Fritzel folks also, they were extremely helpful to me when I visited
their factory in Germany.  Another great company over there is Andes
Antennas, which manufactures VHF and UHF antennas.  I still have a
70cm helical and a 23cm 4-gang helical made by them in 1980.

73's
Dave Mann, VP2EHF


Dave and Dorothea Mann, Little Harbour, Anguilla, BWI




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:46 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.eas.asu.edu!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Homebrew 160 Meter Vertical
Date: 7 Feb 1996 17:16:27 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <4fampb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


        Reference KK5AO proposal for a ballon supported
160 meter vertical.
1       Bil Morrison first 'chooses 0.05 inches for #12 wire'.
It isn't.  It is 0.08081 inches.
        His equation for Zo is in error. He has the 'a' in the
wrong place.  It should be:
        Zo = 60 [ln(2h/a) - 1]  although he appears to have
used the correct equation for his calculated 581 ohm Zo with
0.05 radius wire (which is closer to #10)  The radius of #12 is
not 0.05.  Its 0.040405 inches yielding Zo of 593.86 ohms.
        While the reactance curves of the article are correct
they are actually yielded more simply by  X = Zo / tan (H)
where H is the angular height.
        X = 581 / tan (30) = 1006.32
        His value of 988 ohms of capacitive reactance from
the curves assumes X/Zo = 1.7.  It is actually 1.732 but lets
not quibble about that.  Using 0.40405 radius it comes out to
X = 1028 by the proper equation rather than the crude
curves.
        He then falls into the same trap as the author of the
Vertical Classics article where in Fig. 4 he arrives at 36 ohms
for the radiation resistance.  That curve is for a simple
monopole, NOT a loaded one.
        A simple but fairly accurate equation for the radiation
resistance of a capacitively top loaded vertical is R = 36 sin
squared H,  where H is the angular height of the vertical, in
this case about 27 ohms.  Thus, if his estimate of 4 ohms of
earth loss resistance is true, adds to 40 ohms, not 44.
        It appears that he proposes building the capacity hat
of wire supported by fiber glass struts.  The article from
which he quotes used 1/2 inch tubing for the spokes which
may approach but not equal a solid disk.  Reasonable sized
wires certainly will not approach the capacity of a disk unless
the number of them is quite large.  Check it out with ELNEC.
        The wind load on such a monstrosity would seem to
guarantee that the vertical will be a sloper in anything but a
rare dead calm.  Maintaining the hat in a fixed position
relative to the antenna wire seems a problem that will add still
more wind area  Lifting the resulting capacity top loading
structure would be more difficult than going for a quarter-
wave-resonant wire.
        A thin 90 degree antenna at 1.8 MHz quarter-wave antenna will have radiation

resistance of 36.6 + J 42.5.  Resonant length would be approxametly .95 X 136.
6
added length of only about 45.6 feet of wire.  Less than one pound of weight a
t
per pound for bare #12.
--


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:47 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeeder.gi.net!news.mid.net!news.dra.com!news.starnet.net!wupost!dbsun.vitek.com!dbsun.vitek.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Rod Landers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Interference with lamps
Date: 1 Feb 1996 18:54:50 -0600
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4erncq$[e-mail]>
References: <4ek79r$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dbsun.vitek.com

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (T
ed Kell) writes:
>
>Take a sledgehammer to the lamp.  :)

I second that. Those lamps are creations from hell.......


73, WI0T



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:48 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!news.tcst.com!dildog.lgc.com!news.sesqui.net!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (David Dean)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: J-Pole Antenna
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 21:59:28 GMT
Organization: Keep-In-Touch Communications
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4f0pbu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-den9-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat Feb 03  2:59:10 PM PST 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Where does the center conductor of the coax connect on a J-Pole
antenna. The 19" stub or the 59" pole?  Please help. Thanks. Dave

David Dean
N6RHL

Absolute Communications

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:50 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: J-Pole qestions
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 04:43:33 GMT
Lines: 47

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
m (Ted Fortner) writes:
>I have come across a 2m J-pole antenna plan.  What are the advantages of a
>J-pole over, say a rubber duck on a HT or a dipole?  Does it requrie a
>ground plane for good performance, and what wavelength antenna is it?
>(quarter wave, half wave, etc...)  I would also appreciate any other plans
>for a 2m J-pole.  Thanx in advance.

Ok, a J-pole is a halfwave end fed radiator with a quarterwave
matching stub (the J hook). In theory, a halfwave radiator is a
halfwave radiator, so the J-pole should be identical to a vertical
halfwave dipole. Unfortunately, reality raises its ugly head and it
isn't quite that simple. Because of the unbalanced feedpoint connection,
the J-pole can exhibit high feedline currents, and thus can sometimes
suffer bizarre radiation patterns. A choke balun in the coax at the
feedpoint can suppress this to a large extent.

Like any halfwave radiator, the J-pole doesn't need a groundplane
to function. And like any shorted quarterwave stub, the bottom of
the J hook is electrically neutral, so it can be bolted directly
to a metallic support structure. That means the antenna is a
"plumbers delight" and can be DC grounded for safety.

If you make the J-pole out of copper pipe and place a Tee fitting
at the bottom of the J hook, you can use that to mount the antenna
to the mast, and if you're clever you'll route your coax *inside*
the mast and up inside the J, bringing the inner conductor out
through a strategically placed hole in the J to connect to the
other leg of the J, and soldering the coax shield at the hole.
This hides the coax from the antenna near field and forms a
sleeve balun, and helps give you a clean pattern, as well as
a clean mechanical installation.

Practically *any* antenna will be superior to a rubber dummy load,
and the J-pole is no exception. The J-pole has 0 dbd of course since
it is electrically identical to a vertical dipole. You can stack
halfwave sections, however, using a quarterwave hairpin phasing section
in between, and turn the J-pole into a gain antenna. A 2 bay has 3 dbd
and a 4 bay has 6 dbd. That's about the limit for a self-supporting
2 meter J-pole, but you can go to 8 bays, 9 dbd, on 70 cm with half
inch copper pipe construction.

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 Feb 09 16:53:51 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!globe.indirect.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!blackbush.xlink.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-ulm.de!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!fontane.agnld.uni-potsdam.DE!not-for-mail
From: Jan-Martin Hertzsch <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Long wire on VHF - any experiences?
Date: 9 Feb 1996 09:43:49 GMT
Organization: Max-Planck-Arbeitsgruppe "Nichtlineare Dynamik"
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4ff50l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fontane.agnld.uni-potsdam.de (141.89.176.21)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Access: 16 51 959 960
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; OSF1 V3.2 alpha)
X-URL: news://news.fu-berlin.de/rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Dear friends of r.r.a.a.,

not long ago, I found a description of long-wire antennas for VHF and UHF.
They were 7 lambda antennas fed 1/4 wave from one end. I'd like to try
them for my SSB (and hopefully later telegraphy) operations (running the
antenna from my window or from the roof across the garden to a tree).
Nevertheless, I'd like to know whether anybody has already tried this
kind of antenna, and could give me perhaps some hints.
I am aware of the fact that such antennas are strongly directional,
but this is even an advantage for my intended application.

vy 73 de DG0LFH

Jan-Martin



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:52 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!elna.ethz.ch!usenet
From: Schwander Peter <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: multi el. quad for 7mhz
Date: 5 Feb 1996 23:21:45 GMT
Organization: ethz
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <4f63e9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ibkmac13.ethz.ch
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.12(Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna/19724-19824#[e-mail]

hello dear friend,
                 i am trying to put up for the next ARRL CW contest a 4
or 5 elements quad antenna for the 40 meters band.Maybe it sounds a
little bit crazy,but be sure it is not so very difficult.the last year a
was working with a 4 el. delta loop on 40 meters,but this time I would
like to try the square form.My biggest problem is that I still need to
find the real BEST dimensions to optimize the forward gain(of cours it
is not a rotatable antenna,but to work USA+CANADA from Europe it is
about always in the same direction,i will optimize by bearing exactly
the "center of USA ").now,how i said my biggest problem is to have the
best dimensions and spacing to have the 50 ohms in my coax cable.
My "boom" can be up to 25 meters long(about 70-75 feet).
i would like to explain you how i will mount this antenna(believe me :it
is not so crazy my idea!),but my english is to poor to let you
understand something in my words,hi...
the highest part of the squares will be at about 16-18 meters and the
lowest about 5-7 meters above the ground,so I think it is not very very
low the antenna(of course by higehr heigt would be better...).
so,dear friend,if you have the dimensions and best spacing for this
antenna,please let me know,by leaving a n answering message to me.mni
mni tnx!!
(of course i didnt given you many infos about how i will do the
antenna,but i think you have my most important parameters to "see"more
or less how it looks.i can tell you also that i will use 2 mast distant
about 30 meters and they are about 17 meters high).

so,hope to read something from you as soon as possible,i will be very
very very glad!!!!!

vy best 73 es dx es hpecu in the test    --... ...--   ...-.-  . .  !!




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:54 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Narrow Bandwidth for 2M
Date: 5 Feb 96 01:43:22 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I am looking for information on antennas with extremely narrow bandwidth
for use on a dual frequency packet setup.  All antennas I have seen aim
for the maximum bandwidth possible.  I am looking for the minimum bandwidth
possible, for a single frequency.  A duplexer has been considered, but I
don't think it is a $$$ option.

I tried a full wave loop, but the bandwidth was 4 MHz, even with magnet wire.
I'm trying to run a gateway, but rx blanking occurs, even 2 MHz away.
Ideally, I'd like to run 145.07 and 145.79 together for the APRS crowd.
What I'm aiming for is 1200 baud on 145.07 and 9600 baud on 147.57 as a
dual entry gateway into internet.

I have worked with a loop antenna for hf operation(MFJ) which has a width
of only 30 khz.  All 2m antennas I have seen are at least a few MHz on
average.  The hf loop is a natural filter, and rejects all nearby signals,
even 100 khz away.  The hf loop runs a Q of 50 to 500 depending on the band.

I have considered building a scale version of the loop, but I don't know if
the capacitor is increased or decreased in value.  My ignorance is showing.

73 de Tom S.
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:55 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Narrow Bandwidth for 2M
Date: 6 Feb 1996 04:19:59 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <4f6ktf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet04.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

  Cavity peak, notch, and peak-notch filters can help.  If your problem
is other nearby 2 meter stations, you all may have to coordinate with the
transmitters notching the receive frequencies, or with very sharp pass
filters on the transmitters, as well as the receivers notching out the
transmit frequencies, or using very narrow pass filters. Receive-frequency
crystal filters are available at 2 meters; these are so selective that
you almost don't need a superhet/IF for receive selectivity!  Of course
they have to be ordered for the frequency to be received.

  Site management of the antenna locations would help.  Also, with
multiple frequencies, intermod analysis might show that certain
combinations of your available frequencies should not be co-located if it
is avoidable.

  Circulators (sometimes called directional couplers, but not to be
confused with a bidirectional wattmeter element) should be used at the
transmitter outputs, especially when modern wide-band, solid-state
transmitters are used.  In tough cases, two or three stage units are
required.  Unfortunately, circulators can be EXPENSIVE!  However, their
effect on transmit intermod is very well documented.  On the 450-470 MHz
band, I have seen one new solid-state commercial paging station of good
quality, but which was missing its circulator, clobbering commercial
repeaters on another tower 800 feet away.  Transmitters on the other
tower were intermodulating in the paging TX, and the intermod products
were clobbering other receivers on the other tower!  Fortunately, the
paging transmitter soon got its circulator.

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:56 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!imci5!suck-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Narrow Bandwidth for 2M
Date: 6 Feb 1996 04:26:51 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4f6lab$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet04.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

  One other thing - your best bet in strong signal environments is a
crystal controlled (not synthesized) receiver of strong design.  (Single
freq crystal-controlled transmitters are best, too.)   Scanners and
amplified HTs or cheap mobiles won't cut it...  Those commercial
receivers with 5 stage helical front ends work much better.  Even so,
their mixers are usually not the ultimate; strong double-balanced design
would improve things further.  Avoid unnecessary preamplification for
this reason; even if the RF amp doesn't overload, the mixer certainly can.

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:57 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: 3 Feb 1996 12:23:39 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 54
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4f05mr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi ALL,

Tom B E-mailed me this.
 I said....
: The two wire line doesn't have to radiate.

He said....
Yes, I agree with this, but ...

: If you install a choke balun at
: the antenna terminals it won't radiate if the source feeding the line is
: balanced. If the line is coax and the balun is used the source has to be
: ground independent or a typical unbalanced output.

I'm afraid I don't agree with this.  I just did a little EZNEC simulation
to prove the point.  I modeled a simple horizontal .49 wavelength center
fed dipole at 1 meter wavelength.  I included a second wire not connected
to the first.  It was also horizontal, in the same plane, same length, but
perpendicular to the driven wire.  One end was spaced .01 meters from the
center of the driven wire.  As expected, the model showed an approximately
sinusoidal current distribution on the driven element, and zero current
everywhere on the parasitic element.  But then I moved the parasitic
element so it was 1/3 of the way from one end of the driven element, still
with the end spaced away from the driven element by 0.01 wavelenths.  I
claim that's like a feedline, be it coax or balanced, that's isolated from
the driven antenna by a perfect balun, and 1/2 wave long.  OK, the current
induced in the parasitic element was nearly half as large as in the driven
element!

If you really don't want antenna currents on your feedline in this
situation, break the feedline up with two baluns, one at the antenna, and
one a quarter wave or so away.

Anything that's resonant and not perfectly balanced in the field of the
driven element will have a significant current (= antenna current) induced

in it.  If you make it non-resonant, it very significantly reduces the
problem, and if you space it well away from the radiating element that
helps too.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]

That was a great clairification. Of course as Tom pointed out...ANY line
will radiate (even a balanced antenna) if the feeder is not a proper angle
to the antenna and properly decoupled.

An OCF antenna is NO WORSE than any other dipole antenna for putting out a
signal. They all require proper installation, most of them are never
installed that way...even the dipoles.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:58 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.ptd.net!news
From: Dave Skarbowski <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 12:19:09 -0500
Organization: N2FAM
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4er6c3$[e-mail]> <4esbfj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs1-09.hol.ptd.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b6a (X11; I; Linux 1.3.59 i486)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960201150610.19455A-100000@iglou>, Steve
> Ellington <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >
> >The Windom in it's original form was fed with a single wire. I tried it
> >once and put a nice burn on my lip from the microphone. Now, we have this
>
> >so -called Windom using balanced line, 300 ohm or 450 or whatever,
> >feeding a very unbalanced antenna. YES, the feedline will radiate like
> >crazy! Is this what we desire?
> >
>
> The two wire line doesn't have to radiate. If you install a choke balun at
> the antenna terminals it won't radiate if the source feeding the line is
> balanced. If the line is coax and the balun is used the source has to be
> ground independent or a typical unbalanced output.
>
> Lot's of variables apply when things are mixed and matched!
>
> 73 Tom

Where did the notion come from that openwire line radiates?  If the SOURCE is
balanced (as you
indicate) it will not radiate.  Where you attach it on a dipole should not mat
ter as far as
balance is concerned.  The center of a dipole as a feed point is no different
than the end as
far as balance in the feed is concerned.

73's Dave, n2fam


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:53:59 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.exodus.net!aimnet.com!ns2.mainstreet.net!bug.rahul.net!a2i!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Alfred Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: opinions on Diamond antennas??
Date: 5 Feb 1996 14:01:58 -0800
Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712,714-638-4133,805-294-9338)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Charlie Fortner) wrote:
> I'm thinking about buying a Diamond 2m/440 mobile along with the hideaway
> trunk mount.  Is Diamond a reputable company, and if so, is the mount and
> antenna worth the $120 AES wants?

If hearsay is to be trusted, Comet is the world largest amateur antenna
manufacturer and all Diamond antennas are made by Comet.

73,

---
Alfred Lee                                                       [e-mail]
m
KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:00 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!wellspring.us.dg.com!dg-rtp.dg.com!teton!mead
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Mead)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: opinions on Diamond antennas??
Date: 6 Feb 1996 15:32:59 GMT
Organization: Data General Corp.
Lines: 8
Sender: mead@teton (Glenn Mead)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4f7sbb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: teton.rtp.dg.com

I own four diamond antennas. About 2 weeks ago one of the
twin band mobiles quit working. I called the dealer, he
sent a new one, I sent the dead one back. No hassle, no
problem. The quality of the parts is very high and the reports
I get back are very good.

Glenn Mead
KE4ZEA


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:01 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.service.uci.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: opinions on Diamond antennas??
Date: 6 Feb 1996 17:12:41 GMT
Organization: UCI Medical Center
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <4f8269$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin9103.slip.uci.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...

>If hearsay is to be trusted, Comet is the world largest amateur antenna
>manufacturer and all Diamond antennas are made by Comet.

>73,

>Alfred Lee  [e-mail]
>KE6KGV           'The answer is (e^iπ + 1) ? "No" : "Yes"'

Hearsay is wrong.  Comet (NGK) does not make the antennas for Diamond.
Diamond and Comet are both very good antennas.  Diamond generally look
a bit "more polished" and Comet seems to put more into the inside.

Comet representative in So Cal claims Diamond is completely seperate.

Brian



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:02 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.frontiernet.net!Empire.Net!news.net99.net!News.MO.NET!tattoo.sccsi.com!nuchat!lurch.sccsi.com!news.sccsi.com!news.uh.edu!swrinde!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: opinions on Diamond antennas??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 04:16:58 GMT
Lines: 38

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alfred Lee) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>[e-mail] (Charlie Fortner) wrote:
>> I'm thinking about buying a Diamond 2m/440 mobile along with the hideaway
>> trunk mount.  Is Diamond a reputable company, and if so, is the mount and
>> antenna worth the $120 AES wants?
>
>If hearsay is to be trusted, Comet is the world largest amateur antenna
>manufacturer and all Diamond antennas are made by Comet.

I don't think that's correct. I had the opportunity to talk with the
president of Comet at length at Dayton 3 years ago. My impression was
that Comet was a relatively small company (by Japanese standards anyway).
Also, in examining the internals of Comet and Diamond base station
antennas, I find their design and construction methods very dissimilar.
It seems unlikely they are coming from the same source.

I don't like Diamond base station antennas because of the series
capacitors used in them. Comet antennas use linear loading instead.
This means there's DC continuity throughout the Comet antenna, and
no capacitors to be blown when lightning comes to call. My repeater
uses a Comet antenna, and has numerous burn marks from lightning
hits, but no damage. Only one hit usually puts paid to a Diamond.

Mobile antennas are somewhat different. I find both Comet and Diamond
mobile antennas to be fairly similar in construction. I don't see
much wrong with either brand. Again I use a Comet mobile antenna,
because I like the mechanicals and aesthetics better than the Diamond
or the Larsen (which may be slightly electrically superior to either
of the others). I do use Larsen mounts, the Larsen NMO can't be beat.
Just drill the hole, put it in, and forget about 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] Fri Feb 09 16:54:04 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Opportunity Knocks
Date: 6 Feb 1996 20:07:46 GMT
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4f8cei$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hd30-133.compuserve.com
Content-Type: text/plain
Keywords: Antenna,Design, Engineer,Employment,
Content-length: 379
X-Newsreader: AIR Mosaic (16-bit) version 4.00.08.32


Hello,

I'm an Executive Recruiter in Portland, ME. I currently have several
openings around the country for Antenna Design Engineers.
Please reply if interested in knowing more.
E-Mail would be better than posting to newsgroup.

Sincerely,

Bill Corrigan
Ross Green and Associates
PO Box 547
Cumberland, ME 04021
207-829-6595(P)
207-829-6590(F)
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:06 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!zippy.intcom.net!imci3!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: PC interferes with TV
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <4f2iis$[e-mail]> <4f2vr1$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 03:38:50 GMT
Lines: 65

In article <4f2vr1$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard M
acDonald) writes:
>On Sun, 04 Feb 1996 10:12:53, [e-mail] (Paul Del Priore) wrote:
>>When I use my computer, if someone else is watching TV using off
>>air antenna annoying interference is present on TV, mostly channels
>>2,4,5.
[snip]
>
>1. Check that your computer is FCC Class B certified (home use). If not you m
ay
>not be able to cure the problems.

Sure you can. If the manufacturer can shield to Class B levels, so
can you.

>2. Check all external connections to the main computer - often signal is
>radiated from a cable or an external device. You can generally disconnect cab
les
>at the computer then, if the interference is gone, replace them one at a time
 to
>sse when it returns. Note that you should generally turn off the computer to
>disconnect or connect cables, especially the parallel printer port. Don't for
get
>the monitor cable - it or the monitor are frequent causes of such interferenc
e.
>
>If you find that a cable is doing it you can often find a cable with better
>shielding. Many of the cheaper cables have none at all.
>
>You can use ferrite beads or the equivalent on many cables to cut down
>radiation.
>
>If it isn't a cable or the problem persists with no external things connected
 to
>the computer then you may need another computer.

Don't be *too* quick to write off the computer. You *can* use a
noisy computer if you improve the case shielding. Even the noisest
motherboard can be brought down to Tempest levels if you use good
VHF RF shielding practices on the case. Such things as sanding
all joints for metal to metal contact, using a screw at least
every 5 cm of seam, covering any ventilation openings with
copper screen, etc, will quieten even the noisiest beast down.
You've got to make the case a Faraday cage to contain the noise.

What can be a bear to quieten is the keyboard. Sometimes it
*is* better to just pitch a noisy one and get a quieter
keyboard. I use the Focus 2001 on all my machines. It's
pretty RF quiet, and has a feel that I like. And don't forget
the mouse, some of these can be quite noisy as well.

But it usually is the monitor that's the worst culprit.
There's lots of high current pulses in there, and RFI
shielding is often nonexistant with the plastic cabinets
used on most monitors. Again you can improve shielding.
GC makes a conductive EMI spray you can use on the cabinet,
or you can line it with copper screen. Use fish paper
around any HV parts so you won't get flashovers to the
shielding. Again, follow good VHF RF practices, a few
inches of unbonded seam can make a dandy slot radiator,
letting all that contained noise escape and flow over
the outside of the case, external wiring shields, or
a "ground" connection if you use one. Those all then
become antennas, radiating the noise so your radios
or TV will hear 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] Fri Feb 09 16:54:07 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!night.primate.wisc.edu!nntp.msstate.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.pe.net!news.corpcomm.net!maggie.ionsys.com!newspeak.ultratech.net!worldlinx.com!wchat.on.ca!news
From: [e-mail] (Joe Nemet)
Subject: Portable Quad Antenna
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: WorldChat / The Online Source, Burlington Ontario.
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 03:40:46 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: g3-p15.wchat.on.ca
Sender: [e-mail] (News Owner)
Lines: 27


I am a relatively new ham operator (August 1995). I have just
completed my first home project. I have built the collapsable 2 m quad
which is set out in the April 1993 issue of 73 Amateur magazine.

Surprisingly the thing works great with my HT so I am quite pleased.
However, since I am now in making my own antennas I want to redesign
it to make it smaller and to also consdier making a dual band model.

The one I just made has an 86 inch relector wire which when spread out
on the spreaders makes for a 30 inch lenth. While it is portable by
collapsing it is still nonetheless rather awkward to move around with
when it is up and running. I would like to redesign it so that the
quad elements are shorter but I am uncertain as to how to make the
changes to the calculations. Does anyone know of the formulas to
calculate length, boom length etc. to accommodate this? Also if I want
to add more elements how do I calculate where to put it along the
boom?

Also, any ideas as to how to make it dual band?

Thanks.

Joe Nemet VA3JNE

Campbellville, Ontario, Canada



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:08 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!treasure.coastalnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Kent Fulton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Proper lead in to marine SSB backstay
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 06:25:16 GMT
Organization: Global Information Exchange Corp.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4esai6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm-wsh1-5.coastalnet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I'm completing the commissioning of a new sailboat for a customer.
Boat has factory installed SGC-2000 radio.  I have varying advice on
what the lead-in cable from the autotuner to the insulated backstay
should be.  Everything from number 6 primary wire to high voltage
spark plug cable has been suggested.  Backstay length is approx. 50
ft.  Output nominal 150 watts.  Radio covers USB, LSB, CW, voice, etc.
(not my field. . . hard to guess huh !!).  What's the concensus of
those in the know about the proper cable?  All replies appreciated.



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:09 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!efjohnson
From: [e-mail] (Mark Allen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Q: Info on low temp coax cable
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 20:56:23 GMT
Organization: Minnesota Regional Network (MRNet)
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4er9qn$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark Allen)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.220.11.134

I am looking for information on a coax cable to use as a jumper from
hardline to my HF beam that won't crack in this -30 degree (F) Minnesota
weather.  As the beam rotates, the current RG-xx always seems to crack
on the outer cover.  Anybody got ideas for something that would work in
these types of temperatures?

Mark Allen (WJ7X)

(Please e-mail replies to [e-mail])



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:09 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!efjohnson
From: [e-mail] (Mark Allen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Q: Low temp coax cable
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 21:03:54 GMT
Organization: Minnesota Regional Network (MRNet)
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4era5u$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark Allen)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.220.11.134

I am looking for some low temperature coax cable that will surive the -
30 degree (F) weather here in Minnesota.  The jumper loop around my
rotor to the HF beam antenna (which is currently RG-8) keeps cracking as
I rotate the antenna in this weather.  Any suggestions?

Mark Allen (WJ7X)

(please e-mail to [e-mail])



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:12 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nuclear.microserve.net!luzskru.cpcnet.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Garry Foster)
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Message-ID: <287cc$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 1996 05:00:43 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 24

Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Finally got to read the auto-tuner article. Does it strike anyone
>else as overkill when 17 relays and 16 tuning components are used
>for only 8 bands?

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


Well I guess I need to reread this article as I thought it was
"supposed" to be a full spectrum(hf) tunner. In other words
functionally equal to the SGC, Icom and Kenwood tuner.  Why would it
be any more over kill than one of these commerical tuners? In fact the
schamatic of the tuner is almost a copy of the ICOM AH2 tunner that
was reviewed in the April 1987 issue of CQ. Actually that tuner uses
21 relays (if I didn't miscount),10 coils and 7 caps. The sensing
circuit on the ICOM seems somewhat more complex and it sens a signal
back to the rig to keep the level down during tunning. I have never
seen a schematic of the SGC tuner but assumed it followed the same
arangement.

                                73 Garry WB0NNO





From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:13 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!condor.acc.iit.edu!uchinews!ncar!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!shore!news
From: [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner.uk
Subject: Re: R7100 Modification
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 1996 06:44:47 GMT
Organization: WK1V
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4fbrjo$[e-mail]>
References: <4ejqb8$[e-mail]> <4ek51g$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip-7-20.shore.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news.epix.net uk.radio.amateur:10724 rec.radio.shortwave:69891 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18975 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24771 rec.radio.amateur.misc:97908 rec.radio.scanner:45283 alt.radio.scanner:27357 alt.radio.scanner.uk:2129

>In article <4ejqb8$[e-mail]>, . says...

>>Ever since ICOM decided to delete the 800 - 900 MHZ coverage from its IC-R71
00
>>receiver,

Just fer the record...ICOM didn't just decide to delete the 800-900
MHz coverage from any of their radios.  It was our folks in Washington
D.C. who made it illegal to listen to the cellular telephone
frequencies when they modified the Communications Act of 1934.

I believe the cutoff date for the manufacture of equipment openly
capable of receiving cellular freqs is April of 1994.

Just some gee whiz info.  :)

Cheeers!   jjm



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:14 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!condor.acc.iit.edu!uchinews!ncar!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!shore!news
From: [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner,alt.radio.scanner.uk
Subject: Re: R7100 Modification
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 1996 06:44:49 GMT
Organization: WK1V
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4fbrjp$[e-mail]>
References: <4ejqb8$[e-mail]> <4ek51g$[e-mail]> <4elqh2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip-7-20.shore.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news.epix.net uk.radio.amateur:10725 rec.radio.shortwave:69892 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18976 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24772 rec.radio.amateur.misc:97909 rec.radio.scanner:45284 alt.radio.scanner:27358 alt.radio.scanner.uk:2130

Bill Funk <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hmmm... If you can buy a new R9000 (since you are in a business that will
>allow you to do so), then you can get an un-restricted R-7100.

The manufacturers will not deliver an unrestricted <Brand New> radio
within the confines of the U.S. unless they are delivering it to a
government agency.

>Me, I'm lucky. I have an older R-7100, full coverage! (No, it's *not* for
>sale!!) :-)

This law sucks!!

    jjm






From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:15 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail] (Jim Storm)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rooftop ant. for radio?
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 08:28:13 GMT
Organization: ix.netcom.com
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <4f73ev$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f1c3q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: smx-ca2-06.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Feb 06 12:28:15 AM PST 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Dan Ringer) wrote:

>>   [e-mail] (PjB) writes:
>>  Hi gang.....I just moved into a new apartment bldg.  It was built in the
>>  50's and it is a rather large structure 12 stories tall. The original TV
>>  antenna system is on the roof and I am told it still works. There is a
>>  jack on the wall in the living room. I am wondering if I might utilise
>>  this with my scanner.
>>
>>>>>

>Why not try it?  It might be better than what you've got, but not as good as
you'd like to have.

>Antennas are funny. You never know what might work - I had great success usin
g a Ringo Ranger as a 20 meter vertical a few
>years back. I tried it because I had it and nothing else.  A friend of mine a
ctually loaded an icicle on HF many years ago. Got his
>picture in an ARRL antenna book. Ya just never know.

>Dan, K8WV

The strangest antenna I ever heard of was a guy I worked on CW using
the steam radiator system in his apartment building. Obviously it
worked, since I talked to him. Anything is worth a try...

                                              73, Jim WB6LWS





From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:16 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.localnet.com!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!blackbush.xlink.net!news.fhg.de!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Volker Behrens)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SG-230 Smartuner
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 07:48:33 GMT
Organization: Fraunhofer ITA
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <4f7149$[e-mail]>
References: <4f4o40$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.96.224.32
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Rex Waite) wrote:

>Has anyone had any experience with these ??

...in witch way ? (:))

My SG-230 is working well with 5m- wire...



Volker Behrens

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:17 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.mci.newscorp.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SG-230 Smartuner
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 96 23:12:32 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f4o40$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Rex Waite <[e-mail]>

Rex Waite <[e-mail]> writes:

>Has anyone had any experience with these ??
>[e-mail]

I've got one for mobile work. It's mounted outside on the rear bumper of
my S10. I don't have to change taps on the bugcatcher for 10m-20m coverage.
And I only ever use a single tap for 75m and 40m. It's great for mobile,
expecially maritime mobile. I hear it's also good for single-ended fixed
antennas although I've never tried it.

Something that seems like a natural is to tie a long wire to the top of
the mobile whip and run it through the trees for portable operation when
camping.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:18 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ee.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Henry Hook)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Shortened dipoles
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 16:13:51 GMT
Organization: eNET News Server 1
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4f5a86$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-161.nextek.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Interested in building shortened dipoles for specific frequencies
limited by overall lengths? If so, I may have information which may be
helpful to you.
Henry Hook KD8QA



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:19 1996
From: Vance Campbell <[e-mail]>
Organization: Novell, Inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; PPC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Shortened dipoles
References: <4f5a86$[e-mail]>
X-URL: news:4f5a86$[e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 8 Feb 96 00:39:55 GMT
Lines: 10
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!frankensun.altair.com!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserver.jvnc.net!news.fpk.novell.com!uel!news.provo.novell.com!

[e-mail] (Dr. Henry Hook) wrote:
>Interested in building shortened dipoles for specific frequencies
>limited by overall lengths? If so, I may have information which may be
>helpful to you.
>Henry Hook KD8QA
>


Can you post it? Email it?




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:20 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!quiknet3.quiknet.com!calweb!jolt.pagesat.net!pagesat.net!netserv.com!aimnet.com!news.ossi.com!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!ra.cgd.ucar.edu!tomas
From: [e-mail] (Bob Tomas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: shortwave listening antenna suggestions sought
Date: 6 Feb 1996 14:21:29 GMT
Organization: Climate and Global Dynamics Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <4f7o59$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ra.cgd.ucar.edu

I appologize that this is not an amateur radio question but I thought
that posting here was still appropriate since it involves hobbiest and
hf radio.

I have a friend in Mexico who is an avid shortwave listener and he asked
me for advice on how to construct a simple and effective antenna for
shortwave listening.  He listens to frequencies throughout th hf band.
My first thought was to string a wire as long as possible and as high as
possible.  At the receiver this would be run against an earth ground
(ground rod) through an antenna tuner.

I would appreciate any comments on this idea or alternatives.

Thanks

Bob
n7nd



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:21 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!istar.net!news1.ottawa.istar.net!fonorola!news.ottawa.istar.net!Rezonet.net!altitude!usenet
From: Denis Lachapelle <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Small antenna matching
Date: 3 Feb 1996 20:21:06 GMT
Organization: Sysacom enr.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4f0g3i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynamicppp-166.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

I am developping a portable RF transmitter working around 180Mhz,
the all RF circuit is holded in a single IC, and it's work fine.
But ..., we can't figure out how to match the antenna, which is a
simple piece of wire of about 7".

As soon as we put the antenna the output circuit lose all it's
gain, and the harmonics and noise take over the desired signal. I
guess the problem is that the output circuit tank is changing
it's frequency of resonnance when we place the antenna.

We need more info on the small antenna to fixe-up our problem,
can somebody suggest where to find this info, like a textbook or
any other technical document?

Thank you very much for your help,

Denis Lachapelle




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:22 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!xpat.postech.ac.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!newsrelay.netins.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!webb.ultranet.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Spencer Webb)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small antenna matching
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 21:11:20 -0500
Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc.
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g3i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: webb.ultranet.com

Denis,

I am afraid that a textbook will not help you much with this problem.  As
a professional designer of antennas, allow me to describe how I would
approach this problem.

First, I would use a network analyzer to measure the impedance of the
antenna.  This will require a properly decoupled feedline to the
attachment point on the actual piece of equiment.  In this way, you can
take into account the effects of the equipment's size and wiring, etc. in
the antenna impedance.  Once you know the impedance, you can design an
appropriate matching network for the output of your transmitter.

This is a simplified description of the process that I use frequently in
the work that I do.  If this is a commercial application, it may be
cheaper to use a consultant (like me, but not necessarily me), to finish
the antenna portion of your project.

It also is important to know the impedance range that your transmitter can
tolerate.  It may be that the "harmonics" that you are suddenly noticing
are really spurious oscillations of your final amplifier due to severe
mismatch.

Good luck,

Spencer


In article <4f0g3i$[e-mail]>, Denis Lachapelle <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> I am developping a portable RF transmitter working around 180Mhz,
> the all RF circuit is holded in a single IC, and it's work fine.
> But ..., we can't figure out how to match the antenna, which is a
> simple piece of wire of about 7".
>
> As soon as we put the antenna the output circuit lose all it's
> gain, and the harmonics and noise take over the desired signal. I
> guess the problem is that the output circuit tank is changing
> it's frequency of resonnance when we place the antenna.
>
> We need more info on the small antenna to fixe-up our problem,
> can somebody suggest where to find this info, like a textbook or
> any other technical document?
>
> Thank you very much for your help,
>
> Denis Lachapelle

--
Spencer Webb
[e-mail]

"A dill pickle makes a soggy bookmark"  -Anon.


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:24 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-res.gsl.net!news-penn.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news-paris.gsl.net!news-lond.gsl.net!Tagada.grolier.fr!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!surfnet.nl!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!satisfied.apocalypse.org!news2.near.net!charlotte.wellesley.edu!sallie.wellesley.edu!wlegee
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Thru Tinted Glass Ants.
Date: 1 FEB 96 20:02:15 GMT
Organization: MIT PLASMA FUSION CENTER
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4e31eh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sallie.wellesley.edu

I have a thru the glass antenna on my wifes car and it doesn't work well at al
l
it is a chevy s10 blazer with tinted side glass. The same antenna on my truck
works well. No tinted glass. Thats all I can add.
73
WARREN KD1BC


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:26 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.spss.com!uchinews!ncar!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!news.tamu.edu!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WANTED :  GREAT 80 METER DX ANTENNA
Date: 2 Feb 1996 02:16:32 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <4ers60$[e-mail]>
References: <4elaj2$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.194.44.221
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <[e-mail]>, "Ian White, G3SEK" <G3SEK@ifwtech.d
emon.co.uk> writes:
>In article <4ep8v4$[e-mail]>, W2FOE wrote:
>>I think the 1/2  wave vertical is ideal for the really long haul dx.
>>Unfortunately I don't think there is that much "really long haul" dx.  I
>>just ran a quick plot (using Beezley's AO) on a 4 square - the maximum
>>elevation angle for 1/4 wave elements is 24 degrees; for 1/2 wave elements
>>is 16 degrees.
>
>Unfortunately AO won't give you the right answer, because it's a MININEC
>derivative and ignores ground losses when calculating the gain. It does
>take account of ground losses when calcuating the far-field pattern, but
>that still does not include the efficiency penalty. The pattern will
>have about the right shape, but the maximum gain figure needs to be
>scaled-down by several dB.
>
>
>73 from Ian G3SEK          Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
>                          'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
>Professionally:
>IFW Technical Services     Clear technical English - anywhere.

I talked to Brian about this.  He told me that one of the things that would
be corrected in a future (that was two years ago) release of MN and MNC,
was this very point.   He told me at the time it would be at least two
years before it would show up.

I was told that there were versions of MININEC that did have the correct
routines in them to account for this, however, these versions of the code
were classified.

They are not available to the general public in that some of the so-called
secrets as to the ability of the USA to handle communications with their
submarine fleet while under water are part of this effort.

I was told that there are, indeed, MININEC versions that can handle the
actual ground effects and, indeed certain undergound antenna setups that,
especially at VLF, are modelable with the code!

My cousin is Bob Dunkin, the ex-international service support manager for
Continetal Electronics in Dallas.  I believe you will find that they are one
of about a half dozen really competent firms that do know VLF and,
especially the VLF arrays that can and do use these techniques.

Bob wouldn't talk, but he didn't deny this either.

I was under the impression that the new site and plant modeling version
that Brian was to release that has now been released, would at least have a
better way of looking at this, including the use of elevated radials.

Anyone here have any comments on it?

Mike W5WQN as a guest at leviathan.tamu.edu



From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:28 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.spss.com!uchinews!ncar!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!news.tamu.edu!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WANTED :  GREAT 80 METER DX ANTENNA
Date: 2 Feb 1996 01:58:34 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <4err4a$[e-mail]>
References: <4elaj2$[e-mail]> <4ep8v4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.194.44.221
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <4ep8v4$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W2FOE) writes:
>I think the 1/2  wave vertical is ideal for the really long haul dx.
>Unfortunately I don't think there is that much "really long haul" dx.  I
>just ran a quick plot (using Beezley's AO) on a 4 square - the maximum
>elevation angle for 1/4 wave elements is 24 degrees; for 1/2 wave elements
>is 16 degrees.  I believe the optimum angle from the east coast to Europe
>most of the time is closer to 40 degrees.  The 24 degrees seems to be
>about right into Asia.  The only time I wish it was lower is long path to
>Asia and for me thats only about 15 minutes each Saturday and Sunday
>afternoon.
>
>Regards, Merv

I use Beezley's MNC and did all the work on my 40M version of the thing
to worl out that one for basic playing around.  I did a lot of playing with
both different ground conductivity and stair stepped layers of different
ground conductivity.

I think, from memory, I say that his program confirmed, for my location,
what ON4UN asserts, that the gain and the most gain at a given take
off angle depend largely on both the near and far field ground conductivity.

The array, and all ground referenced verticals, I assume, improves as to
efficiency and also the angle at which maximum gain is had, lowers, as the
efficiency of the ground system goes up.

I do not have all the dozens of plots I made here to look at them.  I believe
that I remember, that were I to have been able to flood my 260 foot above
sea level QTH that is about 170 miles from the Gulf of Mexico with salt
water for many wavelengths around me, my performance from the 4 square
as to overall efficiency would go way up, and the angle at which maximum
radiation would occur would lower from what I have.

I am not in the sand pits of East Texas; they are about 20 mile south-
south east of me just across the fault line that extends from Palestine, TX,
all the way through Navasota, north of Brenham, over to Austin and then
on into the hill country.  I haven't actually tried to measure it (is, is, si?
)
but I think it is going to come out above 6 and below 13 mickeys (slang,
eat your heart out Big Gates.)  I am in the big middle of a creek bottom
area, with soil that has been undisturbed since before the USA became the
USA and still with virgin timber in it.  One day I'll plot it for a few months

and I'll know.

For a long time I have sort of questioned if anyone really knows what the
"optimum" angle is on 80 meters.  I have wondered if it actually is less than
the suggested 18-24 degrees.  I wonder if that figure is really spouted out
on the basis of what reality is for most even good antennae on 80 meteres,
and the real optimum angle is lower than that!

As I get time, I will try to get up some other antennae to see what they
perform like in relation to this thing.

My intention is to use whatever I do with a 160 meter vertical array to
try horizontal stuff on 80 at the first decent height I will ever have had
to play with.

A properly oriented dipole up there for reference should help honestly
answer all this at MY location.

My pocketbook is relatively modest.  The goal for all this was to first get
up the most for the buck I could.  Once the low badns are covered with
that composite, there may or may not be time and funds to play some more!

Hiram Percy Maxim - "The goal is to communicate...."

Right now I'll take my 8Q7 80 CW card and be glad I got it in W5 land!

Mike W5WQN as a guest at leviathan.tamu.edu








From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:29 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.comm.net!imci3!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: WTD: Leaky Coax
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <4fbfeg$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 05:56:34 GMT
Lines: 39
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:97929 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18983

In article <4fbfeg$[e-mail]> Rob Bellville <[e-mail]>
 writes:
>I've got a communications need that requires intra-building
>communications. Since the building is steel and concrete and is rather
>long end-to-end, I'd like to install some type of leaky or radiating coax
>down the long hallways so that signal strengths will be somewhat
>consistant. I need low-power base to portable communications throughout
>the building.
>
>Questions:
>
>1) Can I modify normal coax (like RG-8/U) by cutting slots or some other
>method to achieve "leaky-ness"?

Not practically.

>2) Where can I buy leaky coax at a reasonable price?

The trade name for what you want is "Radiax". I believe it is
made by Andrew. It is not cheap (around $2 a foot).

There is another way. You can use drop fittings in the line and
dipole antennas at intervals.  Use 30 db couplers for your drop
fittings near the transmitter, and increasingly larger coupling
factors as you get further away from the transmitter, IE use a
12 db coupler, a 6 db coupler, a 3 db coupler, and finally just
put an antenna directly on the end of the line.

This probably isn't as good as using Radiax, but it might be
cheaper if you ignore installation costs. When you consider
professional installation costs, which can range up to $2 a
foot themselves when you start talking about drop fittings,
then the cost of the Radiax doesn't look quite so bad.

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 Feb 09 16:54:30 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.zeitgeist.net!cygnus.com!cambridge-news.cygnus.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!panix!news.columbia.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lamarck.sura.net!fconvx.ncifcrf.gov!mack
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mack)
Subject: Re: Yagi design and tuning ?'s
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center
References: <4ehe6i$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 17:17:41 GMT
Lines: 46

In article <4ehe6i$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Lumkes)
writes:
> I just built a Yagi using the design software packaged with the
>latest antenna handbook. Question is this: I design it for a center
>frequency of 146 but when I tune it I get a perfect match at 144 MHz.
>I built a T-match with a 4:1 coaxial balun. (6-ele). I started
>shortening the driven element but the perfect match seemed to
>still occur around 144. Before I shorten the DE more, what is the
>correlation between the surrounding element lengths as far as
>tuning freq. is concerned? Should I just keep shortening the DE
>and a assume the design software is correct for the other element
>lengths or will shortening the DE not produce the desired effect.
>Do I need to shorten all the elements to produce a good match at a
>slightly higher frequency? (Non-conducting boom, 3/8" dia alum. ele)
>
>Welcome any hints and insights,
>
>Thanks alot, John Lumkes AA9QP  [e-mail]
>

Building ygais is not easy - a few points - I don't have the
exact answer for your qusetion

The yagi as designed is a set of elements. It will have
a pattern and a feed impedance as a function of ferqunxy

You then have to feed it. You cannot alter the
antenna design to handle problems wiht the feed (like changing
the DE - you'll affect the design). In princliple you
can feed anything. Just because the SWR is perfect
at 144MHz, it doesn't mean that your antenna is off by
2MHz, you could have a perfect match to the feed impedance
2MHz off freq. You could tell if you had a network
analyser and watched the feed imp as a function of freq,
but a spot SWR doesn't tell you anything.

        Your antenna could be low in freq, ie the elements
could be 1.5% too long - you know beeter than I do, whether they
are likely to be out by that much. If your elements are out by this
much and it's random, then you'll have a poor antenna.

        Are you elements the same diam as the design, was the design
a non-coducting boom - these all cause changes of about the scale you see.

        Joe NA3T EME(B) on home designed and built yagis




From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:32 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (mike del pozzo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Yagi design and tuning ?'s
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 06:28:58 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <4f969o$[e-mail]>
References: <4ehe6i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kr4tg.mindspring.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Joe Mack) wrote:

>In article <4ehe6i$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Lumkes)
 writes:
>> I just built a Yagi using the design software packaged with the
>>latest antenna handbook. Question is this: I design it for a center
>>frequency of 146 but when I tune it I get a perfect match at 144 MHz.
>>I built a T-match with a 4:1 coaxial balun. (6-ele). I started
>>shortening the driven element but the perfect match seemed to
>>still occur around 144. Before I shorten the DE more, what is the
>>correlation between the surrounding element lengths as far as
>>tuning freq. is concerned? Should I just keep shortening the DE
>>and a assume the design software is correct for the other element
>>lengths or will shortening the DE not produce the desired effect.
>>Do I need to shorten all the elements to produce a good match at a
>>slightly higher frequency? (Non-conducting boom, 3/8" dia alum. ele)
>>
>>Welcome any hints and insights,
>>
>>Thanks alot, John Lumkes AA9QP  [e-mail]
>>

>Building ygais is not easy - a few points - I don't have the
>exact answer for your qusetion

>The yagi as designed is a set of elements. It will have
>a pattern and a feed impedance as a function of ferqunxy

>You then have to feed it. You cannot alter the
>antenna design to handle problems wiht the feed (like changing
>the DE - you'll affect the design). In princliple you
>can feed anything. Just because the SWR is perfect
>at 144MHz, it doesn't mean that your antenna is off by
>2MHz, you could have a perfect match to the feed impedance
>2MHz off freq. You could tell if you had a network
>analyser and watched the feed imp as a function of freq,
>but a spot SWR doesn't tell you anything.

>       Your antenna could be low in freq, ie the elements
>could be 1.5% too long - you know beeter than I do, whether they
>are likely to be out by that much. If your elements are out by this
>much and it's random, then you'll have a poor antenna.

>       Are you elements the same diam as the design, was the design
>a non-coducting boom - these all cause changes of about the scale you see.

>       Joe NA3T EME(B) on home designed and built yagis

all good points....
you might check again the lengths of the directors - they do tend to
shift frequency from time t time. A few tips on design:
1. spacing adjustment = +/- Front to back
2. Reflector length slightly produces forward gain as does the
directors
3. director lengths = input impedence & enhances forward gain
4. you should not have to adjust the driven element but slightly in
extreme situations

it is not easy to balance between the two F/B and Forward  endeavours
but you will find a good setting to suit your needs. I always try to
adjust for maximum F/B gain on my yagis. a good antenna design program
can help minimize the snip , snip - oh !@#$%
I like the Yagimax program , and also YO from brian B. both are great
time savers. Also is this the best matching for a yagi ? I know folks
will hash me for that......
Gud Luck es 73 de
KR4TG , Mike





From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:33 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!spool.mu.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 "faq"
Date: 2 Feb 96 04:57:14 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Index of Frequently Asked Questions
hem-onc_seminars
iamslic
info-hams
kelptank
mmc
nel
novell
packet-radio
qigong
socal-raves-calendar
socal-raves-digest
socal-raves
soul


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:34 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!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 "faq"
Date: 8 Feb 96 05:39:29 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Index of Frequently Asked Questions
hem-onc_seminars
iamslic
info-hams
kelptank
mmc
nel
novell
packet-radio
qigong
socal-raves-calendar
socal-raves-digest
socal-raves
soul


From [e-mail] Fri Feb 09 16:54:34 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!spool.mu.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 calculating transmission power"
Date: 2 Feb 96 04:57:15 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "calculating" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:48 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!usenet
From: Jean-Guy Moreau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (no subject)
Date: 13 Feb 1996 14:21:01 GMT
Organization: Inter-Acces Communications
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4fq6od$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tty42.lino.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Hi,

Everybody will understand that I am a newee on antenna building, but here it i
s:

Why can't I use galvanized steel wire to make antennas?

Answer and comments appreciated, thanks




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:49 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!southlin.demon.co.uk!graham
From: [e-mail] (Graham Seale)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 16:42:29 GMT
Lines: 34
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fq6od$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: southlin.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: southlin.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Archimedes TTFN Version 0.36

In message <4fq6od$[e-mail]> Jean-Guy Moreau wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Everybody will understand that I am a newee on antenna building, but here it
 is:
>
> Why can't I use galvanized steel wire to make antennas?
>
> Answer and comments appreciated, thanks
>
>

Hi Jean

You can if you like! Most antenna builders would avoid using steel
because of the weight, and that steel is a very poor conductor compared
to copper. There can be high current nodes (anti-nodes?) where one would
try to avoid heating losses.

There are corrosion issues too. Galvanic zinc coating on steel protects
the steel because the zinc has a positive electro-potential compared to
iron, and thus will oxidise first. The oxidation is self-limiting. This
chemistry is upset at the junction to copper (you have to join to copper
conductors somewhere!) Any moisture will set up a nasty green "verdigris"
corrosion at the joins. The nice thing all antenna copper is the brown
"patina" does not badly affect connections, and it stays stable.

Have fun buuilding antennae + my regards

73's G4WNT

--
Graham Seale


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:50 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!twizzler.callamer.com!antares-1
From: [e-mail] (William Shell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 402BA
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 96 23:51:34 GMT
Organization: Antares C.S.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4flvde$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: max0-046.snlo.dialup.callamer.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #0

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert) wrote
:
>I recently read in a contest magazine that
>a 3 element 40 would have a better SWR than 2 element?
>The 3 element SWR was published with 3:1 at the band edges,
>my 402ba has about 2:1 at the band edges and fairly flat
>from 7.1 to 7.2 ,  Is my 402BA detuned??  or just working fine?
>--
>73 Robert  WB5CRG  [e-mail]

Hi Bob,
I don't know where you read that, but it sounds like it was
specifically referencing two antennas.  The bandwidth of my
two element full-sized 40 meter Telrex is much greater than
my three element shortened 40 meter KLM.  If you are
satisfied with the performance of your 402, then you should
leave it alone.
73, Bill
WA6IET
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:51 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!news2.ee.net!news.ee.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 440 Horizontal Antenna
Date: 12 Feb 96 03:00:17 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Get ahold of Dave, W6OAL, at The Ol Antenna Labs in Denver area.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:52 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!surfnet.nl!newshost.vu.nl!cs.vu.nl!sun4nl!rnzll3!sys3.pe1chl!rob
From: [e-mail] (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: PE1CHL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4efpb3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>   <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>   <[e-mail]> <4ete1q$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 22:41:41 GMT
Lines: 17
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.policy:33052 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18989 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24803 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13253 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14059

In <4ete1q$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dean Denter) writes:

>Every radio has a "unique" pattern when you key it (due to differences
>in the components etc), this pattern can be used to identify a radio.
>There is no encrypted signal or anything that fancy.

I have my doubts about the uniqueness of the pattern generated by
same-type transmitters...  and the stability of the pattern as a
function of temperature, time etc.
But it seems another sub-thread starts to discuss this.

Rob
--
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen         [e-mail] | BBS: [phone] (2300-0730 local) |
| AMPRnet:       [e-mail] | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:53 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!news.crosslink.net!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!wb3ffv!ppp16.bcpl.lib.md.us!dbaker
From: [e-mail] (Donald I. Baker)
Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City, TXxID-1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 12:17:48 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ppp16.bcpl.lib.md.us
References: <4efpb3$[e-mail]> <4ete1q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fgm3h$[e-mail]>
Organization: Reville Engineering Services
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]
Lines: 94
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.policy:33071 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19022 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24862 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13288 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14097

In article <4fgm3h$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dana Myers) wri
tes:
>From: [e-mail] (Dana Myers)
>Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City, TXxID-1
>Date: 9 Feb 1996 23:41:37 GMT

>In article <[e-mail]>,
>Donald I. Baker <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob Janssen) wri
tes:
>>>From: [e-mail] (Rob Janssen)
>>>Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City
>>>Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 22:41:41 GMT
>>
>>>In <4ete1q$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dean Denter) writes:
>>
>>>>Every radio has a "unique" pattern when you key it (due to differences
>>>>in the components etc), this pattern can be used to identify a radio.
>>>>There is no encrypted signal or anything that fancy.
>>
>>>I have my doubts about the uniqueness of the pattern generated by
>>>same-type transmitters...  and the stability of the pattern as a
>>>function of temperature, time etc.
>>>But it seems another sub-thread starts to discuss this.
>>
>>>Rob
>>>--
>>>+------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
-+
>>>| Rob Janssen         [e-mail] | BBS: [phone] (2300-0730 local)
 |
>>>| AMPRnet:       [e-mail] | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU
 |
>>>+------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
-+
>>Lots of ways exist to "fingerprint" transmitters.  One such Ham class produc
t
>>is the
>>
>>TxID-1 from Motron Electronics in Eugene, Oregon.  It works well.  The
>>hardware is GREAT and the software protion is ok.
>>
>>Basically (without re-describing the whole world):
>>
>>When radios are first keyed up they each have a unique "ramp-up" to full pow
er
>>and frequency stability.

>Since the Motron TXiD system connects to discriminator output, it is
>only sensitive to variations in carrier phase/frequency, and
>insensitive to variations in amplitude.

>>Gine Motron a call and they will send literature.  I believe they sell a ful
l
>>manual for $10.00 which has both a good technology description as well as th
e
>>usual "how to use theirs" stuff.

>I had an excellent chat with Don Moser of Motron on this topic, and
>he mentioned his new web page: http://www.motron.com.

>Bottom line is: not every radio is certain to have a unique ID, TXiD
>is a very powerful tool as part of evidence collection but can not be
>treated as infallible.


>--
> * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD#: j | Views expressed here are      *
> * [phone]               | mine and do not necessarily   *
> * [e-mail]      | reflect those of my employer  *
I was avoiding going into a lot of detail.  Of course you are correct in that
the TxID-1 does not "read" any amplitude information, and is absolute by any
interpatation, but it is a GOOD tool to hope "prove" abuse by a given user.

Additional information like DF'ed location, attenuated readings (lots of
signal strength with attenuators in front of the guys house), recordings
(TxID-1) of the same trasnmitter when properly used (talking with ID/callsign)

are all inporatant pieces.

Also tools like APRS to let multiple stations plot a signal bearing and share
the data "quickley" over packet can also be of greate use.

The problems in Kansas are, sigh, not unique.  I can tell you that the same or

similar problems exist in the Balt / Wash area as well.  It is unfortunate
that we must spend time dealing with these issues, but they do keep coming
back.

We are also istalling seperate doppler type direction locators at all of our
recieve sites (12 +) and will be able to "localize" via the basic system
before real DF work with beams and similar comes into play.

Don




Donald I. Baker
Reville Engineering Services
4619 Schenley Road
Baltimore, MD 21210-2525
[phone]
Custon Harsh Environment
Computers and RF Products
"Where no PC has gone before..."


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:54 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!caen!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!nntp-ucb.barrnet.net!cellnet.com!usenet
From: Jim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Help
Date: 9 Feb 1996 20:07:59 GMT
Organization: CellNet
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <4fg9iv$[e-mail]>
References: <4f3ck6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: smoke-2.cellnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1 (Windows; U; 16bit)

[e-mail] wrote:
>I recently aquired a AOR 3000a wide coverage receiver, my question is what
>is a good antenna for the 1000 to 2000 mhz range. The only commercial one
>have seen advertized is the Dressler ara 2000, But it seems a little high in
cost.
>I called Gilfer for information on it but they couldn't tell me much about it
.
>Also what can I expect to hear in this frequency range. I have posted to the
>scanner groups but got no response. Hope you folks can help.
>thanks in advance.
>[e-mail]


What you need is the "Spectrum Guide", by Bennett Kobb.  New Signals Press, P.
O. Box
435, Falls Church VA 22040.  e-mail: [e-mail].

I have the book and it is EXCELLENT.  It's at a ham price, too -- something li
ke
$29.

Cheers.
Jim, WU0I




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:55 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!uw-coco!uw-beaver!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!news.cac.psu.edu!news.math.psu.edu!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!primus.ac.net!news.cais.net!news1.radix.net!xcitor
From: [e-mail] (xcitor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Plans
Date: 12 Feb 1996 15:07:23 GMT
Organization: People's Republic of Laurel, MD, USA
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4fnl3b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: saltmine.radix.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I'm looking for plans to build a j pole antenna for 2 meters. Anyone know of
any web pages or ftp site with a good amount of homebrew antenna plans?


TIA


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:56 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!mel.dit.csiro.au!news.bhp.com.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ux7.cso.uiuc.edu!r-clay
From: [e-mail] (Rudolf T Clay)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best wire antenna Opinions?
Date: 9 Feb 1996 20:18:30 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <4fga6m$[e-mail]>
References: <4fe9jh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux7.cso.uiuc.edu

[e-mail] (Allen) writes:

>I was about to put up a wire antenna today
>and i was wondering if there were any new
>tricks out there or would a regular dipole
>be my best shot,

>i have a yaesu 101ee
>300 watt transmatch
>500 feet #14 copper
>plenty of scrap pvc pipe for insulators
>coax,
>and enough room for a full size 160m dipole

It all depends on what kind of vertical supports you
have. Trees? Tower?  Do you operate mostly on one
band, or all hf bands?  Mostly low bands, or 20 and up?

73,
Tor N4OGW/9 Urbana, IL
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:57 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!inews.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dummy load resistor source???
Date: 9 Feb 1996 16:27:10 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4ffsku$[e-mail]>
References: <4fbfim$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmoore.ch.intel.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: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:97965 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18998

Rob Bellville <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I need to make a bunch of low power (< 5W) dummy loads. Where can I find
>some 50 ohm 5W non-inductive resistors? Alternatively, I could use 25 and
>100 ohm ones, too.

Hi Rob, four 200 ohm 2 watt carbon resistors in parallel sounds just right.

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




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:58 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!newshost.convex.com!news.dfw.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!wb3ffv!ppp61.bcpl.lib.md.us!dbaker
From: [e-mail] (Donald I. Baker)
Subject: Re: Dummy load resistor source???
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 16:37:24 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ppp61.bcpl.lib.md.us
References: <4fbfim$[e-mail]> <4ffsku$[e-mail]>
Organization: Reville Engineering Services
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]
Lines: 32
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:97971 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19002

In article <4ffsku$[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail].c
om> writes:
>From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: Dummy load resistor source???
>Date: 9 Feb 1996 16:27:10 GMT

>Rob Bellville <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I need to make a bunch of low power (< 5W) dummy loads. Where can I find
>>some 50 ohm 5W non-inductive resistors? Alternatively, I could use 25 and
>>100 ohm ones, too.

>Hi Rob, four 200 ohm 2 watt carbon resistors in parallel sounds just right.

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


Try radio shack (model 21-506) dc-500Mhz 15 watt dummy load.  I just bought 2
from a local RS who claims there are super discounted becuase they are being
discontinued.  They cost me $4.80 each.  Great little widget and cheap.

Don




Donald I. Baker
Reville Engineering Services
4619 Schenley Road
Baltimore, MD 21210-2525
[phone]
Custon Harsh Environment
Computers and RF Products
"Where no PC has gone before..."


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:53:59 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.dpc.net!novia!nntp.inc.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!redwood.shu.ac.uk!news
From: Mark Pettigrew <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dummy load resistor source???
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 1996 17:46:58 -0800
Organization: Sheffield Hallam University
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fbfim$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lti-03.lti.shu.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:98024 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19034

Rob Bellville wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I need to make a bunch of low power (< 5W) dummy loads. Where can I find
> some 50 ohm 5W non-inductive resistors? Alternatively, I could use 25 and
> 100 ohm ones, too.
>
> I have looked quite hard for 5W non-inductive resistors, and they are not
easy to find. 2W ones are relatively easy. There are some higher wattage
ones (20W, I think) in TO220 packages.

However, if you only want about 5W, you could simply put two 100 ohm
resistors in parallel. It'll give you 4W. However, for showrt periods,
provided the resistors are well spaced from each other and any mounting
so there is a decent air flow round them, 5W shouldn't be a problem. You
could try series-parallel for larger power ratings.

Mark
G0WLR


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:00 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!dsinc!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!usenet
From: Dave Booth <booth>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feed Line - Ethernet Coax
Date: 7 Feb 1996 04:51:19 GMT
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <4f9b47$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.113.223.131
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.12 (X11; I; IRIX 5.3 IP19)
X-URL: news:[e-mail]

Hum i think i might have to try that!!! thanks de dave kc6wfs.
http://www.lookup.com/Homepages/65348/home.html



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:01 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!news-adm
From: [e-mail] (Don Stoner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Florida Ham Antenna Restrictions - ch125.htm (0/1)
Date: 13 Feb 1996 19:47:42 GMT
Organization: CyberGate, Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4fqpsu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f7v2j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: stpfl-29.gate.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

Richard....you can find a copy of the Florida law in my Restrictive Antenna
Covenants home page. The address is:

http://www.webcom.com/~sjl/STONER/ANTENNA.html



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:02 1996
Path: news.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: G5RV
Date: 9 Feb 1996 11:52:10 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 58
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4ffu3q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Steve,
Are you paying attention?

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
writes:

>
>From the looks of these swrs, a tuner will be need for solid state rigs
>anyway. A recent article in QST proved that many tuners have considerable

>losses. Add that to the 2 to 4 db lost from the coax and you have even
>more loss.

I test new tuner designs several times a year. I find the WORSE CASE
losses are ~20% on 160 and ten, and much less at the mid ranges. I have no
idea what the QST test indicated, but my method was accurate. Let me say
this, if the loss is 20% with 1000 watts, 200 watts of heat is generated.
That makes for a very hot tuner even with very little loss!

But what does that have to do with the constant hacking away at the G5RV?
The open wire dipole so "wildly" endorsed needs a tuner also, and it can
be (and often is) at an extreme impedance that maximizes tuner loss. The
loss in the G5RV coax isn't 2 to 4 dB in the coax on 80, 40 or 20. It can
be lower than that on the high end of the HF spectrum!

>Why is the G5RV considered  a mutliband antenna?

Because the SWR is low on 80, 40 and 20 (for an 80 meter basic design).

>Is there some magic swr the qualifies it?

No, just the right things coming together at those points.

>Put up any old loop in any configeration that is at least one wavelength
around and it >will have better matches to coax then this.

So you are saying I can squish up a loop, and weave it in and out of other
conductors, and it will always have a low SWR? Or that it can be 1-1/4 wl
circum and have a low SWR?

Almost any loop like you describe won't be better on 80, 40 and 20. The
SWR is still in the 2:1 range (+ or - losses or ground effects that make
the SWR look better or worse). The loop is fine in some applications, and
so is the G5RV. The loop becomes BW restricted on higher overtones, plus
the impedance rises. For my application (DX'ing), the pattern stinks.

Every antenna has advantages and disadvantages. The best antenna is
determined by what the user wants. I want a clean predictable low angle
pattern and reasonable SWR on the lower bands. The G5RV provides that
quite nicely in less space. I can keep my G5RV antenna centered over a
good ground system and away from other stuff. I can load it like a T on
160 and work Europeans almost the same as I can with my 135 ft vertical. I
get 160, 80, 40 and 20 with a low SWR and great DX performance with only
two supports!

A loop is better? Not for me.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:03 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!aimnet.com!news.exodus.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!jaring.my!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Cheong Wai Seng)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 03:05:06 GMT
Organization: Unconfigured
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <4fjmv6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: j7.srg2.jaring.my
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I am interested to know the theory behind the G5RV long wire antenna.
Can anybody e-mail me or post it in this Newsgroup  please?



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:04 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com!realtime.net!news.mindspring.com!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-47
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground Radials...?
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 96 09:07:37 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <4ff2r8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-47.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE) wrote:
>. . .
>"Good luck with 16 or 32" radials?  That presumes some special
>definition of luck, I suppose.  But keep in mind that 40 to
>50 1/4 wavelength radials will produce about 50 ohms
>resistive for self impedance of a 1/4 wavelength vertical.
>Recall that a perfect ground screen will find it to be 36.5 ohms.
>The percentage higher than that represents loss of RF energy
>that won't be radiated but will only warm up the surrounding
>ground.

Are you sure you have these numbers right, Forrest? Brown, Lewis, and
Epstein show about one ohm of loss resistance for 60 99-degree radials, and
about two ohms for 30 99-degree radials. (Ref. fig. 26, p. 772.) I've
measured feedpoint resistances of less than 50 ohms on verticals with seven
radials.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:05 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
From: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ground Radials...?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 09:27:00 -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: 18

JK> 2.  As far as RF is concerned, you are simulating a conductive
JK> surface, and the more conductors the better--up to a point.  AM
JK> broadcasters figure 120 radials is good, but hams have good luck
JK> with 16 or 32.  As you add wires, you need to double the previous
JK> number to get a significant result.  Plan on at least 1/4 wavelength
JK> for the lowest band desired.

"Good luck with 16 or 32" radials?  That presumes some special
definition of luck, I suppose.  But keep in mind that 40 to
50 1/4 wavelength radials will produce about 50 ohms
resistive for self impedance of a 1/4 wavelength vertical.
Recall that a perfect ground screen will find it to be 36.5 ohms.
The percentage higher than that represents loss of RF energy
that won't be radiated but will only warm up the surrounding
ground.


 * RM 1.3 02583 *  while (forever) { day++;  dollar--; }


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:06 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.accessone.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Ed Mitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Ham Radio Online goes Interactive! Check us out!
Date: 12 Feb 1996 16:20:22 GMT
Organization: Virtual Publishing Co.
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <4fnpc6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vbook.accessone.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:98010 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14099 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13295 rec.radio.amateur.space:6310 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19025 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24869 rec.radio.amateur.policy:33073 rec.radio.scanner:45431 rec.radio.shortwave:70000


INTRODUCING HAM RADIO ONLINE INTERACTIVE!
Now you can post free classified ads, DX openings, VHF band openings
and much more. And with over 10,000 readers stopping by last month,
your thoughts will actually get read at this ham radio web site! We are not
just pointers to cyberspace - we've got actual content - feature articles,
newsletters, product reviews, real-time propagation conditions and more.

The February 1996 edition of Ham Radio Online International Magazine
is available at http://www.accessone.com/~vbook/hronline.htm

Some of the NEW February stories include a review of SkyTel's "2-way paging" s
ystem,
radio surveillance frequencies, and the effects of two-way radio operation in
blasting
zones.

Ham Radio Online has been selected as a featured web site by America Online
and a Top 100 web site for the month of January by Planet Earth, Inc.
New articles are available now and we add articles throughout the month.

Ham Radio Online has up-to-date news about Amateur Radio from around the world
,
feature stories, real-time propagation and auroral condition reports, real-tim
e
earthquake and severe weather conditions for emergency communications planning
,
online humor section and the Ham Radio Online Library with fully indexed (find
any section with just a mouse click) Part 97 rules and regulations.

Plus we cover broadcasting, shortwave, scanning generally anything having to
do with radio telecommunications.

And we plan to offer some totally cool new services during the coming months.
As
always its free and free of ads.

Thanks to you, we had over 10,000 readers stop by during January!

Please enjoy!

73, Ed Mitchell
KF7VY
[e-mail]
http://www.accessone.com/~vbook/hronline.htm

------------------------
personal email to [e-mail]
Visit Ham Radio Online, it's free, at http://www.accessone.com/~vbook/hronline
.htm



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:07 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.accessus.net!news.one.net!news
From: Jim Nance <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hazer for Rohn 25G
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 15:09:07 -0500
Organization: OneNet Communications HUB News Server
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fm89g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port-5-6.access.one.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)
To: David Whitehurst <[e-mail]>

I used one with a 50 ft. rohn 25g tower for over 9 years. Sold it with
the tower when I moved. It worked very well; However sometimes it did
hang up and I would have to climb the tower to free it up. An easy
process. I felt like kicking myself many times for selling it.


                             73 de KE4WY




David Whitehurst wrote:
>
> Anyone have any experience with the "Hazer" tram system ??? I was looking in
to
> putting one on my Rohn 25G tower(they have a kit built for the 25G Rohn).
> I'm hopping this will be the solution to climbing my tower :) .
> -David.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:08 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (ESTUDIANTES DE COMUNICACIONES)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: re:help calculating transmission power
Date: 9 Feb 96 20:42:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


Considering that at the receiveng point fo the antena you will have -120 dBm
and that at the transmitting point of the antena you will have -80 dBm, and
finally at the output of the transmitter you will need -90 dBm (1 pW).
This result was calculated taking 40 dB of transmission losses (free space
model, because of the frequency). You need to have a line of sight, so that
there are no obstructions neither reflecting paths that would increment your
losses. Also you maybe need to increment your power so that the losses in
mismatches and other losses are taking into account.

I hope this could be helpful for you.

bye,

Benjamin.
.



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:09 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!frankensun.altair.com!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!news.jsums.edu!despina.neptune.com!news
From: Eduardo Artigas <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help on uses for automatic  antenna tuner.
Date: 9 Feb 1996 20:08:38 GMT
Organization: United Nations in Guatemala
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4fg9k6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 200.12.63.145
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

I have access to a few automatic antenna tuners similar to the SGC one,
but made (?) by Motorola.
Other than using it with a vertical or long wire I read somenthing about
using with a dipole or a loop.

Any ideas, variations or information will be appreciated either to my
E-Mail or here.



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:10 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!newsfeed.gsfc.nasa.gov!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ron Parise)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Magnetic mount?
Date: 9 Feb 1996 15:43:50 GMT
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <4ffq3m$[e-mail]>
References: <4fdlfc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: astrolap.gsfc.nasa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

In article <4fdlfc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Well, they look attractive and for versatility it would appear they
can't
>be beat. However, if they fall off while one is careening down the
>highway they might not be worth it. Anyone have any tales they would
like
>to relate? I am thinking of getting one to use on my old Jimmy/S15 as
>well as the occaisonal rental car for a Hustler style HF mobile whip.
>Your experiences would be appreciated. Thanks!

I have used a large 3 magnet mount for HF mobile for many years. I
use the 8ft tall ham stick type antennas and have never had any
problems. In my experience the problem is not having the antenna
come loose while you are driving but trying to get it off when you
are done! Mine requires a lot of force to get the magnets loose and
you have to be very careful not to slide it around and scratch the
roof when trying to get it off.

Ron wa4sir




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:11 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.inc.net!novia!news.dpc.net!news.heurikon.com!uwvax!uchinews!ncar!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.eas.asu.edu!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Homebrew 160 Meter Vertical
Date: 7 Feb 1996 20:56:56 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <4fb3mo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


        Correction on my previous message on same subject.
        Feedpoint impedance of a thin quarter wave vertical over
perfect earth is 36.56 + j 22.25.
Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:11 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!blackbush.xlink.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-ulm.de!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!jacobi.agnld.uni-potsdam.DE!not-for-mail
From: Jan-Martin Hertzsch <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Long wire on VHF - again
Date: 13 Feb 1996 17:11:35 GMT
Organization: Max-Planck-Arbeitsgruppe "Nichtlineare Dynamik"
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4fqgo7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jacobi.agnld.uni-potsdam.de (141.89.176.25)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Access: 16 51 959 960
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; OSF1 V3.2 alpha)
X-URL: news://news.fu-berlin.de/rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Dear YLs and OMs,

recently, I asked whether anybody has experiences with long wire antennas
on VHF because I wanted to try one. Now I have read again the description
of this antenna and found that some details are missing there (in the German
translation).
Can anybody help me to locate the original article? It was published in
OM 49 (1981) no. 3 p. 18, unfortunately no library in my area has got this
journal. I am also interested in an article in OM 49 (1981) No. 9 where a
rhombic antenna for UHF is proposed. By the way, which kind/brand of
resistors are suitable as terminating resistors of a rhombic antenna
(I intend to use about 25 W TX output power)?

Thanks in advance for any help.
Jan-Martin



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:12 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!caen!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dimensional.com!winternet.com!news
From: sholisky <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Skywire
Date: 10 Feb 1996 23:41:36 GMT
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4fjafg$[e-mail]>
References: <FB1BEB90@MHS> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-67-19.dialup.winternet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.12(Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:[e-mail]

I've had a few winters of using a full size horz.80 meter loop. My
results at 30 feet ( in the clear ) are very positive. Coax & balun or
450 ohm line both work well. As for results some of the strongest
signals I have ever heard ! Great choice for qrp work...

73's Scott WB0ATR




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:13 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!guitar.sound.net!news.sprintlink.net!braintree!news.concourse.com!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!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] (Pricemw)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Skywire
Date: 9 Feb 1996 04:42:25 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4ff4u1$[e-mail]>
References: <FB1BEB90@MHS>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Pricemw)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I have a 15 meter horizontal loop in the attic, fed at one corner with
RG-58.  A tuner is used on 20,15, and 10 meters.  I have even made a few
contacts on 40 meters with it.  It is the best indoor antenna I have ever
had, and it compares well on 15 and 10 meters with a Butternut vertical,
ground mounted in a crummy location.  I would think that a full sized
version, outside, in the clear, and at a reasonable height, would perform
very well.  However, theoretically, you would expect it to radiate upward
(a cloud warmer antenna).

--Wayne W5GIE  / Redlands, CA


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:14 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!primus.ac.net!news.serv.net!news.alt.net!newspost1.alt.net!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mac software for antenna analysis
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 08:04:18 -0700
Organization: Home
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <dragonsl-1002960804180001@192.0.2.1>
References: <4fbmb9$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.2.0b4

In article <4fbmb9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (SWAINCW) wrote:

>Does anyone have suggestions  regarding Mac programs for antenna analysis
>which are capable of modeling multielement quads?
  I haven't tried it for quads, but NEC2(mac) should do it. I down loaded
it from one of the Mac FTP sites

Ralph

--
Ralph Lindberg N7BSN
e-mail to [e-mail] (read daily)
RV and Camping FAQ <http://kendaco.telebyte.net/rlindber/rv/
They call it "Sur'n the Net" 'cause you can wipe out so easy


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:15 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Louise Carkenord)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: monoband/triband separation ???
Date: 13 Feb 96 22:41:35 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]



My friend Quinlan, W0GLG, wants me to ask the group
a question. He has an 80 foot tower erected over poor
ground (decomposed granite).
He can mount a beam at 80 feet and another beam 6 feet
lower. That is, beams will be separated by 6 feet.
He has a 10/15/20 tribander and he has a 40M monobander.
Given above data, which he says he will not change......
which antenna should be on top??
Should he have the monobander at 80 feet and the tribander
at 74 feet???
Should he have the tribander at 80 feet and the monobander
at 74 feet???  He lives in Colorado and is a dx chaser.
                                Tnx.....Lee  KA0FPJ


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:16 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!news.uoregon.edu!news.orst.edu!news.PEAK.ORG!engr.orst.edu!osshe.edu!internet!oconneld
From: Dan O'Connell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: nec documentation
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 18:22:51 -0800
Organization: Oregon State System of Higher Education
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960208182050.161A-100000@internet>
References: <4eq1tt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: internet.oit.osshe.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: oconneld@internet
In-Reply-To: <4eq1tt$[e-mail]>



On 1 Feb 1996 [e-mail] wrote:

>
>       Is there any documentation describing the use etc of NEC available
> via the internet?
>
    Yes, I believe I saw it on a ftp? in the SF area that has lots of ham
programs. look under the downloadable programs for NEC and you can print
out the instructions. I have them but not currently with me. hope this
helps. Dan WA7TDZ   [e-mail]> > >


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:17 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!redwood.shu.ac.uk!news
From: Mark Pettigrew <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 10:18:09 -0800
Organization: Sheffield Hallam University
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <[e-mail]> <Pine.SOL.3.91.960201150610.19455A-100000@iglou> <[e-mail]> <4f2uad$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fdcqk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lti-03.lti.shu.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)

> I thought it wasn't
> working until I read a G5RV application note from Antennas West and
> realized that my N/S orientation was at fault. Rotating it by 15 degrees
> made all the difference in the world, e.g. Europe, Pacific Rim, S.America.
>
> 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

Do you have a copy of the relevant bits from the app note, or more details of
the
source?

Thanks

Mark
G0WLR


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:18 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!alterdial.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Opinions on portable antennas?
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 01:17:49 GMT
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <4foorh$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pppl25.rapidramp.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Does anyone have an opinion on the:
1) MFJ-1621
2) Barker & WIlliamson AP-10
portable antennnas?

Any response would be _greatly_ appreciated!
Robert



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:19 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!newsfeed.acns.nwu.edu!ftpbox!mothost!schbbs!news
From: Paul Moller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Passive mobile antennas
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: MOTOROLA
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 12:34:20 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <4figaa$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (SCHBBS News Account)
Nntp-Posting-Host: 144.188.36.8
Lines: 28

David de Schweinitz wrote:
>
> 3.  Finally, I've been toying with the idea of using a 1/4-wave pickup
> duct-taped to to the phone to couple to a coax-fed antenna.  I don't have
> much hope, both because decent coupling would still be a problem and

yes coupling is still an issue, in that I would expect to get around  -10dB co
upling.
But, the path from the inside of the vehicle to the outside can easily exceed
10dB, you might have something here. Try making
a dipole with the top half next to the phones whip, and the bottom half next t
o the other half of the phones antenna, namely
its case.

> because I'm worried about the direct signal from the phone beating
> against the coax-fed phone signal.  This might not be too bad if the
> coax-fed phone has a lot more gain than the internal antenna (such as the
> portable log-periodic that a friend built me that works great when
> screwed in to a phone with a real antenna jack).

The signal that has made its way out of the vehicle is very highly cross polar
ized as well as full of phase distortion as it
is. Not to mention what the highly reflective path does to the signal on it wa
y to the base station. Don't worry in the least
about extra phase or amplitude distortions that you may add!

> It MIGHT do some good in mobile applications.
>
> I'd appreciate any comments from people who have tried any passive
> coupling schemes.
>
>                         TNX
>                                 Dave KD5KZ <[e-mail]>


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:20 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!news.ecn.bgu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!xmission!provo3
From: [e-mail] (Force Majeure)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: PC interferes with TV
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 96 15:30:50 GMT
Organization: XMission Internet
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <4fl1ra$[e-mail]>
References: <4f2iis$[e-mail]> <4f2vr1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: provo3.xmission.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>Don't be *too* quick to write off the computer. You *can* use a
>noisy computer if you improve the case shielding. Even the noisest
>motherboard can be brought down to Tempest levels if you use good

Dont' use "Tempest" levels as an overall EMI spec.  They are very far from it.

 Using a Tempest-compliant computer as a catch-all cure for RFI may work, but
it is no guarantee.  Any class B-complaint computer can also be considered a
catch-all cure for RFI.

Force Majeure
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 21:52:17 GMT
Lines: 39

In article <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
 writes:
>Garry Foster <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>Well I guess I need to reread this article as I thought it was
>>"supposed" to be a full spectrum(hf) tunner. In other words
>>functionally equal to the SGC, Icom and Kenwood tuner.  Why would it
>
>I'm thinking if someone goes to that much trouble to build an auto
>tuner that matches no better than a commercial unit, why bother?

Perhaps because commercial tuners fill a need, and a homebrew version
might be cheaper? You could build tuning networks into each antenna
you use, or you could use an autotuner to handle matching the various
antennas to the radio. The former case isn't as flexible or generically
useful as the latter.

>If you match your auto-tuner design to your antenna, it will accomplish
>perfect matching as opposed to "full-spectrum" matching, be lower loss
>on the average, and require half the components. Thus my original question.

Yeah, but then the "tuner" is only useful with one antenna. You have to
build another tuner if you want to tune a different antenna. The commercial
tuners, and this "homebrew" auto tuner, allow you to use it with a *variety*
of different antennas. You could even add a switch so that the tuner selects
the best antenna for a particular frequency (as some of the commercial
tuners do).

>One of the advantages to an auto-tuner is that it can be located anywhere
>in the system. It seems ridiculous not to locate it at an optimum position.

This increased flexibility doesn't negate the ability to mount the
tuner in an advantageous location.

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] Tue Feb 13 20:54:22 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.inc.net!imci3!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.mci.newscorp.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 96 00:34:44 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Gary Coffman <[e-mail]>

Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> writes:

>might be cheaper? You could build tuning networks into each antenna
>you use, or you could use an autotuner to handle matching the various
>antennas to the radio. The former case isn't as flexible or generically
>useful as the latter.

Based on the signal strength measurements from my antenna system, the
customized tuner performs up to 2 'S' units better than my MFJ-949. That
seems downright useful to me.

>This increased flexibility doesn't negate the ability to mount the
>tuner in an advantageous location.

Unfortunately, with my 102 ft. centerfed, there is no advantageous
location for all the bands. The best I could do was at 82 ft for
40m, 20m, 15m, and 10m. The balun was stressed on 75m, 30m, 17m,
and 12m. With my present tuning system, the balun always sees close
to 300 ohms resistive.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:24 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 96 20:45:30 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Gary Coffman <[e-mail]>

Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> writes:

>12 db? Hmmm, that means that if you're transmitting with 100 watts
>the tuner is dissipating 93.75 watts. Must get pretty hot. I'd
>suggest the tuner is broken.

Hi again, Gary. I don't know how many dB in an 'S' unit on N5AQM's
receiver. Could be 4. Not all the loss is occuring in the tuner.
The balun sees 120+j1000 ohms on 75m and I suspect most of the
loss is there. The tuner is not broken. The signal strength increase
is because the balanced tuner deals with 300 plus j1500 ohms and
the balun deals with 300 plus j0 ohms. I kid you not - the results
are amazing compared to my previous configuration with the same
antenna. My previous configuration is what a lot of "experts"
recommend. 102 ft dipole fed with 300 ohm ladder-line into a 4:1
balun into an antenna tuner. For all of the hams who are using
that configuration, there is a much better way to go.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:25 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 96 21:05:15 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fokfv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Todd Little <[e-mail]>

Todd Little <[e-mail]> writes:

>This seems a little hard to accept if in fact both provide an
>equally good or poor match and the feed line/antenna in both
>cases are the same.  Even with a generous S meter, 2 S units

It has been hard for me to accept also. In fact, the improvement is
close to unbelievable. The matches are obviously not equal. The feedline/
antenna is the same in both cases. Here are the differences.

1. 102 ft centerfed with 300 ohm ladder-line. 4:1 balun into coax into
MFJ-949. Balun sees 120+j1000 on 75m. Don't know what the tuner sees.

2. Same antenna and feedline. Series toroidal inductors at the
300-j1500 point drops the impedance to 300 ohms which is what the 4:1
balun sees.

How many hams are throwing away most of their power with configuration 1
and don't realize it?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:25 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.dpc.net!novia!nntp.inc.net!news.sol.net!uniserve!van-bc!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!alterdial.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: David Nulton <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Screwdriver Ant. Plans Wanted
Date: 10 Feb 1996 00:03:01 GMT
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <4fgnbl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: node094.axiom.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: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13270 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19005

Does anyone know of a resource for building a screwdriver antenna?
Perhaps a net resource, magazine article etc.

Thanks and 73s
de KI5XW



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:27 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!news.mindspring.com!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news.sol.net!solaria.sol.net!garyk9gs
From: [e-mail] (Gary Schwartz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex tribanders and spinning elements
Date: 10 Feb 1996 06:44:37 GMT
Organization: Solaria Public Access UNIX - Milwaukee, WI
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <4fhesl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: solaria.sol.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]

Jeff DePolo WN3A ([e-mail]) wrote:
: We've got a Telrex 5-element tribander at one of our club stations.  We,
: like several other hams I've talked to that have this antenna, have had
: a chronic problem with the 20 meter reflector "tilting" with respect to
: the rest of the elements and the boom.  The design of the yagi is that
: the elements go through the boom.  The 20 meter reflector has an
: additional collar that surrounds the boom and is supposed to provide
: additional mechanical reinforcement.  What happens is that, over time,
: the hole in the boom and the collar through which the element passes
: becomes enlarged from wind/rotor motion, allowing the whole element to
: tilt out of the plane of the other elements.  The collar itself also
: rotates around the boom with the element motion.  Basically the design
: of the whole assembly is pretty poor.

: Anyone else had this problem with the Telrex tribanders, and have you
: come up with a good fix?

:                                                       --- Jeff

Hi Jeff.  I would suggest either pop-riveting the collar to the boom in
SEVERAL places or, and I'm not kidding, have the whole collar/boom
heli-arc welded together.



--
73,
Gary K9GS    (You have to STOP the Q-Tip when there's resistance !)
         ________________________________________________________________
        |                                                                |
        | Gary Schwartz  K9GS           E-Mail: [e-mail] |
        | Society of Midwest Contesters   Packet:[e-mail] |
        | Greater Milwaukee DX Association Secretary/Treasurer           |
        |________________________________________________________________|





From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:28 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.localnet.com!intac!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!ub!csn!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!nntp.coast.net!pravda.aa.msen.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mesh)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex tribanders and spinning elements
Date: 12 Feb 1996 00:01:05 GMT
Organization: DRs. Mesh, P.C.
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <4fm001$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4fhesl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jmesh.pnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: OUI 1.0.3 B1

>> have the whole collar/boom
heli-arc welded together. <<

Exactly!

I have followed Telrex products for years.   The 6 element 20m and the 3
element 40m yagis definitely have this problem.
Many modifications have been tried to overcome this problem in an
attempt to extend the useful service free life of these fine antennas.
Some who have encountered this problem and tried to counter it have even
been fine mechanical engineers.   Most solutions fail at 200ft with ice
over a period of many years.   Only the welding seems to be a permanent
solution for the high wind, 200ft radial ice loaded application.   I
have never seen a welded solution fail.

I have seen pins drilled through vertically that have failed.  Some
engineers have specified various diameters and tempers of stainless
alloys.  Some people include rope in the elements in an attempt to
fabricate a harmonic dampener of some sort (meaning without a
mathematical approach or testing).   Only the welding seems to last.

The problem with the welded solution is that it eliminates disassembly
for movement to a new QTH or resale to another user.  It also requires a
welder with good skill to keep the whole structure straight and aligned.
  He must have portable equipment and inert gas tanks to weld this in
the field near the place of erection.   If one intends to weld the
element pieces as well they really should fabricate a method of trial
erection to examine loading, SWR, and band width at the desired
frequencies as after the welds little opportunity remains for change.

--
Thanks....AA8NF - Joe
from Beautiful Downtown HELL, Michigan USA
02/11/96      19:00
_______________________________________
Always available at:
   [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]
   Please visit our Web Page at:
   http://www.drsmesh.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.1

mQBtAy6eMfIAAAEDALwrWEs+O743G3ANgMDgUxCfK9F1vTR99q4OL05cyGI68nlk
ygUkdYG7CG0BnI8CzOJmSQeTJGjLV6Mw+LGA7UgzybInGUXJMkw7xKRtpZ8QEi+/
PQWM6R7AuxwjYt5iuQAFEbQlUlcgU2FsbmljayA8c2Fsbmlja0BkZWphdnUuc3Br
LndhLnVzPokAdQMFEDB7NL7AuxwjYt5iuQEBGs0DAJf1cyNUKYjSsYxBRtLt7GA4
vd7PPjhs5Gg5q2OqizIUdLQFbCG+IgzN+ftbqp00RvE1eUm62qAzC6DKvZNH2+jR
ZxflW1yk2fSSsoi82jrxzeYwO9jk7o/AjeVi5T/uXLQrUlcgU2FsbmljayA8c2Fs
bmlja0B0ZWFjaC5rYWlzZXIuc3BrLndhLnVzPg==
=+hd/
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:29 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!nntp.coast.net!pravda.aa.msen.com!news
From: [e-mail] (AA8NF)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex tribanders and spinning elements
Date: 13 Feb 1996 04:54:29 GMT
Organization: DRs. Mesh, P.C.
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <4fp5i6$[e-mail]>
References: <4fhesl$[e-mail]> <4fm001$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jmesh.pnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: OUI 1.0.3 B1

>> Does the Telrex 40-meter yagi have this problem at all heights <<

40m is a special problem.   Welding is not a clear cut solution on 40m
as the elements are slightly shortened and brought to resonance with
wires down the boom.   This means that the element halfs are insulated
from the boom.   So you need to weld but you need to machine a collar to
weld first!

All 40m antennas require special considerations in  erection and design.
  Greater height usually translates to greater mechanical loading and
requires consideration for any design.

There is a 3 element 40 Telrex that has been at 120ft for thirty years
near my QTH and it looks and performs perfectly and has never been
serviced.  It may be the exception though!

>> anyone who put an antenna up at 150-plus feet was a little wacky
anyway <<

Well...   tell that to the guy who wants to stack 40s!

--
Thanks....AA8NF - Joe
from Beautiful Downtown HELL, Michigan USA
02/12/96      23:53
_______________________________________
Always available at:
   [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]
   Please visit our Web Page at:
   http://www.drsmesh.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.1

mQBtAy6eMfIAAAEDALwrWEs+O743G3ANgMDgUxCfK9F1vTR99q4OL05cyGI68nlk
ygUkdYG7CG0BnI8CzOJmSQeTJGjLV6Mw+LGA7UgzybInGUXJMkw7xKRtpZ8QEi+/
PQWM6R7AuxwjYt5iuQAFEbQlUlcgU2FsbmljayA8c2Fsbmlja0BkZWphdnUuc3Br
LndhLnVzPokAdQMFEDB7NL7AuxwjYt5iuQEBGs0DAJf1cyNUKYjSsYxBRtLt7GA4
vd7PPjhs5Gg5q2OqizIUdLQFbCG+IgzN+ftbqp00RvE1eUm62qAzC6DKvZNH2+jR
ZxflW1yk2fSSsoi82jrxzeYwO9jk7o/AjeVi5T/uXLQrUlcgU2FsbmljayA8c2Fs
bmlja0B0ZWFjaC5rYWlzZXIuc3BrLndhLnVzPg==
=+hd/
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:31 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Leon D. Zetekoff)
Newsgroups: fl.forsale,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Tower, antenna, and rotator for sale
Date: 11 Feb 1996 13:03:52 GMT
Organization: Z&K Enterprises
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4fkpfo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip37-229-74.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: NeoLogic News for OS/2 [version: 4.2]
Xref: news.epix.net fl.forsale:10832 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19006 rec.radio.swap:57292

I have a Tri-Ex W36 (36 foot) steel crank-up tower as well as a KLM KT34
yagi, and HAM IV rotator (with feedline and cable) for sale. It is located in
Boca Ratom and is down ready for pickup. I am asking $550.00 OBO for the
entire package. All items are in good shape. I will not separate items from
the package. I have the original prints for the tower as well as a Florida
architects seal on the base blueprints. The tower was put up in November 1985
and taken down in April 1995 when I moved.

If interested, please send me e-mail at the below address.

I am open to any reasonable offer for the entire package.

73,

Leon D. Zetekoff, N.C.E.
Z&K Enterprises
1338 SW 3 Street
Boca Raton, FL 33486

E-mail:         [e-mail]
CompuServe:     74015,674
AMPRnet:        wa4zlw@wa4zlw.#bcr.fl.us.na, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:32 1996
Path: news.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: Travelling Wave Antennas & Terminating Resistors for same
Date: 9 Feb 1996 11:52:24 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 54
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4ffu48$[e-mail]>
References: <MSGID_1=3A109=[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jim,

I'd like to caution you about something. Don't trust NEC based
calculations of performace near real earth. Expect it to be worse than
estimated.

In article <MSGID_1=3A109=[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (James Chance) writes:

>In the November '95 issue of QST is an article describing a travelling
wave
>multi-band antenna that appears to be perfect for my lot size (especially
>since
>I live a covenant restricted area). The article covered the subject quite
>well,
>with an exception or two :-). Main one for me is,  as it is fed at one
end,
>and
>terminated with a matching impedance at the other end, what does one use
to
>build a terminating load that can dissipate either 50 watts (when
operating
>without an amplifier) or 750 watts (when using one). And it must be able
to
>handle these amounts of power for quite some time, as I'm not simply
tuning a
>transmatch. The article (nor the ARRL Antenna Handbook) mentions whether
the
>load must be non-inductive. I assume it should not be. Would be nice if
that
>wasn't a factor, as big wire-wound resistors are not too difficult to
come
>by.

You can'y use wire wound, it has to be non-inductive like resistors made
for big dummy loads. They are available for a few dollars each in the
hundred watt range.

>If this *is* a factor, would an oil-filled dummy load (maybe sealed up in
>some way as to be completely weather-proofed) be the way to go?

Yes, you could use a 9:1 transformer and a 50 ohm load.

>Another minor question, what if I wanted to use ladder-line (450 ohm) as
the
>feedline? That would seem  to shoot down the idea of using a large dummy
>load...

No, not easily. You would need a choke balun at the antenna's feedpoint
plus a balanced output from the tuner in the house. I suspect the antenna
will be a large dummy load no matter what you do. But give it a try, you
never know.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:33 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!news.crosslink.net!news1.agis.net!agis!news.walltech.com!news.his.com!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!wb3ffv!blkcat.blkcat.com!f41.n109.z1.fidonet.org!f42.n109.z1.fidonet.org!p2.lastdx.blkcat.com!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 1996 19:12:14 -0500
From: [e-mail] (James Chance)
Subject: Travelling Wave Antennas & Terminating Resistors for same
Message-ID: <MSGID_1=3A109=[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: Net 109 Fidonet <-> Internet Gateway
Lines: 25
X-Gateway: FIDO .. blkcat.fidonet.org [FIDOGATE 3.9.6]
X-FTN-Tearline:
X-FTN-Origin:       Remnants of The Last Relay       (1:109/582.2)
X-FTN-Domain: Z1@fidonet
X-FTN-Seen-By: 109/41 42 239 582
X-FTN-Path: 109/582 42

Hello All!

In the November '95 issue of QST is an article describing a travelling wave
multi-band antenna that appears to be perfect for my lot size (especially sinc
e
I live a covenant restricted area). The article covered the subject quite well
,
with an exception or two :-). Main one for me is,  as it is fed at one end, an
d
terminated with a matching impedance at the other end, what does one use to
build a terminating load that can dissipate either 50 watts (when operating
without an amplifier) or 750 watts (when using one). And it must be able to
handle these amounts of power for quite some time, as I'm not simply tuning a
transmatch. The article (nor the ARRL Antenna Handbook) mentions whether the
load must be non-inductive. I assume it should not be. Would be nice if that
wasn't a factor, as big wire-wound resistors are not too difficult to come by.
If this *is* a factor, would an oil-filled dummy load (maybe sealed up in some
way as to be completely weather-proofed) be the way to go?

Another minor question, what if I wanted to use ladder-line (450 ohm) as the
feedline? That would seem  to shoot down the idea of using a large dummy
load...

As I'm really interested in giving this a shot, any help would be greatly
appreciated...

Jim
N3TKD


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:34 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.gdbnet.ad.jp!news.hebel.net!news.sics.se!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.wko.com!visuallink.com!usenet
From: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Verticals Work!
Date: 11 Feb 1996 10:08:59 GMT
Organization: Visual Link Internet
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <4fkf7r$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp5.visuallink.com
Content-Type: text/plain
Keywords: antennas, ham, radio
Content-length: 551
X-Newsreader: AIR Mosaic (16-bit) version 4.00.08.08


I have good results from a vertical.--- top loaded with a horizontal wire on 1
60 meters.
meters. This is usually called  a T, but really it is a top loaded vertical as
radiation from the horizontal part cancels, and the radiation pattern is
essentiallly that of any vertical--- low angle and circular. Of course I have
a
radial system, 24 wires 66 feet long (except where structures are in the way.
The T is 50 feet of wire connected to the center of 132 feet, and there
is a tuner at the base.

73 Guy
W4PSJ    email at [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:35 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.channel1.com!wizard.pn.com!sundog.tiac.net!jflood.tiac.net!user
From: [e-mail] (John Flood)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB UHF Log periodic
Date: 12 Feb 1996 02:40:33 GMT
Organization: The Internet Access Company
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jflood.tiac.net

Looking for a mil. surplus log periodic in the 200 - 400 MHZ range.
Please send details via e-mail.

                           John


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:36 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.OZ.AU!mel.dit.csiro.au!actcsiro!news.nsw.CSIRO.AU!wabbit.cc.uow.edu.au!news.une.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!tmx!news.tmx.com.au!news.acay.com.au!news
From: spiro evagelakos ([e-mail])
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,aus.radio.amateur.wicen,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: WTB:5KW AM Transmitter
Date: 12 Feb 1996 10:19:25 GMT
Organization: ACAY Network Computing P/L, Sydney AUSTRALIA.
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <4fn47d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiroe.acay.com.au
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)
Xref: news.epix.net aus.radio.amateur.misc:428 aus.radio.amateur.wicen:67 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19019 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14094 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24856 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13283 rec.radio.amateur.misc:98001 rec.radio.scanner:45416 rec.radio.swap:57330

This time I am after a second hand 5KW  AM Transmitter

Regards
Spiro


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:37 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!ns.saard.net!yarrina.connect.com.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!mel.dit.csiro.au!actcsiro!news.nsw.CSIRO.AU!wabbit.cc.uow.edu.au!news.une.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!tmx!news.tmx.com.au!news.acay.com.au!news
From: spiro evagelakos ([e-mail])
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,aus.radio.amateur.wicen,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: WTB:AMATURE TRANSMITTER @ 160MTRS
Date: 12 Feb 1996 10:15:25 GMT
Organization: ACAY Network Computing P/L, Sydney AUSTRALIA.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4fn3vt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiroe.acay.com.au
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)
Xref: news.epix.net aus.radio.amateur.misc:427 aus.radio.amateur.wicen:66 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19018 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14093 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24855 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13282 rec.radio.amateur.misc:98000 rec.radio.scanner:45415 rec.radio.swap:57329

Hi ,
I am after a second hand amature transmitter for the 160mtr band

Regards
Spiro


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:38 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.OZ.AU!mel.dit.csiro.au!actcsiro!news.nsw.CSIRO.AU!wabbit.cc.uow.edu.au!news.une.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!tmx!news.tmx.com.au!news.acay.com.au!news
From: spiro evagelakos ([e-mail])
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,aus.radio.amateur.wicen,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: WTB:LINEAR AMPLIFIER FOR 160MTR BAND
Date: 12 Feb 1996 10:17:15 GMT
Organization: ACAY Network Computing P/L, Sydney AUSTRALIA.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4fn43b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiroe.acay.com.au
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)
Xref: news.epix.net aus.radio.amateur.misc:426 aus.radio.amateur.wicen:65 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19017 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14092 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24854 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13281 rec.radio.amateur.misc:97999 rec.radio.scanner:45414 rec.radio.swap:57328

Hi ,
I am after a second hand  linear Amplifier for the 160mtr band

Regards
Spiro


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:39 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!brighton.openmarket.com!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTD: Leaky Coax
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 14:32:45 -0500
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fbfeg$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zlau.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b6b (Win16; I)
To: Gary Coffman <[e-mail]>
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:97961 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:18996

Gary Coffman wrote:
>

> >1) Can I modify normal coax (like RG-8/U) by cutting slots or some other
> >method to achieve "leaky-ness"?
>
> Not practically.

It looks to me like Andrew takes ordinary Heliax and mills
slots in the cable.  "Holes are milled in the corrugation
peaks of the outer conductor to form the radiating cable."
p.564 of their catalog 36.  I also recall that you considered
Heliax to be ordinary coax, and not something exotic.

> >2) Where can I buy leaky coax at a reasonable price?
>
> The trade name for what you want is "Radiax". I believe it is
> made by Andrew. It is not cheap (around $2 a foot).
>
> There is another way. You can use drop fittings in the line and
> dipole antennas at intervals.  Use 30 db couplers for your drop
> fittings near the transmitter, and increasingly larger coupling
> factors as you get further away from the transmitter, IE use a
> 12 db coupler, a 6 db coupler, a 3 db coupler, and finally just
> put an antenna directly on the end of the line.

Why the need for different value couplers? After all, with the
commercial product aren't all the slots the same size, so that
the coupling factor is the same?  Of course, you probably want
to feed it in the center and perhaps vary the coupling in a couple
spots to optimize coverage.

Zack KH6CP/1 [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:40 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!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 calculating transmission power"
Date: 10 Feb 96 15:39:48 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "calculating" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:40 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!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 on uses for automatic  antenna tuner."
Date: 11 Feb 96 07:37:19 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The mailing list "on" could not be found.
You may use the INDEX command to get a listing
of available mailing lists.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 13 20:54:41 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (David D. Zawodny)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ~~~? What is the best coax cable for CB's?~~~~
Date: 10 Feb 1996 16:51:01 -0700
Organization: Huuda Thunkit
Lines: 36
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4fjb15$[e-mail]>
References: <4dpris$[e-mail]> <4dr03e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4ebt3g$[e-mail]> <4fh4tv$[e-mail]>
X-Posted-By: ip201.tol.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Chester Alderman) wrote:

>In message <[e-mail]> - [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger) writes
:

>:>
>:>Vince Fiscus,  KB7ADL ([e-mail]) wrote:
>:>
>:>: Best Coax for CB is one that ends in a dummy load.
>:>
>:>
>:>It is VERY important that when using CB radio to mount your coax in a
>:>strait line, placing a nail though the coax every 3 feet.  Roofing nails
>:>work best.  This will keep the cable from flopping about in the wind.
>:>
>:>--
>:>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>:>Jeff Stillinger - KB6IBB                              [e-mail]
>:>PSC Box 3429                                          [e-mail]
>:>Edwards AFB, CA  93524                                [phone]N1
>:>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

>If you listen to the ham bands during a pile-up, or if you listen to some of
>the 'broadcast' on the ham bands, or if you listen to the cussin and
>inexcuseable operation on the ham bands, you certainly could apply the above
>'advice' to a hell of a lot of ham radio operators.

>Tom / W4BQF

>[e-mail]

Also, try using RG-174/U.    That way, you can use staples instead of
nails.  It is small enough to double knot when you tie it around
supports like water pipes, TV masts, etc.  You get the idea:-)

Dave WD8DZB



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:35:57 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/@safe.ia.GOV
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 16 Feb 96 14:10:35 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

>From /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/ Fri Feb 16 0
8:18:14 CST 1996 remote from osiint.safe.ia.gov
Date: 16 Feb 1996 08:09:15 -0600
X400-Trace: US*ATTMAIL*IADPS
        arrival 16 Feb 1996 08:09:15 -0600
        action Relayed
From: /PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=attmail/C=us/@osiint.safe.
ia.gov
To: "/RFC-822=Ham-Ant(a)ucsd.edu/OU=OSI-INTERNET/O=WALLACE/PRMD=IADPS/ADMD=ATT
MAIL/C=US/"@osiint.safe.ia.gov
In-Reply-To: <"\"/RFC-822=199602140528.VAA04987(a)mail.ucsd.edu/OU=OSI-INTERNE
T/O=WALLACE/PRMD=IADPS/ADMD=ATTMAIL/C=US/\""@osiint.safe.ia.gov>
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V96 667
Importance: normal
Autoforwarded: FALSE
Message-Id: <werl0216080744aa*/PN=Scott.C.Werling/O=wallace/PRMD=iadps/ADMD=at
tmail/C=us/@osiint.safe.ia.gov>
P1-Message-Id: US*ATTMAIL*IADPS;IDPS3550 werl0216080744aa
UA-Content-Id: werl0216080744aa
P1-Content-Type: P2
Priority: normal
Received: from osiint.safe.ia.gov by iadpshub.safe.ia.gov; Fri, 16 Feb 1996 08
:18 CST
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 782

> Date: 7 Feb 1996 20:21:43 GMT
> From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
> Subject: G5RV
>
> I've been chastised for not ragging on the G5RV. IMO, saying it's not a bad
> antenna falls short of endorsing it. The common advice is to replace the coa
x
> with ladder-line, use a 4:1 balun, and an antenna tuner. Let's see where
> following that advice can lead.
>
> 73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
> ------------------------------
Hi Cecil, I see in the rest of your message u mention using 300 ohm line.
I've used 450 ohm line on my G5RV.  By taking the coax out of the line, my
antenna seems to work better now.  My question:  does the use of the 450 ohm
line require a balun?

Scott   N0XZY
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:35:58 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.charm.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!news.serv.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.ios.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m antenna
Date: 11 Feb 1996 17:32:01 GMT
Organization: Internet Online Services
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <4fl96h$[e-mail]>
References: <4fk658$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup73.fwi.com
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

In <4fk658$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Lambers
on) writes:
>I'm looking for a 2m vertical antenna
>to buy for use with my family's 2m
>base station. Any suggestions?

A couple of ways to go. You can't beat the old Ringo Ranger for Dependability.
 I've
had one up for nearly 20 years. Worked the MIR satellite twice with it last ni
te.
Another real inexpensive way to go is to build yourseff a 1/4 wave ground plan
e
by using a SO-239 connector. It'd the female end of a PL-239 Coax connector. I
t
has a square flange mount. Where the four predrilled holes are, run a 8-32 bol
t,
lock washer, and nut. At that point, fasten a 1/4 wavelength piece of #8 or #9

solid wire. You'll have one mounted at each corner. Bend then down at a 45
degree angle. The part that the PL-239 plugs into, is the 'bottom'. Find yours
elf
a quarter wave length, (about 19 inches to start) piece of solid copper wire.
Again
about #8 or #9. Solder this to the center pin of the SO-239. This is the 'radi
ator'
and points up. It's pretty flimsy at this point, but 'cheap'. if it was in an
attic, you
could suspend it from a string, and you have a 1/4 wave vertical ground plane
for
about 3-4 bucks. Good Luck
                                                Jim WD9AHF



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:35:58 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!chaos.aoc.nrao.edu!newshost.nmt.edu!rutgers!fdurt1.fdu.edu!xyzzy.bubble.org!newshost.cyberramp.net!news.consultix.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!caen!nas
From: [e-mail] (Mark Lamberson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2m antenna
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 96 07:33:13 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <4fk658$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @pm023-00.dialip.mich.net
Summary: Antenna Suggestions
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #0
Keyword: antenna

I'm looking for a 2m vertical antenna
to buy for use with my family's 2m
base station. Any suggestions?


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:35:59 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.us.world.net!tech.cftnet.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!yama.mcc.ac.uk!news.u-net.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Garry Walker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 4 ele Gem Quad
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 10:00:33 GMT
Organization: Garry Walker
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4g1kh4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: bonney.u-net.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

I am trying to find out about the performance/problems with a 4 ele
Gem Quad.  I have used a 2 ele quad in the past on 10 metres only, but
would like further info.  I am interested in the feed arrangement for
a 5 band version of the quad, interaction problems, etc etc.

Any info would be most appreciated.

Regards Garry

----------------------------------
G0IHB, GX0TEN, F/G0IHB/P

Internet:[e-mail]
Packet:  [e-mail]

----------------------------------



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:01 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.mindlink.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Gordon Pritchard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 4 ele Gem Quad
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 22:27:18 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <4g30fv$[e-mail]>
References: <4g1kh4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: line241.nwm.mindlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Garry Walker) wrote:

>I am trying to find out about the performance/problems with a 4 ele
>Gem Quad.  I have used a 2 ele quad in the past on 10 metres only, but
>would like further info.  I am interested in the feed arrangement for
>a 5 band version of the quad, interaction problems, etc etc.

>Any info would be most appreciated.

        Hey, I put up a brand-new Gem Quad last summer!  I know this..
:-)

        First, let me say that I'm young, fit, and smart enough (to say
nothing of modest :-) ), but a two-element Gem Quad was all two
of us and a lawn tractor could handle.
        If you're cotemplating a 4-element quad, all I can say is:  you'd
better have a crank-down and tilting tower, or a good friend at a
crane company.  Getting it up is only half the (very major)
battle, actually getting at the tuning stubs will be a second
very major battle.  FWIW, I have a fixed tower, and no
crane-operator friends (and a nice lawn :-( ).

        The Gem Quad arrives as a kit.  The documentation is dated, and
sorta thin (thankfully, I got enough information from the owner
before I made any mistakes!).  For instance:  the boom has a
welded-on stub, and I got a 10' aluminum mast from Gem.  I was a
bit taken aback that the stub was a very loose fit inside the
pipe, and thought a couple of orthogonal pinning bolts would take
care of things - good thing I phoned, though, because the
wobbling would fatigue and break these bolts!  Turned out that I
wound up cutting 4 wide slots and using a muffler clamp for a
secure fit.
        As a kit, the two-el version was a bit time-consuming to assemble
(or maybe I'm kind of slow?!).  I used a 7-foot ladder to support
the antenna (facing upward) as I assembled the second half.
Don't know how you'd support and assemble a 4-element one.
        The fiberglass arms are secured to the spider stubs using
stainless band clamps - seemed kind of hokey at the time, but
they've stayed together during some 100 km/h winds OK this past
winter.
        The arms are restrained fore and aft using fiberglass rods and
tie-straps.  First wind gust, and these came apart on me!
Subsequent very-strong winds did no further damage, however.
Kinda disappointing, really.
        I cut the wire elements "by the notes", and I dread the thought
of actually trying to separate out the one band's wires to trim
(I twisted and soldered them all together at the feedpoint :-( ).
Basic match is OK across most bands, but a tad higher than I'd
like on a couple.  Front-to-back ratio adjustments are the
biggest pain in the ass you'll ever run across!  Get a friend to
help, both of you will need handhelds or something, and keep a
sense of humour and perspective - good luck!

        When all is said and done, you wind up with an antenna which
looks like a good home-made job, not as clean/crisp as a
professional antenna.
        My Gem Quad works fine (I'm feeding it through an Amidon 2:1
balun, trying to match 50-ohms to somewhere around 100-ohms.
Seems OK.  Mounting this was an exercise in ABS plumbing pipe
ingenuity, though - Gem doesn't provide any way of accomplishing
this, so you're on your own).  Performance is fine.  Turning
circle is tight and small.  Inertia is low (easy on rotator).
Wind torque is very low.
        Would I do it again?  NO.  My buddy's 3-element Yagi may be
slightly lower performance (although we've consumed much beer
during attempts at comparing, and found no substantive
differences), but mechanically it a far sight easier.


_______________________________ |\      _,,,--,,_  ,) _______________
[e-mail]   /,`.-'`'   -,  ;-;;'
     Gordon Pritchard           |,4-  ) )-,_ ) /\  don't ever disturb
______________________________ '---''(_/--' (_/-'_____a sleeping cat!



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:02 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!oronet!uniserve!news.sol.net!daily-planet.execpc.com!homer.alpha.net!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (sm3lbn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 40 M yagis
Date: 12 Feb 96 00:23:43 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: sm3lbn <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Anyone who knows how the Mosley 2el S-402 compares to
the Cushcraft 2el 40-CD ?
Both electrical and mechanical.
Have the offer to buy the Mosley, but don't know much about it.
--------------
73 de SM3LBN



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:02 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!dsinc!ub!csn!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] (PaulS90212)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 440 Horizontal Ant?
Date: 10 Feb 1996 01:50:24 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4fhf7g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (PaulS90212)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

M2 antennas has a small horizontally polorized omnidirectional antenna.

73 - N6DN


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:03 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Relay??
Date: 16 Feb 1996 07:08:23 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4g1s3n$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] "Steve Ellington"
writes:
>
> Has anyone tried using a mercury wetted relay for an antenna changeover
> switch between transmitter and receiver? I'm considering this because I
> want QSK and have been looking at some 2pdt mercury relays for keying
the
> transmitter. They are rated for 2 amps at 500 volts but are physically
> very small. The goal here is to make a very quiet, fast breakin system.
> Can mercury relays handle RF?

I tried some years back and they didn't work. I suspected the skin effect
slowly ate away at the mercury, because the contact resistance climbed
rapidly after a short period of use.

I assume the current rating you specified was at dc or LF ac, and not at
RF. Contacts are generally derated like crazy at RF.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:04 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.agt.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Steve Mason)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ball mount strong enough for screw driver antenna?
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:36:33 GMT
Organization: AGT Ltd.
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4foria$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: clgrpx03-port-19.agt.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/32.182

On 13 Feb 1996 02:03:54 GMT, [e-mail] (Todd Little) wrote:

>I have a screw driver HF antenna that I'd like to mount on
>my Taurus and Grand Voyager.  I puchased a Radio Shack ball

Pardon my ignorance, but I've seen this mentioned a few times now,  what
exactly is a "screw driver" antenna?

As for the ball mount, I don't know the details but there are a few
manufacturers (Hustler rings a bell) who make good heavy-duty ball mounts that
are much better than the RS unit.


Steve VE6STV



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:05 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.tacom.army.mil!ulowell.uml.edu!jupiter.cs.uml.edu!bcharbon
From: [e-mail] (Brad Charbonneau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best areas of New England (especially VT) to erect large TOWER
Date: 14 Feb 1996 19:36:41 GMT
Organization: UMass-Lowell Computer Science
Lines: 5
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4ftdk9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jupiter.cs.uml.edu

Hi!
Name here is Brad NZ1Y.  I am looking to move to Vermont in the near future, a
nd would like to install a large tower (perhaps 150ft high or so).  Does anyon
e know of the best towns that allow this size tower in VT or in New England?
     Any help would be appreciated.  Thanks a lot!
                           Brad NZ1Y



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:07 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bison.alfred.edu!kato.theramp.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best wire antenna   Opinions?
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 22:55:03 -0500
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fe9jh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.12.1.165
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
To: Allen <[e-mail]>

Allen wrote:
>
> I was about to put up a wire antenna today
> and i was wondering if there were any new
> tricks out there or would a regular dipole
> be my best shot,
>
> i have a yaesu 101ee
> 300 watt transmatch
> 500 feet #14 copper
> plenty of scrap pvc pipe for insulators
> coax,
> and enough room for a full size 160m dipole
>
> what works good for you guys? windoms, G5RV, loops,
> multielement, zepps?
> the ground here is old riverbed and extreamly rocky
> so a good radial system for verticals is a no go..  :(
>
> any suggestions would be greatly appriciated!
>
> tnx    73's KB6PQG  [e-mail] 100' or more of ladder line.  Call Ra
dio Works in Chesapeake, VA and
have him send you 2-300' and have him send you a Ladder Lock center
connector.  When you get all that stuff, look at it and you can figure it
out.
Then, build a 270'-long dipole.  Split it in the center and use the
ladder lock to attach the ladder line.  Run the ladder line to the
balanced line output of the tuner and you got it.  Keep the ladder line
as clear of metal objects like towers, gutters, etc, as you can but don't
make a fetish of it.
I have been licensed since 1958.  Last year I finally put up 135' dipole
fed with ladder line.  It runs through a hole drilled in my concrete
block basement wall, upp beside my aluminum siding, and to the antenna.
Loads on every band, even 160.  Why didn't I do this 30 years ago??


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:09 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!sundog.tiac.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.flinet.com!usenet
From: chuck <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,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,rec.radio.noncomm,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Broadcasting Radio Station Database for you......
Date: 12 Feb 1996 04:04:46 GMT
Organization: Orchid City Software
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <4fme8u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpb46.flinet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; U; 16bit)
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.shortwave:70065 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19052 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14132 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24923 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13323 rec.radio.amateur.misc:98059 rec.radio.amateur.policy:33090 rec.radio.amateur.space:6321 rec.radio.noncomm:5156 rec.radio.scanner:45512 rec.radio.swap:57465

Friend,

A fully functional standalone Broadcasting Radio Station Database for IBM
and compatibles with more than 4,000 Radio Station records already.  This
program covers stations on Longwave, Mediumwave, and Shortwave.  Each
record contains the Station name, Frequencies, Schedule, Languages,
Country, and Continent.  The program sorts in same order.

What's needed to get it?  Your EMail address and your Postal Mailing
address for registration and future information via Post of other Radio
Related Database programs.  This information will be kept confidential.

If you can read a document written in MS Word(extension is DOC), request
the operating instructions for the Radio Station Database Program called
Voyageur.  You'll get an idea from reading this document of the Voyageur
Database and what it does.

Incidently, the program offered with this notice is valid until June 6,
1996.

Hope to hear from you..

Chuck

KA4PRF





From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:10 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: Tom Skelton <[e-mail]>
Subject: C3 vs TH6 comparison?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (skeltt)
Organization: NCR
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.5.1.3 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 15:36:42 GMT
Lines: 35


I have been off this newsgroup for a few months, so please
forgive me if someone has already asked this.

I am getting ready to plunk down some cash for a new tribander.
I finished rebuilding the TH5 before we moved, but I am still not
a trap fan.  (HyGain's prices for replacement traps are obscene,
IMHO.)  I've blown them in TH3jr and TH5 antennas.

The Force12 C3 looks good, the price is good, the write - up in
QST was good, KC2X's write-up in NCJ was good, the C3 seems
far easier to put together, and the feedback from users has been
good.  Heck, it was good enough for N7ML to stack 6 of them on
a 200 ft tower!  (Don't take me as anti-Hygain.  I have TH3jr, TH5,
TH6, and 203BA antennas in storage that will be put to use
in some location.)

HOWEVER, what I haven't seen is a side-by-side performance
comparison of the C3 versus a TH5/6/7 series HyGain antenna.

Anybody been there / done that???

Many thanks in advance.

73, tom WB4iUX
[e-mail]

disclaimer:  I obviously have no financial interest in Force12.
My only interests are family and ham radio.  Yes, in that order!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
HUMILITY IS A CRUEL TASKMASTER.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:11 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!usenet
From: Richard Hulse <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCD antennas..how do I scale them (dowm!) ???
Date: 13 Feb 1996 19:36:51 GMT
Organization: Radio New Zealand
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <4fqp8j$[e-mail]>
References: <4epn4c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kgill.dialup.netlink.co.nz
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]

Thanks Bob...

I had already built and 80 m version of the CCD which worked very well at
my last place. It was folded back on itself and ran very close to a large
tree and part of the roof. Unfortunately the houses next to where I now
live are very close together....a CCD folded back on itself 4 times would
no doubt upset the neighbours. Having just writen that I wonder if the
antenna could be folded _on_top_ of itself to reduce the length?

> I found this in an article by Harold Wheeler on HF antennas
>designed to be mounted UNDERGROUND!

Could you let me know where this was?

> Some day I will buy a bunch of 1100
>pF 1000V 5% dipped micas and rebuild the thing, and try again.

The problems is they are so time consuming to make! I took a week off
work to make my 80m one about ten years ago. If the performance hadn't
been so good I wouldn't be contemplating doing it again. Perhaps I should
wait until my kids grow up a bit more and get them to help!

Regards
Richard Hulse
ZL2AJC



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:12 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.i2020.net!alpha.sky.net!winternet.com!news.minn.net!MinnNet
From: [e-mail] (John Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CCD antennas..how do I scale them (dowm!) ???
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 96 04:59:11 GMT
Organization: Minn Net
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <4fue91$[e-mail]>
References: <4epn4c$[e-mail]> <4fqp8j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-43.minn.net
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <4fqp8j$[e-mail]>,
   Richard Hulse <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Thanks Bob...
>
>I had already built and 80 m version of the CCD which worked very
well at

-snip-

>> Some day I will buy a bunch of 1100
>>pF 1000V 5% dipped micas and rebuild the thing, and try again.

-snip-

If the performance hadn't
>been so good I wouldn't be contemplating doing it again.

I thought I had heard of just about every kind of antenna,
but this one eludes me. Could you post some reference
articles from magazine info, or textbook titles on it?
Thanks...John, NJ0M.


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:13 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!matlock.mindspring.com!news.mindspring.com!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: CCD antennas..how do I scale them (dowm!) ???
Date: 15 Feb 1996 06:35:23 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <4fuk7b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet04.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

  A few CCD articles:

Harold A. Wheeler, "Useful Radiation From An Underground Antenna",
Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards - Department of
Radio Propagation, Volume 65D, Number 1, January-February, 1961, Pg. 89.
(Presented at Conference on the Propagation of ELF Radio Waves, Boulder,
CO, January 26, 1960.)

Harry A. Mills, W4FD, and Gene Brizendine, W4ATE, "Antenna Design:
Something New!", Pg. 282 (???), 73 Magazine, October, 1978. (I think).

Harry A. Mills, W4FD, and Gene Brizendine, W4ATE, "The CCD Antenna -
Another Look", 73 Magazine, July, 1981, Pg. 50.

Harry Longerich, W4ANL, "The CCD Antenna Revisited", 73 Magazine, May,
1982, Pg. 40.

David Atkins, W6VX, "the high-performance, capacitively loaded diploe",
ham radio, May 1984, Pg. 33.

James E. Taylor, W2OZH, "The RASER", 73 Amateur Radio Today, September,
1992, Pg. 8.

James E. Taylor, W2OZH, "The RASER Revisited", 73 Amateur Radio Today,
October, 1993, Pg. 29.

Also see:

F. E. Terman, Radio Engineers Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1943,
Pg. 773.

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:14 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!uw-coco!uw-beaver!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!news.cac.psu.edu!news.math.psu.edu!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail](Bob Kusnirik, Jr. )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cellular Passive Repeater Antennas
Date: 12 Feb 1996 15:14:28 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4fnlgk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: atc-nj1-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Feb 12  7:14:28 AM PST 1996

I am seeking information on Repeater Antennas for portable phones.

I have seen three different types advertised and would like to know if
they are worth the investment.

The three types are:

1.  A rear window mount that looks similar to a hard wire antenna.

2.  A window clip that clips onto any door window and has a small 6"
    antenna on the outside of the window.

3.  A suction cup mount antenna approx. 8" in length that is placed on
    the inside of a window and transmits through the car window.

I have tried the "patch" antenna and found no improvements in reception
or broadcasting.  I realize that a 3 watt booster is the best way to
go, but they are expensive.  Are these products worth the investment or
more hype than substance.

Any replies will be appreciated.

Bob


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:15 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.frontiernet.net!news.his.com!news.akorn.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub2!ncrcae!news
From: Bob Archer N4ECO <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cubical Quad Antennas for HF
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (news)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (archer)
Organization: NCR GPGSC, Columbia
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.5.1.3 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <4fsgkr$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 15:40:18 GMT
Lines: 30

I had a CUBEX Tri-Band Quad  that I purchased used in 1980. I
used it for 10 years at 50 feet.
I would still be using it had it not been for not having a place
to install it when I moved.


>==========Karl-Heinz Merscher,,,, 2/14/96==========
>
>
>
>Hi out there,
>
>is there anybody who operats with a LBA (Lightning Bolt Antennas) or a
>cubical quad antenna made by CUBEX??
>
>The LBA antennas are cheaper than the Cubex antennas. In the catalogues
>it seems that the CUBEX antennas are better in stability.
>
>Any exerperiences with that antennas??
>
>I'm searching for a supplier of a good cubical quad antenna ...
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>Charlie
>
>DL6RDE


Bob Archer N4ECO


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:16 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!uw-coco!uw-beaver!news.u.washington.edu!news.uoregon.edu!hpg30a.csc.cuhk.hk!news.cuhk.edu.hk!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!Dortmund.Germany.EU.net!nntp.gmd.de!news.ruhr-uni-bochum.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!zrz.TU-Berlin.DE!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsserv.uni-bayreuth.de!btr0x7.hrz.Uni-Bayreuth.DE!a0378
From: [e-mail] (Karl-Heinz Merscher,,,)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cubical Quad Antennas for HF
Date: 14 Feb 1996 11:22:03 GMT
Organization: Universitaet Bayreuth
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4fsgkr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: btr0x7.hrz.uni-bayreuth.de



Hi out there,

is there anybody who operats with a LBA (Lightning Bolt Antennas) or a
cubical quad antenna made by CUBEX??

The LBA antennas are cheaper than the Cubex antennas. In the catalogues
it seems that the CUBEX antennas are better in stability.

Any exerperiences with that antennas??

I'm searching for a supplier of a good cubical quad antenna ...

Thanks in advance!

Charlie

DL6RDE


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:17 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.fast.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Tony)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dummy load resistor source???
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 03:24:53 GMT
Organization: FASTNET(tm) PA/NJ/DE Internet
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <4fu9ag$[e-mail]>
References: <4fbfim$[e-mail]> <4ffsku$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: abe-ppp322.fast.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:98096 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19087

Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Rob Bellville <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I need to make a bunch of low power (< 5W) dummy loads. Where can I find
>>some 50 ohm 5W non-inductive resistors? Alternatively, I could use 25 and
>>100 ohm ones, too.

>Hi Rob, four 200 ohm 2 watt carbon resistors in parallel sounds just right.

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

STACKPOLE is the source !!!




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:17 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.frontiernet.net!gollum.kingston.net!news4.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!news1.vancouver.istar.net!news.vancouver.istar.net!van-bc!uniserve!news.sol.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news5.ner.bbnplanet.net!news.ner.bbnplanet.net!usenet.continental.com!usenet
From: Paul Christensen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Florida Ham Antenna Restrictions - ch125.htm (0/1)
Date: 14 Feb 1996 20:27:24 GMT
Organization: Continental Cablevision
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <4ftgjc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f7v2j$[e-mail]> <4fqpsu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.152.167.73
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]

Don:

I'll be starting law school this fall.  Perhaps I'll carve my niche in
this area after graduating!

-Paul, N9AZ



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:18 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sover.net!news.monad.net!usenet
From: Chester Bowles <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV vs. 130' Dipole
Date: 13 Feb 1996 19:42:16 GMT
Organization: Crotched Mountain Foundation
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <4fqpio$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bowles.cmf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

For years I've used a 130' dipole fed with 450 ohm line.  I use a Dentron
tuner, so the antenna works great on all bands (including an occasional
160 meter contact).

I've never used a G5RV, but I hear lots of good signals from folks who
use them.  So, all other things being equal, I'd appreciate any comments
about the merits of a G5RV versus my existing 130'dipole. Should I make
the switch?

73,
Chet, AA1EX
--
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
| CHESTER S. BOWLES            | Education, rehabilitation, housing,  |
| Vice President               | and managed care for children,       |
| Crotched Mountain Foundation | adolescents and adults with physical |
| One Verney Drive             | and developmental challenges.        |
| Greenfield, NH 03047         | http://www.cmf.org                   |
| 603.547.3311 ext. 404        | [e-mail]                       |
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:19 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news2.interlog.com!ra.isisnet.com!news
From: Charles Thompson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Gannett antennas
Date: 12 Feb 1996 15:03:01 GMT
Organization: isis, Incorporated
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <4fnkr5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s3_trurong.desktop.ns.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 16bit)

I'm looking for information on a gannett multi band antenna. I neen the
company adress or the specs for their multi band wire antenna. It is
something like a G5RV. Any help would be great.



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:20 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!news.supernet.net!news.cais.net!news.cais.com!news
From: [e-mail] (David Whitehurst)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hazer for Rohn 25G
Date: 12 Feb 1996 02:22:40 GMT
Organization: Centauri War Fund, Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <4fm89g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup_31.ezdial.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Anyone have any experience with the "Hazer" tram system ??? I was looking into
putting one on my Rohn 25G tower(they have a kit built for the 25G Rohn).
I'm hopping this will be the solution to climbing my tower :) .
-David.



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:21 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bison.alfred.edu!kato.theramp.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help- 40 Meter Yagis
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 22:46:44 -0500
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.12.1.165
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)

Ranson J. Pelt wrote:
>
> I want to purchase a 40 Meter shortened Yagi.  Currently looking at the
> Cushcraft 40-2CD and the Hygain Discover 7-2.
>
> Anyone out there using one of these antennas?  Would appreciate any input
> to help me decide which one I should go with.
>
> Thanks - 73
>
> --
> Ranson J. Pelt
> [e-mail]
> QST de nz4iIn a reply to your request, another reader said that his Cushcraf
t 40-2CD
worked great but that he recommended some survivability mods.
I do not know the dates but the mods of which he speaks were in two or
three issues of the NCJ (National Contest Journal, published by ARRL).
If you get the NCJ, or know someone who does, have them look through the
1994 and 1995 issues; there are two or three articles on mdofiying the
40-2CD to make it tougher.  Without those mods, lots of guys have
problems with them in the long run.
Have you considered a Telrx antenna?  Theirs are manufactured for
military.  Don't remember address but they are in Asbury Park, NJ.


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:22 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bofh.mi.org!frankensun.altair.com!nntp.coast.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!night.primate.wisc.edu!relay!relay-wo!dtix.dt.navy.mil!navair2.nalda.navy.mil!avalon.chinalake.navy.mil!harwoodmac.chinalake.navy.mil!user
From: [e-mail] (Bill Harwood)
Subject: Re: HI-Q antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (NAWS news admin)
Organization: NAWC/WD 416000D
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 00:23:11 GMT
Lines: 48

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

> I am looking for information on antennas with extremely narrow bandwidth
> for use on a dual frequency packet setup.  All antennas I have seen aim
> for the maximum bandwidth possible.  I am looking for the minimum bandwidth
> possible, for a single frequency.  A duplexer has been considered, but I
> don't think it is a $$$ option.
>
> I tried a full wave loop, but the bandwidth was 4 MHz, even with magnet wire
.
> I'm trying to run a gateway, but rx blanking occurs, even 2 MHz away.
> Ideally, I'd like to run 145.07 and 145.79 together for the APRS crowd.
> What I'm aiming for is 1200 baud on 145.07 and 9600 baud on 147.57 as a
> dual entry gateway into internet.
>
> I have worked with a loop antenna for hf operation(MFJ) which has a width
> of only 30 khz.  All 2m antennas I have seen are at least a few MHz on
> average.  The hf loop is a natural filter, and rejects all nearby signals,
> even 100 khz away.  The hf loop runs a Q of 50 to 500 depending on the band.
>
> I have considered building a scale version of the loop, but I don't know if
> the capacitor is increased or decreased in value.  My ignorance is showing.
>
> 73 de Tom S.
> [e-mail]

SInce bandwidth is a percentage of frequency and we are at 146MHz area you
are not likely to get a high enough Q antenna to solve your problem.  You
appear to have a 720KHz spread betwen signals.  That is similar to the
600KHz split for 2 Meter repeaters in amateur service.  You probably do
not need the full 80 to 100 db isolation needed to protect a sensitive
reciever on a repeater since digital is more forgiving.  You have two
possible solutions.  One is to get distance between your two antennas and
possibly help this by using directional antennas.  You will prbably still
need some cavity filters (cans) to provide isolation.  If you are on a
single antenna you will prbably need three cans on each side (will look
like the duplexor cans on a repeater).  For seperate antennas one or two
cans should suffice.  remember what you are tradeing offf is reviever
sensitivity.  i.e.  the less filtering the more de-sensitization you will
experience.  Lots of signal into the reciever from directional antennas or
high power transmitters at the sending end will allow the signal to get
through.

The solution will be to find some cans and put them in line.

It aint good news but it is the news.

Good Luck


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:23 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!usenet
From: [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 13 Feb 1996 22:52:38 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 5
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tboza.ch.intel.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 is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
What tool would best be used to make the hole?

WB7ASR...



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:24 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!ausnews.austin.ibm.com!geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!arlut.utexas.edu!news.eden.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Bradley/KK5MH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 02:55:35 GMT
Organization: Adhesive Media, Inc.
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <4friof$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net-3-008.austin.eden.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (WB7ASR) wrote:

>What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
>What tool would best be used to make the hole?

>WB7ASR...

I used a 3/4" hole saw with a built-in pilot drill.  The instructions
are included with the NMO mount.  I recommend using a high quality saw
to avoid messing up the car.

73,
John



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:25 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!netcom10!faunt
From: [e-mail] (Doug Faunt N6TQS [phone])
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
In-Reply-To: Bob Wilson's message of Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:14:59 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: at home, in Oakland
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 18:34:03 GMT
Lines: 32


   From: Bob Wilson <[e-mail]>
   Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
   Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:14:59 -0800

   WB7ASR wrote:
   >
   > What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
   > What tool would best be used to make the hole?
   >
   > WB7ASR...

   Tom,
           A 3/4" hole is the typical requirement...although other "special"
   bases are available...such as 3/8".

           A 3/4" hole saw on an electric drill has worked just fine for the
   dozen or so I've installed.  You just have to be mindful of the
   headliner!

   Good Luck

   Bob Wilson
   WA4PUJ


I'd also suggest covering the area near the hole with tape.  The hot
metal chips from the sawing can melt their way into the clearcoat and
be unremovable.  They then rust, and make a mess.

73, doug



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:26 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!bcarh189.bnr.ca!nrtphba6.bnr.ca!brtph500.bnr.ca!rlukas
From: [e-mail] (Bob KB9MS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 14 Feb 1996 12:31:17 GMT
Organization: Ham Radio
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4fskml$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: brtph8db.bnr.ca
Originator: rlukas@brtph8db


In article <4fr4nm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7AS
R) writes:
|> What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
|> What tool would best be used to make the hole?
|>
|> WB7ASR...
|>
I use a 3/4" chassis punch to make the hole.  Its nice and clean.  They do mak
e
a hole saw but you tend to put too much pressure downward and wrinkly the roof
.

First make a pilot hole bigh enought for the chassis punch screw, then under
the hole scrape a little of the metal so there is a good ground connection.

Best antenna mount Ive ever used.  Good Luck..

73 de Bob KB9MS Raleigh
--
******************************************************************************
Bob Lukaszewski KB9MS Replies to Internet '[e-mail]' or '[e-mail]'
The views expressed here do not reflect the opinions of BNR or Nortel..


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:27 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.av.qnet.com!ibbs!js
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]><[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger)
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 14:30:07 GMT
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Lines: 28


In article <[e-mail]>, Bob Wilson ([e-mail]) wr
ites:
>WB7ASR wrote:
>>
>> What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
>> What tool would best be used to make the hole?
>>
>> WB7ASR...
>
>Tom,
>       A 3/4" hole is the typical requirement...although other "special"
>bases are available...such as 3/8".
>
>       A 3/4" hole saw on an electric drill has worked just fine for the
>dozen or so I've installed.  You just have to be mindful of the
>headliner!
>
>Good Luck
>
>Bob Wilson
>WA4PUJ
>


Remove the headliner when doing the install.  I have also found that
the 3/8" hole and mounts are much easier to install.



--
Jeff Stillinger  <[e-mail]>


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:28 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!satisfied.apocalypse.org!news2.near.net!cronkite.xyplex.com!usenet
From: Gary Thorburn <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 08:50:52 -0500
Organization: Xyplex, Inc. Littleton, Massachusetts
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]> <4friof$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gwt.xyplex.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.4 sun4m)

John Bradley/KK5MH wrote:
>
> [e-mail] (WB7ASR) wrote:
>
> >What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
> >What tool would best be used to make the hole?
>
> >WB7ASR...
>
> I used a 3/4" hole saw with a built-in pilot drill.  The instructions
> are included with the NMO mount.  I recommend using a high quality saw
> to avoid messing up the car.
>
> 73,
> John

Best tool is a "Greelee Punch", 3/4-inch size. Nice, Neat job, you
just drill a pilot hole first.  However, the "punch" only works
if you have access to both sides of the metal you are cutting
thru, for example if you can drop the dome lite and access
the inside.

/****
*  Gary W. Thorburn  KD1TE
*  email address:  [e-mail]
****/


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:29 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!louie.disney.com!root
From: Jim Markle <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: I need hf wire antenna help.........
Date: 13 Feb 1996 19:35:41 GMT
Organization: Walt Disney Company InterNetNews site
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <4fqp6d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.7.141.52
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2 (Windows; U; 32bit)


Briefly (cw version): Can I add coils of wire to a tuner/ladderline fed
dipole to increase  wire lenght and thus performance on 75M without hurting
10M-40M?

Not so briefly (ssb version):
I have a ladder line fed flattop dipole (approx 33'/side) I'm tuning it for
pretty acceptable outputs (except on 75m) with an MFJ tuner.  On 75m it
loads up but I know not much is actually being radiated.  And I want better
"real" performance on 75m. I can't add any more length to either side of
the dipole without practically doubling back the wire on itself.  Very
small lot......

I have some open coils that are about 2" dia at 1/8" spacing.  Can I add a
piece of this coil to each side of the dipole and effectively increase my
total wire length, even though a chunk of it is all coiled up?

Would it be better to insert the coil at the feedpoint?  Midpoint?
Endpoint of the dipole???

Using a good tuner, will I be able to still get a good amount of signal
past the feedline and up into the air?  Or will the coil's inductance
somehow cancel any benefit I'm hoping for and leave me with a very short,
high freq resonant dipole with the coils acting as traps?

Thanks very much in advance for any help, it's much appreciated.

Jim Markle
KB5OB/6



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:30 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: I need hf wire antenna help.........
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 96 22:00:07 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fqp6d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Jim Markle <[e-mail]>

Hi Jim, If 75m is the only band with which you are concerned,
how about considering establishing a Z0-match with components
that don't dissipate much power. Some simple measurements
will yield the information needed. The components can be
switched remotely if desired. If you're interested, email me.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:31 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!noao!math.arizona.edu!news.Arizona.EDU!nemo.as.arizona.edu!hlester
From: [e-mail] (Howard Lester)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: I need hf wire antenna help.........
Date: 13 Feb 1996 22:47:41 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <4fr4ed$[e-mail]>
References: <4fqp6d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nemo.as.arizona.edu

In article <4fqp6d$[e-mail]> Jim Markle <[e-mail]
m> writes:
>
>Not so briefly (ssb version):
>I have a ladder line fed flattop dipole (approx 33'/side) I'm tuning it for
>pretty acceptable outputs (except on 75m) with an MFJ tuner.  On 75m it
>loads up but I know not much is actually being radiated.  And I want better
>"real" performance on 75m. I can't add any more length to either side of

Jim, the following will help greatly, but still might not be great:  ;-)

Tie the ends of the feedline, at the transmatch end, together. Attach the
tied end to the transmatch using the "random wire" configuration. Attach
a suitable counterpoise (i.e. appropriate length of wire) to the transmatch's
ground terminal, and you're all set to operate 75m. The counterpoise is
to alleviate/eliminate RF feedback and other hazards at the transmitter;
typically a 1/4 wavelength wire will do, or the use of one of those
"artificial ground" boxes will also work well. When the counterpoise wire
is of the correct length, the wire's end is VERY "hot", so take all
precautions.

Howard Lester KE7QJ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:32 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.dpc.net!novia!nntp.inc.net!news.sol.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.texas.net!chilesp
From: [e-mail] (Pat Chiles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: IDEAS FOR HAZER TYPE SYSTEM?
Date: 9 Feb 1996 23:06:43 GMT
Organization: Texas Networking, Inc.
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <4fgk23$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: chilesp.intrepid.net
Summary: Anyone have some good ideas or reference articles on build a hazer type system
To: REC.RADIO.AMATEUR.ANTENNA
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

for a tower.  One suggestion has been steel cables with water pipe
riding up and down them.  A construction article reference would be
great.  Thanks  Pat, AA8NY - [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:33 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!brighton.openmarket.com!decwrl!pagesat.net!a3bsrv.nai.net!mgate.arrl.org!news
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Info on 2414.5 mhz
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 09:57:12 -0500
Organization: American Radio Relay League
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zlau.arrl.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b6b (Win16; I)

Chris Tabor wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I would like info on max radiation antenna configurations for 2414.5
> mhz. Can anyone help?

For maximum signal strength in a particular direction at 2.4 GHz,
nothing really competes with a large reflecting surface (typically
a parabolic dish, though spherical approximations can also work
well if properly fed).  I think all the amateur moonbounce work
between 2 and 10 GHz has been with parabolic dish antennas--nothing
else is as practical in achieving the required gain.

For a lightweight portable 12 ft dish design, see page 19-16 of the
ARRL antenna book.

Zack KH6CP/1


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:34 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.slic.com!usenet
From: Chris Tabor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Info on 2414.5 mhz
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 12:36:14 -0500
Organization: Edwards Productions
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nich_dial12.slic.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b6a (Win95; I)

Hello,
I would like info on max radiation antenna configurations for 2414.5
mhz. Can anyone help?
--
-C
--H
---R
----I
-----S
______________________________________________________________________


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:36 1996
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
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!xpat.postech.ac.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!mdisea!pilchuck!news
From: [e-mail] (Tom  Zoch)
Subject: Information on equipment sought by new Tech
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: inet-gw
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet news)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Sosiity fer spelen exalanse
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 02:20:34 GMT
Lines: 50
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19106 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14183 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24986 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13362 rec.radio.amateur.misc:98126 rec.radio.amateur.policy:33110 rec.radio.amateur.space:6337



Hi,
I am going to be taking my Tech tests on Saturday (2/17) and am now starting
to look in to what type of radios to get. I plan to put a 2M Mobile in my
truck and get a more substantial base for home.

For home I'm looking into Base Multiband / Multimode Transceivers and trying
to decide what will be my best bet. I was thinking of one that would cover
at least 2M and perhaps 70cm. I am interested in working into Satellite and
EME as well as FM and perhaps some local CW, 12V operation would be a plus
but not a major requirement. I do plan on upgrading to at least General with
in the next year and expanding also into some HF as well. So I would want to
take that into consideration as well. possibly using Transverters get to the
higher freqs for satellite and EME and going with a more basic UHF/VHF base
unit.

For the mobile unit I was thinking of a rather simple 2M unit for repeater
and simplex FM. I live in a rather remote area in the western foothills of
the Cascades so I think one of the higher output power units would be in
order. I was considering picking up one of the new Radio Shack units. As far
as I can tell it has most everything I am looking for at a reasonable price.
From the cross talk I have seen on the net and the write up in CQ (VHF) it
seems to be a good choice.

I would like to take advantage of the wealth of experience of those out here
on the net and get some input from you as to what you think. Suggestions on
equipment to get or avoid as well as things to look for or useless features
to not even consider. For me price, value and reliability are important, I
have a modest but hopefully adequate amount set aside for starting up and
want to use it wisely. The Base unit I'll be looking for used at up coming
Ham fests so any information about current or older equipment would be
helpful.  I was thinking of picking up the Mobil new  ( if it is in or
around the same price range as the Radio Shack unit ) but am vary open to
suggestions.  I would also welcome comment on other accessory gear that you
feel would be useful as well as thoughts on band selection (pros and cons
of the diffrent amature bands ) or what ever info. you would like to pass on
to a newbie like myself. I know there are lots of books and other sources
around and would not mind pointers to the better source like that, but I am
primarily looking for personal insights and experience.

Thanks
TZ

Reply here or by e-mail to [e-mail]







From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:37 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!nntp.coast.net!news.net99.net!premier1.premier1.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.swap,alt.radio.amateur.club.clarc,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Information sought by new Tech
Date: 16 Feb 1996 18:13:31 GMT
Organization: none of the above
Lines: 48
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4g2hgb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynamic-39.premier1.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19125 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:25002 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13372 rec.radio.swap:57676 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14200 rec.radio.amateur.misc:98147 rec.radio.amateur.policy:33120 rec.radio.amateur.space:6339


Hi,
I am going to be taking my Tech tests on Saturday  (2/17) and am now
starting to look in to what type of radios to get. I plan to put a 2M Mobile
in my truck and get a more substantial base for home.

For home I'm looking into Base Multiband  / Multimode Transceivers and
trying to decide what will be my best bet. I was thinking of one that would
cover at least 2M and perhaps 70cm. I am interested in working into
Satellite and EME as well as FM and perhaps some local CW, 12V operation
would be a plus but not a major requirement. I do plan on upgrading to at
least General with in the next year and expanding also into some HF as well.
So I would want to take that into consideration as well. possibly using
Transverters get to the higher freqs for satellite and EME and going with a
more basic UHF/VHF base unit.

For the mobile unit I was thinking of a rather simple 2M unit for repeater
and simplex FM. I live in a rather remote area in the western foothills of
the Cascades so I think one of the higher output power units would be in
order. I was considering picking up one of the new Radio Shack units. As far
as I can tell it has most everything I am looking for at a reasonable price.
>From the cross talk I have seen on the net and the write up in CQ (VHF) it
seems to be a good choice.

I would like to take advantage of the wealth of experience of those out here
on the net and get some input from you as to what you think. Suggestions on
equipment to get or avoid as well as things to look for or useless features
to not even consider. For me price, value and reliability are important, I
have a modest but hopefully adequate amount set aside for starting up and
want to use it wisely. The Base unit I'll be looking for used at up coming
Ham fests so any information about current or older equipment would be
helpful.  I was thinking of picking up the Mobil new  ( if it is in or
around the same price range as the Radio Shack unit ) but am vary open to
suggestions.  I would also welcome comment on other accessory gear that you
feel would be useful as well ( for example band selection for Satellite and
EME ), or what ever info you would like to pass on to a newbie like myself.
 I know there are lots of books and other sources around and would not mind
pointers to the better source like that, but  I am primarily looking for
personal insights and experience .

Reply here or  by  e-mail to    [e-mail]

Thanks
TZ






From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:38 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Franklin M. Hays  VE6NU)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: IntelliRotor
Date: 13 Feb 96 18:32:40 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Hi all...is there anyone out there who is using the IntelliRotor
HD 1780 by Heath?
I have lost my manual and need the basic setup commands.

If anyone can help, please e-mail the setup commands to
[e-mail].

Tu es 73 de Frank VE6NU (ex VE6INA)



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:39 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news.dacom.co.kr!newsrelay.netins.net!news.netins.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Richard Geifman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Inverted "V"
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 20:30:20 GMT
Organization: INS Info Services, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4fqsdb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: eldr-01-04.dialup.netins.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have a chance to put up an inverted V at a respectable height.  Do
they fire broadside or off the ends or omni-directional?  I haven't
been able to find any authority claiming one way or the other.  Any
opinions?

Thanks.
[e-mail]
KB0KRO




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:40 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted "V"
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 96 22:12:59 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fqsdb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Richard Geifman <[e-mail]>

Richard Geifman <[e-mail]> writes:

>I have a chance to put up an inverted V at a respectable height.  Do
>they fire broadside or off the ends or omni-directional?  I haven't

I'm no authority but I have played around with ELNEC. Above
2 times 5/8 WL long, the radiation pattern of a horizontal
antenna becomes multi-lobed with 4 major lobes. The same
thing happens with inv-Vs with some of the power in the
4 major lobes having a very steep take off angle which
may be good for DX to the moon. In other words, inv-Vs
don't work nearly as well as horizontal antennas when the
es 5/8 WL long.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:40 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx03-06
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted "V"
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 96 09:47:57 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <4fsb2s$[e-mail]>
References: <4fqsdb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-06.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <4fqsdb$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Richard Geifman) wrote:
>I have a chance to put up an inverted V at a respectable height.  Do
>they fire broadside or off the ends or omni-directional?  I haven't
>been able to find any authority claiming one way or the other.  Any
>opinions?
>
>Thanks.
>[e-mail]
>KB0KRO

The radiation is stronger broadside, although they radiate more off the
ends than a dipole. Expect roughly an 8 dB side-to end ratio. (This is from
about 1-1/2 to 3 "S-Units" depending on what kind of rig you have, what
band you're on, and where on the S-meter scale you're measuring.)

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:41 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.neca.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!Dortmund.Germany.EU.net!news.mch.sni.de!horus.mch.sni.de!news
From: [e-mail] (Frits Jensen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Inverted L for 160M
Date: 14 Feb 1996 14:50:13 GMT
Organization: SNI
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <4fssr5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: potd1231.mch.sni.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

Dear OMs

I am planning to put up an inverted L for 160.

How about putting it up parallel to a 80M full size vertical and use the same
radial net, plus adding some 120 ft radiall. say 10 or so?

How long shall the L be cut, given the vertical part is 65 ft?

I will probably need a capacitor in the feedpoint?

- Is it clever to connect my 500 ft of chickenwire fence to the groundplane?

Look forward to get a lot of answers to these Qs.

73 Frits DL4MHU in Munich




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:42 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news1.i1.net!news1.inlink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-Pole antenna
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 21:28:35 GMT
Organization: Inlink
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4fqv5j$[e-mail]>
References: <v01540a00ad458ba30485@[204.157.128.94]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip133.inlink.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (xcitor) wrote:

>I am planning on building a J-Pole antenna and wondered if anyone can point
>me to a WWW page or ftp site where I can find plans for this and various
>other antennas.

>TIA

Check out my web page http://www.inlink.com/~raiar for J-Pole,
Stacked-J's and Mirror-Image J's plus K-Factor charts.  Page also
includes plans for the Copper Cactus single or multi-band J-Poles.

TTUL
Gary - KG0ZP





From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:43 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.us.world.net!guardian.up.edu!gateway.sequent.com!news.orst.edu!engr.orst.edu!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!psgrain!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sun4nl!news.nic.surfnet.nl!tuegate.tue.nl!news.IAEhv.nl!pm2d14.IAEhv.nl!pac
From: [e-mail] (pac)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: logaritmic period antenna
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 14:13:06
Organization: Stichting Internet Access Eindhoven
Lines: 5
Distribution: all
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm2d14.iaehv.nl
Keywords: logaritmic
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Hello, who can help me for detailed description or formulas to build an
Logaritmic period antenna to measure EM immunity between 30Mhz-1Ghz ?
TNX in advance from Hans de Pa3gpw, please send e-mail to [e-mail]
best 73's



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:44 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!fish.pond.com!kd3bj!jolt.pagesat.net!netserv.com!aimnet.com!news.exodus.net!imci4!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!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] (PaulS90212)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Skywire
Date: 11 Feb 1996 17:14:58 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4flpp2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (PaulS90212)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I use to use an 80 meter horizontal loop at a low elevation.  Best antenna
I ever had at my house.  ('Course I haven't had an hf beam)

- Paul, N6DN


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:45 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!interactive.net!winternet.com!visi.com!news2.mr.net!mr.net!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!southlin.demon.co.uk!graham
From: [e-mail] (Graham Seale)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Skywire
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 13:34:48 GMT
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <FB1BEB90@MHS> <[e-mail]> <4fjafg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: southlin.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: southlin.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Archimedes TTFN Version 0.36

In message <4fjafg$[e-mail]> sholisky wrote:

> I've had a few winters of using a full size horz.80 meter loop. My
> results at 30 feet ( in the clear ) are very positive. Coax & balun or
> 450 ohm line both work well. As for results some of the strongest
> signals I have ever heard ! Great choice for qrp work...
>
> 73's Scott WB0ATR
>
>

*Sigh* There's just no logic nor even poetic justice in it. I put up
a tree mounted strut with pulleys for a friend. It was intended to be
the high anchor for a cage vertical. Before we get the vertical together
he hooks up an indifferent 80m loop out of thin old wire draped around
his yard on 7m sticks and ending on the high strut. Then he starts working
DX in enviable fashion. We still haven't got around to the vertical - he's
having too much fun!

Graham G4WNT



--
Graham Seale


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:46 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!sun!oucsboss!gw2.att.com!gw1.att.com!csn!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!iafrica.com!diakonos!rusty
From: [e-mail] (Rusty Lotter)
Date: 12 Feb 96 19:53:15
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Loop Skywire
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: trevor.holmes @ diakonos.iaccess.za
Organization: Diakonos BBS
Lines: 52

 Hi Trevor,
 How are things going?

This antenna for all bands sounds great!


 -=> Quoting UUCP to All <=-

 UU> @MSGID: [e-mail] 29b80001
 UU> From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
 UU> Subject: Re: Loop Skywire
 UU> Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)

 UU> I've been using my loop skywire for 5 years now. Its cut for 160 and
 UU> up  60ft. Does a great job. I feed it with a 4:1 balun and RG8x. SWRs
 UU> are low  on 80-10 except WARC which are only 3:1 there. 160 requires
 UU> some tuning  because mine resonates at 1750kc in order to make the
 UU> multiples come out  in the cw sections of the upper bands. I tried
 UU> feeding it with coax like  the author suggested but that requires
 UU> constant use of a tuner if you  have a SS rig plus I was plagued with
 UU> RF problems on the rig. I recommend  one of the new 4:1 current baluns
 UU> made from 200 ferrite beads on two  strands of RG62 teflon coax. Don't
 UU> expect miracles if you only put it up  15ft or something though. Thats
 UU> a buch of hog-wash. Mine is  omnidirectional on all bands or at least
 UU> the lobes overlap enough that I  can't tell anything. Very low angle
 UU> radiation will occure on bands above  40 meters with the 160m loop.
 UU> Typical for most any antenna anyway.  Lightning doesn't bother it much
 UU> since its at dc ground potential at all  times, a geat feature!

 UU> [e-mail] wrote:
 UU> : Hi Group

 UU> : Is there anyone out there that uses or has used this antenna?
 UU> : How does it compare to a dipole on 4 MHz?
 UU> : 73, Roland
 UU> : AAR2AA/WF4P

 UU> --
 UU> Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky

 UU> -!-
 UU>  ! Origin: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456) (8:79/1)



... JUNK: Stuff we throw away. STUFF: Junk we keep. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.1
--
|FMLYNET:  Rusty Lotter 8:79/0
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
| FMLYNET SA <> INTERNET GATEWAY at Diakonos BBS


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:47 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.math.psu.edu!ra.nrl.navy.mil!usenet
From: David Drumheller <drumhell>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Low profile, 2-meter antenna
Date: 12 Feb 1996 12:34:21 GMT
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <4fnc4d$[e-mail]>
References: <4fk658$[e-mail]> <4fl96h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: claudette.nrl.navy.mil
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1IS (X11; I; IRIX 5.3 IP22)
X-URL: news:4fl96h$[e-mail]

Just some unsolicited advice to those looking for a good low-profile,
2-meter antenna...

   My brother and sister-in-law (N3UMY and N3SYE) wanted to put their
2-meter radio in the dining room of their house, but needed to use a
low-profile antenna.  The highest spot in the dining room is
on the top of two free-standing bookshelves, and has about fourteen
inches of clearance from the ceiling.

   We constructed an antenna using a metal baking pan, a plastic coated
coat hanger, and a female, chassis mount PL-259 connector.  The baking
pan is approximately twelve by fourteen inches.  A hole for the
connector was drilled in the center of the pan.  The wire coat hanger
was unwrapped, and straightened by rolling it between a flat surface
and a piece of scrap wood.  A twenty inch piece of the coat hangar was
used for the vertical radiator which was soldered to the connector.  The
radiator is unoticeble because of the white coating.

   The finished antenna was place on top of the bookshelf, but because
there is only fourteen inches of clearance, the last 6 inches of the
antenna was bent horizontally.  The antenna was tuned by progressively
cutting back the tip of the antenna until we obtained an acceptable
match.  The highest SWR was 2:1 at the low end of the band.  At this
ratio only eleven percent of the power is reflected, so it's an
acceptable match.  I'm sure a better match could be obtained if the
radiator was vertical, and was place away form a wall with an aluminum
siding exterior.

-Dave
--
David Drumheller, KA3QBQ                phone: [phone]
Acoustics Division, Code 7140             fax: [phone]
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington, DC 20375-5350   e-mail: [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:49 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!news.uh.edu!lurch.sccsi.com!news.sccsi.com!tattoo.sccsi.com!nuchat!News.MO.NET!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Colin Wright)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: M2 6 meter halo
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 13:10:55 GMT
Organization: -=MO.NET=- MVP-Net, Inc's Missouri Operations
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4b467v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm3x21.dialip.mo.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/16.182

I just finished working through the pileups with my new IC-706 and M2
6m SQLoop and was VERY impressed.  It's not the same as working with a
beam, but it certainly is a nice antenna for small/no space
situations.  I was only running 90w into it (the antenna was mounted
on my balcony), and had a ball.  I *highly* recommend it!  The only
complaint I could possibly have is with the bandwidth; it is not
possible to work SSB (around 50.125) and switch to FM (52.525) with a
decent SWR reading.  I should probably have a vertically polarized
antenna for FM work anyway!

Colin, AA0YT
http://walden.mo.net/~aa0yt



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:49 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!newsroom.utas.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.uwa.edu.au!classic.iinet.com.au!hades.omen.com.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Klingon Empire)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: need : a Yagi Antenna design program for 477 Mhz (pictorial type)
Date: 14 Feb 1996 12:16:03 GMT
Organization: Omen Computer Services, Perth, Western Australia
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4fsjq3$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: worf.omen.com.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Greetings,
          I am in desperate need of a Yagi antenna design program for the
frequency of 477 Mhz preferably between 8 to 23 elements and folded
dipole fed. If you have any info please Email me....

thankyou for taking the time to read this message...


regards   [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:51 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsat!engineer.mrg.uswest.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!news.mindlink.net!uniserve!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Handheld Doppler Ant Circuit
Date: 16 Feb 1996 00:21:13 GMT
Organization: UNIServe Online
Lines: 34
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4g0ilp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: abb0229.tvs.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

Hello:

It never fails, you keep a magazine for years and one day decide you
should toss it out. Within seconds of the garbage man taking it away,
you NEED an article from it!!!

I'm looking for an article on building a handheld D.F. antenna with a
small doppler circuit on the handle. This particular one looked like a
bow tie antenna on a short handle with a 9vdc battery and PCB doppler
circuit attached. I can't remeber which mag it was in, but it was a
few years old.

If you have the article or a similar circuit, can you PLEASE contact
me and I'll pay for costs to get a copy.

If you wish, you could fax it to me, call my voice phone number and
I'll arrange for the fax to be collect.



Steve Crawford, VE7IIF
Ph: [phone]
Fax: [phone]



PGP Fingerprint: 31 CD 7E DA 1B E3 8A 14 E2 9B 0D D8 C5 27 23 38
Finger: [e-mail] for PGP Public Key


Steve Crawford
PGP Fingerprint: 31 CD 7E DA 1B E3 8A 14 E2 9B 0D D8 C5 27 23 38
Finger: [e-mail] for PGP Public Key



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:51 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!worldlinx.com!thunder.mgl.ca!granite.sentex.net!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Off-Center Fed (OCF) Dipole??
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 96 20:51:43 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <ericr.823020273@access2> <[e-mail]> <Pine.SOL.3.91.960201150610.19455A-100000@iglou> <[e-mail]> <4f2uad$[e-mail]> <Pine.SOL.3.91.960206173111.1 <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com
X-To: Mark Pettigrew <[e-mail]>

Mark Pettigrew <[e-mail]> writes:

>Do you have a copy of the relevant bits from the app note, or more details of
 the
>source?

Hi Mark, I think Antennas West still sells the application not. It is worth
the $7.50 price IMO. Antennas West, Box 50062-C, Provo, UT 84605,
[phone]  Of particular interest are the radiation patterns for all
bands 75m-10m.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:52 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Otterson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Opinions on 6/2 or 6/2/.7Ant
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 00:12:25 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <4frakc$[e-mail]>
References: <4fq31p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: otterson.mindspring.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Lynn Stolz) wrote:


>I need some guidance on what you are using for 6/2 meters FM.

The Larson NMO-150 will load up on 6 and 2 meters.  The pattern's not
the best on 6 though....
Jeff Otterson
-------------
[e-mail]
Maker and user of tools
PGP key available at http://www.mindspring.com/~otterson/pgp.htm



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:53 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!malgudi.oar.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!newsfeed.acns.nwu.edu!ftpbox!mothost!schbbs!news
From: Paul Moller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Opinions on 6/2 or 6/2/.7Ant
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: MOTOROLA
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 15:55:50 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <4fq31p$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (SCHBBS News Account)
Nntp-Posting-Host: 144.188.36.8
Lines: 31

Lynn Stolz wrote:
>
> I need some guidance on what you are using for 6/2 meters FM.
>
> Comet makes a GP-15, Diamond makes a V-2000. There may be others, like
> a new MFJ 1764 dual bander.  Opinions?
>
> Thanks,
> Lynn
> --
> Lynn Stolz  N8AJ [e-mail]

Dual band and Tri band antennas are almost always a compromise! When you
make a longer than 1/2 wave vertical antenna, say stacked half waves to
give some gain, you have to watch the phase angles very carefully in
order to get the magnitudes to add in the horizontal plane. It is EASY
to get the phase wrong and get a butterfly pattern sending much of your
energy into space. The demands of multiband operation cause the designer
to either overlook such issues, or to make a very complicated antenna.
My advise is:

1) Choose a multiband antenna based on someone who has simulated the
model in question and can verify the design.  (I can speak to 2m/70cm
thru the glass antennas only) Looking at the antenna in the store is
only a guess!, or

2) Choose one which does not used stacked elements and only uses a
"fore-shortened" element on the lowest freq. This may be the choice for
a 6m mobile antenna.

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:54 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!psgrain!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Lynn Stolz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Opinions on 6/2 or 6/2/.7Ant
Date: 13 Feb 1996 08:17:45 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus FreeNet
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4fq31p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: acme.freenet.columbus.oh.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


I need some guidance on what you are using for 6/2 meters FM.

Comet makes a GP-15, Diamond makes a V-2000. There may be others, like
a new MFJ 1764 dual bander.  Opinions?

Thanks,
Lynn
--
Lynn Stolz  N8AJ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:55 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!news.mind.net!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Craig A. Warnol (KB5UEJ))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Phasing Two Quagi's on 446.1
Date: 15 Feb 96 21:32:19 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

How would I go about making an array with two 8 element
quagis on 446.1?  I have two of them and would like
to put both of them up.  Is the proper way of doing this
to use 1/4 wave 75 ohm coax to one antenna and a 3/4 wave
75 ohm coax to the second, and have 1 wavelength separation
at the feedpoint. They are going to be vertical polarized
so I know the feed should be in the center of the vertical
side of the drive element.  Also what about a balun.  The
author in the ARRL antenna handbook states any balun he
added only introduced problems.  Can anyone give me any advise???

73 de Craig  (KB5UEJ)
[e-mail]      --- I-net E-mail
[e-mail]        --- AMPRnet E-mail
KB5UEJ@WA4WBI.#MOBAL.AL.USA.NOAM  --- packet E-mail



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:56 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.channel1.com!wizard.pn.com!sundog.tiac.net!shore!news
From: [e-mail] (JJ Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 08:52:46 GMT
Organization: WK1V
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <4frtbm$[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip-7-20.shore.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote to Gary Coffman::

Some stuff deleted by me...

>... My previous configuration is what a lot of "experts"
>recommend. 102 ft dipole fed with 300 ohm ladder-line into a 4:1
>balun into an antenna tuner. For all of the hams who are using
>that configuration, there is a much better way to go.

Okay...I have a 102' dipole up 45' high in the back yard.  Fed with
450 Ohm ladder line, about 50' of it, to a 4:1 balun then a run of
about 40' of RG8X to an MFJ-941C tuner (don't knock it).  If it works
fairly on all HF amateur bands, save 160 - and I can get it to do that
too without melting too much of the plastic -what's left of it anyway
- around the torriodal balun -  does that mean I'm better off
changing it?

   jjm  :)




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:58 1996
Date: 12 Feb 1996 11:28:08 EDT
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!istar.net!infoshare!whome!gts!feline!humnet.humberc.on.ca!hduff
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Hugh Duff)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: HumberNet LSS, Humber College, Canada
References: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Lines: 64


> Garry Foster <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >Well I guess I need to reread this article as I thought it was
> >"supposed" to be a full spectrum(hf) tunner. In other words
> >functionally equal to the SGC, Icom and Kenwood tuner.  Why would it
>
> I'm thinking if someone goes to that much trouble to build an auto
> tuner that matches no better than a commercial unit, why bother?
> If you match your auto-tuner design to your antenna, it will accomplish
> perfect matching as opposed to "full-spectrum" matching, be lower loss
> on the average, and require half the components. Thus my original question.
>
> One of the advantages to an auto-tuner is that it can be located anywhere
> in the system. It seems ridiculous not to locate it at an optimum position.
>
> 73, Cecil, KG7BK


Re: AT-11
This IS a "full spectrum" HF tuner.  It will bring an out-of-tune antenna
for a particular band back to 50 ohms for the radio to 'see'.
Where do you come up with the idea that it is an "8 band" tuner only ?
It is essentially equivalent to an ICOM or KENWOOD tuner (not familiar
with the SGC model) from a functional point of view. It may not be any
better but is sure is a lot cheaper. Have you priced a commercial
autotuner lately ?

The difference between the AT-11 and say a Kenwood model is that it
uses discrete caps and coils whose values can be combined to make up for
256X256X2 combinations in a stepped switched method whereas most of the
commercial units use stepped coils (or one big tapped coil) and variable
capacitors that are controled by motors and servo loop circuitry.
They may be configured as PI networks instead of the simpler L but
in most cases the the L config. will do the trick. The tradeoff of
using the switched method with 17 relays versus the linear variable cap
method is that the latter requires motor linkages and mounting plates
that are more difficult to fabricate for most Hams who don't have access
to a machine or metal fab. shop. Then you get into the requirement of a
standardized enclosure if you want to offer descriptions of the motor
mounting details. And you have to offer a source for standardized motors
which can be relatively 'not cheap'. Not to mention more difficult
circuitry for the servo loop circuit.
Just as a matter of interest, there have been commercially made tuner
that use similar circuitry to the AT-11

I propose that the AT-11 circuit is much more easily reproduceable than
the linear variable cap method. The switched method with its 131072
various combinations for all intents and purposes offers "linear-like"
tuning resolution with a much simpler construction. There really aren't
that many components involved.
You tell me which method you'd prefer to tackle ?
I welcome the AT-11 article from a technical interest as well as
an economically competitive perspective.

73 de

Hugh Duff  VA3TO Toronto




---
 ■ NFX v1.3 [000]


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:36:59 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1.cris.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Marv Uphaus)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 14 Feb 1996 02:07:42 -0500
Organization: Not Organized
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]>
 <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: galileo.cris.com

On Sat, 10 Feb 96 19:46:31 -0500 Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I'm thinking if someone goes to that much trouble to build an auto
>tuner that matches no better than a commercial unit, why bother?

Check the prices of SGC and ICOM auto-tuners...  This one is obviously a
compromise that errors on the side of low price...  I think that the design
is excellent...  If I didn't already have an ICOM AH2 I'd buy a kit...

Marv...

-----------------------------------------------------------
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken.
                                  --Bertrand Russell


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:00 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 96 21:32:57 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fokfv$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fq8u4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Todd Little <[e-mail]>

Todd Little <[e-mail]> writes:

>I'm missing something.  At the end of the ladder line, you said
>above the impedance of the antenna and feedline on 75m was 120+j1000.
>Where is 300-j1500 coming from?  The inductors are trying to do what?

Sorry for the typo. The impedance in (1) should have been
120-j1000. Back up the line a bit at 300-j1500 is where I
put the series toroids which neutralized the -j1500 ohms
and caused 100% re-reflection resulting in an SWR of 1:1
on the 300 ohm ladder-line and a 300 ohm resistive load
for my 4:1 balun.

>Also, is the tuner in the loop in this picture to at least see what
>SWR the transmitter is seeing?

The transmitter sees a 50 ohm SWR of less than 1.3:1 in either case.

>I don't know, but it would be interesting to find out where the
>power is going.  Either something must be getting hot, or you

I do plan to track it down. I suspect the balun, which is
20 ft. from the tuner is getting hot. I could probably
track it down fast if I threw the amp on there.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:01 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 96 21:52:36 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Hugh Duff <[e-mail]>

Hugh Duff <[e-mail]> writes:

>Where do you come up with the idea that it is an "8 band" tuner only ?

Last time I checked, there were only 8 HF amateur bands between
3 and 30 MHz. IMO, it should take no more than 8 relays to tune
8 bands. My all-band auto tuner uses 6 relays, 3 toroids, and
one motor-driven air variable cap for all eight bands. How
does the auto-tuner like 1+j1000 ohms or 2000-j3500 ohms? I'll
bet not very much.

>You tell me which method you'd prefer to tackle ?
>I welcome the AT-11 article from a technical interest as well as
>an economically competitive perspective.

For sure ones hands are tied for mobile installations. The
logical place for an auto tuner is at the base of the
mobile antenna since coax is required. The possibilities
for fixed antennas are almost unlimited. Tuners in ladder-
line systems should go in the ladder-line for maximum
. How does one use the AT-11 with ladder-
line?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:02 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.comm.net!imci3!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!newsfeed.acns.nwu.edu!ftpbox!mothost!lmpsbbs!news
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Burke Redi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 14 Feb 1996 12:34:26 GMT
Organization: Motorola RPG  I.C. Technology Center
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4fsksi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: md20.comm.mot.com

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
}In article <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]
> writes:
}>Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> writes:
}>
}>Based on the signal strength measurements from my antenna system, the
}>customized tuner performs up to 2 'S' units better than my MFJ-949. That
}>seems downright useful to me.
}
}12 db? Hmmm, that means that if you're transmitting with 100 watts
}the tuner is dissipating 93.75 watts. Must get pretty hot. I'd
}suggest the tuner is broken.
}
}Gary
Hold it Gary,

That 6dB/S-Unit is a standard not very well followed by amateur
manufaturers. The only real way to be sure is to connect a signal
generator and measure it.

The last manufacturer that I know actually followed the 6dB/S-Unit
was Signal-One.

73,

Bruce



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:03 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!egsner!convex!newshost.convex.com!bcm.tmc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!shore!news3.near.net!monk.proteon.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Message-ID: <4fl43k$[e-mail]>
Lines: 33
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: peanut.senie.com
Organization: Daniel Senie Consulting
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 16:05:08 GMT

In article <[e-mail]>,
Cecil Moore  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Garry Foster <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>Well I guess I need to reread this article as I thought it was
>>"supposed" to be a full spectrum(hf) tunner. In other words
>>functionally equal to the SGC, Icom and Kenwood tuner.  Why would it
>
>I'm thinking if someone goes to that much trouble to build an auto
>tuner that matches no better than a commercial unit, why bother?
>If you match your auto-tuner design to your antenna, it will accomplish
>perfect matching as opposed to "full-spectrum" matching, be lower loss
>on the average, and require half the components. Thus my original question.
>
>One of the advantages to an auto-tuner is that it can be located anywhere
>in the system. It seems ridiculous not to locate it at an optimum position.

I guess one argument would be that I'd have to build a half dozen different
auto tuners, then, one for each of my antennas. I presently use the auto
tuner in my FT990 with an A3S beam (which is not 1:1 across the entire 3
bands), a G5RV, a 160 meter inverted L, an R7, etc.

Practicality dictates a tuner that's somewhere centralized. This similarly
argues against feeding some of the antennas with ladder line, as I'd have
to switch the function of a manual tuner from one to the other of these
antenna types (not all tuners have antenna switches built in, either).

Dan
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:04 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx03-06
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 96 09:38:49 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4fsaho$[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fokfv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-06.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <4fokfv$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Todd Little) wrote:

>. . .

>Even with a generous S meter, 2 S units
>should be at least 8 dB. . .

Don't count on it! My ICOM 730 S-meter is 7.1 dB from S7 to S9 but only 2.9
from S2 to S4 (preamp out, 40 meter band). 2.9 is a far cry from 8. So now
we have a couple of data points for how much an "S-Unit" is. 2.9? 8? 12 dB?
What would you like it to be? Sorry, Cecil, the statement that one tuner is
"two S-units better" than the other is seriously lacking in information
content.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:05 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com!realtime.net!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 22:52:54 GMT
Lines: 23

In article <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
 writes:
>Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>might be cheaper? You could build tuning networks into each antenna
>>you use, or you could use an autotuner to handle matching the various
>>antennas to the radio. The former case isn't as flexible or generically
>>useful as the latter.
>
>Based on the signal strength measurements from my antenna system, the
>customized tuner performs up to 2 'S' units better than my MFJ-949. That
>seems downright useful to me.

12 db? Hmmm, that means that if you're transmitting with 100 watts
the tuner is dissipating 93.75 watts. Must get pretty hot. I'd
suggest the tuner is broken.

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] Sat Feb 17 13:37:06 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 14 Feb 1996 08:37:06 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4fsoi2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>Hi again, Gary. I don't know how many dB in an 'S' unit on N5AQM's
>receiver. Could be 4. Not all the loss is occuring in the tuner.
>The balun sees 120+j1000 ohms on 75m and I suspect most of the
>loss is there.

Could be two dB also Ceil. Why does does "six" keep coming back? Someone
please drive a stake through it's heart!

Using six dB as an "S" unit is about like a surveyor using a "stones
throw" on a land map. As I said in the amplifier thread, people commonly
tell me my 1500 watt PA picks up 20 dB over a 90 watt exciter!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:07 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!usenet.hana.nm.kr!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: [e-mail](David R. Mohr )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 17 Feb 1996 03:50:00 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <4g3j98$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4g247m$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-roc-il1-10.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Feb 16  7:50:00 PM PST 1996

In <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>What distance was he from you? How "sanitary" was his installation?
If the
>
>He's about 15 miles away. His wife is a good housekeeper.
>
>>The best way to do the test is by measuring the differential current
and
>>common mode in the feedline!!!! Then there would be no guessing!l

>
>Dang, you mean I have to do some work?
>
>>I expect things got a tiny bit better. The tuner probably lost 1/2 dB
if
>>it was tuned at an extreme of Q (much more L, much less C than
needed) and
>>the balun perhaps another  fraction of a dB. I hope you use the more
>>efficient 1:1 configuration in the tuner, and not the 4:1.
>
>It was not simply a perception. Things got appreciably better. I have
avoided
>75m in the past because most gave me poor signal reports. Think about
it -
>the 4:1 balun sees about 5k ohms. It's got 7 turns on it. That just
ain't
>gonna work. I have no idea what the balun was doing but I can
guarantee that
>it was not efficiently converting 5k ohms to 1250 ohms AND the tuner
>efficientll(I hate this editor) efficiently converting 1250 ohms to 50
ohms at
>the same time.
>
>What does a 4:1 balun do with 5k ohms? What does a tuner do with 1250
ohms? I
>don't know but whatever it is, it ain't worth ritin' home 'bout.
>
>73, Cecil, KG7Bk, OOTC

    Ok, guys, if you don't like the design/layout/theory of operation
of this particular tuner, don't buy the kit or build the thing.
    Don't you think you've beaten this thing to death already??
                            73 Dave.


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:08 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,fm.announce
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.nexusprime.org!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Subject: request for help building simple AM antenna, and maybe FM?
Message-ID: <2e7cc$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 21:31:49 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 12
Xref: news.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19141 fm.announce:19

Pardon my low tech interruption but can anyone tell me how to build an
AM antenna to hookup to a standard stereo receiver?  Is it better to
just buy a powered AM/FM antenna?  What is the best brand of indoor FM
antenna on the market for under $75 (the dipole just isn't cutting it
any more)?  I'm surrounded by my neighbor's receiver's, sat dishes,
microwave TV, elect. wires, etc.  Any help is appreciated

Thanks for your time
[e-mail]






From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:09 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!bison.alfred.edu!kato.theramp.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Requesting help with a 6-section Rohn tower.
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 22:50:41 -0500
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fdsin$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.12.1.165
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
To: Riza Akturan <[e-mail]>

Riza Akturan wrote:
>
> We are trying to re-erect a (>25-year old?) 6-section Rohn tower.
> Each section is 20 feet long and the 6 pieces
> fit into each other. There is a winch to crank
> up the tower, but all information on how to
> rig the steel cable to accomplish this is lost.
> If you have such a tower, would you mind getting
> us the rigging instructions?
>
> Please reply to this e-mail address,
> [e-mail]
>
> Thanks!Stop right there!!! Now, I recognize you folks are at U of Texas and
probably operatingon a budget.  But, what's the price of your life?  the
ability to walk?  a couple of arms and legs?
Towers are not to play with and a 25-yr-old Rohn is a deathtrap.

Contact Rohn directly.  Look in QST.  They have an ad in each issue.
Call them, write them, but stay off that tower until you hear from them.
You can screw around with high voltage and such, but don't mess with a
tower.


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:10 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!primus.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!ra.cgd.ucar.edu!tomas
From: [e-mail] (Bob Tomas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: short wave antenna reference sought
Date: 9 Feb 1996 14:03:41 GMT
Organization: Climate and Global Dynamics Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <4ffk7t$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ra.cgd.ucar.edu

Hello all,

I am searching for a reference containing plans/advice on the construction
of antennas for s/w radio listening.

Thanks,

Bob
n7nd


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:11 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!intac!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!ub!csn!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!monster.cibola.net!buffalo.utep.edu!cs.utep.edu!rgfn.epcc.edu!ad118
From: [e-mail] (Roy A Griffin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Slide Rule Wanted
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 18:56:14 GMT
Organization: The Rio Grande Free-Net, El Paso Community College, El Paso, TX
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 9


Wanted:
K & E Decilon slide rule. Either long or short version.
Instruction book for above.
I was forced to sell mine to finish college in the 60's
and I still miss it.

--
Roy Griffin


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:12 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!noc.nyx.net!nyx.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (ted kell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Slide Rule Wanted
Date: 14 Feb 1996 12:55:12 -0700
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <4ften0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx.nyx.net


Well, I have a K&E LOg-Log Decitrig that I got in highschool in the late
50's, and no you can't have it.  :)

I would like to get one of those demonstator jobs, the ones that hung over
the blackboard and were about 10 feet long.

I still drag my rule out now and then, much to the kids amazement.  They
cannot even begin to understand how I get answers out of it.

Ted

In article <[e-mail]>,
Roy A Griffin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Wanted:
>K & E Decilon slide rule. Either long or short version.
>Instruction book for above.
>I was forced to sell mine to finish college in the 60's
>and I still miss it.
>
>--
>Roy Griffin




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:13 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!ctrask
From: Christopher Trask <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Slide Rule Wanted
Date: 15 Feb 1996 07:32:01 -0700
Organization: Primenet [phone]
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4fvg51$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ften0$[e-mail]>
X-Posted-By: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Roy A Griffin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Wanted:
> K & E Decilon slide rule. Either long or short version.
> Instruction book for above.
> I was forced to sell mine to finish college in the 60's
> and I still miss it.
>
>--
> Roy Griffin

        I have found numerous K & E and Post instruction books in
used books stores, ham fests, and the VNSA book sale here in Phoenix.
And no, sorry to say, I won't part with them, unless I can find dup-
licates.
        Myself, I would like to find one of the Post circular slide
rules.  They were about 10" in diameter, and I've only ever seen one
of them, a long time ago.

--
                                          Regards,

                                          Chris

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Trask / N7ZWY                       Circuit Design for the RF Impaired
ATG Design Services                       __  __     ____  ___       ___ ____
[e-mail]       _~_            /__)/__) / / / / /_  /\  / /_    /
                         (@ @)          /   / \  / / / / /__ /  \/ /___  /
----------------------ooO~(_)~Ooo---------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:14 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews
From: Steven B Reed <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Small antenna matching
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 04:35:51 -0500
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g3i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-day-oh1-01.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Feb 15  1:38:11 AM PST 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b6a (Win95; I)

>
> In article <4f0g3i$[e-mail]>, Denis Lachapelle <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> > I am developping a portable RF transmitter working around 180Mhz,
> > the all RF circuit is holded in a single IC, and it's work fine.
> > But ..., we can't figure out how to match the antenna, which is a
> > simple piece of wire of about 7".
> >
> > As soon as we put the antenna the output circuit lose all it's
> > gain, and the harmonics and noise take over the desired signal. I
> > guess the problem is that the output circuit tank is changing
> > it's frequency of resonnance when we place the antenna.
> >
> > We need more info on the small antenna to fixe-up our problem,
> > can somebody suggest where to find this info, like a textbook or
> > any other technical document?
> >
> > Thank you very much for your help,
> >
> > Denis Lachapelle
>
> --
> Spencer Webb
> [e-mail]
>
> "A dill pickle makes a soggy bookmark"  -Anon.
        how about adjusting the ant. lenth
        A quarter wave ant. at 180 mhz is about 15.5 inches

        or you could load the short ant. with a coil

--
Steven Reed  KB8STB


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:15 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news2.interlog.com!winternet.com!fury.berkshire.net!usenet
From: David Robbins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex tribanders and spinning elements
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 22:27:02 -0800
Organization: KY1H
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp18.berkshire.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)

Jeff DePolo WN3A wrote:
>
> We've got a Telrex 5-element tribander at one of our club stations.  We,
> like several other hams I've talked to that have this antenna, have had
> a chronic problem with the 20 meter reflector "tilting" with respect to
> the rest of the elements and the boom.

This is a common problem with Telrex antennas.  I have fixed a TB5EM
that had the 20m reflector torn off it completely twice in storms.  Each
time i added better attachments of the collar to the boom.  The third
time it came off I gave up on the thru the boom stuff and made up a
mounting plate with u-bolts.  So far it has survived more wind than it
did the last time.  This also makes disassembly for sale easier.

73, dave
--
[e-mail]   or   [e-mail]
http://www.berkshire.net/~robbins/ky1h.html
WWW Page now has New England Flea Market list from W1GSL




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:16 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news5.ner.bbnplanet.net!news.ner.bbnplanet.net!usenet.continental.com!usenet
From: Paul Christensen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex tribanders and spinning elements
Date: 14 Feb 1996 20:20:01 GMT
Organization: Continental Cablevision
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <4ftg5h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4fhesl$[e-mail]> <4fm001$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.152.167.73
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]

Is Telrex still in Business?

-Paul, N9AZ



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:17 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!fish.pond.com!kd3bj!jolt.pagesat.net!netserv.com!aimnet.com!news.exodus.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!interramp.com!usenet
From: My name <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex tribanders and spinning elements
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 23:13:37 -0500
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4fhesl$[e-mail]> <4fm001$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.12.1.188
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)

Joe Mesh wrote:
>
> >> have the whole collar/boom
> heli-arc welded together. <<
>
> Exactly!
>
> I have followed Telrex products for years.   The 6 element 20m and the 3
> element 40m yagis definitely have this problem.
> Many modifications have been tried to overcome this problem in an
> attempt to extend the useful service free life of these fine antennas.
> Some who have encountered this problem and tried to counter it have even
> been fine mechanical engineers.   Most solutions fail at 200ft with ice
> over a period of many years.   Only the welding seems to be a permanent
> solution for the high wind, 200ft radial ice loaded application.   I
> have never seen a welded solution fail.
>
> I have seen pins drilled through vertically that have failed.  Some
> engineers have specified various diameters and tempers of stainless
> alloys.  Some people include rope in the elements in an attempt to
> fabricate a harmonic dampener of some sort (meaning without a
> mathematical approach or testing).   Only the welding seems to last.
>
> The problem with the welded solution is that it eliminates disassembly
> for movement to a new QTH or resale to another user.  It also requires a
> welder with good skill to keep the whole structure straight and aligned.
>   He must have portable equipment and inert gas tanks to weld this in
> the field near the place of erection.   If one intends to weld the
> element pieces as well they really should fabricate a method of trial
> erection to examine loading, SWR, and band width at the desired
> frequencies as after the welds little opportunity remains for change.
>
> --
> Thanks....AA8NF - Joe
> from Beautiful Downtown HELL, Michigan USA
> 02/11/96      19:00
> _______________________________________
> Always available at:
>    [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]
>    Please visit our Web Page at:
>    http://www.drsmesh.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
> Version: 2.6.1
>
> mQBtAy6eMfIAAAEDALwrWEs+O743G3ANgMDgUxCfK9F1vTR99q4OL05cyGI68nlk
> ygUkdYG7CG0BnI8CzOJmSQeTJGjLV6Mw+LGA7UgzybInGUXJMkw7xKRtpZ8QEi+/
> PQWM6R7AuxwjYt5iuQAFEbQlUlcgU2FsbmljayA8c2Fsbmlja0BkZWphdnUuc3Br
> LndhLnVzPokAdQMFEDB7NL7AuxwjYt5iuQEBGs0DAJf1cyNUKYjSsYxBRtLt7GA4
> vd7PPjhs5Gg5q2OqizIUdLQFbCG+IgzN+ftbqp00RvE1eUm62qAzC6DKvZNH2+jR
> ZxflW1yk2fSSsoi82jrxzeYwO9jk7o/AjeVi5T/uXLQrUlcgU2FsbmljayA8c2Fs
> bmlja0B0ZWFjaC5rYWlzZXIuc3BrLndhLnVzPg==
> =+hd/
> -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----I have read the same thing about the Telre
x 40-meter antennas.  In fact,
a few years back in either CQ or 73 magazine, quite a debate raged.
Finally, the guy from Telrex claimed that anyone who put an antenna up at
150-plus feet was a little wacky anyway and deserved to have it slip and
slide.  Or words to tht effect.

Anyway, I am planning to put up a 100' tower and 40 meter beam in a year
or so.  Does the Telrex 40-meter yagi have this problem at all heights,
or just when you get on up there?  I will be living in East Tennessee,
not exactly known for ice storms.


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:19 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W2FOE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals in Trees/Radials
Date: 13 Feb 1996 18:17:41 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4fr66l$[e-mail]>
References: <9602122023.AA11448@adphdw20>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Dennis, I have a 4square vertical array on 80 meters which sits in the
middle of fairly dense woods - mostly oak and maple trees.  My radiating
elements are #14 insulated wire pulled up in the trees. I've tried to keep
them away from the trees where possible, but one is about 4 feet from the
trunk of the tree and the others are all within 10 feet of the tree
supporting them.

The system works well at all times, although I believe it to be somewhat
better after the leaves fall.  However, it should be noted that conditions
on 80 meters begin to get conisderably better as the leaves fall and
colder weather arrives, so I'm not sure the leaves really have anything to
do with it. One other observation is that the best balance frequency (that
is the frequency at which the currents in the four radiators are most
balanced) is about 3825 in the summer time, and about 3790 in the winter
time.  The further I move from this frequency the less front to back I
see.  Bottom line, I think the trees have minimal affect.

Can't comment on your choice of radial wire.  Mine are old surplus coax
laying on top of the ground - 32 on each antenna. (You can do that when
you live in the woods)

Good luck, Merv


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:19 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.ssd.intel.com!chnews!usenet
From: [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Verticals, how many radials?
Date: 13 Feb 1996 23:12:23 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4fr5sn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tboza.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

At what pratical point does adding more radials to a 40 meter 1/4 wave
(33 ft) vertical make no more significant difference in gain, impedance
and/or take-off angle?  Im looking for the pratical cross-over point
investment vs cost/construction per performance trade off. Im assuming
adding radials is some sort or logarithm forumla and the return on
investment will diminish after some significant point.

Does all the radials need to be 1/4 wavelength in length or does
a 3-5 ft long radial give the same effect when adding radials?

WB7ASR...



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:21 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals, how many radials?
Date: 13 Feb 1996 19:21:06 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 37
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4fr9ti$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr5sn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Tom,
In article <4fr5sn$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(WB7ASR) writes:

>At what pratical point does adding more radials to a 40 meter 1/4 wave
>(33 ft) vertical make no more significant difference in gain, impedance
>and/or take-off angle?

The was an extensive study done in 1937 by three engineers at RCA. With
1/8 wl radials you may as well quit at 15 or 20 but the efficiency will be
pretty low.

With 1/4 wl radials, the improvement stops at around 60 wires, and the
antenna will be within a couple dB of the maximum possible.

With 1/2 wl radials, the efficiency improves up to 110 radials. The
antenna will be within a dB of perfect.

Radials DO NOT change the "take-off angle" unless they are many
wavelengths long, so the waveangle will be the same with any system.

>Im looking for the pratical cross-over point
>investment vs cost/construction per performance trade off. Im assuming
>adding radials is some sort or logarithm forumla and the return on
>investment will diminish after some significant point.

I think 50 or so radials 1/4 wl long is a good compromise for a 1/4 wl
vertical. The shorter the vertical, the more important the radials become.
A short vertical needs many very long radials.

>Does all the radials need to be 1/4 wavelength in length or does
>a 3-5 ft long radial give the same effect when adding radials?

If they are short, they don't need to be as dense. Try to make them as
long as you can.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:22 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals, how many radials?
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 07:39:17 +0000
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 48
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fr5sn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ifwtech.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.11 <9qI82xurdT5+z2vSgnCPFcKgQL>

In article <4fr5sn$[e-mail]>, WB7ASR wrote:
>At what pratical point does adding more radials to a 40 meter 1/4 wave
>(33 ft) vertical make no more significant difference in gain, impedance
>and/or take-off angle?  Im looking for the pratical cross-over point
>investment vs cost/construction per performance trade off. Im assuming
>adding radials is some sort or logarithm forumla and the return on
>investment will diminish after some significant point.
>
The wave angle is created by ground reflections much farther out than
most people's radial systems extend. The value of radials is in reducing
local ground losses, immediately around the antenna, and thus improving
the feedpoint efficiency. As ground losses decrease, the feedpoint
imedance will fall towards the perfect-ground value of about 35 ohms,
and the VSWR bandwidth will decrease.

As you suspect, it's diminishing returns after a certain point.
The longer the radials are, the more you can use before returns (in
terms of feedpoint efficiency) start to diminish.

Conversely, with shorter radials you reach the point of diminishing
returns quite rapidly and the efficiency levels off at a relatively
lower value.

>Does all the radials need to be 1/4 wavelength in length or does
>a 3-5 ft long radial give the same effect when adding radials?

Resonance disappears when the radials are very close to or on the
ground. Think of it more in terms of "metal-plating" the ground as
extensively as you can.

There's a useful table on page 3-13 of the current ARRL Antenna
Handbook. There are also graphs in an article by Sevick, W2FMI in QST
for April 1978. Analysing the graphs, it seems that - whatever length of
radials you use - returns start to diminish when you've laid enough
radials that the open ends are about 0.05 wavelengths apart.

From which you may gather that 3-5ft radials are almost useless for 40m.
On the other hand, there is some value in intensively "metal-plating"
the first 0.05-0.1 wavelengths radius because the ground return currents
are higher at distances very close to the antenna.



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] Sat Feb 17 13:37:24 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!daffy.ldp.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Rolfe Tessem)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals, how many radials?
Date: 16 Feb 1996 17:43:27 GMT
Organization: Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4g2fnv$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr5sn$[e-mail]> <4fr9ti$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: excalibur.ldp.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

In article <4fr9ti$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>
>With 1/4 wl radials, the improvement stops at around 60 wires, and the
>antenna will be within a couple dB of the maximum possible.
>
>With 1/2 wl radials, the efficiency improves up to 110 radials. The
>antenna will be within a dB of perfect.

I'm putting up one of the MFJ top-loaded models for 80 and 40 after
recommendations from several users. Physical length is 33 ft. Any
thoughts on the number and length of radials needed to optimize for 80m?
Thoughts on a chicken wire screen  vs. regular wire? Thoughts on phasing
two of them?

Rolfe
W3VH

--
Rolfe Tessem      |    Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.
[e-mail]     |    96 Morton Street
[phone]    |    New York, NY 10014



From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:25 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!news2.net99.net!news.cais.net!news.jsums.edu!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx06-20
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals, how many radials?
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 96 18:14:21 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <4g2hgc$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr5sn$[e-mail]> <4fr9ti$[e-mail]> <4ftscq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx06-20.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <4ftscq$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist) wrote:
>In article <4fr9ti$[e-mail]>,
>W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Hi Tom,
>>
>>Radials DO NOT change the "take-off angle" unless they are many
>>wavelengths long, so the waveangle will be the same with any system.
>>
>>73 Tom
>
>Is anyone aware of any data as to how long the radials have to be for
>a given take off angle?  Is there any way to simulate this with NEC
>or whatever?

"Takeoff angle" is a misleading term to use for this. Actually, it's
usually a misleading term to use to describe an antenna pattern at any
time, because it reduces a pattern shape to a single number. Like "average"
or "peak", a lot of information is lost in the reduction. (Remember
the statistician who drowned while crossing a creek whose average
depth was only three feet!) "Takeoff angle" usually means the elevation
angle at which the radiation is maximum. The radiation at low angles (or
any other angle, for that matter) can change a great deal without any
effect on the "takeoff angle". Antennas with the same "takeoff angle" can
have vastly different performance at other, possibly more important
elevation angles.

Putting out moderately long radials (1/2 wavelength or so) does have some
effect on the field strength from a vertical at very low angles. The amount
of the effect depends on the ground conductivity and permittivity, the
antenna height, and of course the number and length of radials and the
elevation angle in question. Both MININEC and NEC do a good job of modeling
this effect, provided that the ground is flat well beyond the ends of the
radials.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:26 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ghgcorp.com!usenet
From: Serious <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WANTED: TOWER/ANTENNAE
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 14:39:22 -0800
Organization: GHG Corporation
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialupline23.ghgcorp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)

Hi.  Due to a tornado, my tower and antennae are now junk.

STATE FARM INSURANCE REFUSES TO PAY CLAIM!!!!!  DETAILS UPON REQUEST.

I am wanting to buy the following: a used TRI-EX/HYGAIN LM-354 tower or
at the very least, the center section thereof.

 HYGAIN TH-7DXS OR TH-11.

 CUSCHCRAFT 2 METER BOOMER.

 M2 1.2 gig atv antenna.

 AEA OR  M2 434 mhz. atv antenna.

Please send prices and condition.

Thank you.

W5BRY, Ros.

my email is [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:27 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!aimnet.com!news.exodus.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!alterdial.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: Burt Fisher <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,aus.radio.amateur.wicen,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: What about ham radio that is on the cutting edge.
Date: 13 Feb 1996 00:12:27 GMT
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <4fol1b$[e-mail]>
References: <4fn47d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s202.ccsnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 32bit)
Xref: news.epix.net aus.radio.amateur.misc:437 aus.radio.amateur.wicen:70 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19061 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14142 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24936 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13330 rec.radio.amateur.misc:98072 rec.radio.scanner:45535 rec.radio.swap:57485
































From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:27 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.icon.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news5.ner.bbnplanet.net!news.ner.bbnplanet.net!news3.near.net!sol.caps.maine.edu!maine.maine.edu!baack
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 09:37:24 EST
From: <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What is good for 6m?
Lines: 8

Hello,
just want to get some info. on what antennas
seem to "do the job" on 6 meters.
What is good, what is not.
Thanks,
Jason  N1RWY  FN54
[e-mail]
http://www.umecut.maine.edu
A.T. hiking is a poor products nightmare.....


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:28 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ghgcorp.com!usenet
From: Ros <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB: TOWER/ANTENNAE
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 17:00:51 -0800
Organization: GHG Corporation
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialupline18.ghgcorp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)

Hi.  Due to a tornado, my tower and antennae are now junk.

STATE FARM INSURANCE REFUSES TO PAY CLAIM!!!!!  DETAILS UPON REQUEST.

I am wanting to buy the following: a used TRI-EX/HYGAIN LM-354 tower or
at the very least, the center section thereof.

 HYGAIN TH-7DXS OR TH-11.

 CUSCHCRAFT 2 METER BOOMER.

 M2 1.2 gig atv antenna.

 AEA OR  M2 434 mhz. atv antenna.

Please send prices and condition.

Thank you.

W5BRY, Ros.

my email is [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:29 1996
Path: news.epix.net!uunet!in2.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] (JRosariojr)
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,aus.radio.amateur.wicen,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: WTB:5KW AM Transmitter
Date: 14 Feb 1996 03:49:49 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <4fs7nd$[e-mail]>
References: <4fn47d$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JRosariojr)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: news.epix.net aus.radio.amateur.misc:446 aus.radio.amateur.wicen:71 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:19099 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:14179 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:24980 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:13359 rec.radio.amateur.misc:98120 rec.radio.scanner:45613 rec.radio.swap:57615

good luck


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:30 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.onramp.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!dsi.unimi.it!aix1.cdc.polimi.it!cdc8g5.cdc.polimi.it!piu1884
From: [e-mail] (Claudio (IN3OTD))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Yagi elements correction factor
Date: 14 Feb 1996 17:00:30 GMT
Organization: Centro di Calcolo POLITECNICO di MILANO
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <4ft4fe$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cdc8g5.cdc.polimi.it
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Hi, all!
Does anyone know about the difference between correction factors for Yagis
with square cross-section boom and with circular cross-section boom ?
I found some literature on the latter type but nothing on the  former...
Thanks in advance!

Claudio, IN3OTD.


From [e-mail] Sat Feb 17 13:37:31 1996
Path: news.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!lori.albany.net!news.sover.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!news.crosslink.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Chester Alderman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ~~~? What is the best coax cable for CB's?~~~~
Date: 10 Feb 1996 03:54:39 GMT
Organization: CrossLink Internet Services
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <4fh4tv$[e-mail]>
References: <4dpris$[e-mail]> <4dr03e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4ebt3g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn016a.springfield.va.us.crosslink.net
X-Newsreader: NeoLogic News for OS/2 [version: 4.2]

In message <[e-mail]> - [e-mail] (Jeff Stillinger) writes:

:>
:>Vince Fiscus,  KB7ADL ([e-mail]) wrote:
:>
:>: Best Coax for CB is one that ends in a dummy load.
:>
:>
:>It is VERY important that when using CB radio to mount your coax in a
:>strait line, placing a nail though the coax every 3 feet.  Roofing nails
:>work best.  This will keep the cable from flopping about in the wind.
:>
:>--
:>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
:>Jeff Stillinger - KB6IBB                              [e-mail]
:>PSC Box 3429                                          [e-mail]
:>Edwards AFB, CA  93524                                [phone]N1
:>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

If you listen to the ham bands during a pile-up, or if you listen to some of
the 'broadcast' on the ham bands, or if you listen to the cussin and
inexcuseable operation on the ham bands, you certainly could apply the above
'advice' to a hell of a lot of ham radio operators.

Tom / W4BQF

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:03 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4fq6od$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 18:45:46 GMT

In article <4fq6od$[e-mail]> Jean-Guy Moreau <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>Why can't I use galvanized steel wire to make antennas?

Steel is ferromagnetic. That has the effect of making the skin
resistance of the wire *very* much greater than copper or aluminum.
Increased skin resistance is increased heat loss which means less
signal radiated. OTOH it's really easy to get a good SWR with this
setup because the extra losses make the antenna look "flat" (that
is to say, look like a dummy load). Always be wary of an antenna
with a flat SWR curve. It usually means that it's inefficient.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (Robert G. Strickland)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 4 ele Gem Quad
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 12:29:41 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4gfhmn$[e-mail]>
References: <4g1kh4$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Garry Walker) wrote:

>I am trying to find out about the performance/problems with a 4 ele
>Gem Quad.  I have used a 2 ele quad in the past on 10 metres only, but
>would like further info.  I am interested in the feed arrangement for
>a 5 band version of the quad, interaction problems, etc etc.

>Any info would be most appreciated.

>Regards Garry

>----------------------------------
>G0IHB, GX0TEN, F/G0IHB/P

>Internet:[e-mail]
>Packet:  [e-mail]

>----------------------------------

Just read the comments of [hmmm, forgot to get his name/call before
closing the window], and thought i'd throw some wood on the fire.

I have a Lightning Bolt, five band, two element quad, also advertised
in the usual places. This quad does NOT use a central spider for the
spreaders, but rather an 8ft boom with spreader mounts on each end.
The spreaders are the usual fiberglass, etc, etc, etc. The advantages
of this construction, observed after the fact, are as follows. [1]
each bay can be assembled laying flat on the ground. I did both in
one, long day. It wasn't hard, just time consuming as things usually
are. [2] since the boom and two bays are separate items, they can each
be hauled up in the air separately. I installed the boom and then slid
it back and forth to bring each end within easy reach. I then "flew"
each bay up using a jin pole for lift and friends on the ground
holding cords that "held" the bay away from everything on the way up.
Once bolted to the boom, the cords were slipped off. No problem. I
didn't tune the thing (see below), but have muscled it back and forth
several times doing one thing or another. It's a bit of a sweat job,
but in the end, not so hard to do. Accordingly, tuning would be easy
to accomplish, since the tuning stubs can be brought within eash
reach. Quads built with a central spider will not have this
flexibility. This quad is also built with all driven elements tied
together to one 2:1 balun and fed with 52ohm coax. SWR is low across
all bands except 15m where it is higher but still under 2:1.
Performance is fine, especially when you compare it to other 5-band
antennas.

I've become interested in studying quads and have been using EZNEC to
teach myself about them. Nice program, and very instructiive. What I
have learned to date is that there are many subtilties of design with
the quad, all of which alter its performance in significant ways. A
good design can be achieved to deliver whatever performance profile
one desires. What is clear is that wire lenghts, spacing,
driver-reflector ratio and operating freq all play a part. Sooooo,
it's clear to me that my initial wire cutting was rather casual
compared to what I would do now. Also, I think that separate feeds
would increase performance. Accordingly, I'm going to redesign this
thing and "reconstruct" it this summer. Up and down should go as easy
as the original installation. It has been up through four winters
without incident, two of which were the worst on record here in
Central New York. At this point, I'm not looking to yagi's, especially
in light of wanting 5-band performance.

Now, 5-elements would be an entirely different question, and then a
crane/etc probably becomes mandatory.

Robert


Robert G. Strickland KE2WY
[e-mail]
Syracuse, New York



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:07 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
From: [e-mail] (Donald I. Baker)
Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City, TXxID-1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 02:18:32 GMT
References: <4efpb3$[e-mail]> <4ete1q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fgm3h$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4g6ard$[e-mail]>

In article <4g6ard$[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
>From: [e-mail] ()
>Subject: Re: 82 Repeater in Kansas City, TXxID-1
>Date: 18 Feb 1996 04:44:29 GMT

>I WRITE:

>        Of course if you are a smart jammer like myself. You simply
>construct a simple automatic rf sensing switch box. Simply made from rip
>off shack parts. What it does is for the first 100mills on the tx my rf
>output is directed into a small 10 watt 50 ohm dumy load, after the cap
>charges up it causes the relay to swithc me over to my antenna.
>VAWALLLLAAAAA   NO fingerprint. Of course no fingerprint is a fingerprint.
>but now i cant give out all my secrets can I?
>jeff aa7up
>PDX, or
of course you could just mod the radio so that the final is "up" all the time
and just switch the link between the driver and final...........


Donald I. Baker
Reville Engineering Services
4619 Schenley Road
Baltimore, MD 21210-2525
[phone]
Custon Harsh Environment
Computers and RF Products
"Where no PC has gone before..."


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:08 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9:1 Baluns
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 96 21:22:38 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>Seveal recent articles in QST and other magazines describe antennas
>requiring 9:1 baluns.  I understand Palomar makes a ground mount 9:1

Hi Bob, for you to need a 9:1 balun your antenna impedance would need to
be 450 ohms. I haven't kept up with the articles you mention, but that
impedance is rare for an antenna. If your antenna system has appreciable
reflections, you probably don't need a 9:1 balun. If you have an SWR
much different from 1:1, you will never see 450 ohms using 450 ladder-
line. You will see resistive impedances of SWR times 450 and SWR divided
into 450 but never 450+j0. Are the antennas you describe high SWR
configurations?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:09 1996
From: [e-mail] (David L. Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: a slinky antenna?
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 04:03:08 GMT
Message-ID: <4g3jjo$[e-mail]>
References: <4g3b0f$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Curtis Brown) wrote:


>I've heard before about ham antennas being made out of slinkys. Is this a
>rumor, or has anybody actually done this? If so, are there any 'construction
>plans' available?

>Thanks in advance.

>                                             Curtis
>                                              [e-mail]

There was a commercial Slinky antenna made from heavy 4" coils several
years ago.  There have been articles over the past 10 or 15 years in
QST, CQ, 73.  Consider a Slinky as a helical antenna!

73, Dave K4JRB



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:10 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: a slinky antenna?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g3b0f$[e-mail]> <4g3jjo$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 12:06:46 GMT

: >I've heard before about ham antennas being made out of slinkys. Is this a
: >rumor, or has anybody actually done this? If so, are there any 'constructio
n
: >plans' available?

Slinky antennas have been around since the late 60's. They were designed
to be used as indoor antennas for obvious reasons. They require adjusting
for each band change. Always looked like a lot of trouble to me but
a novel idea.




Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:10 1996
From: [e-mail] (CAMILLE J. PRAT, SJ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: a slinky antenna?
Date: 19 Feb 1996 03:54:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4g8sab$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4g3b0f$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (CAMILLE J. PRAT, SJ)



>Curtis Brown wrote:
>>
>> I've heard before about ham antennas being made out of slinkys. Is this a
>> rumor, or has anybody actually done this? If so, are there any 'constructio
n
>> plans' available?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>

There have been a couple of posts about slinkys a good while back. For those
interested, Antennas West markets an antenna kit involving 2 slinkys.  For
their address, check 73 magazine and/or QST, where they've advertised
regularly.  They may be in other ham magazines; I just haven't noticed them
there.....

73, .....   Camille Prat   KB7LBN
--


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (Curtis Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: a slinky antenna?
Date: 16 Feb 1996 18:28:47 -0700
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4g3b0f$[e-mail]>


I've heard before about ham antennas being made out of slinkys. Is this a
rumor, or has anybody actually done this? If so, are there any 'construction
plans' available?

Thanks in advance.

                                              Curtis
                                              [e-mail]

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Curtis Brown
                                              [e-mail]
                                      http://lamar.colostate.edu/~curt


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (John N0ISL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: a slinky antenna?
Date: 17 Feb 1996 20:11:26 -0500
Message-ID: <4g5ubu$[e-mail]>
References: <4g3jjo$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John N0ISL)

The Slinky was marketed by KK4WW from Floyd, VA. He still has the
technical data. It was the Balckwell group if I remember correctly...
John Douglas, N0ISL
AX.25 N0ISL@KZ7I.#MSP.MN.USA.NOAM
I'm in Minnesota only because I must be somewhere!


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Information For C.B. Radio
Date: 20 Feb 1996 18:01:35 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gd29v$[e-mail]>
References: <4gbcf4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:

> For CB radio we highly recomment a good underground antenna. Bury it at
> least 6ft. The copper tubing will make good plumbing material. Use tubing
> large enough to pass the CB radio through, about 6" is large enough.
> Connect the far end to the drain pipe of your house and insert the CB.
> Follow up with a large bucket of water.


> : Does anyone know how to make an antenna for a base C.B. radio
> : unit, I have a lot of copper wire,copper tubing that type of
> : stuff, would like to know suggested height if that matters.
> : Will be using this in a city.

I've seen several posts along this line recently and have to
ask "What are you trying to prove?"  Is your sense of self worth
so low that your only answer to someone is to denigrate them
because they aren't a licensed amateur?  Do you make snide
comments to the public when they come to your Field Day station?

Our bands are granted to us not by just the amateur population
but the entire population of the country.  I'm sure responses such
as above really help our cause when the country looks to us as
a pool of trained technical resources.  I guess your view is
that those trained resources can only be counted on to help
themselves and not the general public?  Nice attitude and
interpretation of Part 97.1.   :-(

In answer to the original question, a 1/4 wave ground plane antenna
would work fine.  The higher the better.  A 1/4 wave CB ground plane
antenna would have a vertical element (piece of 1/2" copper tubing
would do fine) that is attached to the center conductor of your coax
and it should be about 8 1/4 feet high.  The ground plane should be 3 or
4 radials (also of tubing if you like) that are about the same length
and attached to the braid of your coax.  I'd start with 8 1/2 of tubing
for the vertical element and trim it as necessary to lower your SWR.

Also, please forgive the rather boorish response given by the previous
poster.  He is definitely *not* representative of all amateurs (just a
loud vocal minority.)

Another source of information on antennas and their construction is
the ARRL Antenna Book.  Should be available at a public library near
you or you can order it directly from the ARRL at 860-594-0200.

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:15 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Antenna Information For C.B. Radio
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gbcf4$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 11:15:35 GMT

For CB radio we highly recomment a good underground antenna. Bury it at
least 6ft. The copper tubing will make good plumbing material. Use tubing
large enough to pass the CB radio through, about 6" is large enough.
Connect the far end to the drain pipe of your house and insert the CB.
Follow up with a large bucket of water.


: Does anyone know how to make an antenna for a base C.B. radio
: unit, I have a lot of copper wire,copper tubing that type of
: stuff, would like to know suggested height if that matters.
: Will be using this in a city.

: Thank-you,if you have any info. Email me [e-mail]

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:15 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joel Govostes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Placement on Vehicles?
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 19:07:35 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I work at a university that has a fleet of buses to move everyone around.
Each bus has an FM transceiver for dispatching purposes.  It always bugged
me that the 3-4 ft. whip antenna on each bus is mounted on the side just
behind where the driver is, and about 2" away from the side of the bus
running vertically parallel to it.  I presume the bus is the ground
plane.  Question is, how can those antennas possibly work correctly when
they are so close to the metal side of the bus for practically their whole
length?  The same problem arises with vans which have bumper-mounted
vertical whips.  Doesn't the proximity to the auto body ruin the
feed-point impedance and radiation???   Thanks to anyone with ideas on
this...
N1AEP


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:16 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Antenna Relay??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 15:58:22 GMT

Has anyone tried using a mercury wetted relay for an antenna changeover
switch between transmitter and receiver? I'm considering this because I
want QSK and have been looking at some 2pdt mercury relays for keying the
transmitter. They are rated for 2 amps at 500 volts but are physically
very small. The goal here is to make a very quiet, fast breakin system.
Can mercury relays handle RF?

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:17 1996
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Relay??
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 96 17:53:34 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] "Steve Ellington" writes:

> Has anyone tried using a mercury wetted relay for an antenna changeover
> switch between transmitter and receiver? I'm considering this because I
> want QSK and have been looking at some 2pdt mercury relays for keying the
> transmitter. They are rated for 2 amps at 500 volts but are physically
> very small. The goal here is to make a very quiet, fast breakin system.
> Can mercury relays handle RF?

In a perfectly matched 50 ohm transmission line, the current will exceed 2
amps peak above 100 watts.

Regards,
--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:19 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Relay??
Date: 19 Feb 1996 06:03:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4g93qo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4g3t7r$[e-mail]> <4g8r01$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4g8r01$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jerry Flanders) w
rites:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>================Concerning a QSK antenna relay system============
>snip...
>
>>There are a whole set of vaccuum RF relays made by several shops.  The
>>little RJ-1 relay which is a double pole single throw relay is VERY quiet.
>>This is a Jennings part, available off the shelf from RF shops all over.
>
>SNIP...
>
>>Now comes the fun part.  Toggle the relay so that when the relay snaps shut,

>>it is grounding your receiver antenna, but at the same time, through an RF
>>choke setup, that same ground circuit actually is your KEY line to the
>>transmitter.  No grounded RX input; no RF output either.
>
>>Mike W5WQN as a guest at leviathan.tamu.edu
>==================================================================
>Mike,
>
>What happens upon key-up? At the instant the relay starts to open,
>there is still RF being generated, and will continue for a few MS
>(from the usual tailing-off we all see in the rig tests of qsk
>performance). How do you deal with this?
>
>Jerry W4UKU  [e-mail]
>

Key line is in series with the closure as well.  It comes up FIRST, silencing
the RF generation.  Relay drags it's feet for the time required, or so it seem
s.
I've never had any noticable problem with it.  All the RF is gone by the time
the armature is back on contact for the RX side of the house.

Getting it to snap shut quickly is no problem.  The decay time is slower
than the closure time pulsed like this anyway.

You can pad the circuit with a little capacitance and even get the relay to
drag on and cover up the dots if you like.  It's really VERY quiet, but
if you like, you can tune it so that it doesn't fully drop out between the
dots and dashes.  My plate transformer from Pete Dahl makes more noise
from the core chatter than the relay!

There is an article in a very old QST on building the little box.  About 1960
or so, I think.  I'm not at my library, so I can't pull it up from memory.
If you can get to the December QST index lists for the 60's or so and look
forward, you can get the schematic for it from QST.

Next time I am out at the fixed site for W5WQN, I'll get the article citations

for you and post it to your email address, or will try to.  The site is my
FidoNet site 1:117/3000, however, there are gateway problems right now.
I think I can get a reply to you before the gateway goes down, but you can't
reply to me here for email and the gate may be closed by the time you
try to reply to my mail to you...

Cheers,

Mike W5WQN as a guest at leviathan.tamu.edu



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (David de Schweinitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Software
Date: 18 Feb 1996 15:27:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4g7ghc$[e-mail]>
References: <4g59va$[e-mail]>

To: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Subject: Re: Antenna Software
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: Texas Metronet, Inc  (login info (214/488-2590 - 817/571-0400))

In article <4g59va$[e-mail]> you wrote:

: G4WNT asked about NEC based antenna software

: I have read som articles mentioning NEC, and the development of it that
: runs on PC's (MININEC), and versions with graphical goodies (ELNEC). There
: may be others.
:               :

ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC

MININEC is a BASIC implementation of NEC, first written when the
FORTRAN-based full-up NEC was too much for PCs.  The full-up NEC runs fine
on decent computers now.  I haven't messed with MININEC lately.  I use
NEC2, which I believe is the latest public-domain (free) version.  You
might want to try both.  Executables and source are available, as well as
several utilities to make input/output more friendly. Check out the
"00-index.txt" (or something like that) file for descriptions of the
available files.  I think that the PC executable package is called
something like nec-pc.zip.  There's also a nec2pc.zip package that's more
appropriate for older machines with less memory (but it seems much slower
on my machine).  Some folks are working on a html manual.  Check out my nv
and nov input and output geometry/color-coded current map programs.

NEC is a great tool, and it's possible to analyze quite realistic models
now.  300-segment models run on a 486DX within 5 meg. of memory in a
minute or so.

                        Dave



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Software
Date: 17 Feb 1996 19:23:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4g59va$[e-mail]>


G4WNT asked about NEC based antenna software

I have read som articles mentioning NEC, and the development of it that
runs on PC's (MININEC), and versions with graphical goodies (ELNEC). There
may be others.

From where can any of this software be obtained?

        See Roy Lewallen ads in QST for ELNEC and EZNEC
Charlie ,  W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:22 1996
From: [e-mail] (Robert G. Strickland)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Software
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 12:06:52 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4gfgbq$[e-mail]>
References: <4g59va$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS) wrote:


>G4WNT asked about NEC based antenna software

>I have read som articles mentioning NEC, and the development of it that
>runs on PC's (MININEC), and versions with graphical goodies (ELNEC). There
>may be others.

>From where can any of this software be obtained?

>       See Roy Lewallen ads in QST for ELNEC and EZNEC
>Charlie ,  W7XC
>--
Some further comments...
I recently bought Roy's EZNEC, and I am finding it both easy to use
and a good teaching/research tool. I give it a very good evaluation.
I'm running it on a 486DX75 with 8Mgs mem, and it perks right along.

Robert


Robert G. Strickland KE2WY
[e-mail]
Syracuse, New York



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:23 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ball mount strong enough for screw driver antenna?
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 96 21:38:12 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4foria$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fvns3$[e-mail]>

Todd Little <[e-mail]> writes:

>By powering the screw driver one way or the other, you can move the inner
>coil up or down.  If more loading is required, you simply push more coil out,
 if
>less is needed, then you pull the coil further into the outer tube.  They are
>available pre-assembled or you can home brew one yourself.  They are
>supposed to work quite well.  We'll see.  :-)
>
>73,
>Todd
>N9MWB

They sure do...I've used one for nearly a year now and would not go back to
any of the other HF mobile antennas I've used (Hustlers, Bugcatcher, whips,
etc.).  The screwdriver is a fantastic performer and is by far the most
convenient for all band (80 to 10m) use.  Haven't tried it yet on 160 but
that's next :)

73 de Mike, KB3RG


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ball mount strong enough for screw driver antenna?
Date: 15 Feb 1996 16:43:47 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4fvns3$[e-mail]>
References: <4foria$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Steve Mason) wrote:

> Pardon my ignorance, but I've seen this mentioned a few times now,  what
> exactly is a "screw driver" antenna?

A "screw driver" antenna is a mobile HF antenna that gets its name from
using a hand held power screw driver to adjust the setting of a coil.  Basical
ly
the antenna is a roughly 2" diameter tube with a disemboweled hand held
power screw driver mounted inside.   In the chuck of the screw driver is a
piece of threaded rod.  Riding on that threaded rod is a smaller diameter tube
that has a coil wound around it.  At the top of the outer tube is some finger
stock
(or other wiper material) that grips the coil wound on the inner tube.  Attach
ed
to the top of the inner tube (and the coil wrapped around it) is a whip.  So t
he
thing looks like a variable base loaded whip.

By powering the screw driver one way or the other, you can move the inner
coil up or down.  If more loading is required, you simply push more coil out,
if
less is needed, then you pull the coil further into the outer tube.  They are
available pre-assembled or you can home brew one yourself.  They are
supposed to work quite well.  We'll see.  :-)

73,
Todd
N9MWB




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (Peter Gerba)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best 1.2 GHz repeater beam ?
Date: 14 Feb 1996 21:14:38 -0800
Message-ID: <4fuffu$[e-mail]>

I'm looking for a short (4 FT or so) 1.2 GHz beam for the repeater band.
I want to buy an antenna that is well made; loop or vert polar yagi.

Thanks for any advice.  A friend has had an M2 on order for more than a
year and is still waiting...no M2 !

pete
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:26 1996
From: Roland S Geter PhD <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,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,rec.radio.noncomm,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Broadcasting Radio Station Database for you......
Date: 17 Feb 1996 07:47:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4g4170$[e-mail]>
References: <4fme8u$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Chuck,

Let's try to get the database over here on this provider, OK?

Thanks
Roland S Geter PhD
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Butternut HF Multiband Vertical
Date: 21 Feb 1996 18:34:05 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gfoit$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>
John M Sonley <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I've heard good reports of it's efficiency wrt other types but it looks
> pretty flimsy and is probably a real pain to tune. Would welcome anyones
> experiences of buying, building, tuning-up and using - - -
> or should I go for a vertical using the linear resonator principle?

I have one and really like it.  I usually keep it lightly guyed above the top
set of coils, but that is mostly because we can get some pretty good
icing here.  As for tuning, I don't think it is more of a pain to tune than
any other multi-band antenna.  You start with the lowest frequency
and then work up from there.  Each coil is adjusted for lowest SWR
and then you move on.  The biggest problem I had was that I installed
the 160 meter coil and still wanted a DC grounded antenna.  In talking
with the manufacturer, we determined a way to provide a similar feed
as is used without the 160 meter coil, but it means I need to readjust
my antenna, which is a pain given the weather here now.

Also, I have mine mounted about 8-10' up with a set of elevated radials.
Most people I have talked to that use this arrangement really like it!

As for using it, the only complaint I have is narrow bandwidth.  The 160 meter
coil further reduces the bandwidth on 80 and a little on 40.  If you don't
install radials or have lousy ground, you might get better bandwidth, but
you are trading off efficiency.  Personally I'll take the narrow bandwidth on
the lower bands instead of the increased ground losses

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (YOUR NAME)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cubical Quad Antennas for HF
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 22:01:24 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4g8p7f$[e-mail]>
References: <4fsgkr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Bob Archer N4ECO <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I had a CUBEX Tri-Band Quad  that I purchased used in 1980. I
>used it for 10 years at 50 feet.
>I would still be using it had it not been for not having a place
>to install it when I moved.
>

>>==========Karl-Heinz Merscher,,,, 2/14/96==========
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi out there,
>>
>>is there anybody who operats with a LBA (Lightning Bolt Antennas) or a
>>cubical quad antenna made by CUBEX??
>>
>>The LBA antennas are cheaper than the Cubex antennas. In the catalogues
>>it seems that the CUBEX antennas are better in stability.
>>
>>Any exerperiences with that antennas??
>>
>>I'm searching for a supplier of a good cubical quad antenna ...
>>
>>Thanks in advance!
>>
>>Charlie
>>
>>DL6RDE


>Bob Archer N4ECO


I used a GEM Quad 2ele on 15 meters during CQWW 1993 test, following
year I used a Cushcraft A3S at same height. The GEM Quad out performed
the yagi by a mile.
Stan AH6JR



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (Brad Charbonneau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Does anyone know of tower legislation in Vermont? Are there any VT hams out there that could give me some info?
Date: 20 Feb 1996 19:46:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4gd8fj$[e-mail]>
References: <4gd87t$[e-mail]>

Hello,
     Name is Brad NZ1Y, and I am looking to build a home in Vermont in the nea
r future.  I am looking to set up a decent tower there.  Does anyone know of t
he tower legislation in any of the rural towns in VT tends to be?  In general,
 are the rural areas more accepting of a ham tower?  If anyone could help me w
ith any info regarding this subject, I'd greatly appreciate it.  Or, if anyone
 could direct me to someone who could help me with this info, I'd also appreci
ate that.   Thanks in advance!

                               Brad NZ1Y



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (Richard Zimmerman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Florida Ham Antenna Restrictions - ch125.htm (0/1)
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 20:32:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4g5e8k$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f7v2j$[e-mail]> <4fqpsu$[e-mail]> <4ftgjc$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Paul Christensen <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I'll be starting law school this fall.  Perhaps I'll carve my niche in
>this area after graduating!

>-Paul, N9AZ

Although a good idea, and I'm sure many hams would thank you, would
there ready be enough "Business" in 1 state to warrent specializing in
Antenna restrictions? Curious question, I know....

Richard, KE4RIT



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:32 1996
From: Al Konschak <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: G5RV on 160 meters
Date: 19 Feb 1996 00:05:16 GMT
Message-ID: <4g8ers$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have the dimensions for a G5RV to be used on 160.
I've tried the method of shorting out the input and driving
it as a "T" but have had limited success. There must be a longer
design that will work on 160.

Thanks
WI3Z
Al



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:32 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV on 160 meters
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 96 21:29:13 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g8ers$[e-mail]>

Al Konschak <[e-mail]> writes:

>Does anyone have the dimensions for a G5RV to be used on 160.

Hi Al, if I remember the Antennas West G5RV ap note correctly, just doubling
all dimensions will yield a (what else?) double-size G5RV. Halving the
dimensions yields a half-size G5RV for 40m. It stands to reason that the
harmonically related bands would scale (160m,80m,40m,20m,10m) but the
different sized antennas may have completely different characteristics
on the WARC bands.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:33 1996
From: Michael Haydon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV on 160 meters
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 17:11:01 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g8ers$[e-mail]>

Currently use a Double g5rv, 204foot on 160, fed with 450 ohm twinlead,
driving it with a knwd ts-830, works fb


On 19 Feb 1996, Al Konschak wrote:

> Does anyone have the dimensions for a G5RV to be used on 160.
> I've tried the method of shorting out the input and driving
> it as a "T" but have had limited success. There must be a longer
> design that will work on 160.
>
> Thanks
> WI3Z
> Al
>
>
>


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (David L. Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV vs. 130' Dipole
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 03:56:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4g3j7p$[e-mail]>
References: <4fqpio$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Chester Bowles <[e-mail]> wrote:

>For years I've used a 130' dipole fed with 450 ohm line.  I use a Dentron
>tuner, so the antenna works great on all bands (including an occasional
>160 meter contact).

>I've never used a G5RV, but I hear lots of good signals from folks who
>use them.  So, all other things being equal, I'd appreciate any comments
>about the merits of a G5RV versus my existing 130'dipole. Should I make
>the switch?

Stay with the dipole.  The G5RV does not work as well on 80 and your
antenna is simplier to maintain.

One thing you might want to consider for 160 is to load 1/2 of the
antenna as a 1/4 L and use the other as a counterpoise.  Drake tells
of this scheme in their 2700 tuner and there is no reason why it
cannot be used with any tuner.  Hook one side to the long wire
connection of the Dentron and hook the other side to the ground.
WA2SRQ is one that does well in contests with an 80 meter dipole thus
connected.   You can't do this with the G5RV.

73, Dave K4JRB






From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:36 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV vs. 130' Dipole
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 96 11:44:37 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fqpio$[e-mail]> <4g3j7p$[e-mail]>

David L. Thompson <[e-mail]> writes:

>>I've never used a G5RV, but I hear lots of good signals from folks who
>>use them.  So, all other things being equal, I'd appreciate any comments
>>about the merits of a G5RV versus my existing 130'dipole. Should I make
>>the switch?
>
>Stay with the dipole.  The G5RV does not work as well on 80 and your
>antenna is simplier to maintain.

How do you know Chester's dipole works better on 80 than a G5RV? His SWR
on 80 will be close to 9:1 on the ladder-line. If he is feeding his antenna
with an odd multiple of quarter-wavelengths, his balun will see about
4000 ohms. Slightly shorter or longer will result in high reactance
in addition to high resistance. How are you going to design a balun
to handle those impedances? The G5RV feedpoint impedance on 80m is
around 10 ohms which is pretty easy to match.

IMO, to put his mind at rest, Chester should make some simple ladder-
line measurements that yield the impedance at the balun or tuner.
Knowing that impedance will tell him if he needs to do something
different.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV vs. 130' Dipole
Date: 18 Feb 1996 13:08:34 -0500
Message-ID: <4g7pv2$[e-mail]>
References: <4g3j7p$[e-mail]>

In article <4g3j7p$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (David L. Thompson) writes:

>
>Stay with the dipole.  The G5RV does not work as well on 80 and your
>antenna is simplier to maintain.

The poor G5RV doesn't deserve such a reputation.;-)

I had both a G5RV (up `80-90 feet) and a dipole fed with ladder line (up
130-135 ft) here. They were about 100 feet apart (end to end).

Truthfully, no one I talked to caould tell the difference between them on
80, 40, or 20 when I A-B'ed the antennas!

On 15 and ten the ladder line fed dipole was a bit better, but the G5RV
was easier to match on 80, 40 and 20 and gave me less problems with
windload from the feedline. The G5RV SWR was less than 3:1 on 80, 40 and
20 without a tuner.

>One thing you might want to consider for 160 is to load 1/2 of the
>antenna as a 1/4 L and use the other as a counterpoise.  Drake tells
>of this scheme in their 2700 tuner and there is no reason why it
>cannot be used with any tuner.  Hook one side to the long wire
>connection of the Dentron and hook the other side to the ground.
>WA2SRQ is one that does well in contests with an 80 meter dipole thus
>connected.   You can't do this with the G5RV.

This ceratinly CAN be done with a G5RV, as long as the balun is
accessable. 160 operation can be obtained by connecting either the shield
or the center (alone or in parallel) to the tuner's unbalanced output. I
bring the G5RV's short ladder line feeder down to coax, and the coax down
to ground level. At the ground, I installed a choke balun and a ground
system.

I can load the G5RV as a "T" on 160, and the normal way on the other bands
by changing a jumper connection at the balun.

By the way, there is very little difference connecting to one feedline
wire or both in parallel. The antenna still acts like a T, and not an L.
There is so much coupling from conductor to conductor over the length of
the feedline, both halves of the flat-top are active on 160 no matter how
they are connected at the feedpoint.

73, Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mike Groves)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help Needed: UHF, H-Polarize, Omni Dir. antenna with *GAIN*.  HOW?
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 22:00:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4gask1$[e-mail]>

OK you guys (gals), I've got a problem in need of an answer.

If money were no object, how would one go about getting any kind of
gain from an antenna at a repeater sight that was horizontal polarized
and "semi" omni directional?  (I actually only need about 160 degrees
of coverage as the repeater is located part-way up a hillside,
overlooking a valley.)  This will be used on the 440 MHz band.

I'm currently using an egg-beater, but it has little or no gain to
speak of.  Could I co-phase a few of these?

How about if I had four 10 dB gain yagi's stacked with each one being
pointed about 40 degrees over from the one below it in a "spread"
barber-pole type pattern.  Anyone played with this?

What about 2 corner reflectors mounted wing-to-wing to cover the
valley floor?

I know someone out there has had a similar problem, I would appreciate
hearing your solutions/suggestions.  Thanks,

Mike Groves (KD6PKJ)



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Graham Seale)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HI-Q antenna
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 10:41:27 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

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

 > I am looking for information on antennas with extremely narrow bandwidth
 > for use on a dual frequency packet setup.  All antennas I have seen aim
 > for the maximum bandwidth possible.  I am looking for the minimum bandwidth
 > possible, for a single frequency.  A duplexer has been considered, but I
 > don't think it is a $$$ option.
 >
 > I tried a full wave loop, but the bandwidth was 4 MHz, even with magnet wir
e.
 > I'm trying to run a gateway, but rx blanking occurs, even 2 MHz away.
 > Ideally, I'd like to run 145.07 and 145.79 together for the APRS crowd.
 > What I'm aiming for is 1200 baud on 145.07 and 9600 baud on 147.57 as a
 > dual entry gateway into internet.
 >
 > I have worked with a loop antenna for hf operation(MFJ) which has a width
 > of only 30 khz.  All 2m antennas I have seen are at least a few MHz on
 > average.  The hf loop is a natural filter, and rejects all nearby signals,
 > even 100 khz away.  The hf loop runs a Q of 50 to 500 depending on the band
.
 >
 > I have considered building a scale version of the loop, but I don't know if
 > the capacitor is increased or decreased in value.  My ignorance is showing.
 >
 > 73 de Tom S.
 > [e-mail]

A past RadCom (uk) article I recall describes the use of collinear
elements mounted in a vertical line, one directly over the other.
I don't have detail on the separation, but apparently done by putting a
little signal into one while listening the other, then move the lower one
about in the null to get optimum lowest coupling.

I don't recall the numbers, but the coupling loss was useful enough
to allow the use of fewer cavity filters in the diplexer. You will
need to ensure two things are right.

 a) The amount of unwanted Tx that couples back into your Rx (even if
   shifted by 720kHz) must not cause the front end stages to go
   non-linear and act as a mixer, giving a huge crowd of unwanted sigs
   going thru the Rx as if they were legit.

b) The (conflicting) requirement that the insertion loss of any filtering
   in the receiver path, to reject the unwanted Tx, does not also make the
   receiver deaf. The limit of what it can hear is decided by the front end
   noise figure. Cable and filter loss add directly to that figure. The
   guys with the collinears did not want to put in yet another cavity filter
   because of cost and rig deafness, so they exploited the null. (70cm kit)

73's

--
Graham Seale


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:41 1996
From: Bob Wilson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:14:59 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]>

WB7ASR wrote:
>
> What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
> What tool would best be used to make the hole?
>
> WB7ASR...

Tom,
        A 3/4" hole is the typical requirement...although other "special"
bases are available...such as 3/8".

        A 3/4" hole saw on an electric drill has worked just fine for the
dozen or so I've installed.  You just have to be mindful of the
headliner!

Good Luck

Bob Wilson
WA4PUJ


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dave O'Neal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 17 Feb 1996 17:23:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4g52tm$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]> <4friof$[e-mail]>

In article <4friof$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>[e-mail] (WB7ASR) wrote:
>
>>What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
    3/4"
>>What tool would best be used to make the hole?
    If possible, use a 3/4" hole saw with a stop (available through
    larsen).  This will keep you from dropping the bit into the head-
    liner.  Also, before you drill, LOOK UNDERNEATH!  Usual access is
    via dome lamp.  Make sure that you are not drilling on top of a
    support beam.  Make sure that the head liner and wires are out of
    the way.  Make sure there is a path for your coax... some cabs
    have a double metal roof or other obstacles.  Remember that the
    hole is PERMANENT... make sure it's where you want it.

                              good luck



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:43 1996
From: "Mark Herson, N2MH" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 17 Feb 1996 20:47:49 GMT
Message-ID: <4g5etl$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]> <4friof$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (John Bradley/KK5MH) wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB7ASR) wrote:
>
>>What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
>>What tool would best be used to make the hole?
>
>>WB7ASR...
>
>I used a 3/4" hole saw with a built-in pilot drill.  The instructions
>are included with the NMO mount.  I recommend using a high quality saw
>to avoid messing up the car.
>
>73,
>John
>

An even better suggestion is a 3/4" Greenlee hole punch. Makes really
nice clean holes for NMO mounts.

73, Mark



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:44 1996
From: Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 17 Feb 1996 18:26:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4g56ko$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]> <4friof$[e-mail]> <4g52tm$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

I agree with the hole saw comment. DO NOT USE A PUNCH such as Greenlee
it will buckle the sheet metal -- I know I did it,\.%#@*&% not bad tho Hi
Hi

Using these mounts gets a nice ground plane for the antenna. I use a 1/4
wave around town (low garage door) and a 5/8 while travelling.

Good sawing
Rod

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Woodybozak)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 19 Feb 1996 15:18:30 -0500
Message-ID: <4galum$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Woodybozak)

The NMO nut makes "no (electrical) connection to the vehicle body"??? An
o-ring flattens out when compressed. Thus, the brass nut does indeed make
a good electrical connection to the vehicle, from the OUTSIDE, if the
1/16" ring of paint/primer is removed by use of the proper hole saw (or
carefully removed by some other means). The teeth of the underside mount
are, as you indicated, required to keep the mount from spinning when the
brass nut is tightened. However, when Motorola engineers developed the NMO
mounting system, they recognized that the underside of automobile roofs,
fenders, trunk lids, etc., are often corroded, coated with oils and other
compounds from the die-stamping process at the factory, so they needed a
way to ensure positive electrical connection would be possible from the
OUTSIDE of the vehicle. The o-ring will not only compress and facilitate
an electrical connection, but the o-ring also will protect the grounding
area (now bare paint) from rust, etc., as the o-ring is on the outside of
the grounding area! Good job, Motorola.  As a side note, the 3/8" NLA
mount can be used with NMO antennas by use of an NLA/NMO adapter ring (if
they're still available).


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:47 1996
From: "Richard G. Slavens" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 19 Feb 1996 06:49:39 GMT
Message-ID: <4g96i3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

I agree with John, the Motorola antenna tool is the best way to go.  Try
one and be prepared for a easy installation.  It will also scrape away a
small ring of paint for a good antenna ground connection.

You might be able to borrow/rent one from a local Commercial Radio shop.

73,

Dick  WA6TMF
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[e-mail] (John Gianotti) wrote:
>And now to add my 2 cents worth.  The best way (IMHO) to drill the 3/4"
>hole for an NMO antenna mount is with a genuine Motorola hole saw.  This
>nifty device combines a hole saw with a colar that prevents you from
>going through the headliner of the car when the saw punches through.  Get
>on from a Motorola Service Center (but be prepared to pay).  Best idea is
>get your club to buy one they can loan to members.
>--
>     ____.      .__
>    |    | ____ |  |__   ____
>    |    |/  _ \|  |  \ /    \
>/\__|    (  <_> )   Y  \   |  \
>\________|\____/|___|  /___|  /
>                     \/     \/
> __________________________________________________________
>| John L. Gianotti KF9GW   [e-mail]|
>| Dir Computer Services     VOICE:     [phone]  x260|
>| Lake Central School Corp.   FAX:     [phone]      |
>|__________________________________________________________|
>




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:48 1996
From: [e-mail](David R. Mohr )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 17 Feb 1996 03:44:13 GMT
Message-ID: <4g3iud$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In <[e-mail]> Bob Wilson <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>WB7ASR wrote:
>>
>> What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
>> What tool would best be used to make the hole?
>>
>> WB7ASR...
>
>Tom,
>       A 3/4" hole is the typical requirement...although other "special"

>bases are available...such as 3/8".
>
>       A 3/4" hole saw on an electric drill has worked just fine for the

>dozen or so I've installed.  You just have to be mindful of the
>headliner!
>
>Good Luck
>
>Bob Wilson
>WA4PUJ
  A 3/4" Greenlee Chassis punch works well also.


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:49 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 20 Feb 1996 13:41:41 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gcj2l$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Chr
is Boone) writes:
}
}a PUNCH will distort the metal around the hole.....and the mount may never
}seat correctly....causing water leaks etc....
}
}73
}Chris
}--
}|Fidonet:  Chris Boone 1:106/4267
}|Internet: [e-mail]
}|
}| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
}

That is incorrect. The design of the punch prevents this as the
metal is supported around the outside perimeter of the hole being punched.
Actually, if it didn't, you wouldn't have a punch.

If the metal becomes distorted, it is because the user of the punch has placed
a lateral force on it deflecting the punch from a perpendicular position
to the metal being punched.

If the punch is damaged or worn out, that too could warp the metal being punch
ed.
Like any other tool, it must be in good shape.

Greenlee punches are especially nice because they have a beveled punch. This
design makes it act more like a shear than a punch, ensuring the metal isn't
stretched by the punching action.

73,

Bruce





From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:51 1996
From: Ginsberg Family <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 19 Feb 1996 23:45:38 GMT
Message-ID: <4gb232$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr4nm$[e-mail]> <4friof$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Gary Thorburn <[e-mail]> wrote:
>John Bradley/KK5MH wrote:
>>
>> [e-mail] (WB7ASR) wrote:
>>
>> >What is the hole size is required for the Larson NMO antenna mount?
>> >What tool would best be used to make the hole?
>>
>> >WB7ASR...
>>
>> I used a 3/4" hole saw with a built-in pilot drill.  The instructions
>> are included with the NMO mount.  I recommend using a high quality saw
>> to avoid messing up the car.
>>
>> 73,
>> John
>
>Best tool is a "Greelee Punch", 3/4-inch size. Nice, Neat job, you
>just drill a pilot hole first.  However, the "punch" only works
>if you have access to both sides of the metal you are cutting
>thru, for example if you can drop the dome lite and access
>the inside.
>
>/****
>*  Gary W. Thorburn  KD1TE
>*  email address:  [e-mail]
>****/

If you have acces to top and bottom you need not drill a 3/4 inch hole
there are NMO fittings that I purchased that only require a 3/8 hole, I
used one and they work fine.  I purchased mine at the Queen Mary
convention but there are other source I am sure if you check around.  A
3/8 inch hole can be done with not much more effort then the pilot for
larger 3/4 inch NMO  Hope that helps. Ed Ginsberg  KE6BNL



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:52 1996
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Horizontal Omni Antenna
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 10:30:41 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Horizontal Omni Antenna References in QST

The Big Wheel on Two  Sept 1961 pp 42-45
Three full wave loops--one of the best mobile performers.

The Two-Meter Eggbeater  April 1971 pp 44-46
Originally for 2M mobile, now popular for satellite work.
No, the authors didn't analyze its satellite performance.

10 GHz Omni Slot antenna   March 1983  p. 73
Simple phased array using WR-90 waveguide.

Reprints are available from the ARRL Technical
Department Secretary ($3/article/issue,
$5/article/issue for non-members.)


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:53 1996
From: "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 12:16:06 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR) wri
tes:
> >How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
> >when in use?
> >
> >Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of it
, measure
>  the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the pow
er
>  out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>
>                                     73's WD9AHF - JimWell, the wattmeter wil
l have to work at the output impedance of the tuner.......
Did anyone read the series of articles last year on tuner losses? Some of the
comments
posted here are contrary to the findings of the author. One that comes to mind
 is that
the loss is independent of the impedance being matched. The articles usually s
howed that
losses were greater for the same SWR when the impedance of the load was low ra
ther than
high. The author, Frank Witt AI1H, used the fact that the SWR measured at the
input of a
tuner with loss will not correctly report the mismatch at it's output. The los
ses are
proportional to the error in the reported SWR. For example, he adjusts a tuner
 to 1:1
for a 100 ohm load. Then he replaces the load with a 50 ohm load, and then a 2
00 ohm
load. The deviation of the SWR from 2:1 in both cases is due to the loss in th
e tuner.
Read the articles April,May 1995. What do you guys think?
--


Charles Jack Hawley Jr.
Amateur Radio KE9UW (A.K.A. 'Chuck' in Ham Radio)
BMW K100RS, BMWMOA #224 (A.K.A. 'Jack' in Motorcycles)
[e-mail]
Sr. Research Engineer Emeritus
Univ of Ill, Urbana-Champaign




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:54 1996
From: "Tom V. Pfaffenbach" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 19 Feb 1996 21:05:17 GMT
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4gaomd$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Tom;

An easy way is to use an RF ammeter and a resistive dummy load. Tune your
transmitter into the load directly and set it for highest reading on the
ammeter. P=I*I*R.

Now go thru your coupler and tune again for maximum ammeter reading.
Again P=I*I*R.   P1-P2=lOSS.

We are assuming that your best power output occurs at approximately the
same power input level, in both cases.  Generally this is valid, but you
can also verify the input level independently. It is important that you
make the measurements with a resistive load.

DO NOT BE SURPRISED IF YOU FIND LOSSES IN THE ORDER OF 15-30%.

Happy DXing 73-K9JDU



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (John R. Cunliffe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 02:35:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4gbc12$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4gaomd$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

"Tom V. Pfaffenbach" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hi Tom;

>An easy way is to use an RF ammeter and a resistive dummy load. Tune your
>transmitter into the load directly and set it for highest reading on the
>ammeter. P=I*I*R.

>Now go thru your coupler and tune again for maximum ammeter reading.
>Again P=I*I*R.   P1-P2=lOSS.

>We are assuming that your best power output occurs at approximately the
>same power input level, in both cases.  Generally this is valid, but you
>can also verify the input level independently. It is important that you
>make the measurements with a resistive load.

>DO NOT BE SURPRISED IF YOU FIND LOSSES IN THE ORDER OF 15-30%.

>Happy DXing 73-K9JDU

Well guys, I do matching for a living. I generally tune loads from 15
to 2000 ohms and with phase angles from 0 to +- 88 deg.
As a rule of thumb.... the lower the impedance is and the higher the
phase angle the higher the loss. Now... there is one exception for
that. EVERY load can be matched with reasonable low loss ( abt 10-15
%) if the tuner is built with high quality components AND the tune
range is small. Generally there is an inverse relationship between
efficiency and tunerange. The larger the tunerange is the lower the
efficiency for a given frequency. The closer the phase angle is to 0
deg the lower the loss is. So it is no problem to tune a 10 ohm 0 deg
load with a wide tune range tuner  and get reasonable low loss. But as
soon as the phase angle changes from 0 deg the loss will rise very
fast . We have a auto tuner for 13.56 mhz in our program that tunes
from 10 ohm -89deg to 2000 ohm +60deg and everything in between. The
average loss is around 50% and can go up to 70%;a lot of heat for a
1kW tuner.
We also have tuners that have only 10% loss but a very narrow tune
range. For the average ham tuner I have measured everything from 5-15%
in to "nice" loads to 50% loss into short 160 and 80m verticals.
The best way to find out is to calculate the exact impedance for a
given frequency of interest and build a "load simulator " for this
frequency with capacitors or coils and using a 50 ohm load to take the
power. With this you could then measure the power into the tuner and
also measure the power into the 50 ohm loss. A program like ECA (TM)
could be used to do this.


=====================================
John R. Cunliffe  N2NEP
[e-mail]
http://www.frontiernet.net/~cunliffe




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:57 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Croft)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 17:39:29 GMT

"C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>>
>> In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR) wr
ites:
>> >How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>> >when in use?
>> >
>> >Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of i
t, measure
>>  the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the po
wer
>>  out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>>
>>                                     73's WD9AHF - JimWell, the wattmeter wi
ll have to work at the output impedance of the tuner.......
>Did anyone read the series of articles last year on tuner losses? Some of the
 comments
>posted here are contrary to the findings of the author. One that comes to min
d is that
>the loss is independent of the impedance being matched. The articles usually
showed that
>losses were greater for the same SWR when the impedance of the load was low r
ather than
>high. The author, Frank Witt AI1H, used the fact that the SWR measured at the
 input of a
>tuner with loss will not correctly report the mismatch at it's output. The lo
sses are
>proportional to the error in the reported SWR. For example, he adjusts a tune
r to 1:1
>for a 100 ohm load. Then he replaces the load with a 50 ohm load, and then a
200 ohm
>load. The deviation of the SWR from 2:1 in both cases is due to the loss in t
he tuner.
>Read the articles April,May 1995. What do you guys think?
>--
>
>
>Charles Jack Hawley Jr.
>Amateur Radio KE9UW (A.K.A. 'Chuck' in Ham Radio)
>BMW K100RS, BMWMOA #224 (A.K.A. 'Jack' in Motorcycles)
>[e-mail]
>Sr. Research Engineer Emeritus
>Univ of Ill, Urbana-Champaign
>
>
Chuck -
One small hint needed - April and May of which publication?

Patrick  WB9IQI


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:57:59 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 20 Feb 1996 16:15:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4gcs28$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>>
>> In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR) wr
ites:
>> >How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>> >when in use?
>> >
>> >Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of i
t, measure
>>  the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the po
wer
>>  out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>>
>>                                     73's WD9AHF - JimWell, the wattmeter wi
ll have to work at the output impedance of the tuner.......
>Did anyone read the series of articles last year on tuner losses? Some of the
 comments
>posted here are contrary to the findings of the author. One that comes to min
d is that
>the loss is independent of the impedance being matched. The articles usually
showed that
>losses were greater for the same SWR when the impedance of the load was low r
ather than
>high. The author, Frank Witt AI1H, used the fact that the SWR measured at the
 input of a
>tuner with loss will not correctly report the mismatch at it's output. The lo
sses are
>proportional to the error in the reported SWR. For example, he adjusts a tune
r to 1:1
>for a 100 ohm load. Then he replaces the load with a 50 ohm load, and then a
200 ohm
>load. The deviation of the SWR from 2:1 in both cases is due to the loss in t
he tuner.
>Read the articles April,May 1995. What do you guys think?
>--
>
>
>Charles Jack Hawley Jr.
>Amateur Radio KE9UW (A.K.A. 'Chuck' in Ham Radio)
>BMW K100RS, BMWMOA #224 (A.K.A. 'Jack' in Motorcycles)
>[e-mail]
>Sr. Research Engineer Emeritus
>Univ of Ill, Urbana-Champaign
>
>
Hi again,
  I think you are complicating a pretty basic problem. Why not just put a non
 reactive load that matches what you think is your feed point impedance and
 measure Current and voltage there, and back at the transmitter, again using a
 non reactive load do the same. If the two power readings don't match, that's
 the loss. Did you ever build an amplifier and tune the inductor for the maxim
um
 efficiency?  Maybe I've landed in the middle of a thread that I don't know wh
ats
 gone on before, but I can't see what your hung up on. Sorry
                                                             Jim


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:02 1996
From: "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 10:10:16 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Patrick Croft wrote:
>
> "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >[e-mail] wrote:
> >>
> >> In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
writes:
> >> >How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
> >> >when in use?

> >Did anyone read the series of articles last year on tuner losses? Some of t
he comments
> >posted here are contrary to the findings of the author. One that comes to m
ind is that
> >the loss is independent of the impedance being matched. The articles usuall
y showed that
> >losses were greater for the same SWR when the impedance of the load was low
 rather than
> >high. The author, Frank Witt AI1H, used the fact that the SWR measured at t
he input of a
> >tuner with loss will not correctly report the mismatch at it's output. The
losses are
> >proportional to the error in the reported SWR. For example, he adjusts a tu
ner to 1:1
> >for a 100 ohm load. Then he replaces the load with a 50 ohm load, and then
a 200 ohm
> >load. The deviation of the SWR from 2:1 in both cases is due to the loss in
 the tuner.
> >Read the articles April,May 1995. What do you guys think?
> >--

> Chuck -
> One small hint needed - April and May of which publication?
>
> Patrick  WB9IQI

Sorry! It was QST.

Chuck, KE9UW




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:04 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: I need hf wire antenna help.........
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4fqp6d$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 18:53:33 GMT

In article <4fqp6d$[e-mail]> Jim Markle <[e-mail]
m> writes:
>
>Briefly (cw version): Can I add coils of wire to a tuner/ladderline fed
>dipole to increase  wire lenght and thus performance on 75M without hurting
>10M-40M?

Yes. Add the loading coils to each end of the dipole. Allow about
6 feet of wire to dangle beyond the coils for adjusting resonance
on 75 meters. The coils will have negligible effects on operation
on the higher bands. You can add stubs for each of the other bands
so that the dipole looks resonant on them too. This was the basis
of the famous Lattin antenna. It can be coax fed, no tuner required
80 thru 10.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:05 1996
From: Jeff <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ICOM INFO. NEEDED
Date: 17 Feb 1996 00:33:09 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4g37o5$[e-mail]>

My friend located a very good deal on a Icom 740 and it has
the WARC bands marked on the band selector but after
a look through the owners manual is says for recieve only
( on 17 & 12 mtrs.) I`ve looked at radio TX mods around the
net and they seem to jump from the Icom 735 right to the
751. Does anyone know if you can do the mod on the 740 so it
will work on the WARC bands ? This radio is a good deal only
if its workable on 12 and 17.  Can anyone help ?

                       THANKS        Jeff


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ken Bessler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Information abouth propagation in 27MHz (11metros)
Date: 16 Feb 1996 13:24:38 GMT
Message-ID: <4g20im$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, Eduardo
Luiz Barbin <[e-mail]> says:
>
>
>Helo all,
>
>        I am from Brasil, state of Sao Paulo, city Ribeirao Preto.
>        I am to  make  amatheur radio in 27MHz and I lake to know
>information abouth propagation.
>
>Tanks!


We are currently approaching the lowest period of sunspot activity in 11
years.The conditions on 27 Mhz won't improve untill summertime and won't
really be great untill the summer of 2000!


If you want good DX, then I suggest you drop the toy radio stuff, get a Ham
license and some real equipment and call me on 14.185.....


                             Good luck!
                                         KG0WX


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:06 1996
From: Eduardo Luiz Barbin <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Information abouth propagation in 27MHz (11metros)
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 19:31:47 -0300
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


Helo all,

        I am from Brasil, state of Sao Paulo, city Ribeirao Preto.
        I am to  make  amatheur radio in 27MHz and I lake to know
information abouth propagation.

Tanks!


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:07 1996
From: Jeff <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Information abouth propagation in 27MHz (11metros)
Date: 17 Feb 1996 00:41:55 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4g388j$[e-mail]>

Start looking for propagation on this band near the end of 1997
Things will be slow until then.I know this was`nt your question
but " oh well ".


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:08 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Kinda disappointed
Date: 18 Feb 1996 01:44:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4g60ad$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

A couple of weeks ago, I posted 'free software' in this category. The program:
TEEREV.ZIP is on the ARRL BBS. I was looking for a little feedback as to wheth
er
the program was worthwhile or not. I guess that's relative considering it's 'f
ree'.
The program although only taking 4 seconds to download, Calculates Effective
Radiated power, SWR, loss, at varying feedline types, length of run, Input pow
er,
antenna gain, and reflected power. To date, I have received exactly 0 (nada, z
ip,
nil,zilch) responses. Has anybody even tried it?

                                                             Jim WD9AHF


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:09 1996
From: [e-mail] (TuckerTF)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Marine SSB antenna help!!
Date: 19 Feb 1996 02:04:32 -0500
Message-ID: <4g97e0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (TuckerTF)

I wish to use one of the backstays on my 42' sailboat as a marine SSB
antenna. I have gotten conflicting answers to several questions. One
person says I need 2 insulators, top & bottom, and 35' between. The other
says only one insulator, bottom, to insure people don't touch antenna
portion, and based on transmitting freqs, the upper portion of the
backstay needs to be >23 feet. Both say I need considerable copper screen
connected by copper foil low down in boat for counterpoise...help???

TuckerTF


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:10 1996
From: [e-mail] (Graham Seale)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: monoband/triband separation ???
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 10:26:51 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In message <[e-mail]> Louise Carkenord wrote:

>
>
> My friend Quinlan, W0GLG, wants me to ask the group
> a question. He has an 80 foot tower erected over poor
> ground (decomposed granite).
> He can mount a beam at 80 feet and another beam 6 feet
> lower. That is, beams will be separated by 6 feet.
> He has a 10/15/20 tribander and he has a 40M monobander.
> Given above data, which he says he will not change......
> which antenna should be on top??
> Should he have the monobander at 80 feet and the tribander
> at 74 feet???
> Should he have the tribander at 80 feet and the monobander
> at 74 feet???  He lives in Colorado and is a dx chaser.
>                               Tnx.....Lee  KA0FPJ

80 feet is about 24 metres. The tribander's lowest wavelength is 20m.
The tribander would not care if it were mounted a bit lower. The wave
would launch at a satisfactory low angle. The 40m antenna, being so
large, cannot be mounted at a similar fraction of its wavelength high,
but you do the best you can and put it at the top. There may be good
mechanical reasons not to do this, and DX or not, I am not sure anyone
would notice it on their S-Meter!

--
Graham Seale


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:12 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Dave Kirkby)
Subject: Re: need : a Yagi Antenna design program for 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 16:57:26 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
References: <4fsjq3$[e-mail]>

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Klingon Empire) writes:
> Greetings,
>           I am in desperate need of a Yagi antenna design program for the
> frequency of 477 Mhz preferably between 8 to 23 elements and folded
> dipole fed. If you have any info please Email me....
>
> thankyou for taking the time to read this message...
>
>
> regards   [e-mail]
>


I have written something that can design, analyse and optimise a Yagi. Its kno
wn as
the YagiUda project and can be ftp'ed from medphys.ucl.ac.uk in the
directory /pub/users/davek/YagiUda  Look for a file yagiu109.zip. You should f
ind
some DOS executables as well as source code which will compile under DOS or un
ix
systems.

The optimiser needs a bit of work and is likely to be slow with 23 elements, b
ut
the only limits are on time and memory size. I have analysed a 500 element bea
m.



---
Dave Kirkby
Dept of Medical Physics,
University College London,
11-20 Capper St,
London WC1E 6JA
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]






From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:13 1996
From: David Nulton <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Contact for Don Johnson RE: Screwdriver Antenna
Date: 19 Feb 1996 16:29:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4ga8hg$[e-mail]>

If anyone knows an email address, snail mail address, phone
number, callsign, anything...please forward.  I want to enquire
about his "screwdriver antenna" design.

73s
de KI5XW



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:13 1996
From: Hank Blackstock <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need Contact for Don Johnson RE: Screwdriver Antenna
Date: 19 Feb 1996 22:27:00 GMT
Message-ID: <4gatfk$[e-mail]>
References: <4ga8hg$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

David Nulton <[e-mail]> wrote:
>If anyone knows an email address, snail mail address, phone
>number, callsign, anything...please forward.  I want to enquire
>about his "screwdriver antenna" design.
>
>73s
>de KI5XW
>
Callsign is W6AAQ.

73 Hank WA5JRH



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (Brad Charbonneau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Optimum VHF QTH
Date: 20 Feb 1996 19:42:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4gd87t$[e-mail]>

Hi there,
     I am interested in setting up a nice VHF station up in Vermont in the nea
r future.  I was thinking of trying to build a house on the largest reasonable
 hill I could find, and set up a tower with some long boom yagis set-up in 2 x
 2 fashion for at least 2m and 440 to start.
     I am especially interested in DX on these bands, and taking advantage of
band openings.  In order to do this, is a large hill the optimum location?  Or
 is a high tower and good beams all you need, regardless of your elevation abo
ve sea level?
     I would greatly appreciate any VHF'ers or anyone's response and any help
that you can give.  Thanks in advance!

                              Brad NZ1Y



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:15 1996
From: Tim Brown <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: PC interferes with TV
Date: 19 Feb 1996 10:55:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4g9kvk$[e-mail]>
References: <4f2iis$[e-mail]> <4f2vr1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (James D. Cronin) wrote:
>
> In article <4f2vr1$[e-mail]>,
> Richard MacDonald <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >On Sun, 04 Feb 1996 10:12:53, [e-mail] (Paul Del Priore) wrote:
> >
> >>When I use my computer, if someone else is watching TV using off
> >>air antenna annoying interference is present on TV, mostly channels
> >>2,4,5.
> >>...
>
> >Paul:
> >
> >1. Check that your computer is FCC Class B certified (home use). If not you
 may
> >not be able to cure the problems.
>
> All of them are, but there are companies that actually (oh no!) cheat.  Dial
> into the FCC BBS (don't remember the number, call a field office) and check.
> My 486 DX2/66 had the FCC number from a 386.
>
> 73..Jim  N2VNO



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:16 1996
From: Tim Brown <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: PC interferes with TV
Date: 19 Feb 1996 11:00:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4g9l8b$[e-mail]>
References: <4f2iis$[e-mail]> <4f2vr1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (James D. Cronin) wrote:
>
> In article <4f2vr1$[e-mail]>,
> Richard MacDonald <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >On Sun, 04 Feb 1996 10:12:53, [e-mail] (Paul Del Priore) wrote:
> >
> >>When I use my computer, if someone else is watching TV using off
> >>air antenna annoying interference is present on TV, mostly channels
> >>2,4,5.
> >>...
>
> >Paul:
> >
> >1. Check that your computer is FCC Class B certified (home use). If not you
 may
> >not be able to cure the problems.
>
> All of them are, but there are companies that actually (oh no!) cheat.  Dial
> into the FCC BBS (don't remember the number, call a field office) and check.
> My 486 DX2/66 had the FCC number from a 386.
>
> 73..Jim  N2VNO


Paul:
  With the t.v. and computer both on, unplug your mouse.  I recently
  purchased an inexpensive (cheap) mouse due to desireable shape and
  features.  Unfortunately, it bled RF interference as far away as
  the guest house t.v. 30 feet away!  Stick with "name brands" and
  you should have no problem.  Even if your mouse is a good one, heavy
  use may have caused a break down in its ability to insulate against
  RF bleed.  Good Luck!


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:17 1996
From: "Ken (KC6TEU)" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Phasing Two Quagi's on 446.1
Date: 16 Feb 1996 18:32:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4g2ije$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Craig A. Warnol (KB5UEJ)) wrote:
>How would I go about making an array with two 8 element
>quagis on 446.1?  I have two of them and would like
>to put both of them up.  Is the proper way of doing this
>to use 1/4 wave 75 ohm coax to one antenna and a 3/4 wave
>75 ohm coax to the second, and have 1 wavelength separation
>at the feedpoint. They are going to be vertical polarized
>so I know the feed should be in the center of the vertical
>side of the drive element.  Also what about a balun.  The
>author in the ARRL antenna handbook states any balun he
>added only introduced problems.  Can anyone give me any advise???
>
>73 de Craig  (KB5UEJ)
>[e-mail]      --- I-net E-mail
>[e-mail]        --- AMPRnet E-mail
>KB5UEJ@WA4WBI.#MOBAL.AL.USA.NOAM  --- packet E-mail
>

Craig,

I've done exactly what your doing years ago. Use a 5 turn loop
of rg58 type coax about 2.5 inches in dia. I had used the
radio shack stuff for this as connectors were allready
connected. Without this you will find the SWR moving around as
the antenna moves.

As for the 75 ohm coax, use odd 1/4 wave lengths for each leg
of the antenna. I don't think your idea will work, use 3/4
wave lengths for each matching section.

The results... It worked on the frequency that I was using but
accross the FM portion of the band the SWR was up and down
depending on the frequency. With about 35 mW (yes thats 0.035
watts, I was hitting the repeater I wanted to get into
reliably in all seasons with good audio -- and it was 75 miles
away and I was behind a dirt hill of about 150 feet.

                Good Fun...

                    73,
                  Ken
                  KC6TEU - CM98LQ




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:19 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Problems with reception using TV antenna in vertical plane
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 02:34:47 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <31253de9.3577027@news>

I know this isn't a HAM antenna question but....


This is what  I have done:

1. Mounted my TV antenna that was on our roof in the vertical plane.
    (the muffler shop bent the tube for no charge)

2. Hooked a matching transformer to the antenna

3. Used RG6/U cable to run to a F-BNC adapter, which I hooked to my

    scanner  (AOR AR1500).

Now the problem, when I use my RS telescopic, I can get the 46-50MHz
chatter no prob. When I switch to the roof top antenna, I lose
them--just static.

I live in a semi-rural area and I would have thought that the TV
antenna in the vertical plane should have increased my reception?

Could the antenna be not working (it came with the house), is the
AR1500 just a crappy scanner... ...I'm baffled-- it seems that
everyone else gets way better reception with TV antennae.

I am keeping my eyes peeled for a 2006 anyways--if that will even
help.

I have pulled that antenna down so many times now, I'm sure I'm due to
drop it off the roof soon.

I have an Archerator too--turning it hasn't helped yet. Right now I
want to get the most range in the 46-50 MHz range.

Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.


[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 18 Feb 1996 06:49:41 -0500
Message-ID: <4g73ol$[e-mail]>
References: <4g3j98$[e-mail]>

Hi Gary,
In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) writes:
>There *is* a standard (two of them actually), but unfortunately
>most amateur gear doesn't adhere to it. An S-unit is defined as
>6 db, and S9 is defined as 50 uV across 50 ohms at the receiver
>input. (The second standard is for VHF where S9 is equal to 5uV.)
>

If most (actually ALL current production ) amateur gear doesn't adhere to
it, what makes it a standard? Is there a professional reference book that
defines the 6 dB standard? I can't find that "standard" in any of my
reference books!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:21 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 96 02:34:12 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4fsoi2$[e-mail]>

W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> writes:

>Using six dB as an "S" unit is about like a surveyor using a "stones
>throw" on a land map. As I said in the amplifier thread, people commonly
>tell me my 1500 watt PA picks up 20 dB over a 90 watt exciter!

Hi Tom, Note I reported a 2 'S' unit improvement, not a 12 dB improvement.
Don't really know how many "Sterbies" improvement it was. Looks like
"Sterbies" is going to stick thanks to Roy, W7EL. KNSterba gave Roy
credit for it in this month's Worldradio and started using it himself.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:22 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 96 02:42:22 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <xpDI5Vy.cecilmoore@delphi <4frtbm$[e-mail]>

JJ Martin <[e-mail]> writes:

>- around the torriodal balun -  does that mean I'm better off
>changing it?

I think you probably would be better off on a couple of bands if you
fine tuned it like I did. I have distilled my homebrew tuner down to
4 switches, 3 toroids, and one variable cap all mounted on a piece
of plexiglas at the operating position. I'm going to run some tests
using a number of receivers and report the results. The contraption
cost next to nothing and gives SWRs of less than 1.3:1 on all HF bands.

The real advantage of my configuration is that the 4:1 balun sees
nothing but 300 ohms resistive and there is no 50 ohm antenna tuner.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:23 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 96 02:29:08 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fokfv$[e-mail]> <4fsaho$[e-mail]>

Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> writes:

>What would you like it to be? Sorry, Cecil, the statement that one tuner is
>"two S-units better" than the other is seriously lacking in information
>content.

Hi Roy, you're right, but that's the only information content that I
have except N5AQM said I was a lot louder with one configuration. On
20m where there is no terrific mismatch, the configurations were equal
on the 'S' meter. On 75m where there is a terrific mismatch adding
two toroids in series at the proper point resulted in better performance
than an antenna tuner. We will run the experiment with a number of
receivers next time.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 15 Feb 1996 13:17:06 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4fvboi$[e-mail]>
References: <4fsoi2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
}In article <[e-mail]>, Cecil Moore
}<[e-mail]> writes:
}
}
}Could be two dB also Ceil. Why does does "six" keep coming back? Someone
}please drive a stake through it's heart!
}
}Using six dB as an "S" unit is about like a surveyor using a "stones
}throw" on a land map.
}
}73 Tom

Well Tom,
It goes like this. Since the meter is calibrated in
microVOLTS, 6dB/S-Unit would mean you have twice the signal power differential
per S-Unit.

73,
Bruce






From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 16 Feb 1996 09:27:02 -0500
Message-ID: <4g247m$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Hi Cecil,

I think you have to be careful with this test!

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

>
>N5AQM and I just ran the signal strength measurements in a (hopefully)
>more acceptable way. Using an MFJ-949 into a 4:1 balun into the ladder-
>line, I was S9 with 100w into the tuner. Taking the output of the
>transmitter directly into the 4:1 balun into the ladder-line with two
>series toroids (17 uH each) I was S9 with 30w into the balun. Sounds
>like the first configuration has about 5dB more loss than the second.

What distance was he from you? How "sanitary" was his installation? If the
common mode feedline current increased the groundwave signal signal also
would have increased with almost no change in system efficiency.

The best way to do the test is by measuring the differential current and
common mode in the feedline!!!! Then there would be no guessing!l

>In configuration number one, the same one that a lot of hams run, the
>4:1 balun sees a 300-j800 ohm load. Assuming a perfect transformation,
>the tuner sees a 75-j200 ohm load. I would guess the additional loss
>is primarily in the balun. Do you agree.

I don't. Did the balun temperature change? Can you measure the temp rise
and do a dc test for the same rise and calculate the power dissipation for
that temp rise?

>In configuration number two, with the toroids in the ladder-line, the
>4:1 balun sees a 300 ohm resistive load which is probably a low-loss
>highly efficient point. Then nothing between the balun and the
transmitter
>except an SWR/power meter. When I switched over to this configuration
>on 75m, my signal reports got a lot better. Same for 40m. No difference
>on 20m betwee the tuner in or out.

I expect things got a tiny bit better. The tuner probably lost 1/2 dB if
it was tuned at an extreme of Q (much more L, much less C than needed) and
the balun perhaps another  fraction of a dB. I hope you use the more
efficient 1:1 configuration in the tuner, and not the 4:1.

Even knowing an S unit is *****NOT***** 6 dB (as some people keep
insisting), I suspect something else went on. One dB I'll buy, more than
that....no sale.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 16 Feb 1996 06:50:03 -0500
Message-ID: <4g1r1b$[e-mail]>
References: <4fvboi$[e-mail]>

In article <4fvboi$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Bruce Burke) writes:

>
>Well Tom,
>It goes like this. Since the meter is calibrated in
>microVOLTS, 6dB/S-Unit would mean you have twice the signal power
>differential
>per S-Unit.

3 dB change in voltage is 3 dB change in power.

3 dB change in power is 3 dB change in current.

3 dB change in current is 3 dB change in voltage.

When it's voltage or current it's 20 log10 (ratio), when it's power it's
10 log10 (ratio).

An "S" unit is not anything, because there never was a standard that came
into common use. Even the dB scale on most "S" meters is pathetic. It's
more dream than real. Years ago "S" stood for sorta'. If you were S7 and
he was S9 I'd say you were sorta' louder. It sure as hell isn't 12 dB.

The most recent use of S units is in "Sterba" units, an esoteric
pedonecrobeastohomogrouchopheliac type of unit.

73 Tom




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 96 17:42:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4fvr94$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4fsoi2$[e-mail]>

In article <4fsoi2$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

;. . .

;Using six dB as an "S" unit is about like a surveyor using a "stones
;throw" on a land map. As I said in the amplifier thread, people commonly
;tell me my 1500 watt PA picks up 20 dB over a 90 watt exciter!

My ICOM will show just about exactly that. S9 to S9 + 20 is 12.9 dB on its
meter. 6 dB isn't an S-Unit -- it's a "Sterby". So what should we call the
"dB" above S9 on an S-meter? (Other than "wishful thinking. . .")

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:28 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 96 11:30:20 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4g247m$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4g3j98$[e-mail]>

David R. Mohr <[e-mail]> writes:

>    Ok, guys, if you don't like the design/layout/theory of operation
>of this particular tuner, don't buy the kit or build the thing.
>    Don't you think you've beaten this thing to death already??

Hi Dave, you're right, the subject has broadened to tuners/baluns
losses in general. It sure is easy to evolve from one subject to
another without changing the thread title.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:29 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 96 22:08:48 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4fsoi2$[e-mail]> <4fvr94$[e-mail]>

Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> writes:

>My ICOM will show just about exactly that. S9 to S9 + 20 is 12.9 dB on its
>meter. 6 dB isn't an S-Unit -- it's a "Sterby". So what should we call the
>"dB" above S9 on an S-meter? (Other than "wishful thinking. . .")

Hi Roy, how about S10, S11, S12 etc. S9+18dB would be S12. Have you ever
got an S12 report before? :-)

N5AQM and I just ran the signal strength measurements in a (hopefully)
more acceptable way. Using an MFJ-949 into a 4:1 balun into the ladder-
line, I was S9 with 100w into the tuner. Taking the output of the
transmitter directly into the 4:1 balun into the ladder-line with two
series toroids (17 uH each) I was S9 with 30w into the balun. Sounds
like the first configuration has about 5dB more loss than the second.

In configuration number one, the same one that a lot of hams run, the
4:1 balun sees a 300-j800 ohm load. Assuming a perfect transformation,
the tuner sees a 75-j200 ohm load. I would guess the additional loss
is primarily in the balun. Do you agree.

In configuration number two, with the toroids in the ladder-line, the
4:1 balun sees a 300 ohm resistive load which is probably a low-loss
highly efficient point. Then nothing between the balun and the transmitter
except an SWR/power meter. When I switched over to this configuration
on 75m, my signal reports got a lot better. Same for 40m. No difference
on 20m between the tuner in or out.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:30 1996
From: "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner, balun losses, and accurate antenna measurements
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 12:19:46 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4g26q0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

James R. Duffey wrote:
>
> This thread on the QST auto tuner and losses in the tuner/balun system has g
one on too long for me to ignore. I cannot resist commenting on several points
;
>
> 1. The place for a balun with a multiple band ladder line fed antenna is bet
ween the tuner and the transmitter, not between the tuner and the antenna. The
 auto
> ork fine in this configuration as well.
>
> 2. Accurate antenna measurements are not difficult to make, particularly whe
n relative measurements are all that are required. Interpreting them does requ
ire s
>  You may wish to make field strength readings at various locations in case t
he feed line radiation is different in the two cases, and you probably want ha
ms ac
> them are given in the ARRL Antenna Anthology.  RF ammeters in the output lin
e should also give a good relative indication of the performance of different
anten
> rn more about their antenna.
>
> 3. The high radiation resistances and impedances which give the most problem
s in matching can be significantly reduced by the paralleling of wires in the
anten
> urrents. More improvement can be obtained by using a third wire, but you beg
in to get into the point of diminishing returns, that is, it is harder to keep
 the
>  will also improve the performance of the commonly used 3/2 wavelength on 20
 meters antenna, also known as the G5RV, when used on other bands.
>
> Just my $0.02 worth. This has grown past my origninal intent and I have refr
ained from starting another controversy by saying that my favorite multiple ba
nd an
> -Duffey KK6MC/5

What the heck kind of editor do you have? I can't even find
the ends of the lines.
--


Charles Jack Hawley Jr.
Amateur Radio KE9UW (A.K.A. 'Chuck' in Ham Radio)
BMW K100RS, BMWMOA #224 (A.K.A. 'Jack' in Motorcycles)
[e-mail]
Sr. Research Engineer Emeritus
Univ of Ill, Urbana-Champaign




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:32 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Croft)
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner, balun losses, and accurate antenna measurements
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4g26q0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 17:37:11 GMT

"C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>James R. Duffey wrote:
>>
>> This thread on the QST auto tuner and losses in the tuner/balun system has
gone on too long for me to ignore. I cannot resist commenting on several point
s;
>>
>> 1. The place for a balun with a multiple band ladder line fed antenna is be
tween the tuner and the transmitter, not between the tuner and the antenna. Th
e auto
>> ork fine in this configuration as well.
>>
>> 2. Accurate antenna measurements are not difficult to make, particularly wh
en relative measurements are all that are required. Interpreting them does req
uire s
>>  You may wish to make field strength readings at various locations in case
the feed line radiation is different in the two cases, and you probably want h
ams ac
>> them are given in the ARRL Antenna Anthology.  RF ammeters in the output li
ne should also give a good relative indication of the performance of different
 anten
>> rn more about their antenna.
>>
>> 3. The high radiation resistances and impedances which give the most proble
ms in matching can be significantly reduced by the paralleling of wires in the
 anten
>> urrents. More improvement can be obtained by using a third wire, but you be
gin to get into the point of diminishing returns, that is, it is harder to kee
p the
>>  will also improve the performance of the commonly used 3/2 wavelength on 2
0 meters antenna, also known as the G5RV, when used on other bands.
>>
>> Just my $0.02 worth. This has grown past my origninal intent and I have ref
rained from starting another controversy by saying that my favorite multiple b
and an
>> -Duffey KK6MC/5
>
>What the heck kind of editor do you have? I can't even find
>the ends of the lines.
>--
>
>
>Charles Jack Hawley Jr.
>Amateur Radio KE9UW (A.K.A. 'Chuck' in Ham Radio)
>BMW K100RS, BMWMOA #224 (A.K.A. 'Jack' in Motorcycles)
>[e-mail]
>Sr. Research Engineer Emeritus
>Univ of Ill, Urbana-Champaign
>
>

Chuck -
You may need to open up your setup width.  Many people are going to 17" or lar
ger monitors, and
with most news readers (I'm using News Express and a 17" - your post only abou
t 25% width) allow
wide spaces.  It has been my understanding that one should attempt to maintain
 width of original
sender, ie: hit the return key!
73

Patrick   WB9IQI


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner, balun losses, and accurate antenna measurements
Date: 20 Feb 1996 06:37:55 -0500
Message-ID: <4gcbqj$[e-mail]>
References: <4g73ol$[e-mail]>

Hi Jim,
In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(James R. Duffey) writes:

>1. The place for a balun with a multiple band ladder line fed antenna is
>between the tuner and the transmitter, not between the tuner and the
antenna.
>The auto tuner described in the QST article will work fine in this
fashion.
>Connect the ladder line to the tuner, don't ground the tuner, and feed
the
>tuner from the transmitter through a 1:1 transmission line balun. This
>configuration should result in low losses if the tuner is not grounded
and
>kept at least 6 inches or so from ground. A manual tuner will w
>ork fine in this configuration as well.

We have to be careful here! If the tuner is a single ended tuner, or is
"balanced" and has a floating common point, common mode impedance isn't
transformed any appreciable amount. The common mode impedance remains
essentially the same, and moving a balun to the tuner input does nothing
to relieve common mode voltage problems or improve system balance. It does
control differential mode voltages, but most of the time differential mode
voltages aren't the real problem! With a properly designed choke balun,
differential voltages aren't a problem at all and moving the balun to the
input is a complete waste of time!

>2. Accurate antenna measurements are not difficult to make, particularly
when
>relative measurements are all that are required. Interpreting them does
>require some expertise however. <<snip>> I think that accurate methods of
>making relative antenna performance measurements are available to nearly
all
>hams with a minimum of technical ability and a desire to lea
>rn more about their antenna.

Those suggestions work well with vertical antennas. I want to point out
the horizontal component is attenuated rapidly by propagation along the
earth, while any vertically polarized radiation (from the feedline) is
attenuated **much** less. Accurate measurement of a horizontal antenna in
the far field requires nothing short of a test range type system system
that allows "direct wave propagation" measurements, and on low frequency
bands accurate comparisons require very careful planning. Accurate
measurement requires a receiving antenna that responds only to horizontal
signal components.  If the receiving antenna responds to the vertical
components (even with considerable attenuation), a false conclusion can be
reached. Feedline radiation can dominate the measurement!

>3. The high radiation resistances and impedances which give the most
problems
>in matching can be significantly reduced by the paralleling of wires in
the
>antenna. Thus instead of a single 14 gauge wire for each leg, use two
such
>wires spaced a foot or so apart.

That's a good suggestion, and a bow tie also works nicely. The ideal
antenna for constant impedance bandwidth is a tapered transmission line of
constant impedance (the center and the shield both flare out),. The line
eventally becomes infinitely wide and radiates (like a horn antenna). The
next most desirable is a constant impedance cone that expands on the open
end worked against an infinite groundplane. The least desirable is an
inverted cone wide at the feedpoint and pointed at the open end. In order
of BW: tapered line, conical or bi-conical antennas (like a bow tie),
thick linear antennas, thinner linear antennas, reverse tapered antennas
(backwards cones, like self supporting towers).

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:35 1996
From: "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner, balun losses, and accurate antenna measurements
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 10:07:34 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4g26q0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Patrick Croft wrote:
>
> "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >James R. Duffey wrote:
> >>
> >> This thread on the QST auto tuner and losses in the tuner/balun system ha
s gone on too long for me to ignore. I cannot resist commenting on several poi
nts;
> >>
> >> 1. The place for a balun with a multiple band ladder line fed antenna is
between the tuner and the transmitter, not between the tuner and the antenna.
The a
> >> ork fine in this configuration as well.

> >What the heck kind of editor do you have? I can't even find
> >the ends of the lines.
> >--
> >
> >
> >Charles Jack Hawley Jr.

> Chuck -
> You may need to open up your setup width.  Many people are going to 17" or l
arger monitors, and
> with most news readers (I'm using News Express and a 17" - your post only ab
out 25% width) allow
> wide spaces.  It has been my understanding that one should attempt to mainta
in width of original
> sender, ie: hit the return key!
> 73
>
> Patrick   WB9IQI

Well that's the thing. I use a 17 inch monitor and I usually open up to where
the lines don't wrap
on the post that I am responding to. I the above case, I could never get the f
ew words on the ends
of the lines. I use Netscape, and I scrolled to the end of the window and the
lines just ended
resulting in missing words. No big deal, but it's happened before and I wonder
 how it could be.

Chuck KE9UW




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:36 1996
From: Eduardo Luiz Barbin <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: short wave antenna reference sought
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 19:24:20 -0300
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ffk7t$[e-mail]>

On 9 Feb 1996, Bob Tomas wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I am searching for a reference containing plans/advice on the construction
> of antennas for s/w radio listening.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
> n7nd
>

 Helo Bob Tomas,

 I am have reference of one spanish book with very plans/adivice for the
construction of antennas of any waves.

If you want this references, write for me.


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Spacing between stacked yagis
Date: 20 Feb 1996 20:30:08 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gdb0g$[e-mail]>

Im making plans on installing a Cushcraft A3 3-element 20/15/10 meter
yagi on the same mast section with a homebrew 2-element 12/17 meter yagi.
I need to determine what length of mast section will be acquired.

What is the mimimum required spaceing between the two yagis to prevent an
interaction.

Tom...



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Spacing between stacked yagis
Date: 20 Feb 1996 18:29:21 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gd3u1$[e-mail]>

Im making plans on installing a Cushcraft A3 3-element 20/15/10 meter
yagi on the same mast with a homebrew 2-element 12/17 meter yagi.

What minimum spacing is required between the two yagis to pervent
interaction?

Tom...



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (Donald M. Ross)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SQLoop Antenna ?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 96 03:37:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4geos0$[e-mail]>

I'm just getting back to 2m SSB and am reading N6CL's book.
 In it he mentions the SQLoop antenna.  What is it?  What
are it's spec's?  Where can I get one?

Don, NL7CO,  EM04


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SQLoop Antenna ?
Date: 21 Feb 1996 05:22:39 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gea6v$[e-mail]>
References: <4geos0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <4geos0$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Donald M. Ross) wrote:

> I'm just getting back to 2m SSB and am reading N6CL's book.
>  In it he mentions the SQLoop antenna.  What is it?  What
> are it's spec's?  Where can I get one?

I believe this is a half wave length loop that is fed on one
side and open on the other side.  It can be built in the form of
a loop or a square.  Roughly it looks like:

           +-------|  |-------+
           |                  |
           |                  |
           |                  |
           |                  |
           |                  |
           |                  |
           |                  |
           |                  |
           +--------+====-----+


If fed at the bottom of this picture, the opposite side of the
loop is open.  Usually there is some capacitive loading at the
open point.  One design I saw showed construction made from
1/4" copper tubing with pennies soldered to the open ends.  The
feed was a simple gamma match.  Tuning the antenna was simply a
matter of moving the pennies closer or farther apart.

They work fine.  You can build one or you can buy on from M squared
(I believe their designs are half wave length loops.)  They call their
antennas SQLoops, so I imagine that is what the book was referring
to.

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:40 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SWR=3:1  How do I lower it?
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 20:18:58 -0400
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have a small 6m SQLOOP antenna and my meter says I have a 3:1 SWR.
What can I do to lower the SWR?


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:41 1996
From: Jeff DePolo WN3A <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Telrex tribanders and spinning elements
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 17:45:03 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4fhesl$[e-mail]> <4fm001$[e-mail]> <4ftg5h$[e-mail]>
To: Paul Christensen <[e-mail]>

Paul Christensen wrote:
>
> Is Telrex still in Business?
>
> -Paul, N9AZ

Yeah, they're still in business.  If you've ever tried to deal with them
directly, it's not a pleasant experience.  We had an element get damaged by
ice loading on a Telrex antenna that we couldn't find the manual for.
They wanted money just to pull the drawings for the series antenna we had
before they would tell us how much it would cost for a replacement
piece of tubing!  Has anyone else dealt with Telrex for replacement
parts?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-J
eff DePolo  WN3A            Twisted Pair: H:610-337-7383 W:215-387-3059 x300
[e-mail]  RF: 442.1 442.2 442.4 443.45 443.8 444.15 linked
Claim to Fame:  I got the 1st speeding ticket on the information superhighway


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:42 1996
From: [e-mail](Richard P. McCoy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals in Trees/Radials
Date: 15 Feb 1996 11:24:01 GMT
Message-ID: <4fv54h$[e-mail]>

On Feb 12, 1996 20:23:15 in article <Verticals in Trees/Radials>,
'[e-mail] (Dennis Ashworth)' wrote:


>So, from a performance standpoint, does anyone see a problem using
>small gauge steel galv wire versus expensive copper?

Try using aluminum electric fence wire.  Steel is a poor conductor compared

to copper.  (Although I have used steel fence wire with pretty good success
for antennas)
Aluminum conducts almost as well as copper  ( i.e. lots of antennas use it)


A couple of thousand feet is $ 15 to $ 20 at WalMart.  If you need to
solder to it,  try using 'Solder It'
for aluminum available from AES, etc.

Good luck,
Dick, N4UN



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals, how many radials?
Date: 14 Feb 1996 23:48:42 GMT
Message-ID: <4ftscq$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr5sn$[e-mail]> <4fr9ti$[e-mail]>

In article <4fr9ti$[e-mail]>,
W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Hi Tom,
>
>Radials DO NOT change the "take-off angle" unless they are many
>wavelengths long, so the waveangle will be the same with any system.
>
>73 Tom

Is anyone aware of any data as to how long the radials have to be for
a given take off angle?  Is there any way to simulate this with NEC
or whatever?

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steve Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals, how many radials?
Date: 15 Feb 1996 18:12:20 GMT
Message-ID: <4fvt24$[e-mail]>
References: <4fr5sn$[e-mail]> <4fr9ti$[e-mail]> <4ftscq$[e-mail]>

In article <4ftscq$[e-mail]>,
Richard Karlquist <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <4fr9ti$[e-mail]>,
>W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>Radials DO NOT change the "take-off angle" unless they are many
>>wavelengths long, so the waveangle will be the same with any system.
>
>Is anyone aware of any data as to how long the radials have to be for
>a given take off angle?

James R. Wait has published some research on this topic.

For a _very_ crude, first order approximation - you can employ ray optics
image theory. For a given takeoff angle, find the reflection point of the
highest portion of the antenna. At 5 degrees elevation, this point is 2.9
wavelengths away for a 1/4 wave vertical. To be effective, it would also
require a _lot_ more radials.

A fairly dense grid of radial wires is required to significantly alter the
reflection coefficient. Unfortunately wire spacing increases with radial
distance. A 0.1 wavelength radial spacing (which won't alter the
reflection coefficient that much) at r=2.9 wavelengths would require over
180 radials! You can extend a sector of radials in a preferred direction
to improve low angle efficiency (Wait has also published on this), but
you still would need a lot of wire and a pretty good chunk of real estate to
notice any difference.

> Is there any way to simulate this with NEC or whatever?

Not really.

--
Steve Miller  WD8IXE
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Brad Charbonneau)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: What are the optimum heights for Yagi ant's for 40,20,15,&10 mtrs?
Date: 20 Feb 1996 19:37:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4gd7th$[e-mail]>

     Could someone please help me with the optimum heights to install HF yagis
 on a tower in New England?  I have read a couple of antenna handbooks and fro
m what I read it seems that the following heights would work.  However, I have
 no practical experience with these beams and how they actually perform at dif
ferent heights...Here are the proposed heights of each beam:

      40 mtr 3 or 4 ele at  = 115ft
      20 mtr long boom 4 or 5 el = 100ft
      15 mtr 6 ele = 100ft
      10 mtr 6 ele = 110ft

My goal is to get an optimum setup for DX.  If anyone could tell me what they
think of these proposed heights, I'd really appreciate any info I could get.
Thanks in advance!
                                 Brad NZ1Y




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:46 1996
From: John Wilcox/NS1Z <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is good for 6m?
Date: 19 Feb 1996 00:31:35 GMT
Message-ID: <4g8gd7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]


what works? not much with condx like they are! But if they ever do start
working again I have a Cushcraft 5 el (the short 12 footer) at 40 feet.
--
John Wilcox / NS1Z
INTERNET :204.117.6.48
          [e-mail]
Work     :[e-mail]
TCP/IP   :44.118.6.4
          [e-mail]
AX-25    :[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:47 1996
From: "Anthony R. Gold" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why free space path loss?
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 96 10:53:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g8n5l$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <4g8n5l$[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "Anonymous" writes:

> Even if the power from your isotropic radiator (or other antenna)
> is completely absorbed in a surrounding sphere, implying zero
> power loss, the theoretical path loss is still there and can be expressed in
>  terms of decibels.

What on earth (or indeed in Free Space) does this mean?

And why does [e-mail] pretend to be [e-mail]?

Regards,
--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:48 1996
From: Roland S Geter PhD <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,aus.radio.amateur.wicen,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: WTB:5KW AM Transmitter
Date: 17 Feb 1996 07:58:55 GMT
Message-ID: <4g41rv$[e-mail]>
References: <4fn47d$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

What are you going to do with it?

Roland S Geter PhD
Internet:  [e-mail]
  Packer:  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:49 1996
From: Roland S Geter PhD <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: aus.radio.amateur.misc,aus.radio.amateur.wicen,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: WTB:5KW AM Transmitter
Date: 17 Feb 1996 07:57:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4g41pi$[e-mail]>
References: <4fn47d$[e-mail]>
To: spiro,evagelakos

What are you going to do with it?

Roland S Geter PhD
Internet:  [e-mail]
  Packer:  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Feb 21 15:58:50 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 16 Feb 1996 21:28:07 PST
Subject: Re: WTD: Leaky Coax

You can buy leaky coax at radio shack!
Phantom



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wayne Day)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 10m mobile ant recommendations
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 23:43:33 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4geos0$[e-mail]> <4gea6v$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

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

> Does anyone have any recommendations for 10m mobile antennas?
> I am interested in mobile operation with a radio of <100w and
> am I'm looking for either plans for a 10 m antenna or
> recommendations for a commercial product.

Remembering the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid)... take a 108" CB
whip antenna and start bringing the length down till the antenna is
resonant where you want it.

Simple, effective, inexpensive.

73 Wayne KF5ZC

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Wayne Day KF5ZC Fort Worth,Texas,USA  [e-mail]          |
   CompuServe: 76703,376               [e-mail] |  ,__o
                                       [e-mail]             |--\_<,
   Member: Bicycle Mobile Hams of America                       (*)/'(*)
 For info on BMHA or the BIKEHAM mailing list: Finger [e-mail]
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:36 1996
From: Ken Harrison <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 3 Repeaters, 1 Antenna??
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 23:05:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960221225733.7990A-100000@zippy>

Anyone know of someone who has tried this one?

Our club, in an effort to consolidate antennas up on the hill, is
purchasing a Comet Tri-band antenna (144/220/440) and a Comet triplexor
and will be running the 2 meter repeater, 220 repeater, and the 440
repeater on it.  Each of the repeaters already has it's own duplexors so
we will be tying those in to the triplexor and then to the antenna.

Sound feasible?  Any hints or kinks that we might want to aware of or
look out for?

If this works, our next move will be for another of the same set-ups for
a 2 meter digipeater, a 220 digipeater, and the 440 control link.

Ken

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






From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:37 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 3 Repeaters, 1 Antenna??
Date: 22 Feb 1996 07:48:40 GMT
Message-ID: <4gh74o$[e-mail]>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960221225733.7990A-100000@zippy>

Our group has tried this same thing with prety much the same result in
the end-failure of the triplexer.

case 1 220 repeater with remote bases on 2 and 440 worked ok for awhile
seems the triplexer could not handle 100 watt pa on repeater continous.

case 2 diferent repeater 65 watt pa  antena was shared with person
downstairs who was using 160 watt amp for fm voice on two meters and
repeater 220 mhz. was using antena at same time. worked ok for a while
but triplexer failed probably because it couldnt take both transmiting at
same time.


conclusion: from a reliability standpoint I would not recomend this
unless combined power of the repeaters is less than half the max power
handling capability of the device.


tom n8ies



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:40 1996
From: Ken Harrison <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 3 Repeaters, 1 Antenna??
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 23:02:32 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960222225649.9938B-100000@zippy>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960221225733.7990A-100000@zippy> <4gh74o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

On Thu, 22 Feb 1996, Jeff DePolo WN3A wrote:

> I'd stay away from any of the ham-grade diplexers/triplexers.  You should lo
ok
> at commercial models - they have higher power handling capabilities, and in
> some cases, better isolation.  Now that the 220 MHz commercial band has been

> around for a few years, you should be able to find a commercial diplexer tha
t
> splits VHF-hi (2m) and 220 MHz.  That diplexer would be connected to the
> low-pass side of another diplexer that splits VHF from UHF.  I'd suggest
> calling TxRx - even if they don't have a stock model that will split 2m and
> 220, they should be able to make one to your specifications.  I can't rememb
er
> ever seeing any commercial-grade triplexers.

OK, thanks for the reply.  I'll bring this idea up.  I wasn't aware that
there were commercial grade diplexers available.  It stands to reason,
though.

73,
Ken

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






From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:41 1996
From: Jeff DePolo WN3A <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 3 Repeaters, 1 Antenna??
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 10:40:31 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960221225733.7990A-100000@zippy> <4gh74o$[e-mail]>

I'd stay away from any of the ham-grade diplexers/triplexers.  You should look

at commercial models - they have higher power handling capabilities, and in
some cases, better isolation.  Now that the 220 MHz commercial band has been
around for a few years, you should be able to find a commercial diplexer that
splits VHF-hi (2m) and 220 MHz.  That diplexer would be connected to the
low-pass side of another diplexer that splits VHF from UHF.  I'd suggest
calling TxRx - even if they don't have a stock model that will split 2m and
220, they should be able to make one to your specifications.  I can't remember

ever seeing any commercial-grade triplexers.

You'll lose a few tenths of a dB in each diplexer (typically 0.2 to 0.5 dB)
Obviously you'll take a performance hit in switching to a multi-band antenna
for the repeater as well.  At one of my sites I use a pair of Telewave
diplexers to share a run of 1 5/8" line between my 440 repeater and an 800 MHz

LTR system.  I have a diplexer at each end of the line -- at the top of the
tower there are two antennas: the 800 MHz stick for the LTR system
(transmitters) and my Decibel 2x4 440 antenna.  It has worked out well
performance-wise, and it was a whole lot cheaper than another 600' run of 1
5/8" line, hi!

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jeff DePolo  WN3A            Twisted Pair: H:610-337-7383 W:215-387-3059 x300
[e-mail]  RF: 442.1 442.2 442.4 443.45 443.8 444.15 linked
Claim to Fame:  I got the 1st speeding ticket on the information superhighway


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:42 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 4 ele Gem Quad
Date: 19 Feb 1996 14:01:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4g9vsf$[e-mail]>
References: <4g1kh4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4g1kh4$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Garry Walker) writes
:
>I am trying to find out about the performance/problems with a 4 ele
>Gem Quad.  I have used a 2 ele quad in the past on 10 metres only, but
>would like further info.  I am interested in the feed arrangement for
>a 5 band version of the quad, interaction problems, etc etc.
>
>Any info would be most appreciated.
>
>Regards Garry
>
>----------------------------------
>G0IHB, GX0TEN, F/G0IHB/P
>
>Internet:[e-mail]
>Packet:  [e-mail]
>
>----------------------------------
>
Hi Garry,
 I am a former owner of a similar aray. Mine was only the 3 band version. The
only
reason I'm a former owner was that after 12 years in two different locations.
A
good old midwest tornado destroyed the quad. It had held up under 1/2 inch ice
storms, 70 mph wind gusts, 100 degree to -20 degree temps. Extremely rugged.
In fact, a part of it still lives as a 2 element 10 meter quad at a friends QT
H. The
force of the tornado twisted the top 3 sections of Rohn 25G to look like a lic
orice
stick. The helioarced welds on the aluminum spreader on the driven/reflector
elements sheared and then it was the end of the line for the rest of the anten
na.

 No Yagi antennas survived that day either.

 Performance wise, absolutely dynamite. I replaced it with a TH6DXX and it was
n't
 even close to the performance. I had thought GEM was out of business at that
time
 but was wrong about that. You will love the performance and be very competiti
ve
 on the bands.  I sold the TH6DXX and replaced it with a two element quad, sti
ll
 seems better.

 As far as I'm concerned, there is only one way to feed a multiband wire array
. Use
 separate feedlines. Don't tie all the driven elements together. The interacti
on is
 too darn aggravating to deal with. Get yourself a remote antenna switch, Amer
itron
 makes two, one with a single feedline ( I use it ) and one that requires a co
ntrol
 cable. The control cable version will switch 8 antennas.

 I currently have a 4 band quad up with the Ameritron 4 position remote switch
.
 I feed it with 75 ohm coax all the way. The quad has an approximate 100 ohm
 feedpoint and the 75 ohm coax seems to work very well. With the separate feed
 lines, you are more easily able to tune the array at lower heights before put
ting
 it up at the operating height. Anyway, it's just my opinion.

                           73's de WD9AHF  Jim





From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:43 1996
From: [e-mail] (Doug Reed)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 440 Horizontal ant?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 06:30:22 -0100

to: [e-mail]
BC>Date: 9 Feb 96 02:29:40 GMT
BC>>
BC>>Does anyone know where I can get a 440 horizontal mobile antenna? Our ATV
BC>>repeater is horizontal so I need an omni 440 horizontally polarized
BC>>mobile antenna for mobile atv.
BC>>
BC>>TNX & 73
BC>>
BC>>Barry - KT4DQ
BC>I reposted this on the HAM-L list, and this is the only response i have so
BC>far.
BC>Bob KD8WU

The two best omni antennas for ATV are the Alford Slot or the Mini-Wheel
antennas.  The slot antenna can easily be made from a 2 foot square
piece of 1/2" hardware cloth but will look like heck on your car.  The
mini-wheel antenna is a 440 MHz version of the 144 mHz Big Wheel antenna
design.  The easiest way to get one is to send $45 to Olde Antenna
Lab in Denver CO [phone].  He even makes a mag mount version for
$60.   Most other omni horizontal designs don't provide the very wide
bandwidth required for ATV.  I highly recommend Amateur Television
Quarterly for ATV info although you'll have to buy a bunch of back
issues to find all the antenna designs.  Hope this is what you want.
73's.
Doug Reed, N0NAS                 email: [e-mail]

 * SLMR 2.1a * My reality check just bounced.




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:44 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6 meter halo
Date: 22 Feb 1996 15:29:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi24h$[e-mail]>

I am looking for information on a three ring 6 meter halo.  I have a friend wh
o wants build one and need any information you can supply.

73
Alan 'K9CTF'



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:45 1996
From: Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 6 meter halo
Date: 22 Feb 1996 15:51:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi3di$[e-mail]>
References: <4gi24h$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

See ARRL Publication "The Radio Amateur's VHF Manual" -- 1968. Covers a
halo big wheel for 2 meters which probably could be scaled to 6 Meters.

Hope this helps.

BTW: the article doesn't speak favorably ofthe halo's gain


Rod
--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 6 meter halo
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 14:27:47 GMT
Message-ID: <4gkibb$[e-mail]>
References: <4gi24h$[e-mail]> <4gi3di$[e-mail]>

Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]> wrote:

>See ARRL Publication "The Radio Amateur's VHF Manual" -- 1968. Covers a
>halo big wheel for 2 meters which probably could be scaled to 6 Meters.

>Hope this helps.

>BTW: the article doesn't speak favorably ofthe halo's gain


>Rod

Hey Rod

By your callsign, I will assume you were around in the 60's!

We used to use 6-m halo's on our cars for our Heathkit Sixer
Lunchboxes.  3 watts and talked the world.  Local simplex
communications on AM were equivalent to the range of our 2-m FM
repeaters these days, hmmmmmmmm. well almost in retrospect!

You don't want to know what it did to our trunk decks, Hi Hi....

TTUL - 73+ de Gary - KG0ZP





From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 900 MHz phones
Date: 25 Feb 1996 04:19:42 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4goo0u$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

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

> Our test team at work is considering buying a 900 MHz cordless phone.  I see
m
> to remember a few years ago there was some health concerns regarding cordles
s
> of cellular phones operated in this frequency range.
>
> Can anyone tell me the latest on this, or am I completely off base?

There were some lawsuits a year or two ago that claimed people were
developing cancers as a result of using hand held cellular phones.  In
at least one case, a women developed a brain tumor on the side of her
head where she normally held her cellular phone and supposedly spent
a great deal of time on the phone.  To the best of my knowledge, none
of these cases have found in favor of the plaintiff (which given the sorry
state our legal system is in is pretty amazing!)

The medical reports I've seen so far can find nothing conclusive.  There
have been some studies that show varying magnetic fields can change
the movement of calcium in cells (this is from memory so I may not have
this exactly correct), but nothing that indicates any potential risk.  There
is also the issue of tissue heating once you start reaching UHF and
microwave frequencies, but at the levels a cordless phone uses, there
shouldn't be a problem.  This can be a problem at 2-5 GHz where the
eyeball starts becoming a resonant cavity.  Plus the eye has no nerves
to sense heat.  As a result, it is possible to cause permanent eye damage
and be totally unaware of it at the time.  Again, this is usually at higher
frequencies and at higher power levels than a 900 MHz cordless phone is
going to use.

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:48 1996
From: Bill Crocker <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 900 MHz phones
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 12:57:41 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Bob:

The health concerns were related to the hand-held Cellular telephones that ope
rate
in the mid to high 800 MHz area.  There was concern because they operate at ar
ound
6/10'ths of a watt.  Nobody has died yet.  To my knowledge, there was only one
 case
of a women who developed a brain tumor sometime after she started using her Ce
llualar
phone.  There was never any proof it was caused by the phone.

900 MHz. cordless telephones, used in the home and office produce much less po
wer. I'm
not sure what the output is, but it's much less.

I've been using both for sometime now, and nothing has gone wrong...gone wrong
...gone
wrong...gone wrong...gone wrong...

:)

Bill Crocker

p.s.  The guys in the blue helmets will get you before your phone does!


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:50 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Subject: Re: 900 MHz phones
Message-ID: <4gqpq6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 23:02:30 GMT

In article <[e-mail]>,
Bill Crocker  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Bob:
>
>The health concerns were related to the hand-held Cellular telephones that op
erate
>in the mid to high 800 MHz area.  There was concern because they operate at a
round
>6/10'ths of a watt.  Nobody has died yet.  To my knowledge, there was only on
e case
>of a women who developed a brain tumor sometime after she started using her C
ellualar
>phone.  There was never any proof it was caused by the phone.
>
>900 MHz. cordless telephones, used in the home and office produce much less p
ower. I'm
>not sure what the output is, but it's much less.
>
>I've been using both for sometime now, and nothing has gone wrong...gone wron
g...gone
>wrong...gone wrong...gone wrong...

The early handheld cell phones ran 3 watts into a rubber duckie right next to
the user's head. The newer phones run 600 mW. All cell phones can be reduced
in power output automatically by the cell sites. If the signal is strong, the
cell site will tell the phone to reduce power, which improves frequency re-use
.

The 900MHz cordless phones used on the 902-928 band are FCC Part 15 devices,
which limits their output to around 150mW normally, or 1 watt if spread
spectrum. The better 900MHz cell phone are indeed spread spectrum devices,
making eavesdropping unlikely.

Dan
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:51 1996
From: [e-mail](Richard P. McCoy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: a slinky antenna?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 09:08:38 GMT
Message-ID: <4ghbqm$[e-mail]>

Curtis:

I built one of these many years ago while in school.  I believe there was
an article
in QST in the early to mid 70s.

Some people suspend them from the ceiling along one wall.

I used two collapsing fiberglass fishing poles,  which when extended
allowed
the slinky to be stretched along its length.  One slinky per side.  The
poles
were mounted in a three feet long 2"  PVC pipe.   The vertical support pipe

used 3 metal angle brackets inserted in the base to act as a tripod.
Not real stable,  but it worked.

Feed it with a short length of ladder line and use an antenna tuner.   I
used
coax at the time.

I used this in a second floor apartment and was able to work into Europe on
SSB with
100 watts on 20 and 15 meters.

Hope that helps.

73s,
Dick, N4UN



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (MARKTAINT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: a slinky antenna?
Date: 21 Feb 1996 02:09:27 -0500
Message-ID: <4gegf7$[e-mail]>
References: <4g3b0f$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (MARKTAINT)

Antennas West does sell the slinky antenna and they also sell a booklet
giving some technical details about the antenna as well as construction
details. You can e-mail them at [e-mail]. They've been very
helpful whenever I've contacted them.
Mark, N0YRW


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Bengt Stromer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Active SW antenna circuit diagram
Date: 24 Feb 1996 19:05:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4gnnhb$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have a circuit diagram/description of a wideband active
antenna which can be built from ordinary components? I want to know if you
have seen any magazine articles, or even something that can be downloaded
on the net. Answer by email preferred.

Thank you
Bengt /SM6ALA



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:54 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Advice please - hf end fed antenna...
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 08:24:38 GMT

A friend has his tech plus license, and wants to get on HF CW for the
first time. He has an unusual antenna situation:

He has CC&Rs that limit hin to low profile antennas. He is tentatively
planning an endfed long wire about 120', from the chimney on the
house to the garage roof peak, pretty flat at 15' in the air.
Alternately he can go from a tree in the front yard to the
garage roof peak, for about 180' sloping from 30' at the tree
to 15' at the garage.

The antenna will be about 15' in the air. The total distance from
the mounting points on the structures is about 140'.
He was musing about a relay box at each end of the antenna and two
feedlines so he could have the ham station in the garage attic
(correct - a 2 story garage - cars and auto workshop on the first f
loor, electronics workshop/computer room on the second), and a SWL
receiver in the house. Only one end would be active at a time,
naturally. I told him to forget it in the begining - the coax
relays would cost too much.

Center feeding the antenna is almost a non-issue; the coax would have
to be strung horizontal to about 10' off center, making the antenna
almost a horizontal shallow V shape.

I figure 120-140' of wire carefully measured (and then tweaked with the
aid of a noise bridge) should get him on the air on the CW portions of
160m through 10m without traps. With only 15' off the ground, his
efficiency and performance won't be the best, but he should have
some fun. What are his chances of working Europe (or even WAS) from
the west coast of the USA with 100w PEP?

Anyway, the radio he has is a barefoot Heathkit HW series that is in
good shape, he can borrow a FT-101EE, and he may inherit an S-line
(in complete but very tired shape) in a couple of years.

Comments? all of the above is strictly off of theory and reading -
my HF experience has been 90% on my (still running well on all but one
of the factory tubes!) SX-28.

Please reply via EMAIL as well as posting - the ham newsgroups expire
rapidly on this system - sometimes morning postings are gone in the
evening before I can read them.

Thanks in advance - Mike Morris, WA6ILQ.

--
---
Mike Morris                                [e-mail]
#include <disclaimer.std.h>        I have others, but this works the best.
   This message assembled from 100% recycled electrons (and pixels).


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:55 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: antenna couplers
Date: 22 Feb 1996 20:10:04 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4giiis$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

A transmatch output is conjugately matched to the antenna feedline.
But two identical transmatches with identical Ls and Cs back to back
*may* not be conjugately matched to each other.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Design Software
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 96 02:55:27 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtrpb$[e-mail]>
References: <4gqgpj$[e-mail]>

In article <4gqgpj$[e-mail]>,
   Jeff <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Can anyone tell me if there are evaluation or demo versions
>of antenna design software available on the internet ?
>I want to build a antenna and would like a program to
>consult with . THANKS             Jeff    VE7 GMX

A demo version of ELNEC is available at ftp.teleport.com/pub/vendors/w7el.
The file name is ELNECDEM.EXE. After downloading, type ELNECDEM and it will
expand to a number of files, including a READ.ME file.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (MVenable)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Information For C.B. Radio
Date: 21 Feb 1996 19:04:42 -0500
Message-ID: <4ggbuq$[e-mail]>
References: <4gd29v$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (MVenable)

Well said, Todd.

73 Mark Venable


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:57 1996
From: Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Information For C.B. Radio
Date: 22 Feb 1996 14:59:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi0ca$[e-mail]>
References: <4gbcf4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

See Article titled "Goofy Antennas" for a serious discussion of
underground antennas.  No joke it has been done. Plans are included in the
reference.

You can get out further with a Wet Noodle and a Linear than you can with
just a Wet Noodle -- Big Al in Chicago!

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:58 1996
From: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Information For C.B. Radio
Date: 20 Feb 1996 02:42:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4gbcf4$[e-mail]>

Does anyone know how to make an antenna for a base C.B. radio
unit, I have a lot of copper wire,copper tubing that type of
stuff, would like to know suggested height if that matters.
Will be using this in a city.

Thank-you,if you have any info. Email me [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:56:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (Glen Reifsnyder)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Length
Date: 22 Feb 1996 00:54:50 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4ggesq$[e-mail]>

I am in Princeton, NJ and want to receive CBC Radio out of Toronto,
Ontario at 740 on the AM band.  I have a GE Super Radio with external
connections for an AM antenna.  How long should the antenna be to receive
740?  Is there a formula to determine the antenna length knowing the
frequency?  What type of wire do I use?  I can only have the antenna
inside the house, first floor or basement.  Should the wire run around
the baseboard of a room?  Do the number of angles or turns in the length
or wire make a difference?

Thanks!


-
  GLEN REIFSNYDER  [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:00 1996
From: Steve Beyers <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna location program
Date: 21 Feb 1996 03:03:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4ge22m$4j5$[e-mail]>

I recently read an article about a computer program that finds the
best location for an antenna, taking into account the topography
of the potential locations, and antenna parameters.  The trouble
is, I can't remember where I read it.  Can anybody help?  Thanks.

                               Steve W9HJW

--
Steve Beyers W9HJW


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:01 1996
From: Pierre-Andre Rovelli <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna location program
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 12:59:27 +0100
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ge22m$4j5$[e-mail]>

Steve Beyers wrote:
>
> I recently read an article about a computer program that finds the
> best location for an antenna, taking into account the topography
> of the potential locations, and antenna parameters.  The trouble
> is, I can't remember where I read it.  Can anybody help?  Thanks.
>
>                                Steve W9HJW
>
> --
> Steve Beyers W9HJWDear Steve,
please contact N6BV from ARRL technical staff (ANTENNA BOOK editor)
73 de HB9FMN
Pierre-AndrΘ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (Don Stoner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Rotator
Date: 24 Feb 1996 23:58:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4go8mc$[e-mail]>

I hope to put up a 7-30 MHz log periodic antenna. I'd like recommendations on
a
suitable rotator. Cost not important but am interested in strength of casting
because of high windloading. Appreciate ur comments and suggestions. 73 W6TNS



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:02 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Subject: Re: Antenna Rotator
Message-ID: <4gor6j$[e-mail]>
References: <4go8mc$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 05:13:55 GMT

In article <4go8mc$[e-mail]>, Don Stoner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I hope to put up a 7-30 MHz log periodic antenna. I'd like recommendations on
 a
>suitable rotator. Cost not important but am interested in strength of casting

>because of high windloading. Appreciate ur comments and suggestions. 73 W6TNS
>

Don, is THIS the antenna you're fighting the condo association over? :-)


--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (McCarthy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna rotator
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 05:08:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4gr871$[e-mail]>

Radio shack antenna rotator for small to med. beams.
Works great, will test before ship. $40.00 plus $5 shipping.

                                       73
                                       Robert KC5RYI
                                       [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:04 1996
From: Roger A. Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Software
Date: 19 Feb 1996 14:34:25 GMT
Message-ID: <4ga1ph$d55$[e-mail]>
References: <4g59va$[e-mail]>

Here is some general information on where to find NEC
information:

The Numerical Electromagnetic Code (Version 2), also called NEC-2
can be downloaded from:

ftp.netcom.com/pub/ra/rander/NEC  or
ftp.emclab.umr.edu/pub/ACES   or
ftp.funet.fi/pub/ham/antenna/NEC

The Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society (ACES) has a
WEB home page at:

http://www.emclab.umr.edu/ACES

The NEC Internet mailing list is at:

davem @ ee.ubc.ca     (requests for additions/deletions)
nec-list @ ee.ubc.ca  (postings)

A preliminary NEC Manual can be found at:

http://www.cici.com/~richesop/nec/index.html

73, Roger WB0DGF


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:05 1996
From: [e-mail] (Steve Mason)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ball mount strong enough for screw driver antenna?
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 19:54:44 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4foria$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4fvns3$[e-mail]>

On 15 Feb 1996 16:43:47 GMT, [e-mail] (Todd Little) wrote:


>> Pardon my ignorance, but I've seen this mentioned a few times now,  what
>> exactly is a "screw driver" antenna?
>
>A "screw driver" antenna is a mobile HF antenna that gets its name from
>using a hand held power screw driver to adjust the setting of a coil.  Basica
lly
>the antenna is a roughly 2" diameter tube with a disemboweled hand held
> They are
>available pre-assembled or you can home brew one yourself.  They are
Interesting.

Thanks for the reply.  I guess I should read the ham magazines more often.

Steve VE6STV



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Robert Smits)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CB antenna to 2m 5/8?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 22:20:00 PST
References: <4gf5um$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Distribution: world

[e-mail] (Benjamin J. Weiss)KE6HRM writes:

>Hi!
>
>I bought a used CB mag-mount antenna, as I had hear that it
>was easy to convert one to a 2m 5/8 whip.  I went down to
>the local library and looked at W1FB's Antenna Notebook,
>the ARRL Antenna Compendium Vol 1, and the 1994 ARRL Handbook.
>None of these had the modification.
>
>Is a file available on the net that explains how to do this?

I don't know. There is an article in an old version of the ARRL's FM and
Repeaters (1972) that talks about modifying a Radio Shack 21-908 CB antenna
to a 5/8 antenna for 2 M.  The antenna consists of a clamp on trunk mount,
a base coil, and a 39 inch spring-mounted stainless steel whip.

The mod involves removing the loading coil inductance, winding a new coil
and mounting a 3-30 pf trimmer in the bottom housing (it used a trunk
mount).

1. Remove the weather proof covering from the coil. Remove the base
   housing and clamp the whip side of antenna in a vise. Insert a
   knife blade between the edge of the whip base and the covering.
   Gently tap the knife edge with a hammer to force the housing away from
   the whip section. Work around the edge 'til the covering loosens.
2. Remove the coil turns and wind a new coil using No 12 wire. The
   new coil should have 9 turns, equally spaced. Tap the coil 2 turns up
   from the base (ground) end on the antenna.
3. The 3-30 pf trimmer is connected between the inner conductor of the
   coax cable and the tap on the coil. It was mounted on a terminal strip
   inside the trunk mount, with a hole drilled in the trunk mount to allow
   adjustment with the cover reinstalled and antenna mounted.



--
[e-mail]

Dave Lister: We want no moo'fins, no toast, no tea cakes, no boo'ns,
     baps, baggets, or bagels, no cra'ssants, no croo'mpets, no
     pancakes, no potato cakes, and no hot cross boo'ns, and
     *definitely* -- no smeggin' flapjacks!

Talkie Toaster: Ahhhh -- so you're a *Waffle* man. -- "Red Dwarf"


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:07 1996
From: Dan O'Connell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CB antenna to 2m 5/8?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 13:45:26 -0800
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960223134103.29199D-100000-100000-100000-100000-100000@internet>
References: <4gf5um$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

B

On Wed, 21 Feb 1996, Robert Smits wrote:

> [e-mail] (Benjamin J. Weiss)KE6HRM writes:
>
> >Hi!
> >
> >I bought a used CB mag-mount antenna, as I had hear that it
> >was easy to convert one to a 2m 5/8 whip.  I went down to
> >the local library and looked at W1FB's Antenna Notebook,
> >the ARRL Antenna Compendium Vol 1, and the 1994 ARRL Handbook.
>
   the article was in CQ magazine sometime before 1988, because I used
the article to modify a mag cb antenna. Also used it on 6 meters!
   Dan WA7TDZ   [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:09 1996
From: Ken Harrison <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CB antenna to 2m 5/8?
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 15:52:54 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960224155038.10907C-100000@zippy>
References: <4gf5um$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <Pine.OSF.3.91.960223134103.29199D-100000-100000-100000-100000-100000@internet>

On Fri, 23 Feb 1996, Dan O'Connell wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Feb 1996, Robert Smits wrote:
>
> > [e-mail] (Benjamin J. Weiss)KE6HRM writes:
> >
> > >Hi!
> > >
> > >I bought a used CB mag-mount antenna, as I had hear that it
> > >was easy to convert one to a 2m 5/8 whip.  I went down to
> > >the local library and looked at W1FB's Antenna Notebook,
> > >the ARRL Antenna Compendium Vol 1, and the 1994 ARRL Handbook.
> >
>    the article was in CQ magazine sometime before 1988, because I used
> the article to modify a mag cb antenna. Also used it on 6 meters!
>    Dan WA7TDZ   [e-mail]

I took an old Radio Shack mag mount CB antenna and cut the radiator down
and rewound the coil for a 5/8 on 220.  Works just fine.  It just
happened that the coil form was already the same size as the plans in the
ARRL Handbook and Antenna Book for their 220 5/8 antenna.

Ken

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






From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:10 1996
From: Ken Harrison <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CB antenna to 2m 5/8?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 23:14:45 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960226231118.4557B-100000@zippy>
References: <4gf5um$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <Pine.OSF.3.91.960223134103.29199D-100000-100000-100000-100000-100000@internet> <Pine.SUN.3.90.960224155038.10907C-100000@zippy> <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 26 Feb 1996, nstn2527 wrote:

> There was a program for the Commodore 64 that helped one design a mobile
> antenna by calculating no. of turns, coil diameter and length, length and
> diameter of whip to accommodate a desired frequency.  But who uses the
> Commodore anymore?  I don't know of a similar program for the PC but it
> would be nice to have for experimentation.

I've seen a program for the PC that will help design coils, but never the
whole ball of wax...  i.e. the whole antenna.  It would be nice to play
with.  If I could work up some formulas and had a little more spare time,
it wouldn't be too hard to get a program going.  Might make a nice summer
project...

Ken

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






From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:11 1996
From: [e-mail] (HENRYPOL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Communications Quarterly Magazine
Date: 22 Feb 1996 08:56:00 -0500
Message-ID: <4ghslg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (HENRYPOL)

Saw a recent cumulative index of this mag. There have been numerous
interesting articles on antennas.  Does anyone have back issues that they
would like to sell or let me borrow (I pay shipping both ways)?

73,
Henry Pollock - WB4HFL
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Connector losses
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 12:23:40 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat Ha
milton) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Pat Hamilton)
>Subject: Connector losses
>Date: 25 Feb 96 01:58:11 GMT


>To:            [e-mail]
>Subject:       Connector losses
>Date:          Wed, 21 Feb 1996 07:09:57


>>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 20:33:11 GMT
>> From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
>> Subject: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
>>
>Big Snip
>>
>> Anyhow, my only reason for replying is to bring up another loss that I
>> find more relevant in my antenna installations.  The number quoted is
>> not proper, but the effect is very real.  I consider every connector
>> between my rig and antenna to be a 1 db loss, and every component or
>> device, like an swr meter left inline to be an equivalent loss.
[snipped]

>Hello Gary,

>I have heard that opinion many times before and could never quite
>understand it. While I would agree that there certainly is some
>degree of loss in each connection between the rig and it's antenna,
>but a db each?
>I would find that very hard to believe.

Me too, although Gary hedged by saying the number quoted wasn't correct.

I would say that each connector, etc. is an opportunity for something to go
wrong and we know what Murphy says about that. Also, we must consider the
frequency before issuing any blanket statements and use caution even then.

Each interface does introduce a mismatch (reflection) as well as some
attenuation due to normal losses. Each of these reflections is complex, ie has

both a magnitude and a phase. As frequency is changed, the phases of each
reflection change as well. Because the mismatches are distributed at various
places down the line, the electrical distances between them also vary with
frequency.

Consequently, at the input to the line, what is seen is the vector sum of all
of these individual reflections which are changing with frequency. Sweeping
the input frequency and measuring the input reflection coefficient (VSWR) will

show a ripple pattern caused by the constructive and destructive summing of
the various mismatches. This mismatch ripple will cause a related transmission

loss variation over and above the inherent network attenuation. Also, note
that the higher frequency and the greater the electrical length or distances
between mismatches, the more rapidly the ripple changes. Therefore, at UHF/uW,

these effects become much more bothersome.

One interesting (and sometimes overlooked) aspect of this is that with two
identical mismatches, the composite reflection can be either completely
canceled or twice as large as either of the two or anywhere in between. Stub
and other types of conjugate matching are special cases where this phenomenon
is used to advantage.

The bottom line is, as in most things, it depends.

73, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:14 1996
From: John Wightman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cubical Quad Antennas for HF
Date: 22 Feb 1996 09:16:49 GMT
Message-ID: <4ghca1$[e-mail]>
References: <4fsgkr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4g8p7f$[e-mail]>

 I used wide spaced 2 el tri-band quads for 25 years and loved them! Two
foot boom with angled spiders and 17 foot fi-glass spreaders enabled me to
use 0.2 wavelength spacing. Very easy to tune and good bandwidth. Having to
move house only reason I had to part with them.  John,  ZL1AH.



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:15 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cubical Quad Antennas for HF
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
References: <4fsgkr$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 00:03:09 GMT

I've used Cubex hardware for 20 years and never had a mechanical
problem.
I currently use a 3 el Quad for 20 mtrs, 5 el on 15mtrs and 5 el on 10,
all on a 8.5 meter boom (convenient available length here in CA).
All 3 are better than the 5 element monobanders (Hygain types) that they
replaced and at 20 feet lower.
The cubex fiberglass and cast aluminum spiders have never failed in
winds up to 140 kph in Arizona dust storms and California rainstorms.
I could not be happier with the performance.
With less than maximum legal power (800W out) I have worked 300+
countries on 10,  15, and 20 mtrs.
You could do the same.
Regards, Al




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (Joel Govostes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DIPOLE acting fishy
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 13:21:43 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I have a dipole up for 10 meters (coax-fed, half wave).  The SWR is fine.
Yesterday I attached two more "legs," at the center insulator, to make a
half-wave for 40 meters fed by the same coax.  The 40 meter ant is about
perpendicular to the 10 meter ant.  SWR looks sweet on 40 meters, all is
good so far.

Problem is, I try to apply power on 15 meters, and I can't get an SWR
below 3:1.  I double checked my math, and found that the antenna was about
10 inches short for the bottom of 40 meters.  I just added 5" wire to each
end.  Resonant still at bottom of 40 meters, but on 15 still 3:1 at lowest
point.

What might be causing the lack of resonance on 15??  BTW feed point is
about 20 feet up.    THANKS... N1AEP


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:17 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Rod Adkins)
Subject: Re: Drae Trident 8 Multiband Vertical
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 19:15:13 GMT

>Has anyone bought this newish UK made HF vertical
>I'm looking for a vertical and am uncertain of whether to go for this
>one, a Butternut or one of the GAP models
>Please e mail direct as well as replying here to
>[e-mail]
>Thanks
>G3XZV
>--
>John M Sonley


I have a Butternut HF6V with WARC and B'nut radials.
Generally very satisfied.
Tunes up as per manual.  Low SWR on regular bands; not so low on 18/24 but sti
ll usable.
Very good reports on 30m.
Bear in mind that the radials are essential, and one's real estate is indeed a
n antenna
farm by the time you have finished.
The narrow bandwidth on 80m is a fact of life unless you can figure out a way
of remote
tuning the coil (I have a design in my head - doesn't seem to have reached the
 top
of the list...)
The ant sways alarmingly, but has survived 3 Canadian winters...
I did fit a truss to limit bending as I hauled it in the air (I have a homebre
w tilt-up).
The radials do break off through flexing, and you need to work out some
 more robust attachment method.

Rod,  VE3INE



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:18 1996
From: John M Sonley <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Drae Trident 8 Multiband Vertical
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 09:09:23 +0000
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Has anyone bought this newish UK made HF vertical
I'm looking for a vertical and am uncertain of whether to go for this
one, a Butternut or one of the GAP models
Please e mail direct as well as replying here to
[e-mail]
Thanks
G3XZV
--
John M Sonley


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:19 1996
From: Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Drae Trident 8 Multiband Vertical
Date: 21 Feb 1996 14:44:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4gfb45$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]


Hello John. Would suggest that you also consider the Cushcraft R5 or R7
and the new Hy-Gain DX-77. Here on the West Coast in San Diego several of
us have tried them as well as the conventional 1/4 wave verticals and have
found these "half-wave end feds" to perform very very well.
--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:20 1996
From: Hank Blackstock <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Eggbeater Antenna ???
Date: 26 Feb 1996 22:06:39 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtatf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (SAMIR KHAYAT) wrote:
>Hi,
>I read an Article about the M2 EB-432 Eggbeater Antenna in QST January
>96 and would like to know if anyone has the Schematic diagram of the
>Antenna so that I can try to make one myself ( I like Home brew antennas)
>Any Idea about its DB gain ?? ( Not been mentioned in the Article).
>
>Best 73's
>
>Samir ( OD5SK / KC5RYL )
>QTH: JEDDAH - SAUDI ARABIA
>
>---
> =FE QMPro 1.53 =FE =B0=B1=B2=DB CQ CQ CQ DE OD5SK =DB=B2=B1=B0
>

The eggbeater is simply 2 full wave loops (about 100 ohms
impedance) feed 90 degrees out of phase. Attach the antennas
together with 1/4 wavelength of rg 62 (93 ohm coax) then feed
one of them with some 50 ohm coax. Use some ferite beads for a
current balun on the feed line.

Gain depends on how high above ground you put the antenna.
mounted high it has about 3db gain at low angles of radiation.
Mounted low (about 1/8 wave) it has gain at very high angles of
radiation. Polarazation is horizantal at low angles and
circular at high angles (right or left depending on feed
arrangment)

73 Hank WA5JRH



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SAMIR KHAYAT)
From: [e-mail] (SAMIR KHAYAT)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 00:04:00 GMT
Subject: Eggbeater Antenna ???

Hi,
I read an Article about the M2 EB-432 Eggbeater Antenna in QST January
96 and would like to know if anyone has the Schematic diagram of the
Antenna so that I can try to make one myself ( I like Home brew antennas)
Any Idea about its DB gain ?? ( Not been mentioned in the Article).

Best 73's

Samir ( OD5SK / KC5RYL )
QTH: JEDDAH - SAUDI ARABIA

---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ ░▒▓█ CQ CQ CQ DE OD5SK █▓▒░



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SAMIR KHAYAT)
From: [e-mail] (SAMIR KHAYAT)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 00:04:00 GMT
Subject: Eggbeater Antenna ???

Hi,
I read an Article about the M2 EB-432 Eggbeater Antenna in QST January
96 and would like to know if anyone has the Schematic diagram of the
Antenna so that I can try to make one myself ( I like Home brew antennas)
Any Idea about its DB gain ?? ( Not been mentioned in the Article).

Best 73's

Samir ( OD5SK / KC5RYL )
QTH: JEDDAH - SAUDI ARABIA

---
 ■ QMPro 1.53 ■ ░▒▓█ CQ CQ CQ DE OD5SK █▓▒░



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:22 1996
From: Paul Christensen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Florida Ham Antenna Restrictions - ch125.htm (0/1)
Date: 19 Feb 1996 14:03:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4g9vve$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f7v2j$[e-mail]> <4fqpsu$[e-mail]> <4ftgjc$[e-mail]> <4g5e8k$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

>Although a good idea, and I'm sure many hams would thank you, would
>there ready be enough "Business" in 1 state to warrent specializing in
>Antenna restrictions?

Richard:

My statement wasn't altogether serious, but upon graduation, I would like
to assist other amateurs in these matters.

My legal education will focus on both telecommunications and intellectual
property law.

-Paul, N9AZ



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:23 1996
From: Paul Christensen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Florida Ham Antenna Restrictions - ch125.htm (0/1)
Date: 19 Feb 1996 14:02:14 GMT
Message-ID: <4g9vt6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4f7v2j$[e-mail]> <4fqpsu$[e-mail]> <4ftgjc$[e-mail]> <4g5e8k$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

>Although a good idea, and I'm sure many hams would thank you, would
>there ready be enough "Business" in 1 state to warrent specializing in
>Antenna restrictions?

Richard:

My statement wasn't altogether serious, but upon graduation, I would like
to assist other amateurs in these matters.

My legal education will focus on both telecommunications and intellectual
property law.

-Paul, N9AZ



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore~)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: re: G5RV
Date: 22 Feb 1996 16:44:45 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gi6ht$[e-mail]>

>Hi Cecil, I see in the rest of your message u mention using 300
>ohm line.  I've used 450 ohm line on my G5RV.  By taking the coax
>out of the line, my antenna seems to work better now.  My
>question: does the use of the 450 ohm line require a balun?
>Scott N0XZY  [e-mail]

Hi Scott, according to my simulations, taking the coax out of
the line results in better performance on some bands and worse
on others unless a good balanced antenna tuner is used. Since
commercially available balanced antenna tuners are in short
supply, many hams settle for a lossy situation involving a balun
and an unbalanced antenna tuner.

Remember, "balun" means balanced to unbalanced. The G5RV dipole
is balanced and the 450 ohm line is balanced. Your transmitter
is probably 50 ohms, unbalanced. To keep RF off your shack
ground (chassis) you need a balun of some sort even if it is
a 1:1 choke-type balun.

Your antenna has a relatively high SWR on all bands and
therefore will never exhibit a 450 ohm resistive impedance.
Unless you somehow measure the actual impedances, you will
never really know if your system is optimized. The necessary
measurements are very easy to make with ladder-line. Ask
TechnoLogic Concepts about their "ladder lizard".

IMO, the best thing one can do is replace the unbalanced tuner
with a switchable balanced network that achieves a Z0-match
before any reflected energy can get to the balun. TechnoLogic
Concepts is preparing a "how-to" application note on the
subject. They can be reached at [e-mail]
I have no monitary connection to TLC but Don, KE6AJH, of
DHConsulting is a personal friend of mine.

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


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:26 1996
From: Al Konschak <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV on 160 meters
Date: 22 Feb 1996 01:00:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4ggf6r$[e-mail]>
References: <4g8ers$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Michael Haydon <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Currently use a Double g5rv, 204foot on 160, fed with 450 ohm twinlead,
>driving it with a knwd ts-830, works fb
>
>
>On 19 Feb 1996, Al Konschak wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have the dimensions for a G5RV to be used on 160.
>> I've tried the method of shorting out the input and driving
>> it as a "T" but have had limited success. There must be a longer
>> design that will work on 160.
>>
>> Thanks
>> WI3Z
>> Al
>>


Question? Do you use the same length of twinlead?
Al




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:28 1996
From: Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GOOFY ANTENNAS -- RF GOTTA GO SOMEWHERE!
Date: 22 Feb 1996 14:48:54 GMT
Message-ID: <4ghvom$[e-mail]>
References: <4gfgi7$[e-mail]>

Almost forgot about my neighbor Paul who back many years ago loaded up a
garbage can lid -- six meters I think -- it was published in Ham
magazines.

Oh yes the legendary 2M stacked beer can antenna (required a hardy beer
lover to drink all the beer prior to construction)

The ARRL Antenna Handbook makes reference to bedspring antennas as well as
an apartment dweller who loads up the nearest fire escape.

Recently in a Ham magazine an enterprising Amateur loaded up (as I recall)
a Dodge Station Wagon!! Or was it 2 of em?? Dodge Dipole ???

And of course you can load up a flagpole -- except in California where
many CC&R's forbid flag poles -- durn un-patriotic sez I!

One can audio modulate a light beam and demodulate it on the other end--
haven't tried modulating with RF tho.

Disclaimer

EFFICIENCY OF ALL GOOFY ANTENNAS NOT GUARANTEED

If it is metal -- load it!  RF Gotta Go Somewhere!--- AC6V



--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:29 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: James Mills <jmills>
Subject: GPS Satellite Coverage
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 13:33:49 GMT

Hi All

Does anybody know what the signal level at the user would be in dB/sq meter
for a GPS satellite. I playing around with some antennas.

Thanks

Jon Mills

[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (JCHol)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hazer for Rohn 25G
Date: 25 Feb 1996 17:19:55 -0500
Message-ID: <4gqnab$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JCHol)

I am now using the steel heavy duty hazer for a fifty ft. Rohn 25 tower.
I have one set of guys attached to the hazer.  I have an A-3 stacked about
8 ft. above a 40 meter beam (KLM).  Am very happy with it and have had no
problems, no hanging up, etc.  Solved my tower climbing problems!

73 de John, WA5TWL


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:31 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Help Needed: UHF, H-Polarize, Omni Dir. antenna with *GAIN*.  HOW?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4gask1$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 11:36:36 GMT

In article <4gask1$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (M
ike Groves) writes:
>OK you guys (gals), I've got a problem in need of an answer.
>
>If money were no object, how would one go about getting any kind of
>gain from an antenna at a repeater sight that was horizontal polarized
>and "semi" omni directional?  (I actually only need about 160 degrees
>of coverage as the repeater is located part-way up a hillside,
>overlooking a valley.)  This will be used on the 440 MHz band.

Since you need less than a hemisphere of coverage, why not just use
a stacked colinear array of horizontal dipoles in front of a reflector?
The horizontal pattern will be similar to a single dipole, but the
vertical pattern is compressed, giving you gain toward the horizon.

I assume this is to be an ATV repeater given the requirement for
horizontal polarization. This type of antenna used to be common
for TV reception and is called a stacked bowtie array. (Fanned
dipoles, IE looked like a bowtie, were used to broaden the VSWR
bandwidth for TV.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mike)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Help on finding/creating custom? mobile antenna.
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 96 15:16:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4ga39g$[e-mail]>

I'm looking to add a multi-band scanner antenna (30Mhz - 900Mhz) to my car
(station wagon with LOTS of ground-plane area!!).

The thing I would like to accomplish is to keep it under 24" in length so I
don't destroy my new garage doors every time I pull the car in.  I know this
may be a dumb reason to some of you, but the less painting I have to do, the
better :-)

I'm willing to try and experiment with making one or if you know of one that
already exists, great.

Any help is greatly appreciated.  Thanks.  (e-mail is appreciated too).



Mike


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jafinlay)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help to receive LA 90.7FM in SD
Date: 21 Feb 1996 04:11:46 -0500
Message-ID: <4genki$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jafinlay)

Folks,

I used to live in LA and enjoyed listening to KPFK 90.7 FM.  I moved to
San Diego and I can get KPFK in my car pretty well around town, esp. if I
head North, but I can't get it at all in my condo.  I have tried several
power FM antennas I bought at radio shack but none work on my stereo in my
home.  Does anyone have any ideas of what kind of anntenna I can install
in my condo in order to get this station?  It is pretty strong but I think
it is getting lost in all the others.

Tx for any help you can give me.

Judith


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:34 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF Mobile Magnetic Mount
Date: 25 Feb 96 12:22:54 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Can anyone give me feedback on using any type of HF antenna with the
extra large multi-pad magnetic mounts?  Bob AA2UV
([e-mail])


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Senie)
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Magnetic Mount
Message-ID: <4gqq0j$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 23:05:55 GMT

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Can anyone give me feedback on using any type of HF antenna with the
>extra large multi-pad magnetic mounts?  Bob AA2UV
>([e-mail])

I've had good luck with a mount that has four 5-inch magnets in an H pattern.
On this I've mounted a quick disconnect and run a Carolina bug Katcher
(40 meters through 10 meters), and alternate that with a 75 meter hamstick.

All this was mounted on the roof of my Pathfinder, so I had to watch bridges
under 13 feet. Looked pretty neat, though!

Dan
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 21 Feb 1996 18:03:41 -0500
Message-ID: <4gg8cd$[e-mail]>
References: <4ga68v$[e-mail]>

In article <4ga68v$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Woodybozak) writes:

> However, if you want to use what Larsen recommends, they
>sell (or used to sell) their own 3/4" saw that also removed a 1/16" area
>of paint beyond the hole to provide a good ground connection for the
brass
>nut/vehicle body.

Yes, I believe they still do.  I borrowed on from a buddy of mine.  The
Larsen hole saw did a real nice job, much better than the typical Lennox /
hardware store variety.   As I recall the "blade" had a much finer pitch
than the typical hole saw.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (mlmitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 18:00:03 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ga68v$[e-mail]> <4gg8cd$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (PTracy) wrote:

>In article <4ga68v$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>(Woodybozak) writes:
>
>> However, if you want to use what Larsen recommends, they
>>sell (or used to sell) their own 3/4" saw that also removed a 1/16" area
>>of paint beyond the hole to provide a good ground connection for the
>brass
>>nut/vehicle body.
>
>Yes, I believe they still do.  I borrowed on from a buddy of mine.  The
>Larsen hole saw did a real nice job, much better than the typical Lennox /
>hardware store variety.   As I recall the "blade" had a much finer pitch
>than the typical hole saw.



MOTOROLA  also makes and sells a similar unit for the 3/4" hole for
the NMO mount, which, by the way, was a Motorola original, long before
Larsen thought of it .


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 22:17:33 LOCAL
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk>

In article <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk> "Ian White, G3SEK" <G3SEK@if
wtech.demon.co.uk> writes:
>From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
>Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 20:14:38 +0000

[snip snip snip]

>One way around this problem would be to borrow a second, identical
>tuner. Tune the first one into the antenna system as usual, for minimum
>VSWR at the TX end. Then connect the second tuner back-to-back into a
>50-ohm absorption wattmeter (or Bird 43 and dummy load) and tune that
>one also for minimum VSWR at the TX end. The power loss (in dB) in a
>single tuner will be one-half of the total.

See below.

>That would get around the problem of measuring output power into an
>arbitrary complex impedance, and also get around the problem that the
>loss in any tuner will depend on the impedance to be matched.

>Note also that the loss in a tuner that has more than two independent
>adjustments (eg two variable Cs and a variable L) will also depend on
>which combination of settings you choose. Even though there will be many
>ways to achieve a 1:1 match, different combinations of settings will
>affect the loaded Q and hence the loss.

I have mentioned this in this group before. Without an OUTPUT indicator of
some kind, you can effect a match with an infinite number of settings (of
three variables). Only one will be the lowest loss condition. With components
of reasonable unload Q, the differences between optimum an worst case can be
many dB. Unfortunately, this is also true when running the above experiment.
Therefore, the loss in one tuner may not be one half of the total.

Some of the blanket statements (not Ian's) in this thread cry out for
rebuttal. To say a tuner is lossless is absurd. To say that an arbitrary tuner

will be more efficient when the load Z is higher than lower or the converse is

just not true or that the left side of the Smith chart is better than the
right (which way are you holding it BTW?). Without more specificity as to the
configuration of the tuner one cannot justify statements such as these.

[snip]

Wes -- N7WS


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chester Alderman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 05:24:24 GMT
Message-ID: <4ggum8$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In message <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> - [e-mail]
(WB7AS
R) writes:
:>
:>How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
:>when in use?
:>
:>

All depends on the RF loss within your tuner. Two way you can find out for
sure: 1) Connect a RF power meter on the tuner input and output and read the
difference between the two.; 2) Use a signal generator and calibrate its
output power into a power meter. Have your tuner tuned to the input and output
impedance you want to match. Connect your signal generator to the input of the
tuner and connect a power meter to the output connector of the tuner. Measure
the loss through the tuner, in dB, and that is your losses through your tuner.
It should be less than a half a dB (and if not, you need to fix it or get a
better tuner). Using the dB loss figure, you can calculate the power loss
through your tuner (tuned for the specific conditions under which you made the
measurement), no matter what the RF power level is.

Tom/W4BQF


[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 06:59:35 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4genna$[e-mail]> <4ghj93$[e-mail]>

In article <4ghj93$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writ
es:
>From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
>Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
>Date: 22 Feb 1996 06:15:47 -0500

>Hi All,

>[snip]

>With only 5% power loss, the coil became so hot it smelled and gave off a
>little smoke after a few minutes of 1500 watt carrier. The heat was
>confined to the inductor. The tuner arced (the caps) at 1400 watts with
>the ten ohm load, 1600 watts with the 50 ohm load, and 2300 watts with the
>800 ohm load. The arcing was rather inconsistant, so those values are only
>approximate and show a trend only. They were made with a 500 uS pulsed
>carrier.

>I find it very difficult to understand how a large tuner can dissipate
>more than 100-150 watts without blowing some serious smoke out! Especially
>since this tuner had a good open coil (air wound, no form) that allowed
>air to circulate. Something is going on that we are missing here. Does
>anyone know what the QST article gave for loss?

Your numbers are as good as theirs. I think maybe duty cycle is the
difference. Assuming a 50% trans/rec factor and the intermittent nature of SSB

or CW, the average dissipation is way down from what you measured. Besides, we

often forget that 75 W (your example) into a 75 W light bulb makes it too hot
to touch rather quickly. When we speak of fractions of a dB, we can lose sight

of this.

>And more important, I wonder if RF is bad for the brain? Maybe I should
>turn the power off when I sniff the coil next time.

Brain? I thought your head was ferrite-loaded<g>. Keeping the common-mode
current choked you know... You bent over that coil, and detuned it. That's
where your efficiency went.

>73 Tom

73, Wes


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Ferguson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 01:28:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4gfk3h$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>

Theoretically, an antenna tuner does not dissipate power, de k4kxo.
[e-mail] wrote:

>In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR) writ
es:
>>How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>>when in use?
>>
>>Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of it,
 measure
> the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the powe
r
> out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.

>                                    73's WD9AHF - Jim




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:44 1996
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 20:14:38 +0000
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>

In article <4gdfng$[e-mail]>, Roy Lewallen wrote:
>In article <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>>In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
>writes:
>>>How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>>>when in use?
>>>
>>>Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of
>it, measure
>> the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the
>power
>> out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>>
>>                                    73's WD9AHF - Jim
>
>The problem with doing that, Jim, is that the impedance on the output of
>the tuner may not be anywhere near 50+j0 ohms. (After all, that's why we
>need tuners, no?) If you know where I can get a wattmeter I can insert into
>a feedline looking into 2000 - j600 or 2 + j750 ohms and get an accurate
>(or even approximate!) reading, please let me know!

One way around this problem would be to borrow a second, identical
tuner. Tune the first one into the antenna system as usual, for minimum
VSWR at the TX end. Then connect the second tuner back-to-back into a
50-ohm absorption wattmeter (or Bird 43 and dummy load) and tune that
one also for minimum VSWR at the TX end. The power loss (in dB) in a
single tuner will be one-half of the total.

That would get around the problem of measuring output power into an
arbitrary complex impedance, and also get around the problem that the
loss in any tuner will depend on the impedance to be matched.

Note also that the loss in a tuner that has more than two independent
adjustments (eg two variable Cs and a variable L) will also depend on
which combination of settings you choose. Even though there will be many
ways to achieve a 1:1 match, different combinations of settings will
affect the loaded Q and hence the loss.

All you need to do is find someone else who has the same kind of tuner
and is equally keen to know the losses.


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] Tue Feb 27 19:57:45 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4genna$[e-mail]> <4gi1oa$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 16:25:16 GMT

What about measuring the rise of temperature within the tuner to determin
the btu's produced and converting btus into watts? I suppose a thick
layer of insulation would be necessary to keep the heat in. Maybe
that would be the most conclusive way to settle this. Radio Shack
has a cheap digital thermometer with a probe. Sufficient care would
have to be taken to guard against RFI on the probe though.



--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 19:03:41 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk> <4gista$[e-mail]>

In article <4gista$[e-mail]> Kevin Schmidt <kschmidt> writes
:
>From: Kevin Schmidt <kschmidt>
>Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
>Date: 22 Feb 1996 23:06:18 GMT

>"Ian White, G3SEK"<[e-mail]> writes:

>>One way around this problem would be to borrow a second, identical
>>tuner. Tune the first one into the antenna system as usual, for minimum
>>VSWR at the TX end. Then connect the second tuner back-to-back into a
>>50-ohm absorption wattmeter (or Bird 43 and dummy load) and tune that
>>one also for minimum VSWR at the TX end. The power loss (in dB) in a
>>single tuner will be one-half of the total.

>This can work if the load to be matched is resistive, but the
>tuners will otherwise be tuned to complex conjugate impedances.
>You can see this by imagining you are matching a 50 ohm resitor in
>series with a 50 capacitive reactance. An L network tuner would be
>a 50 ohm inductive reactance in series and no parallel component.
>The other tuner would have to be a 50 ohm capacitive reactance in series to
>tune out this inductance. By the way, the method given in the QST
>article also only works for resistive loads.

This is the exact example I was ready to use to respond to Ian's response to
my response:-) Kevin beat me to it. Even in this case, the losses will
probably not be the same in both tuners. The series cap should have an
unloaded Q much higher than the series inductor. Therefore, the inductive side

will have (slightly in this case) higher loss than the capacitive side.

This just goes to show that this measurement is NOT trivial, QST articles not
withstanding.

Wes -- N7WS

>Kevin [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:48 1996
From: Jeff DePolo WN3A <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 01:02:27 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]>

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>
>The other impedance, 2 + j750 is a 50-ohm SWR of 5650, requiring the Bird
>to read a forward power of 141,300 watts forward and 141,200 watts reverse.
>This isn't really a realistic impedance, since even a tiny bit of feedline
>loss would lower the SWR below this value.

I'd be hard-pressed to resolve a 100 watt difference on a 250kW Bird
slug  ;-)

I would think a calorimetric measurement would provide more accurate
results, although the technique for doing such that doesn't
require submersion may not be all that easy to do at home.
I would imagine that it would be more difficult to make and use
an air-based calorimeter, especially one that would yield results
as accurate as a submersion-based one.  Maybe the tuner could be
placed in a thermally-conductive, liquid-tight container and
then submerged?  Anyone with more knowledge on the subject care to
comment?

Also, this all may be for naught as the losses in the tuner will
vary greatly with load impedance and frequency among other things,
so a few data points would only give a general picture of the
efficiency of a particular tuner.

                                                --- Jeff


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:49 1996
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 16:13:36 +0000
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, Wes Stewart wrote:
>In article <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk> "Ian White, G3SEK"
><[e-mail]> writes:
>
>
>>One way around this problem would be to borrow a second, identical
>>tuner. Tune the first one into the antenna system as usual, for minimum
>>VSWR at the TX end. Then connect the second tuner back-to-back into a
>>50-ohm absorption wattmeter (or Bird 43 and dummy load) and tune that
>>one also for minimum VSWR at the TX end. The power loss (in dB) in a
>>single tuner will be one-half of the total.
>
>See below.
>
>>That would get around the problem of measuring output power into an
>>arbitrary complex impedance, and also get around the problem that the
>>loss in any tuner will depend on the impedance to be matched.
>
>>Note also that the loss in a tuner that has more than two independent
>>adjustments (eg two variable Cs and a variable L) will also depend on
>>which combination of settings you choose. Even though there will be many
>>ways to achieve a 1:1 match, different combinations of settings will
>>affect the loaded Q and hence the loss.
>
>I have mentioned this in this group before. Without an OUTPUT indicator of
>some kind, you can effect a match with an infinite number of settings (of
>three variables). Only one will be the lowest loss condition. With components

>of reasonable unload Q, the differences between optimum an worst case can be
>many dB. Unfortunately, this is also true when running the above experiment.
>Therefore, the loss in one tuner may not be one half of the total.

Wes is absolutely right, of course! When using two identical tuners with
three adjustments each, you'd need to set one (any one) adjustment in
the tuner 2 to exactly the same as in tuner 1. The other two adjustments
in tuner 2 should then come out the same when you tune for minimum VSWR.

Buddhist master says: You can never adjust your antenna tuner the same
twice.

Zen Buddhist master says: You can never adjust your antenna tuner the
same even once!


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] Tue Feb 27 19:57:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 06:15:47 -0500
Message-ID: <4ghj93$[e-mail]>
References: <4genna$[e-mail]>

Hi All,

I did some long hand calculations on a T network. I've got to get one of
these new spice programs, hi. Anyway, my figgers are rownded.

As I recalled, a traditional T net falls apart with low  Z  -j  loads on
160. Here's what I calculated for a typical 225 pF maximum C roller
inductor tuner at 1500 watts:

Load 10 ohms, Cin 100pF(5.5a, 4800v),  Cout 225pF(12a, 4800v), L 24.1uH
(17.5a, 4800v).

Load 10 ohms -200j, Cin 67pF(5.5a,7300v), Cout 225pF(12.3a, 7300v), L
36.2uH (17.9a,7300v).

Load 3000 ohms, Cin 225pF(5.5a,2170v), Cout 125pf(.7a,502v), L  34.3uH
(5.6a,2188v).

From this it is easy to see the best loads are high Z, the poorest loads
are low z capacitive reactive loads.

By the way, I was looking at a proto-type roller inductor tuner today
using 225 pF caps and a 12 ga roller coil. I used a Delta Electronics
operating RF bridge with internal ammeter option to measure the load. Into
a non-reactive ten ohm load the efficiency was ~92%, a 50 ohm load ~95%,
and an 800 ohm load produced ~98% eff. This tuner followed expectations as
calculated above.

With only 5% power loss, the coil became so hot it smelled and gave off a
little smoke after a few minutes of 1500 watt carrier. The heat was
confined to the inductor. The tuner arced (the caps) at 1400 watts with
the ten ohm load, 1600 watts with the 50 ohm load, and 2300 watts with the
800 ohm load. The arcing was rather inconsistant, so those values are only
approximate and show a trend only. They were made with a 500 uS pulsed
carrier.

I find it very difficult to understand how a large tuner can dissipate
more than 100-150 watts without blowing some serious smoke out! Especially
since this tuner had a good open coil (air wound, no form) that allowed
air to circulate. Something is going on that we are missing here. Does
anyone know what the QST article gave for loss?

And more important, I wonder if RF is bad for the brain? Maybe I should
turn the power off when I sniff the coil next time.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 96 21:51:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4gdfng$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>

In article <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
writes:
>>How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>>when in use?
>>
>>Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of
it, measure
> the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the
power
> out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>
>                                    73's WD9AHF - Jim

The problem with doing that, Jim, is that the impedance on the output of
the tuner may not be anywhere near 50+j0 ohms. (After all, that's why we
need tuners, no?) If you know where I can get a wattmeter I can insert into
a feedline looking into 2000 - j600 or 2 + j750 ohms and get an accurate
(or even approximate!) reading, please let me know!

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 23 Feb 1996 10:26:57 -0500
Message-ID: <4gkmc1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Wes
Stewart) writes:

>Some of the blanket statements (not Ian's) in this thread cry out for
>rebuttal. To say a tuner is lossless is absurd. To say that an arbitrary
>tuner
>will be more efficient when the load Z is higher than lower or the
converse
>is
>just not true or that the left side of the Smith chart is better than the

>right (which way are you holding it BTW?). Without more specificity as to
the
>
>configuration of the tuner one cannot justify statements such as these.
>
>[snip]
>
>Wes -- N7WS

Hi Wes, I disagree with you on something (finally, it took years!). ;-)

We can make a general statement that applies to traditional T net tuners
on low frequencies (as I did). The main limitation in the efficiency is a
lack of sufficent output C range (too little C) for matching low Z loads.
The lack of sufficent C causes the tuner to operate at higher Q than
necessary. The voltages and currents in the tuner components become MUCH
higher than necessary for a given to match the load, and so do losses.

This condition is aggrivated by a capacitive load. Such a load requires
more output C than a resistive load, and there allready is a shrt fall!
The operating Q and losses are forced even higher by this condition!

In the practical world of traditional low band T network tuners efficiency
is always lowest with low  Z capacitive loads.

Do a spead sheet on a T network, and you'll see what I mean. (Unless a
tuner with a LCL T or huge capacitors is assumed!)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:55 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (David Stockton)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 10:12:10 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>

Ian White, G3SEK ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Zen Buddhist master says: You can never adjust your antenna tuner the
: same even once!


    Hey! you *can* calculate the capacitance of a capacitor with only one
plate!  a true Zen antenna tuner is a possibility. In a world where
anything different sells....



   (You've not heard rumours of a certain "Global Domination" class ATU
from 'ROO, have you?)

   Cheers
            David


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:56 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gfk3h$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 09:23:14 GMT

In article <4gfk3h$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kenneth Ferguson)
writes:
>Theoretically, an antenna tuner does not dissipate power, de k4kxo.

Snicker. And theoretically a bumble bee can't fly. When reality doesn't
match your theory, your theory is wrong (or at best is being misapplied).
No tuner has infinite unloaded Q, so all tuners dissipate power. The
question of interest is "how much?"

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:57 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 15:22:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi1oa$[e-mail]>
References: <4genna$[e-mail]>

>   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
>  In article <4gaomd$[e-mail]>,
>     "Tom V. Pfaffenbach" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>  >Hi Tom;
>  >
>  >An easy way is to use an RF ammeter and a resistive dummy load. Tune your
>  >transmitter into the load directly and set it for highest reading on the
>  >ammeter. P=I*I*R.
>  >
>  >Now go thru your coupler and tune again for maximum ammeter reading.
>  >Again P=I*I*R.   P1-P2=lOSS.
>  >
>  >We are assuming that your best power output occurs at approximately the
>  >same power input level, in both cases.  Generally this is valid, but you
>  >can also verify the input level independently. It is important that you
>  >make the measurements with a resistive load.
>  >
>  >DO NOT BE SURPRISED IF YOU FIND LOSSES IN THE ORDER OF 15-30%.
>  >
>  >Happy DXing 73-K9JDU
>
>  The problem here is that the tuner loss can vary dramatically depending on
>  the load impedance. The suggested method will tell you the loss when
>  the tuner is presented with a purely resistive load, but not by the actual
>  load presented by the feedline. If you know the load Z and have an RF
>  ammeter you can calculate the output power as I^2*R where I = the magnitude

>  of the output current and R = the resistive part of the load impedance. Or
>  you can measure the RF output voltage and calculate the output power as
>  V^2/R where V is the magnitude of the output voltage and R is the parallel
>  equivalent R of the output Z. But you have to know the output Z.
>
>  Roy Lewallen, W7EL
>
>>>>
If you wish to get an idea of the loss expected from a theoretical view get a
copy of TL.Zip
from ARRL.  This is a program that will calculate the optimum component values
 for a T - L
or Pi net work given the Z of the antenna, transmission length and transmissio
n line Z.  It
will also calculate the max voltage on the line and the location of the peak v
oltage.

Of course to be accurate you must know the component parts of the antenna Z.
You can
guess - or calculate it from one of the antenna programs - or measure it with
some of the
test equipment available from several sources.

73/Jim/AC4CZ


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:58 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 16:30:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi5n2$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4gdfng$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
>In article <4ga0lt$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>>In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
>writes:
>>>How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>>>when in use?
>>>
>>>Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of
>it, measure
>> the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the
>power
>> out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>>
>>                                    73's WD9AHF - Jim
>
>The problem with doing that, Jim, is that the impedance on the output of
>the tuner may not be anywhere near 50+j0 ohms. (After all, that's why we
>need tuners, no?) If you know where I can get a wattmeter I can insert into
>a feedline looking into 2000 - j600 or 2 + j750 ohms and get an accurate
>(or even approximate!) reading, please let me know!
>
>73,
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

   I think I'd reexamine my antenna choice.
                  Jim WD9AHF


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:57:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 23 Feb 1996 18:29:44 GMT
Message-ID: <4gl12o$[e-mail]>


        As somewhat a deviation from this thread, consider the
absurdity of the tuner similar to the conventioanal T with the
capacitors in series across the top BUT with a variable capacitor
ACROSS the inductor.  The circulating currents in the inductor in
this absurdity can be disasterous.

Charlie,  W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:00 1996
From: Kevin Schmidt <kschmidt>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 23:06:18 GMT
Message-ID: <4gista$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk>

"Ian White, G3SEK"<[e-mail]> writes:

>One way around this problem would be to borrow a second, identical
>tuner. Tune the first one into the antenna system as usual, for minimum
>VSWR at the TX end. Then connect the second tuner back-to-back into a
>50-ohm absorption wattmeter (or Bird 43 and dummy load) and tune that
>one also for minimum VSWR at the TX end. The power loss (in dB) in a
>single tuner will be one-half of the total.

This can work if the load to be matched is resistive, but the
tuners will otherwise be tuned to complex conjugate impedances.
You can see this by imagining you are matching a 50 ohm resitor in
series with a 50 capacitive reactance. An L network tuner would be
a 50 ohm inductive reactance in series and no parallel component.
The other tuner would have to be a 50 ohm capacitive reactance in series to
tune out this inductance. By the way, the method given in the QST
article also only works for resistive loads.

Kevin [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (robbin decker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 17:21:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4gkif3$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Jeff DePolo WN3A <[e-mail]> wrote:

My thoughts are that it has always been exceedingly difficult to
properly configue the ants to accept coaxial connecting devices,
and in order to do so the proper surgical equipment is very difficult
to obtain without a certificate of authority from the State Board of
Entomology, although the policy probably varies from State to State.
It is my understanding that there is a degree of inductance variance
between different factions of Army ants, the Clintonian variety being
particularly difficult to induct. The carpenter would afford the
largest hardware interface but could be detrimental to wood burning
test equipment. A solid warning is that any such tests should be done
in strict secrecy as the possibility of disruption by factions of
PETA, Greenpeace, ASPCA, Handgun Control International, and other
organizations dedicated to prevent such unscrupulous activities
exists. Measuring the loss of RF power when using an ant tuner, not to
mention the mere act of tuning an ant to begin with,  would surely
disrupt the morning tofu and granola indulgences of the membership.



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:03 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 01:48:12 GMT
Message-ID: <4gj6ba$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>In article <4gdfng$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:
>>The problem with doing that, Jim, is that the impedance on the output of
>>the tuner may not be anywhere near 50+j0 ohms. (After all, that's why we
>>need tuners, no?) If you know where I can get a wattmeter I can insert
into
>>a feedline looking into 2000 - j600 or 2 + j750 ohms and get an accurate
>>(or even approximate!) reading, please let me know!
>
>Ahem. Roy, the wattmeter only has to have the same impedance as the
>*characteristic* impedance of the line, regardless of what load impedance
>may be terminating the line. If the output coax is 50 ohms (the usual
>case), then your trusty Bird 43 will work just fine. Of course, since
>the line won't have a unity VSWR, you'll have to calculate true output
>power from the forward and reverse readings on the wattmeter.
>
>Gary

Gary's right -- I shouldn't have dismissed the directional wattmeter out of
hand.

Using the impedances I snatched from the air:

2000 - j600 is an SWR of 43.6 in a 50 ohm system. This probably isn't
an unreasonably high SWR to see with a multi-band antenna fed with
ladder or open wire line. With 100 watts of power, the trusty Bird should
read a forward power of 1141 watts and reverse power of 1041 watts. It
might be possible to resolve the difference well enough to get an idea of
the actual power being transmitted.

The other impedance, 2 + j750 is a 50-ohm SWR of 5650, requiring the Bird
to read a forward power of 141,300 watts forward and 141,200 watts reverse.
This isn't really a realistic impedance, since even a tiny bit of feedline
loss would lower the SWR below this value.

So, the Bird 43 with a high-power slug might, after all, be adequate for
measuring the output power to determine loss, as long as the SWR (in the 50
ohm wattmeter) isn't too outrageous.

Thanks for the correction, Gary.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:04 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 96 18:23:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4gstq5$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>For a balanced tuner, we'd want to use hot wire ammeters, and a RF
>voltmeter that we could move along the line, to determine power out.
>The RF voltmeter would let us directly determine VSWR and give us
>a direct tuner output voltage reading. Combined with the RF current
>readings of the hot wire ammeters (one in each leg) we could then
>determine power out by cranking the formulas.

It's not obvious to me how this would work. Wouldn't we have to know the
phase angle between the voltage and current to determine the power?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:05 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 96 23:17:38 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk> <[e-mail]>

Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:

>just not true or that the left side of the Smith chart is better than the
>right (which way are you holding it BTW?). Without more specificity as to the

>configuration of the tuner one cannot justify statements such as these.

Hi Wes, maybe I was assuming too much. With a Smith chart normalized to
300 ohms and a 50 ohm input tuner, it is best to operate the tuner on
the low impedance side of the Smith chart rather than on the high
impedance side. Doesn't everybody know that infinity is on the right? :-)
The general neighborhood of 50 ohms on a 300 ohm Smith chart is a circle
centered at 0.167, on the low impedance side.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 18:28:19 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <io6alDAu03KxEwb$@ifwtech.demon.co.uk> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
 writes:
>From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
>Date: Thu, 22 Feb 96 23:17:38 -0500

>Wes Stewart <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>just not true or that the left side of the Smith chart is better than the
>>right (which way are you holding it BTW?). Without more specificity as to th
e
>>configuration of the tuner one cannot justify statements such as these.
>
>Hi Wes, maybe I was assuming too much. With a Smith chart normalized to
>300 ohms and a 50 ohm input tuner, it is best to operate the tuner on
>the low impedance side of the Smith chart rather than on the high
>impedance side. Doesn't everybody know that infinity is on the right? :-)
>The general neighborhood of 50 ohms on a 300 ohm Smith chart is a circle
>centered at 0.167, on the low impedance side.

On the other hand... with a Smith chart normalized to 50 ohm, 300 is on the
right (infinity) side. So this must make the right side the right side <g>.
Unless of course, infinity is to the left in which case the right side is the
wrong side.

I suggest a  new convention.  If the antenna is horizontal and greater than a
half wavelength long, we hold the chart with infinity to the right. If the
antenna is horizontal and 1/2 lambda or less in length, we hold the chart
with infinity to the left. Verticals; infinity is up, loops; it's down.  End
of confusion. Then for more fun, let's always normalize the chart to the load
impedance. Think of how much fun we can have if the chart center represents
say--- 17 + j47.

Philip Smith would be proud.

Regards, Wes -- N7WS  (76% of an OOT)

> >73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (Pricemw)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how to build a simple Hi-Q loop antenna
Date: 22 Feb 1996 02:42:29 -0500
Message-ID: <4gh6p5$[e-mail]>
References: <4gb8b5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Pricemw)

<details on loop construction snipped>

Sounds like a nice design...very interesting.   How critical is tuning of
the variable capacitor?  Can you tune the antenna without sandpapering
your fingertips first?

--Wayne  W5GIE in Redlands, CA


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:08 1996
From: Vance Campbell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how to build a simple Hi-Q loop antenna
References: <4gb8b5$[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 22 Feb 96 23:49:47 GMT

Peter,

Sounds interesting. What sort of performance, (Bandwidth, SWR, gain,
directionality, etc.) do you get?

73 WA7ROI




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:09 1996
From: [e-mail] (BigTrain 9)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Isoloop HF 10-30
Date: 23 Feb 1996 14:23:44 -0500
Message-ID: <4gl480$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BigTrain 9)

Any comments out there in the nether land concerning this antenna for us
condo covenant challanged individuals?

Ron, KB7WC


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:10 1996
From: Jim Daneke <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Isoloop HF 10-30
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 15:23:25 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gl480$[e-mail]>

BigTrain 9 wrote:
>
> Any comments out there in the nether land concerning this antenna for us
> condo covenant challanged individuals?
>
> Ron, KB7WC

only works 10-30. Who works 10-30?


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:11 1996
From: AC6V <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Isoloop HF 10-30
Date: 23 Feb 1996 22:39:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4glfnm$[e-mail]>
References: <4gl480$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

One of our Hams here in San Diego has worked DXCC with an AEA Isoloop.
Another has worked 50+ countries just recently on the bands (bad as the
band are). I talked to a US Ham who claimed 100+ countries on all its
bands.
A station in Haiti used one on his balcony with 50 watts in and would
chide the USA Hams for running kilowatts.

Yep they work -- perhaps not as well as outdoor types -- but Ms Clipboard
of the HOA don't "lough" no antennas round here!!!

73 -- Rod
--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Large Searchable Ham Classifieds @ http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 21:19:45 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

The Raymond Sarrio Company╣s Ham Radio WWW site is proud to announce a
FREE Ham Radio classified advertising page at
http://www.csz.com/sarrio.html. This new classified page will allow Hams
to find equipement with the help of a search engine--no need to scroll
through 100╣s of listing before you find that special piece of gear. Plus,
when you find the gear you'er interested in, you are also provided with
easy point-and-click e-mail access, directly to the Ham that listed the
item.

For those Hams with gear to sell, take note! there is NO charge to list
your equipment within Ham Classifieds, and there will be no posting time
delays.  Your posting(s) will go on-line in our classified search engine
within about 1 hour. All you need do is fill out a simple forms page, and
upon its (point-and-click) submission your │For Sale▓ classified is
immediately on-line.

I will be purging the classified listings initially, about once every
month, but that timeline will shorten as our classified numbers grow.

73╣s, Ray
--
The Raymond Sarrio Co. a full feature Ham Radio Storefront on tth WWW at http:
//www.csz.com/sarrio in association with Brillar Enterprises http://win-win.co
m/brillar an Extensive Discount CD-Rom Catalog!



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (DRW1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Loop Skywire Ant
Date: 23 Feb 1996 14:07:29 -0500
Message-ID: <4gl39h$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DRW1)

Looking for information on building, installing, operating on a loop
skywire.  What is best position for minimum radiatin angle?  What is best
point to attach coax? etc.  any help will be greately appreciated.

Don KB5QPN


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:14 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Loop Skywire Ant
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gl39h$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 00:58:55 GMT

Make it resonant at the lowest operating frequency. For 80 meters, I
recommend 3530kc or so. This will enable the multiples to fall within
the higher bands. I feed mine with a 4:1 current balun and RG8x coax.
Results show a very low, less than 1.5:1 swr on all multiples. You will
need a tuner on the WARC bands. I tried using coax directly to the loop
and RFI problems ensued. Also the swr was too high. Don't do this. I
tried using 300 ohm balanced line with the balun in the shack. This
worked quite well but on the warc bands I did experience some rfi on the
computer. Coax and balun seems like the most tame choice.


DRW1 ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Looking for information on building, installing, operating on a loop
: skywire.  What is best position for minimum radiatin angle?  What is best
: point to attach coax? etc.  any help will be greately appreciated.

: Don KB5QPN

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:16 1996
From: AC6V <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 24 Feb 1996 05:01:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4gm640$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Frank, I have had an R5 for several years now and it is a real winner
for DX. On the long haul it really performs well. Around the US -- its
just OK.

Don't compare an R5 with a dipole at 20 to 30 feet working domestically.
Dipoles at these heights, depending on the band, can have a quite high
angle of radiation and bomb into close in stations (several hundred miles)

Check out the R5, R7's on the long haul (DX as it were). Here the R5 is
mounted on an eight foot water pipe secured to the rear concrete block
fence. HOA problems prevent height.

I feel that the "half wave end fed" R5 has a very low angle of radiation
and is  highly efficient compared with a 1/4 wave with a few skimpy
radials. I have had several 1/4 wave verticals ground mounted with six or
more radials and there is just no comparison. At my previous QTH, I had
inverted vees and dipoles at 25-30 feet -- great for working USA, but
forget DX, I'll take em at 80 feet tho.

Brag tape for the R5 follows:  (got the qsl's for em)

106 countries with 6 watts into the R5 (early 90's) not easy but
achievable. Longest QRP Haul -- was Mozambique on 15 Meters -- 17,020
kilometers from San Diego with six watts!!

With 600 Watts (AL-811A) and the R5: -- A61, 3W, C9, 5X, A92, R1FJL, 9U,
9H, ZA, SU, 5T, Trindade, XT, S92, 3D2 Conway, Eritrea, 5R, XW, ZL8
Kermadec, Peter Isle and many log pages more -- these were the tough ones
and they are mostly long haul DX from here.

Interestingly I have a heck of a time getting to Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas
with an R5  -- suspect I'm going right over em. Bombs into W1, W2 and the
Carribean tho.

As in the previous reply, ground conditions and obstructions can make or
break you.

Another San Diego Ham here had the R5 at about 25 feet on his house and
switched to 8 or 9 feet to reduce TVI and saw very little difference.
E-Mail me if you want to correspond with him, he is not on the internet.

A station in Nevada tested the Gap, the R7 and the DX-77. The R7 and DX-77
were clear winners at HIS QTH with the R7 and DX-77 a push except for 40M
where the DX-77 had a slight edge.

Half wave, end fed, ground mounted - verticals do function very well --
but they "ain't no beam" even tho they may think so. Excuse the brag
tapes, but offered as proof of the pudding.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You can get more respect with a wet noodle and a linear than just a wet
noodle --- Big Al from Chicago. (The Untouchables Movie quote)


73
Rod

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:18 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 00:53:57 GMT

Frank, I can tell you this. I had an R7 installed on a 6ft metal post. it
was way out in the clear on 2 acres of flat land. 40 meter performance
was amazingly close to that of my 160 meter loop at 65 feet. 30 meters
was good but 20 and above was way down in comparison.

I then put it on top of my 60ft tower. 40 meter performance was horrible
for any distance. The higher bands only slightly improved. In my opinion,
If you install one of these little verticals, no matter which kind, in an
open area above a decently reflective ground, it will outperform one that
is mounted high. However, if you have a lot of surrounding buildings,
trees, power lines etc. it will probably do better at greater heights
due to less absorbtion.

Last. Almost any resonant wire without traps will outperform a trap
vertical at any practical height. On 20 meters, a dipole mounted only 30
feet above ground has a very nice low angle lobe for dx work. Verticals
do too but the angle of radiation is soooooo low that a lot of signal is
lost in the ground and in surrounding objects not to mention the losses
in the traps.

Consider also that if a vertical has several traps, a certain amount of
RF will be lost in every trap, not just one. That all adds up. Personally
I tend to think the Butternut is the best choice. Just from experience
over the years, I seems like the strongest signals come from them. Gap
antennas are too weird for my liking.

BTW, putting the R7 on the tower was a frightful experience. I tilted the
tower over and bolted it on the top. The antenna sagged so badly in that
position that I was surprised it survived. I  was extreemely flimbsey up
there and I doubt that it would have lasted through a stiff breeze. I
don't recomment trying this with out guying the antenna which would be  a
real mess. I only did this as an experiment. Once I was satisfied, I sold
the R7 to someone who needed it worse than I. Your R5 may be a bit more
rugged due to it's shorter length.


--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:19 1996
From: AC6V <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 15:31:42 GMT
Message-ID: <4gpvcu$[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]> <4gn6du$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

My original motivation for the R5 ground mount post was:

If u can't get an antenna up in the air (CC&R's etc) try an R5, R7 or
DX-77 they work! We restricted Calif Hams love em.

Listen for us in the pileups

73 Rod

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (Woodybozak)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 24 Feb 1996 02:49:22 -0500
Message-ID: <4gmfu2$[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Woodybozak)

Hmmmmm.....how much Cushcraft stock does this guy own anyway? This is the
first time I have heard any amateur rave about an R-series antenna. Maybe
I and the dozen or so hams I hang out with all bought the R5-L version...L
for LOUSEY!
We've done many, many side-by-side tests with the R5 vs. dipoles at
various heights. The R5 was ALWAYS at least 3 to 6 db down from the
dipoles on both local and DX.  I did better with an MFJ tuner and a random
wire INSIDE my attic (and I have the QSLs to prove it) than the R5 at
different heights outdoors.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]> <4gn6du$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 13:23:30 GMT

Dont' take this wrong but I want to make a very clear statement here.

Measuring antenna performance by the number of dx stations worked and their
location means absolutely NOTHING.

Remember the old Gotham Vertical advertisements from the 60's?

"I worked the world with my Gotham Vertical"!!!

THIS MEANS NOTHING. Period.......

Only direct comparison test, A-B switching done several times or field
strength measurements give any meaningful data.

Thanks. Have a nice day. :*)





--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:27 1996
From: [e-mail] (Woodybozak)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 24 Feb 1996 02:39:32 -0500
Message-ID: <4gmfbk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Woodybozak)

I agree with N4LQ !  Also, from my experience with an R5 (in a box in my
garage...anyone want to buy it?) a random wire will out perform an R5 on
most any band - a dipole cut to the resonant frequency will do even more.
I think $200 for an antenna tuner plus a few dollars for a long-wire
antenna or simple dipole is a MUCH better use of funds, compared with the
$279 or so that Cushcraft wants for the R5. Don't get me wrong, I think
Cushcraft makes some good antennas, such as their 2 meter amateur &
commercial units. However, I think the R-series is WAY over rated in the
Cushcraft ads. But, if you don't have room for a random wire, dipole or
beam, I guess the R-antennas are better than nothing.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:28 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 06:04:08 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]>

The problem being that when you do not make field strength
measurements or have an opportunity to switch between the antennas to
be compared, the differences must be outstanding in order to be
properly notified. When you have two antennas within, say 3 dB (which
is a lot), random variables may hide the true results. This is the way
you get opinions like "it works great", which truly means that the
fellow is satisfied with his antenna. It does not actually say
much about the antenna itself.

It is like measuring fever with a hand. You notice that yes indeed,
the poor fellow has fever, but you don't know how much.
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:30 1996
From: Joe Fitter  BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 07:17:11 GMT
Message-ID: <4grmpn$[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]> <4gn6du$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
>Dont' take this wrong but I want to make a very clear statement here.
>
>Measuring antenna performance by the number of dx stations worked and >their
location means absolutely NOTHING.
>Only direct comparison test, A-B switching done several times or field
>strength measurements give any meaningful data.
>
>Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


I disagree in-part.  While field-strenght indications may be useful
to determine the amount of RF leaving the antenna, it alone tells little
about the angle of maximum radiation.  Angle of radiation is
important when "working DX".   I'd rather have an antenna of 50%
efficiency optimized for maximum raddiation angle of 16 to 18 degrees
with a 5 degree beamwidth, than an antenna of 95% efficiency with a
radiation angle of 45 degrees and same beamwidth.  The high angle is
ineffective.

Now the problem....how does one measure field strength at a specific
angle of radiation?    Anyone have some ideas?

Thanks, Joe
----------------------------------------------------------
Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China

ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
----------------------------------------------------------




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:31 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]> <4gn6du$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4grmpn$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 11:05:37 GMT

: Now the problem....how does one measure field strength at a specific
: angle of radiation?    Anyone have some ideas?
:

It's simple if you have a helicopter and a good FS meter

--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:32 1996
From: AC6V <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 16:00:09 GMT
Message-ID: <4gsle9$[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Woody -- just got a reply from Frank the original writer of the R5
Height question. He reported improved results with the R5 compared to a
dipole at 40 feet.

Son of a Gun! What can one say ?

R5's ARE!
DX IS! ---- AC6V

73
IT WAS AN INTERESTING ROUND ROBIN

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tom Carrubba)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 24 Feb 1996 11:56:52 GMT
Message-ID: <4gmue4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Frank Scutch ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Hi fellas:

: I just picked up an R5 to play with and initially have it mounted on a
: 10 ft mast in my back yard.  I think it works fine considering it's
: size.  I have noticed that it doesn't really perform any better than
: some of the wire arrays I'm already using in the yard.

: Question:  Would the antenna perform any differently at maybe 30 or 40
: feet than it does at 10 ft?  Before I go through the trouble of putting
: it up higher... can someone tell me if will even matter?  Seems I
: remember a post where someone mentioned that there is no diffence in
: performance. I'm not looking for a beam's performance out of a vertical
: but just want to know if it's worth it.  Thanks.

: Frank, WB4AYJ

Hi frank,

I went through the routine with my R5, it works well at 10 or 20ft..
I tried 30 and 40ft, but the swr match started to get flakey. I finally
settled for 20ft....it worked fine, and the swr match was as published.


73--
============================================================================
Tom Carrubba            "To err is human, but to really foul
N. Babylon, NY          things up requires a computer......"
KA2DFO                  packet radio| [e-mail]
============================================================================


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:34 1996
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.video.satellite.tvro,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.ham-radio,alt.support.turner-syndrom,alt.radio.digital
Subject: Re: Need : IF/RF Detectors
Date: 21 Feb 1996 16:33:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4gfhg2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:

: Hi there, I am looking for IF/RF detectors/detector diodes for micropower
: measurements (100 MHz - 2 GHz). Has anybody had any good or bad experiences
: whith this products ? Has anybody know manufactures which produce such parts
.

My employer, and I'm sure others, make detector diodes intended for use at
zero bias.  There is a pretty good article about them in the December,
1995, "Hewlett Packard Journal."  If you would be happy with an SOT-23
package, the HSMS-2850 might be worth looking at.  At low power levels, the
output into the proper load is nearly linear in voltage versus input power;
that diode has about 100mV/uW sensitivity in the frequency range you are
interested in.  You should be able to measure down to nanowatt levels with
homebrew stuff; that's a fraction of a millivolt of RF.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:35 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.video.satellite.tvro,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.ham-radio,alt.support.turner-syndrom,alt.radio.digital
Subject: Need : IF/RF Detectors
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 96 09:32:09 PDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


Hi there, I am looking for IF/RF detectors/detector diodes for micropower
measurements (100 MHz - 2 GHz). Has anybody had any good or bad experiences
whith this products ? Has anybody know manufactures which produce such parts.
Thanx in advance for any help.
                                        N. Alexander

e-mail: [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (RICKCRIDER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Info: Trylon Tower.....?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 18:55:33 -0500
Message-ID: <4givpl$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (RICKCRIDER)

Seeking information on a tower that has been donated to us, to be
dissassembled and removed.   Made by Trylon Mfg. Co.,  possibly from
Ontario/Canada......

It is freestanding,  triangular, 44" leg to leg at base.   Nine eight foot
sections.   Top section is missing.   Base buried in slab.  Will have to
cut at base.

Trylon still in business?   Any U.S. distributors?   Top section still
available?  Currently mounted in a 5 1/2 foot square concrete base.....any
idea how deep the slab would need to be?

Any contact information will be greatly appreciated.   Thanks.

Rick Crider
KD4FXA
UCARS (Union County Amateur Radio Society)
<[e-mail]>
[phone]


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:36 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Jeffery Shelton)
Subject: need mod for ft1000mp
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 03:11:47 GMT

need gen transmit mod for yeasu ft1000mp can anyone help????
any help would be apprieciated
jeff at j&s electronics
e-mail= [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need plans for 6m antenna
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 19:42:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4gfs0e$[e-mail]>
References: <4gaqpe$[e-mail]> <4gasnj$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (DeNoid95X) wrote:

>are you looking for a ground plane or other?

>N9RLR/2

Check my web page under Copper Cactus multi-band antenna, it can be
constructed as a monobander using the same numbers.
http://www.inlink.com/~raiar

TTUL - 73+ de Gary - KG0ZP





From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (Mark McAnally)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: need plans for 6m antenna
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 15:43:54
Message-ID: <4gaqpe$[e-mail]>

Does anyone know of a source for a simple yet effective dipole or
vertical 6m homebrew antenna? Thanks in advance   KE4QKN in
Milton, FL



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need plans for 6m antenna
Date: 22 Feb 1996 16:33:11 -0500
Message-ID: <4ginen$[e-mail]>
References: <4gfs0e$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)

actully someone before was inquiring on how to construct a 6 m antenna and
I was only asking what type...etc.  I never saw a response from him.
It is nice to see someone actually reads these postings.
N9RLR/2


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:40 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need plans for 6m antenna
Date: 26 Feb 1996 17:53:35 GMT
Message-ID: <4gss2v$[e-mail]>
References: <4gaqpe$[e-mail]>

The ARRL Antenna Book has many antennas for 6 meters;
such as, dipoles, yagis, loops, etc.  All easy to build yourself.
Just remember the formula length = 468/(frequency in Mhz)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sid George, CPA     [e-mail]
._  _...  .....  _.._  .._
http://www.hal-pc.org/~sid
-------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:41 1996
From: Dennis Doonan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: NVIS Antenna Question
Date: 22 Feb 1996 15:29:28 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi24o$[e-mail]>

Hello,
  I am trying to dig up some information on the NVIS (Near Vertical
Incident Skywave) antenna.  As I understand it, it was used by the
military for short range (100 -- 300 mile) communications on hf (4 MHz).
  Variations appear to be permanent installations, field installations,
and vehicular installations.
  Is this similiar to the old "Cloud Warmer" antenna?  Are there any
published references?  Will this function as a "short" antenna for 80/75?
  TNX
73 de KG9DO, Dennis
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Glenn Schultz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Patch antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 13:43:25 -0100

QST did an article on building a patch antenna for GPS units. My
brother-in-law built it and it works great. Not sure which issue, but I
think it was Nov95<?>
Good luck!
Glenn, N0VYK




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:43 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: power and voltage
Date: 22 Feb 1996 19:17:40 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gifgk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

About power, voltage and dB:

1) Consider two "test" points within a circuit or equipment.

2) Point 1 has a voltage E1 Volts across R1 Ohms

3) Point 2 has a voltage E2 Volts across R2 Ohms.

4) The power ratio in dB=20*log(E1/E2)+10*log(R2/R1)

5) If R1=R2 then the power ratio is 20*log(E1/E2)

6) The practical problem is that very often R1 and R2 are unknown
   and may even be difficult to measure or calculate.

7) But quite often we can use a voltmeter to compare E1 and E2
   with the values that were measured in a circuit that was known
   to be functioning correctly (a reference circuit).

8) This is a "diagnostic" or "troubleshooting" tool that is very useful.
   It is often convenient to express the ratio E1/E2 as a voltage dB ratio.
   This practice had its roots in high impedance vacuum tube gear, but
   it is still used and is practical in low impedance solid state circuits.
   For example voltage ratios at every stage of a receiver can be measured
   and tabulated in dBs using instruments that do not disturb the circuits.

9) If a problem is discovered then it may be necessary to measure R1 and R2
   as well as many other things.

10) There is nothing wrong with this practice as long as the ground rules
    are understood. There was never any intention to equate voltage ratios
    with power ratios.

11) On a power basis when *designing* equipment the concepts of
    "available power", "available gain", and "transducer" gain are
    preferred methods for analyzing and tabulating system performance.


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner
Date: 22 Feb 1996 10:05:44 -0500
Message-ID: <4gi0o8$[e-mail]>
References: <4gbmqc$[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman) writes:

>
>[I wrote]
>>The step was set at 6 db because that represented a doubling of power,
>>IE a 3 db power change is a 6 db voltage change, and that was the
>>smallest *significant* signal strength change detectable by the ear.
>>(I *know* that's a corruption of db, but that's the way they did it
>>then. They talked about voltage db and power db. Today we'd use 20*log
>>and 10*log and get power db every time.)
>
>Now very carefully read the parenthetic remark. The OTs in the
>literature I was referencing tended to be a bit sloppy in what
>they called a "db".

I'm curious about the sources of information.

If you knew all that, why did you tell Cecil two S units was 12 dB? Do you
still use voltage dB, has that stuck in some area of the industry?

I thought that comment just stemmed from common but UNTRUE misconceptions
that:

1.) S units are defined as 6dB by an industry standard.

2.) S meters are calibrated and can actually be used to indicate the
actual improvement.

Where does the UHF-VHF standard you mentioned (something like 5 mV for
S9???) come from? I'm curious of the history of these standards, because
for years I've always had to answer "I dunno, sometime in the 40's but it
never caught on."

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Lyle Murphy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Question about AM/SW
Date: 22 Feb 1996 14:56:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi06f$[e-mail]>

I enjoy listening to AM and Short Wave (SW) talk shows.  But I never can
get good reception (if I can get reception at all.)  The radios I am using
are cheap.  So I have this question: Should I build a crystal radio making
a major large (1 to 2 foot) coil/variable capacitor trap antenna with a
schotky diode (for the lowest forward bias of .3v).  The large trap circuit
I hope will bring in a very strong signal (question here is can I reach
SW?) to make it work.  Someone please help me out.  This would be a fun
project but don't know if it will work.

Regards,
Lyle (the inventor)


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:46 1996
From: Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Question about AM/SW
Date: 22 Feb 1996 15:17:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi1e6$[e-mail]>
References: <4gi06f$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Probably the most critical element for receiving any radio signal is the
antenna. Take a look at "Easy-Up Antennas for Radio Listeners and Hams" by
Edward M. Knoll, ISBN 0-672-22495-X. Lots of antennas here made out of
inexpensive easily obtained parts such as PVC Pipe.

Covers Broadcast Band, Short Wave Bands (By Meters), Ham, VHF etc.

The plans are simple and easy to construct and they work.

Good SWLing

Rod

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dean)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rabbit ears better than roof top tv antenna?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 16:09:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4gq1jt$[e-mail]>

I know that must sound rather stupid but this is the problem I am having.

I recently moved into a new house.  It has no cable service.  When I first set

up my TV I hooked up a cheap set of rabbit ears.  I received a few stations
fairly well and a couple others not as well.  I also picked up a UHF station I

had never seen before.  (I only moved about a mile from where I lived before)
Anyway, I figured if I could pick these stations up this good with rabbit
ears, with a roof top antenna they should be perfect.  I bought a 59 element
VHF/UHF/FM antenna.  I mounted it in the attic for now just to see how much
better the reception would be.  To my utter surprise it was not much better
than the rabbit ears!  One of the stations came in a little better, most of
the others about the same.  The one UHF channel that I had never seen before
does not come in at all????

Now I realise that mounting it on the roof would be better and should increase

the performance, but the rabbit ears were laying on their side on top of my
set. The attic of my house is much higher than that.

I am using RG6 cable for the roof top antenna straight into the TV.  The
rabbit ears use twin lead.

Could I possibly have a bad matching transformer?  Or is the antenna being in
the attic the problem?  Or maybe I just have a crappie antenna.  But anything
has got to be better than rabbit ears, right?

As you may be able to tell I am not real knowledgeable about antennas. And I
know this is not a radio antenna problem, but this seemed like the place to go

for an educated opinion.

Thanks for any help you may be able to give me with this matter.

Dean
[e-mail]

P.S.  Could you please send e-mail as well as post any comments here.  I would

like to make sure I don't miss anyones messages.



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:49 1996
From: Per Stangeland <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,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,rec.radio.noncomm,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Radio Database Program LW, MW, SW coverage for YOU.....
Date: 22 Feb 1996 19:50:43 GMT
Message-ID: <4gihej$[e-mail]>
References: <4gduns$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Charles Bolland <[e-mail]> wrote:
>FRIENDS,
>
>If you would like a free copy of a radio database program that covers
>longwave, mediumwave, and shortwave with at least 4,000 of records, send
>your NAME, POSTAL ADDRESS, and EMAIL address to chuck@flinet, and I will
>return the program to you via EMAIL.
>
>The program is not up to date!  It is a program used during 1994 and
>hasn't be updated since.  However, many of the records are still current
>for stations that do not change every quarter.
>
>The program is good until June 6, 1996.  After that it will not function.
>
>Hope to hear from you and don't forget your Postal Address for
>registration and future information via mail..
>
>All addresses will be kept confidential!
>
>Chuck
>
>[e-mail]
>
>
My address is:
Per Stangeland
Luftfartsverket
Luftveien 16
N-3440 Royken
Norway.

Best Regards Per



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: S Units
Date: 21 Feb 1996 20:03:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4gftqa$[e-mail]>


Gary writes
(Gary Coffman) writes:
>There *is* a standard (two of them actually), but unfortunately
>most amateur gear doesn't adhere to it. An S-unit is defined as
>6 db, and S9 is defined as 50 uV across 50 ohms at the receiver
>input. (The second standard is for VHF where S9 is equal to 5uV.)
        The service manual for my TS940 says to calibrate the S
meter by setting a specific signal generator to 8 dB and adjust
to ra// read S1 on the meter then set to 40 db for S9 Repeat
as they interact of course.  This indicates that 9 - 1 = 8 and
40 - 8 = 32 dB for about 4 dB per S unit.  I believe this to be
closer to whhat manufacturerers use than the much discussed 6 dB.

Excuse wrong call on previous posting, please.

Charlie, w7XC
--


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: S Units
Date: 23 Feb 1996 10:29:02 -0500
Message-ID: <4gkmfu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jari
Jokiniemi) writes:

>
>It is quite unfortunate that few radios adhere to 6 dB / S unit. My
>IC-751 is one of the worst. From S1 to S9 a S unit is about 1
>dB. Above S9 each dB in the meter is pretty close to 1 true dB.
>--
>Jari Jokiniemi, jari.jokin

Hi Jari,

The reason they don't is because there is NO 6 dB standard! It's just a
popular rumor.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: S Units
Date: 23 Feb 1996 06:00:55 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gftqa$[e-mail]>


It is quite unfortunate that few radios adhere to 6 dB / S unit. My
IC-751 is one of the worst. From S1 to S9 a S unit is about 1
dB. Above S9 each dB in the meter is pretty close to 1 true dB.
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:54 1996
From: Michael Valentine <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: S-meter Calibration Rumors
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 11:57:33 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

>
> Where does the UHF-VHF standard you mentioned (something like 5 mV for
> S9???) come from? I'm curious of the history of these standards, because
> for years I've always had to answer "I dunno, sometime in the 40's but it
> never caught on."
>
> 73 Tom

Hi all, I used to work for R.L. Drake in the late '60s and early '70s in
engineering.  We used the 50 microvolts as S-9 standard and I never did
hear where it came from.  The 5 microvolts at VHF/UHF, I speculate, comes
from having a 20 dB conversion gain transverter ahead of the HF receiver
being used as the IF.

We used to giggle about how some of the lower-priced manufacturers would
calibrate their S-meters to make the receiver look "hot".  If my receiver
reads S-9 on a signal that your 75S3-B reads as S-6, my radio is better
than a Collins rig, right?  Oh well, the world was ever thus.

Cheers!

Mike
WA8MSF


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Barry Himes)
Subject: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: 23 Feb 96 22:28:20 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna

I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.

Any ideas?
Barry Himes KF6AZU


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:55 1996
From: [e-mail] (Sutherland)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 14:55:53 GMT
Message-ID: <4gn95k$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

VE1EA [e-mail]  Don't believe everything you hear I also
worked W5LFL and got him with 45 watts with a home built 9 elementquad
15 db gain  element pacing is 11 5/8 ... cut your driven element for
the freq that you want to work most ...but the ant is very forgiving
.. reflector is 5% larger each director 1 through 5 each go down 5%
and the last two 6 7&7 are tyhe same size.  Mine is built on an 8 ft
piece of 2x2 and dowels support the elements  are cross drilled
vertically to hold elements made of 1/8 in aluminum ground wire bought
from Radio Shack  If you figure the gain at 15 db ...that gives me an
effective 1440 watts with 45 watts input  Which repeater do you want
me to melt down today???  HI HI Another friend of mine worked th the
american  on MIR mobile in his car from a shopping center parking lot
while waiting for his wife  IT CAN BE DONE and it doesn't take a
kilowatt  have fun es 73 de Brett
[e-mail] (Wes Stewart) wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry Himes) write
s:
>>From: [e-mail] (Barry Himes)
>>Subject: shuttle communication on 2 meter
>>Date: 23 Feb 96 22:28:20 -0800

>>I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
>>to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
>>built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.

>>Any ideas?
>>Barry Himes KF6AZU


>As one of only about 350 hams who contacted the first shuttle op, W5LFL, I
>suggest that you forget trying with an HT. There will be hundreds of people
>calling and on FM, it's the big guy that captures the receiver. I recommend
>1500W and 20 dB of antenna gain. Worked for me:-)

>73, Wes -- N7WS





From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:56 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: 26 Feb 1996 00:13:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4gqtvh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Wes Stewart) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry Himes) write
s:
>>From: [e-mail] (Barry Himes)
>>Subject: shuttle communication on 2 meter
>>Date: 23 Feb 96 22:28:20 -0800
>
>>I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
>>to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
>>built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.
>
>>Any ideas?
>>Barry Himes KF6AZU
>
>
>As one of only about 350 hams who contacted the first shuttle op, W5LFL, I
>suggest that you forget trying with an HT. There will be hundreds of people
>calling and on FM, it's the big guy that captures the receiver. I recommend
>1500W and 20 dB of antenna gain. Worked for me:-)
>
>73, Wes -- N7WS
>

  Barry,

  Looks like Wes there is teasing you a little. Maybe he can come with a 50 db
 antenna design for you that'll boost your 2 watt HT to 200,000 Watts Effectiv
e
 Radiated Power output. Just be careful who you point that thing at!

  P.S. I see you've 'hamming' for just about a month. Welcome to the zoo.

                                                         Jim WD9AHF


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:57 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Greg Dolkas)
Subject: Re: Slide Rule Wanted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 20:37:47 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>

"Bill C." ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Heh,
:
:    I love watching jaws drop at Field Day when I whip out a baterry-less
: slide rule to assist with antenna problems ;)
:
:     Bill

You should have seen them when I used mine to take the Advanced test...

Greg  KO6TH


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (Jeffery L. McMahan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Slide Rule Wanted
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 05:24:44 UNDEFINED
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ften0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> "Bill C." <[e-mail]> writes:

>Heh,

>   I love watching jaws drop at Field Day when I whip out a baterry-less
>slide rule to assist with antenna problems ;)

>    Bill

I love the expression on people's faces when I whip out the spare
batteries for my HP-48 :D

Jeff


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:58:59 1996
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Spacing between stacked yagis
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 17:09:18 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gd3u1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Ranson J. Pelt wrote:
>
> In article <4gd3u1$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (WB7ASR) wrote:
>
> > Im making plans on installing a Cushcraft A3 3-element 20/15/10 meter
> > yagi on the same mast with a homebrew 2-element 12/17 meter yagi.
> >
> > What minimum spacing is required between the two yagis to pervent
> > interaction?
> >
> > Tom...
>
> I have a 10/12/17 Yagi combination stacked over a 20/15 yagi about 5 or 6
> feet- never had any problems
>
> --
> Ranson Pelt
> [e-mail]
> nz4iIf you would really like to check the interaction model a couple of
similar antennas using EZNEC.  You can try all kinds of spacing and
guywires in a couple hours, saving lots of time on the tower.

Dick Kiefer, K0DK


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:00 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (charles copeland)
Subject: Re: SWR=3:1  How do I lower it?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 03:52:57 GMT

In article <[e-mail]>,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I have a small 6m SQLOOP antenna and my meter says I have a 3:1 SWR.
>What can I do to lower the SWR?

Don't know about your particular loop antenna, but:

492/54mhz = 9.11 feet for 1/2 dipole end to end should have good SWR.

Better yet make a 1/4 wave ground plane. One element 4.55 feet vertical,
three 4.55 foot elements pointing 45 degrees down from horizontal plane.
You can adjust 45 degree angle to get exactly 1:1 SWR. This antenna
would be 6.4 feet tall, small enough to fit in a room. You could make
it out of wire. Hang from ceiling, tie off lower elements with string.




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:01 1996
From: Edward Lawrence <eal>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR=3:1  How do I lower it?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 21:33:06 GMT
Message-ID: <4gt8ui$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4gkshn$[e-mail]> <4gst78$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:
>In article <4gkshn$[e-mail]>, Edward Lawrence <eal> wrote:
>>[e-mail] wrote:
>>>I have a small 6m SQLOOP antenna and my meter says I have a 3:1 SWR.
>>>What can I do to lower the SWR?
>
>Just out of curiosity, why do you want to lower the SWR?
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy, I responded to this, I did not originate it.  I suggested that he set the
size to bring it into resonance, then adjust his matching network to match it
to the 50 ohm coax.   WA5SWD   Ed



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:01 1996
From: "James M. Toney, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: T2FD
Date: 24 Feb 1996 19:27:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4gnorv$[e-mail]>
To: all

Does anyone have a list of references for the Tilted Terminated Folded
Dipole?  I've built a couple but am looking for some more refs.  Jim



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:02 1996
From: Rich Griffiths <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Verticals in Trees/Radials
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 08:58:45 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4fv54h$[e-mail]>

Richard P. McCoy wrote:
>
> On Feb 12, 1996 20:23:15 in article <Verticals in Trees/Radials>,
> '[e-mail] (Dennis Ashworth)' wrote:
>
> >So, from a performance standpoint, does anyone see a problem using
> >small gauge steel galv wire versus expensive copper?
>
> Try using aluminum electric fence wire.  Steel is a poor conductor compared
> to copper.

<snip>
>
> Good luck,
> Dick, N4UN

Also, galvanized steel corrodes amazingly fast in loamy soil, so don't
plan on burying it.  Aluminum is a good idea, and copper wire isn't all
that expensive if you buy it in 500 or 1000 ft spools.

Rich Griffiths, W2RG


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:03 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What are the optimum heights for Yagi ant's for 40,20,15,&10 mtrs?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 16:20:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi54i$[e-mail]>
References: <4gd7th$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4gd7th$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brad Charbonneau
) writes:
>     Could someone please help me with the optimum heights to install HF yagi
s on a tower in New England?  I have read a couple of antenna handbooks and fr
om what I read it seems that the following heights would work.  However, I hav
e no practical experience with these beams and how they actually perform at di
fferent heights...Here are the proposed heights of each beam:
>
>      40 mtr 3 or 4 ele at  = 115ft
>      20 mtr long boom 4 or 5 el = 100ft
>      15 mtr 6 ele = 100ft
>      10 mtr 6 ele = 110ft
>
>My goal is to get an optimum setup for DX.  If anyone could tell me what they
 think of these proposed heights, I'd really appreciate any info I could get.
 Thanks in advance!
>                                 Brad NZ1Y
>
>
   I think your going to "do real good". Just make sure you have a good ground

 system on that tower. Those heights should give you some outstanding signals
 don't skimp on the feedline, You'll lose that great height advantage. For the
 heck of it, if you have a PC with windows, snag my program down from
 the internet address in the post "Kinda dissapointed II' and you can see what
 different feedlines will cost you, as you vary the type and length of coax.

                                    Jim WD9AHF


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:04 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What are the optimum heights for Yagi ant's for 40,20,15,&10 mtrs?
Date: 22 Feb 1996 16:33:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4gi5ru$[e-mail]>
References: <4gd7th$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4gd7th$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brad Charbonneau
) writes:
>     Could someone please help me with the optimum heights to install HF yagi
s on a tower in New England?  I have read a couple of antenna handbooks and fr
om what I read it seems that the following heights would work.  However, I hav
e no practical experience with these beams and how they actually perform at di
fferent heights...Here are the proposed heights of each beam:
>
>      40 mtr 3 or 4 ele at  = 115ft
>      20 mtr long boom 4 or 5 el = 100ft
>      15 mtr 6 ele = 100ft
>      10 mtr 6 ele = 110ft
>
>My goal is to get an optimum setup for DX.  If anyone could tell me what they
 think of these proposed heights, I'd really appreciate any info I could get.
 Thanks in advance!
>                                 Brad NZ1Y
>
>    P.S. The program can be ftp'ed from:
              137.80.1.2 /pub/hamradio/incoming/TEEREV.ZIP

                                             Jim


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:06 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: "Al Koblinski  (W7XA)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What are the optimum heights for Yagi ant's for 40,20,15,&10 mtrs?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
References: <4gd7th$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 23:54:03 GMT

I think your 10,15,20 meter antennas are too high if you only use 1
antenna on each band.  When the band is "open" yopu will get whipped by
the guys with antennas at 1 wavelength or so.  I suggest that you
consider phasing two yagis with the lower one near 1 wavelength high.
You can use one or the other or both to suite the conditions.
The 40 mtr ant sounds good at 110 feet. (Wish I could do it!)
I used to kick the butt of W7KW at 180 ft on 20 and W7NA at 100ft on
20mtrs with my little quad at 50 feet when the band was open.  They
would both kick my butt when long path was in due to their very low
angle of radiation.
It is possible to have antenna too high for certain conditions.
73, Al




From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:07 1996
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What are the optimum heights for Yagi ant's for 40,20,15,&10 mtrs?
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 17:15:00 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gd7th$[e-mail]> <4gi5ru$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In <4gd7th$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brad Charbonne
au) writes:
> >     Could someone please help me with the optimum heights to install HF ya
gis on a tower in New England?  I have read a couple of antenna
handbooks and from
> >
> >      40 mtr 3 or 4 ele at  = 115ft
> >      20 mtr long boom 4 or 5 el = 100ft
> >      15 mtr 6 ele = 100ft
> >      10 mtr 6 ele = 110ft
> >
> >My goal is to get an optimum setup for DX.  If anyone could tell me what th
ey think of these proposed heights, I'd really appreciate any info
I could get.  Th
> >                                 Brad NZ1Y
> >
> >    P.S. The program can be ftp'ed from:
>               137.80.1.2 /pub/hamradio/incoming/TEEREV.ZIP
>
>                                              JimYou really should model thos
e antennas, or just simple dipoles at those
heights with EZNEC.  You will easily see what the take off angles are, as
these are determined primarily by height above ground.  Then you can use
MiniProp to decide what take off angles you need to work what ever paths
you desire.  It's lots of fun

Dick Kiefer, K0DK


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (Darrell Moody)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is good for 6m?
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 09:20:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hello,
>just want to get some info. on what antennas
>seem to "do the job" on 6 meters.
>What is good, what is not.
As usual, the bigger the better. I've worked stations at 1000 miles+
with half a watt to a dipole via Sporadic E, but I reckon a 3 ele yagi
is a minimum for reasonable performance - worked 70 DXCC countries on
mine until I replaced it with a 5 ele. If I had the space it would be
a 6 ele Crushcraft but most of us in the UK do not have much land.
Propagation isn't too hot at the moment, mainly summer Sporadic E, but
last year we had 2 weeks of short UK-US openings so don't give up.

--------------------------------------
Darrell G0HVQ UKSMG#353 Loc IO81VV
[e-mail]
--------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:09 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Why free space path loss?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 12:09:12 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> Paul Moller <[e-mail]> w
rites:
>>   By the way, the inverse-D-squared characteristic does not hold when you
>> get closer than 1/2 wavelength from an antenna.  There are so-called
>> "near-fields" which fall off even more rapidly, at the fourth and sixth
>> powers of distance.  The near-field and the inverse-D-squared field are
>> equal at about 1/6 wavelength from the antenna.
>>
>
>This is correct. There is a distance refered to as the "radian sphere",
>which is a distance of 1 radian around the antenna, inside which one is
>in the near field and outside which one is more or less in the far
>field. Be very carefull though, although this distance is related to
>wavelength of course, this is only an approximation as the fields make a
>smooth transition, and for quite some distance have properties of both!

The rule of thumb I've seen expressed many times is that you should
make your measurements at least 10 wavelengths from the antenna in
order to be reasonably free of near field effects. In AM broadcast,
we start our field strength measurements at 1 mile which is a bit
inside that rule of thumb limit.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:11 1996
From: [e-mail] (James M. Atkinson, Communications Engineer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Wiretapping and Telephone Bugging Web Page tscm.com
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 15:34:56 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Keywords: Counterintelligence Debugging Surveillance Counter-Terrorism

Finally the tools and test equipment page is finished, and we have updated
our frequency tables/lists.

Check out our updated tool and TSCM test equipment list.

http://www.tscm.com/

http://www.tscm.com/tmde.html    <--- TSCM Test Equipment
http://www.tscm.com/tools.html   <--- TSCM Hand Tools
http://www.tscm.com/stu.html     <--- Secure Telephones and Scramblers

Upcoming Topics to watch for in March... Any interest??

   Wired Microphones and Pinhole devices... tons of pictures
   The Computer Audio/Video Threat... tons of pictures
   Join us for a real world TSCM sweep...

   Feel free to suggest topics...
 ===============================================================
    James M. Atkinson          "...Shaken, not Stirred..."
    TSCM.COM
    127 Eastern Avenue #291
    Gloucester, MA 01931-8008
    URL: http://www.tscm.com/      E-Mail:  [e-mail]
 ===============================================================
    The First, The Largest, The Most Popular, and the Most
    Complete TSCM Counterintelligence Site on the Internet
 ===============================================================



From [e-mail] Tue Feb 27 19:59:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (Carlos Ramirez)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB: MFJ-1796
Date: 26 Feb 1996 07:27:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4grndv$[e-mail]>

I am looking for this antenna, state price and condition. Only reasonable
prices would be answered. New I think is $170.
73's
Carlos



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:18 1996
From: John Spoonhower <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 10m mobile ant recommendations
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 12:51:58 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4geos0$[e-mail]> <4gea6v$[e-mail]>

Does anyone have any recommendations for 10m mobile antennas?
I am interested in mobile operation with a radio of <100w and
am I'm looking for either plans for a 10 m antenna or
recommendations for a commercial product.
Thanks & 73,
John, kc2du, [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:19 1996
From: Kent Winrich <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Kiwa Loop Wanted
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 12:57:51 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am looking for a Kiwa MW loop for my BCB Dx adventures.  Anyone out
there have one to part with??

Kent Winrich, NI9U
Waukesha, WI


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:20 1996
From: Zack Lau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Optimum VHF QTH
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 13:29:27 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gd87t$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Brad Charbonneau) writes:
 >Hi there,
>I am interested in setting up a nice VHF station up in Vermont
>I am especially interested in DX on these bands, and taking
> advantage of band openings.  In order to do this, is a large
> hill the optimum location? (Edited by ZL)

For long paths, the critical factor is your horizon angle--how
low in the sky can you see stars from the antenna location in
the important directions?

Obviously, a large hill helps by reducing the number of obstructions
(taller hills) but you run into several problems as you go up higher.

1) How to you intend to get there?  Will the winter access problems
        hurt or help operating time?

2) My experience is that the higher the hill, the worse the weather.
        I wouldn't count on the typical stacked array surviving even a
        weekend on Mt Washington. (100 mph+ winds every month)

3) Increased interference from LOS stations.  You can't work DX you
        can't hear.  Contest operating is different in the USA--you
        want to maximize the LOS paths, so a good contest site isn't
        necessarily the best DX site.

OTOH, the higher elevations seem to do OK during recent tropo openings I'm
familiar with---people have worked hundreds of miles on 10 GHz with under
100 mW from Mt Washington.

Zack KH6CP/1


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:22 1996
From: Edward Lawrence <eal>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR=3:1  How do I lower it?
Date: 23 Feb 1996 17:12:23 GMT
Message-ID: <4gkshn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>I have a small 6m SQLOOP antenna and my meter says I have a 3:1 SWR.
>What can I do to lower the SWR?
If this is similar to the old SQALOW antenns, that is to say, a diploe bent in
to a square configuration, I might be able to help.
        1. Disconnect the feedline.
        2. Use a grid Dip meter (GDO)to set the size of the Antenna to the freq.
         of cinterest.  Use your 6 mtr receiver to listen for the 'blip' as you
         tune the GDO to locate the dip that indicates the resonance.
        3. Remember to couple the GDO as loosely as possible for the final
           size adjustments.
        4. Now connect the feedline with an SWR Bridge at tha antenna. Adjust
           the matching system for lowest SWR at the freq. of interest.

This worked for me in the '60's, should work for you now.  WA5SWD



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:23 1996
From: Jeff DePolo WN3A <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 18:26:23 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gkif3$[e-mail]>
To: robbin decker <[e-mail]>

robbin decker wrote:
>
> Jeff DePolo WN3A <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> My thoughts are that it has always been exceedingly difficult to
> properly configue the ants to accept coaxial connecting devices,
> and in order to do so the proper surgical equipment is very difficult
> to obtain without a certificate of authority from the State Board of
> Entomology, although the policy probably varies from State to State.
> It is my understanding that there is a degree of inductance variance
> between different factions of Army ants, the Clintonian variety being
> particularly difficult to induct. The carpenter would afford the
> largest hardware interface but could be detrimental to wood burning
> test equipment. A solid warning is that any such tests should be done
> in strict secrecy as the possibility of disruption by factions of
> PETA, Greenpeace, ASPCA, Handgun Control International, and other
> organizations dedicated to prevent such unscrupulous activities
> exists. Measuring the loss of RF power when using an ant tuner, not to
> mention the mere act of tuning an ant to begin with,  would surely
> disrupt the morning tofu and granola indulgences of the membership.

You're wrong, I didn't write that.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-J
eff DePolo  WN3A            Twisted Pair: H:610-337-7383 W:215-387-3059 x300
[e-mail]  RF: 442.1 442.2 442.4 443.45 443.8 444.15 linked
Claim to Fame:  I got the 1st speeding ticket on the information superhighway


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 18:33:42 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4gkmc1$[e-mail]>

In article <4gkmc1$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writ
es:
>From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
>Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
>Date: 23 Feb 1996 10:26:57 -0500

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Wes
>Stewart) writes:
[snip]
>> Without more specificity as to the
>>configuration of the tuner one cannot justify statements such as these.
 >>
>>[snip]

>Hi Wes, I disagree with you on something (finally, it took years!). ;-)

Easy now...:-)

>We can make a general statement that applies to traditional T net tuners
>on low frequencies (as I did). The main limitation in the efficiency is a
>lack of sufficent output C range (too little C) for matching low Z loads.
>The lack of sufficent C causes the tuner to operate at higher Q than
>necessary. The voltages and currents in the tuner components become MUCH
>higher than necessary for a given to match the load, and so do losses.

True but I wasn't limiting my statement to just tee networks. We weren't
thinking alike this time.

>This condition is aggrivated by a capacitive load. Such a load requires
>more output C than a resistive load, and there allready is a shrt fall!
>The operating Q and losses are forced even higher by this condition!

>In the practical world of traditional low band T network tuners efficiency
>is always lowest with low  Z capacitive loads.

>Do a spead sheet on a T network, and you'll see what I mean. (Unless a
>tuner with a LCL T or huge capacitors is assumed!)

Ah Ha... now you're seeing it my way <g>.

>73 Tom

73, Wes



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 18:42:54 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry Himes) writes
:
>From: [e-mail] (Barry Himes)
>Subject: shuttle communication on 2 meter
>Date: 23 Feb 96 22:28:20 -0800

>I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
>to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
>built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.

>Any ideas?
>Barry Himes KF6AZU


As one of only about 350 hams who contacted the first shuttle op, W5LFL, I
suggest that you forget trying with an HT. There will be hundreds of people
calling and on FM, it's the big guy that captures the receiver. I recommend
1500W and 20 dB of antenna gain. Worked for me:-)

73, Wes -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dana Myers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 23 Feb 1996 18:44:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4gl1ul$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>,
Jeff DePolo WN3A  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>I would think a calorimetric measurement would provide more accurate
>results, although the technique for doing such that doesn't
>require submersion may not be all that easy to do at home.

Hey, I was gonna post this, but I couldn't think of a suitable
liquid to submerse the tuner in.

>I would imagine that it would be more difficult to make and use
>an air-based calorimeter, especially one that would yield results
>as accurate as a submersion-based one.  Maybe the tuner could be
>placed in a thermally-conductive, liquid-tight container and
>then submerged?  Anyone with more knowledge on the subject care to
>comment?

The thermal latency resulting from "insulating" the tuner in another
container would complicate taking the reading.  I'd be more interested
in finding a suitable dielectric liquid.

;-)

--
 * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD#: j | Views expressed here are      *
 * [phone]               | mine and do not necessarily   *
 * [e-mail]      | reflect those of my employer  *


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:27 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Frank Scutch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mounting height of R5?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 20:18:10 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Hi fellas:

I just picked up an R5 to play with and initially have it mounted on a
10 ft mast in my back yard.  I think it works fine considering it's
size.  I have noticed that it doesn't really perform any better than
some of the wire arrays I'm already using in the yard.

Question:  Would the antenna perform any differently at maybe 30 or 40
feet than it does at 10 ft?  Before I go through the trouble of putting
it up higher... can someone tell me if will even matter?  Seems I
remember a post where someone mentioned that there is no diffence in
performance. I'm not looking for a beam's performance out of a vertical
but just want to know if it's worth it.  Thanks.

Frank, WB4AYJ




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:28 1996
From: [e-mail] (William Pulvermacher)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Apartment Antenna
Date: 23 Feb 1996 20:58:06 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gl9ou$[e-mail]>

Anyone know of a reliable antenna to be used in an apartment.
Preferrably something that I dont have to sneek into the attic for.  I
live on the second floor and have a balcony outside.  I don't want to
kill the nieghbors either.  It's a stock Galaxy DX88HL.  Mostly used on
11m.

Thanks      Snoshu. . .



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ranson J. Pelt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Spacing between stacked yagis
Date: 24 Feb 1996 03:30:30 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gd3u1$[e-mail]>

In article <4gd3u1$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(WB7ASR) wrote:

> Im making plans on installing a Cushcraft A3 3-element 20/15/10 meter
> yagi on the same mast with a homebrew 2-element 12/17 meter yagi.
>
> What minimum spacing is required between the two yagis to pervent
> interaction?
>
> Tom...

I have a 10/12/17 Yagi combination stacked over a 20/15 yagi about 5 or 6
feet- never had any problems

--
Ranson Pelt
[e-mail]
nz4i


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: 24 Feb 1996 04:35:38 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gm4iq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Barry Himes) wrote:

> I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
> to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
> built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.

I'm not sure I should ask, but why an HT?  A very directional antenna
with respect to a long boom yagi would only be either a *very* large
dish (as dishes aren't very effective at 2 meters) or an array of
yagis.  8 long boom yagis and an HT might do the job, but a much cheaper
alternative would be a 10-25 watt rig into a  150-300 watt amplifier
and a single OSCAR class steerable antenna.  The cost and hassle
of making a "more focused" antenna system than a long yagi
is considerable.  But the flip side is that if you add an amp and an
all mode rig, you'd be able to work moon bounce!  :-)

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Mitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 24 Feb 1996 05:55:21 GMT
Message-ID: <4gm989$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>>Question:  Would the antenna perform any differently at maybe 30 or 40
>feet than it does at 10 ft?  Before I go through the trouble of putting
>it up higher... can someone tell me if will even matter?  Seems I
>remember a post where someone mentioned that there is no diffence in
>performance. I'm not looking for a beam's performance out of a vertical
>but just want to know if it's worth it.  Thanks.
>
I always used my R5 on a chimney mount with a 10 foot mast, raising it to
about 50 feet above the ground.,.

Works better than near the ground, I'd say, altho never actually tested
it on the ground.

Good Luck,
John



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:31 1996
From: Jeff <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ANTENNA WANTED
Date: 24 Feb 1996 06:42:43 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gmc13$[e-mail]>

I HAVE A FRIEND WHO IS LOOKING FOR A CUSHCRAFT A3S OR SIMILAR
ANTENNA .  THANKS..


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:33 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 10:54:30 GMT

In article <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
writes:
>Gary's right -- I shouldn't have dismissed the directional wattmeter out of
>hand.
>
>Using the impedances I snatched from the air:
>
>2000 - j600 is an SWR of 43.6 in a 50 ohm system. This probably isn't
>an unreasonably high SWR to see with a multi-band antenna fed with
>ladder or open wire line. With 100 watts of power, the trusty Bird should
>read a forward power of 1141 watts and reverse power of 1041 watts. It
>might be possible to resolve the difference well enough to get an idea of
>the actual power being transmitted.

Yeah, that's about a 10% difference in reading. Now a Bird is only
rated for 3% of full scale accuracy, but we aren't concerned about
that here. That will cancel out when we subtract the relative readings.
In this case, depending on the slug chosen, we should be able to
resolve down to  between 3% to 6% of true power out (the real limitation
being how well we can interpolate the meter scale, which we *could*
expand if we wanted to take the trouble). If the tuner has less loss
than that, we won't be able to resolve it, IE if tuner loss is less
than 0.27 db, we won't be able to see it on the Bird. I don't think
we'd care too much about that anyway.

However, the *coax* tuner that started this thread wouldn't be used
with that high a VSWR anyway. Line losses, and even the possibility
of flashover, would limit the impedances we'd try to tune with a
coax tuner to a range that produced VSWRs more on the order of 10:1
or less. For that sort of measurement, the Bird is just fine.

For a balanced tuner, we'd want to use hot wire ammeters, and a RF
voltmeter that we could move along the line, to determine power out.
The RF voltmeter would let us directly determine VSWR and give us
a direct tuner output voltage reading. Combined with the RF current
readings of the hot wire ammeters (one in each leg) we could then
determine power out by cranking the formulas.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:34 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: QST Auto Tuner, balun losses, and accurate antenna measurements
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4f0g0n$[e-mail]> <287cc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4g26q0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 11:28:41 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James
 R. Duffey) writes:
>This thread on the QST auto tuner and losses in the tuner/balun system has
>gone on too long for me to ignore. I cannot resist commenting on several
>points;
>
>1. The place for a balun with a multiple band ladder line fed antenna is
>between the tuner and the transmitter, not between the tuner and the antenna.

>The auto tuner described in the QST article will work fine in this fashion.
>Connect the ladder line to the tuner, don't ground the tuner, and feed the
>tuner from the transmitter through a 1:1 transmission line balun. This
>configuration should result in low losses if the tuner is not grounded
>and kept at least 6 inches or so from ground. A manual tuner will
>work fine in this configuration as well.

While a manual tuner might work fine in this configuration (I'd be
careful making tuning adjustments under power), the QST autotuner
would not be a happy camper used this way. In the first place, it
has power and control cabling that would have to be carefully RF
isolated. But more importantly it is a simple L network and would
be asymmetrically driving the two legs of the balanced line. Common
mode rejection would be severely compromised.


>3. The high radiation resistances and impedances which give the most
>problems in matching can be significantly reduced by the paralleling
>of wires in the antenna. Thus instead of a single 14 gauge wire for
>each leg, use two such wires spaced a foot or so apart. These wires
>should be bonded together electrically at the feed point, at the end
>points, and at points between that are less than a half wavelength
>on the highest frequency to be used, or 15 feet or so apart for 10 M.
>this will prevent circulating currents.
>
>More improvement can be obtained by using a third wire, but you begin
>to get into the point of diminishing returns, that is, it is harder to
>keep the antenna in the air,and teh improvement in going from 2 wires
>to 3 is less than going from 1 wire to 2. The addition of the extra wire
>should reduce the radiation resistance by approximately a factor 4.
>This should increase the bandwidth and the efficiency of the antenna,
>particualrly at low frequencies and low antenna heights.

What you've described is a "fat" or caged dipole. This is an old
and well established way of broadening the VSWR curve of a dipole.
However, I don't understand how this gives you a reduction in radiation
resistance by a factor of 4. Please explain.

Also, since Q=X/R, a reduction in radiation resistance should result in
higher Q and narrower bandwidth (and lower efficiency since loss resistances
now tend to dominate). That's what we see in other antennas with low radiation

resistance, such as HF whips on autos. Is the relationship between radiation
resistance, efficiency, and Q somehow different for a fat dipole?

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:36 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Help to receive LA 90.7FM in SD
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4genki$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 11:48:52 GMT

In article <4genki$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jafinlay) writ
es:
>I used to live in LA and enjoyed listening to KPFK 90.7 FM.  I moved to
>San Diego and I can get KPFK in my car pretty well around town, esp. if I
>head North, but I can't get it at all in my condo.  I have tried several
>power FM antennas I bought at radio shack but none work on my stereo in my
>home.  Does anyone have any ideas of what kind of anntenna I can install
>in my condo in order to get this station?  It is pretty strong but I think
>it is getting lost in all the others.

Your auto setup has two very important advantages. First the antenna
is *outside*, and second the auto radio has better RF sensitivity
and better selectivity than most home tuners.

These two factors should give you an idea what you need to do. First
you need to locate the FM antenna *outside*, as high and in the clear
as possible. A directional antenna like a yagi would be best, but any
outside antenna is going to work better than anything you have inside.

Second, you may need to use a preamp/preselector in front of the house
radio in order to gain the sensitivity and selectivity missing from
home units. This is a tricky balancing act, and won't be met by something
you find at Radio Shack. The preamp needs to be able to resist strong
adjacent channel signals, hence the preselector part. You may have to
build this to get exactly what you need.

Another option, that I've used frequently in this sort of situation,
is to simply go to the junkyard and get a good Delco auto radio, bring
it back and use it in the house powered by a 12 volt supply. It already
has the good features built in that you need. Just hook it to an outside
antenna and you'll have reception at least as good as you get in the car.
Now don't go to Radio Shack for the auto radio, they suck, get a good
OEM radio like the Delco from the junkyard. It'll be cheaper, and work
better too.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:37 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gcs28$[e-mail]> <4gd2b8$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 12:02:41 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
 writes:
>Steve Ellington <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>Could the bottom line here be:
>>
>>You are better off with an antenna that requires no tuner  i.e.
>>parallel dipoles, seperate antennas that require no matching etc.
>
>Hi Steve, IMO the bottom line is whatever your antenna configuration,
>achieve a Z0-match before the balun or tuner. If no reflections are
>allowed to reach the balun or tuner and the transmission line is low
>loss, there is nowhere else for the power to go except to be radiated.

Well, Cecil, that does appear to be a tautology. If you have a Zo match,
you don't *need* the tuner. But that seems to beg the question, what *is*
achieving that Zo match if it isn't a tuner? Just because you distribute
its parts in a different location, is it not doing the same function
as a traditional tuner?

Whether you match at the antenna, at the transmitter, or at some point
or points in between, aren't you doing conceptually the same thing?
Which end of the feedline you match wouldn't seem to matter except in
so far as the line may show greater losses with high VSWR, but that
isn't a great concern with balanced open wire feeders, or in so far
as the transmission line transformer action of the feedline may
present you with a more convienent impedance to match at one end
rather than the other (that can make a difference, but can be dealt
with by adjusting feed line length).

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:39 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 12:35:47 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry Himes) writes
:
>I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
>to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
>built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.
>
>Any ideas?

To work the Shuttle or Mir, you need a 2 meter antenna. About
the only thing with a tighter pattern than a yagi on 2 meters
is going to be a *huge* parabolic dish. OTOH, Shuttle and Mir
move *fast* across the sky, an antenna with too small a beamwidth
is a tracking nightmare. Even a KLM-22C is approaching the limit
of practicality for use with the Shuttle or Mir, computer driven
tracking is almost a must. If you're going to hand track, something
with about 10 elements is probably near ideal. Neither Shuttle nor
Mir are weak signal targets, so huge amounts of antenna gain aren't
necessary. Circular polarization is a big help, however. (CP dramatically
reduces spin modulation of the signal.)

If I were building an antenna specially for Shuttle and Mir, I'd
use a 5 element long boom design with cross elements staggered a
quarterwave up the boom for circular polarization (yielding a total
of 10 elements in a 6 element length). That would be manageable
with hand steering, and should offer enough gain to boost the
HT signal to respectable level.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:39 1996
From: AC6V <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 24 Feb 1996 14:13:18 GMT
Message-ID: <4gn6du$[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]>

Sorry your R5 doesn't perform well --- mine does (qsl's not withstanding)

73 Rod

--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:41 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gayle Lawson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna location program
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 14:50:34 GMT
Message-ID: <4gn8pl$[e-mail]>
References: <4ge22m$4j5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

Pierre-Andre Rovelli <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Steve Beyers wrote:
>>
>> I recently read an article about a computer program that finds the
>> best location for an antenna, taking into account the topography
>> of the potential locations, and antenna parameters.  The trouble
>> is, I can't remember where I read it.  Can anybody help?  Thanks.
>>
>>                                Steve W9HJW
>>
>> --
>> Steve Beyers W9HJWDear Steve,
>please contact N6BV from ARRL technical staff (ANTENNA BOOK editor)
>73 de HB9FMN
>Pierre-AndrΘ [e-mail]

Steve:

The software that Pierre is talking about was discussed in QEX.  It
called Yagi Terain Analysis with Diffraction.  I used it and it gave
some very interesting results.  It's available from the ARRL BBS or on
the internet @ ftp.cs.buffalo.edu. and is located in the PUB.HAM-RADIO
/QEX directory.  Have fun.

Gayle W0FO
 Gayle Lawson W0FO




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:42 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where to buy a tower?
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 17:06:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4gnd0p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I am looking to install a 40-60' tower in my back yard and want to
know where to buy a used one inexpensively.  I am also interested in
building one if there are plans available.   Appreciate any ideas.



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:43 1996
From: Gary Davidson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 01:29:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4goe25$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

With all the fuss over technical aspects of power loss thru an antenna
tuner (FEEDLINE TUNER!), couldn't we just sidestep all the BS by just
stating that a well designed tuner, operating properly, will consume
*NEGLIGIBLE* power. so little as to be difficult to measure, and
IMPOSSIBLE to detect at the receiving end?

SEE, that wasn't hard...

--
Gary... KJ6Q... I am the NRA | Annoy a Liberal - say NO to gun control!
============================ | Annoy a Democrat - say BYE BYE CLINTON!
"Did you come here to *LEARN*|==================================
or to nose around, make rude | "It's *EASY* to be a liberal, it's
noises & provide proof our   | OTHER people's money you are giving
educational system stinks?"  | away! (or living off of!)




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:44 1996
From: AC6V <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 14:41:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4gpsfc$[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]> <4gn6du$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Steve. I have read most of your recent posts and replies and like your
style and objective approach, very much enjoy your posts and replies.

RE: Data and comparisons --- right on -- only way to compare em for sure.

Here in San Diego, we have had several Hams who did just that -- and the
R5 holds up very well. I have CC&R's so can't put anything above the roof
line so haven't personnally made comparisons.

I don't collect data, however, just QSL's from the aforementioned and tis
good enough for me.

Maybe its like analyzing the specs on a Corvette and then driving one!!

73
Keep up the excellent posts
Rod


--
*****************************************************************
Hark! I Have Hurled My Words To The Far Reaches Of The Earth!
What King Of Old Could Do Thus ?  --- AC6V
*****************************************************************
A Man May Know Of The World Without Leaving The Shelter Of His
Own Home!
Loa-Tsze
*****************************************************************




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Rich Mulvey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 15:40:39 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gm640$[e-mail]> <4gmfu2$[e-mail]> <4gn6du$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

On Sun, 25 Feb 1996 13:23:30 GMT, Steve Ellington <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Dont' take this wrong but I want to make a very clear statement here.
>
>Measuring antenna performance by the number of dx stations worked and their
>location means absolutely NOTHING.
>
>Remember the old Gotham Vertical advertisements from the 60's?
>
>"I worked the world with my Gotham Vertical"!!!
>
>THIS MEANS NOTHING. Period.......
>
>Only direct comparison test, A-B switching done several times or field
>strength measurements give any meaningful data.
>

   Well, I have to disagree.  :-)

   While field-strength measurements are useful indicators, the end result
that most amateurs are looking for is "can I make contacts?"  If the
antenna they use permits them to do so, then I could consider the
antenna to be effective, even if it just happens to be the gutters
on the house.  :-)

- Rich

---
Rich Mulvey, aa2ys                                        Rochester, NY   USA
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
aa2ys@wb2psi.#wny.ny.us



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:46 1996
From: [e-mail] (David de Schweinitz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why free space path loss?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 16:23:04 GMT
Message-ID: <4gq2d8$[e-mail]>
References: <4g8n5l$[e-mail]>


: >Please excuse me fellow radio hams, but can I ask a very stupid
: >question ?

: >Why is the free space path loss different for different frequencies
: >Thus every time you double the frequency the pathloss increase by
: >6dB. I know what the mathematical formulae say but can somebody
: >just give a plain gutfeel common sense answer for this dummy ?

If you express the TX and RX antenna gain in effective aperture, the path
loss is independant of frequency.  For a link consisting of two horns or
dishes or arrays with effective apertures of many square wavelengths
(roughly proportional to their physical apertures), the link transmission
loss is flat with frequency.  Links involving antennas like dipoles vary
with frequency because the effective aperture of these antenna types
varies with frequency.  "Antennas" by Kraus has a very good discussion of
effective aperture in Ch. 1 or 2.

                        Dave






From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:47 1996
From: [e-mail] (JCHol)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Carolina Windom
Date: 25 Feb 1996 18:24:41 -0500
Message-ID: <4gqr3p$[e-mail]>
References: <4fn6p6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JCHol)

I have the 80 meter version installed as a flat top in the clear at 40 ft.
 It works very well on 80 and well on the other bands. I would say it is
better than the G5RV's I have had but have not tried one in the same
location, so can't be certain.  It is a very good "one solution" antenna.
It was equal to my 80 meter loop skywire and takes up less space.

73 de John, WA5TWL


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (AC6V)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Test (No need to Read)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 20:11:18 GMT
Message-ID: <4gqfot$[e-mail]>

V21AS - Buro: Not Active - Source: unknown - Since: Wed Aug 8 17:18:06
1990
JOSPEH HADEED
BOX 750, ANTIGUA


These can be found at the following WWW page

http://promet12.cineca.it/htlzh/search.html



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:49 1996
From: Jeff <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Design Software
Date: 25 Feb 1996 20:28:35 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gqgpj$[e-mail]>

Can anyone tell me if there are evaluation or demo versions
of antenna design software available on the internet ?
I want to build a antenna and would like a program to
consult with . THANKS             Jeff    VE7 GMX


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (Don Stoner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Rotator
Date: 25 Feb 1996 21:15:05 GMT
Message-ID: <4gqjgp$[e-mail]>
References: <4go8mc$[e-mail]> <4gor6j$[e-mail]>

In article <4gor6j$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>In article <4go8mc$[e-mail]>, Don Stoner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I hope to put up a 7-30 MHz log periodic antenna. I'd like recommendations o
n
a
>>suitable rotator. Cost not important but am interested in strength of castin
g
>>because of high windloading. Appreciate ur comments and suggestions. 73 W6TN
S
>>
>
>Don, is THIS the antenna you're fighting the condo association over? :-)
>
>
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>Daniel Senie                 Internet:     [e-mail],
>Daniel Senie Consulting                    [e-mail]
>http://www.senie.com         Packet Radio: [e-mail]


I WISH! No, my fight is over a simple longwire antenna. I'm on the air with it

and association has not been able to force me to take it down. But you know th
e
problems associated with using a longwire on, say, 20 meters and trying to wor
k
DX. I am investigating the possiblity of a remote station using an AEA HAMLINK
.
Appreciate ur interest! 73 Don, W6TNS



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 25 Feb 1996 22:06:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4gqmi2$[e-mail]>


        The pattern of a vertical half wave antenna depends on its
height abobve ground.  See ARRL Antenna Book chapter 3 Fig 15 on
page 3-10 of the 16th edition.
        As the height is increased higher angle lobes appear.  These
may imporove short skip signals and make the added height desirable
but the power has to come out of the lower angle lobe.  The nulls
in the pattern of an elevated antenna might also make sinals near
these wave angles very fade suseptable.

Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:51 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: monoband/triband separation ???
Date: 25 Feb 1996 23:17:47 GMT
Message-ID: <4gqqmr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Hello....
I tried the same thing a few years ago....I had the mono-bander on top at firs
t...
it worked and worked well.....after a bit of wind I lost a mast, when I put
things back up the tri-bander was on top...
I noticed a difference in receive...It seemed the mono-bander was shadowing th
e
tri-bander....
Plus it was a lot easier to put up that way.
Good Luck
Chet KA3NUM


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:53 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Bradley/KK5MH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Slide Rule Wanted
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 03:40:58 GMT
Message-ID: <4gra3c$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4ften0$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (ted kell) wrote:


>Well, I have a K&E LOg-Log Decitrig that I got in highschool in the late
>50's, and no you can't have it.  :)

>I would like to get one of those demonstator jobs, the ones that hung over
>the blackboard and were about 10 feet long.

>I still drag my rule out now and then, much to the kids amazement.  They
>cannot even begin to understand how I get answers out of it.

>Ted

Well, I have one of those demonstrator jobs, the ones that hung over
the blackboard and ... :) No, you can't have it!  It's actually about
8 feet long and is labeled on the back with "Property of the Real Math
Department".  Probably sold by UT-Austin in a suplus auction.

My wife found it at an antique store and bought it for my birthday
last year.  My K&E is safely tucked away as well.

73,
John



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:53 1996
From: Jesse Touhey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Test (do not read)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 11:47:18 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Test


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:54 1996
From: [e-mail] (Terry Burge)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What are the optimum heights for Yagi ant's for 40,20,15,&10 mtrs?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 16:32:02 -0800
Message-ID: <4gtje2$[e-mail]>
References: <4gd7th$[e-mail]> <4gi54i$[e-mail]>

In article <4gi54i$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In <4gd7th$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brad Charbonnea
u) writes:
>>      40 mtr 3 or 4 ele at  = 115ft
        Good average height for a 40 meter beam. 40 meters is a strange
        band and I suspect different heights have different advantages
        to different areas of the world.
>>      20 mtr long boom 4 or 5 el = 100ft
        Excellent height for 20 meters. Should work very well. Much
        higher probably won't buy you a whole lot.
>>      15 mtr 6 ele = 100ft
        Will work but why so high? A wavelength is about 45 feet and
        if you get much over that without stacking and phasing multiple
        beams I don't see that it buys you a whole lot. 60 feet would do
        very well.
>>      10 mtr 6 ele = 110ft
        Not a good idea funny as it may sound. I found this out running
        from W7NI's place during CQWWPHN a few years back. Having a 10
        meter beam at 45-55 feet is about optimum for 'most' contacts.
        We also had one at 110 feet about and I just didn't use it cause
        everyone was stronger on the beam at 45 feet, even into Africa.
        All a matter of takeoff angel.
>>
>>My goal is to get an optimum setup for DX.  If anyone could tell me what the
y think of these proposed heights, I'd really appreciate any info I could get.
  Thanks in advance!
>>                                 Brad NZ1Y

        Check out the plots for horizontal dipoles at different heights
in the ARRL Antenna Handbook. You will find that with a takeoff angel of
around 8-15 degrees is best for working DX. This means an antenna of about
7/8 to 1 or 1.25 wavelengths (best I recall from memory). I remember thinking
that 7/8 wavelength was very good.
        When you stack and phase beams you can improve it some but is it
worth it for all the trouble?

Terry
KI7M



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:56 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: 9:1 Baluns
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4gspst$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 20:29:18 GMT

Try Amidon Associates. I don't have their number handy but they advertise
in QST every month.


--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:57 1996
From: [e-mail] (Thomas M. Alldread)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need Info: Trylon Tower.....?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 20:36:38 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4givpl$[e-mail]>

On 22 Feb 1996 18:55:33 -0500, [e-mail] (RICKCRIDER) wrote:

>Seeking information on a tower that has been donated to us, to be
>dissassembled and removed.   Made by Trylon Mfg. Co.,  possibly from
>Ontario/Canada......
>
>It is freestanding,  triangular, 44" leg to leg at base.   Nine eight foot
>sections.   Top section is missing.   Base buried in slab.  Will have to
>cut at base.
>
>Trylon still in business?   Any U.S. distributors?   Top section still
>available?  Currently mounted in a 5 1/2 foot square concrete base.....any
>idea how deep the slab would need to be?
>
>Any contact information will be greatly appreciated.   Thanks.
>
>Rick Crider
>KD4FXA
>UCARS (Union County Amateur Radio Society)
><[e-mail]>
>[phone]
Greetings Rick:

        I have been using a Trylon tower for the last 8 years. A
friend of mine just bought one last year so I presume Trylon is still
in business. I have a brochure titled "TRYLON ABC TOWERS" which
describes their tower wind load capacity and base requirements. Their
address on the brochure I have (which is at least 8 years old) was
given as follows:

TRYLON MANUFACTURING CO. LTD.
P.O. BOX 186
ELMIRA, ONTARIO, CANADA
N3B-2Z6
TEL [phone]

         I suggest you contact them to obtain a copy of their current
brochure information. The brochure I have is quite informative as it
provides their tower wind load capacities for various heights for wind
loads of 70, 85 and 100 MPH.

        Good luck and 73 de VE7TMA


E-mail: [e-mail]
packet: VE7TMA@VE7KGW.#NVI.BC.CAN.NA


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Help on finding/creating custom? mobile antenna.
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:19:29 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtb4g$[e-mail]>
References: <4ga39g$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Mike) wrote:

>I'm looking to add a multi-band scanner antenna (30Mhz - 900Mhz) to my car
>(station wagon with LOTS of ground-plane area!!).

>The thing I would like to accomplish is to keep it under 24" in length so I
>don't destroy my new garage doors every time I pull the car in.  I know this
>may be a dumb reason to some of you, but the less painting I have to do, the
>better :-)

>I'm willing to try and experiment with making one or if you know of one that
>already exists, great.

>Any help is greatly appreciated.  Thanks.  (e-mail is appreciated too).



>Mike


Hi Mike

I used to have an old UPS truck with the fiberglass top and built an
antenna that tuned from about 20 MHz all the way up to about 1500 MHz,
just guessing at the numbers, more likely a little less, let's say 30
MHz up to 1200 MHz to be on the safe side.

The antenna was very very simple and included it's own ground plane,
out of necessity to the fiberglass top of the truck, but assume it
would work on a metal vehicle as well since the ground plane was to
shield.

The antenna consists primarily of two metal disks, the bottom disk is
32 inches in diameter and the top disk is 22-3/4 inches in diameter.
The space between the bottom disk and top disk is exactly 5/8 inch.

The coax is connected to the very center of each disk, center
conductor to the top disk and shield to the bottom disk.

I used 1/4 inch welded wire fabric for construction, however, solid
aluminum or even wire to a loop frame would work as well.

The two plates do not connect electrically, they are separated by
insulators, either one in the center on rigid material or around the
perimiter on flimsy material.  I used nylon bolts with pieces of 3/8
diameter PVC tube for the insulators between the plates.

This antenna cannot be used for transmission purposes as constructed,
however a similar version using a 32 inch diameter by 32 inch high
cone measured on the hypontenous as the bottom plate (now cone) will
work fine on both 2 meters and 440 with an SWR under 1.8 - 1

Again, the cone can be constructed of welded wire fabric, solid
aluminum or even wire to a formed ring.

TTUL
Gary





From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:00:59 1996
From: bio2.com (David P. van De Kerk, KE6GXD)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Why long wire TVI
Date: 27 Feb 1996 01:01:15 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtl4r$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Simple question: why do long wire antennas cause more TVI than most
other types of antennas?

All responses appreciated.  Correct answers appreciated even
more.

[e-mail].


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:01 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Information For C.B. Radio
Date: 27 Feb 1996 01:30:30 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtmrm$[e-mail]>
References: <4gsr1m$[e-mail]>

>   [e-mail] writes:
>  The simplest antenna might be a half-wave dipole.
>  I'm not sure what frequency the CB band is, but
>  the formula is :
>  the length of wire in feet = 468/(the frequency in Mhz)
>  For the CB band that might be:
>  18 feet = 468/26.0 Mhz.
>
>  Take this 18 feet of wire and cut it in half.  Attach (solder is best)
>  one end to the center feed point and attach the other
>  9 foot wire to the ground feed.  Then connect the antenna
>  feed line to you CB radio.  Place the 18 foot antenna as high
>  up as you can get it.  The higher the better, but at least, 9 feet
>  up.
>
>  If this confussing, go to the library and check out an
>  antenna book, "The ARRL Antenna Book" is best, and look
>  up DIPLOES.
>
>  Good luck and don"t be put off by some of the idiot answers.
>
>
>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  Sid George, CPA     [e-mail]
>  ._  _...  .....  _.._  .._
>  http://www.hal-pc.org/~sid
>  -------------------------------------
>
>
>>>>
That should be - look up DIPOLES.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sid George, CPA     [e-mail]
._  _...  .....  _.._  .._
http://www.hal-pc.org/~sid
-------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:02 1996
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 27 Feb 1996 11:37:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4guqea$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gstq5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

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

>1.  Tune a tuner to its operating point to match a tranmitter to an
>antenna.
>2.  Then, disconnect the tuner and measure its complex input impedance
>with its output open.

Richard,

It is easy to show that your method does not work:
Imagine someone had incorporated (without your knowledge) a resistor
in your tuner just before the output connector in series with the
coax inner, you would not detect its losses, because it carries no current
when the output is open circuit.

The way around is to measure all four scattering parameters, if you want a
result more accurate than what can be got from a reflectometer.

73, Moritz DL5UH


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:03 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Eric Cosens)
Subject: Good Mobile Antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 12:51:51 GMT

I'm finally ready to get a 2m mobile rig in my car, but what's the antenna
to get.  I'd like to get a high quality one; "professional" quality if you
will.
How does the voice of experience speak on:

Larson
Cushcraft
Comet
etc?

Is any mfg. regarded as producing a superior product?

I'd sure appreciate some advice.  It'd help me avoid an expensive mistake.

Regards,
Eric
'73


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:04 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: [Q] Frequency of Jupitor emissions
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 96 13:51:35 PDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


Hi All:

Anyone know what frequence emissions from Jupitor may
be picked up on. Also, is there equipment that can
be bought or built cheaply to do such. As I recall I thought
I saw mentioned in a trade rag 18Mhz - 22Mhz...

Thanks,

Gary-



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:05 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (David Stockton)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 17:22:20 GMT
References: <4gstq5$[e-mail]>

Roy Lewallen ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>,
:    [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

: >For a balanced tuner, we'd want to use hot wire ammeters, and a RF
: >voltmeter that we could move along the line, to determine power out.


: It's not obvious to me how this would work. Wouldn't we have to know the
: phase angle between the voltage and current to determine the power?
: Roy Lewallen, W7EL


   Hmm, well, if he could slide the ammeters AND the voltmeter along the
line and find the positions of the respective maxima, and know the length
to the load end as well, he can get the velocity factor from the distance
between current and voltage maxima, then get the reflection phase shift
from the distance between a maximimum and the end.

   It could be done, but I can't imagine anyone would want to do it this
way.

   I think I'd build myself a vector voltmeter before I got desperate
enough to use lecher lines on a regular basis



     Cheers
            David


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:07 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 27 Feb 1996 17:22:38 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gveku$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4goe25$[e-mail]>

Gary Davidson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>With all the fuss over technical aspects of power loss thru an antenna
>tuner (FEEDLINE TUNER!), couldn't we just sidestep all the BS by just
>stating that a well designed tuner, operating properly, will consume
>*NEGLIGIBLE* power. so little as to be difficult to measure, and
>IMPOSSIBLE to detect at the receiving end?

Hi Gary, if well designed *balanced* tuners were readily available, this
thread would probably be moot. How many hams do you think use the
following configuration?

Xmtr---unbalanced----balun----ladder-line----non-resonant length
       tuner                                 balanced antenna

This is the configuration some of us are worried about. IMO the
tuner function should be moved to the ladder-line side of the
balun implying balanced tuning techniques including balanced tuners,
stubs, and/or parallel or series reactances.

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




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:08 1996
From: [e-mail] (Maurice Andries)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 17:31:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4gvjcr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Wes Stewart) wrote:


>>I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
>>to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
>>built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.

>>Barry Himes KF6AZU


>As one of only about 350 hams who contacted the first shuttle op, W5LFL, I
>suggest that you forget trying with an HT. There will be hundreds of people
>calling and on FM, it's the big guy that captures the receiver. I recommend
>1500W and 20 dB of antenna gain. Worked for me:-)

>73, Wes -- N7WS

Right, go for the power..... this is ridicoulous. It's because of 'big
guns' that no one else gets a chance. I worked almost all shuttles in
packet for the last 2,5 years and some in fone with 8 (yes eight)
watts on a dualband colinear COMET antenna with 6dB gain. The only
thing you achieve with high power is 'hogging' the frequency.

Don't forget that the shuttle itself only uses a 2 watt transmitter
and omnidirectonal antenna.. they are ALWAYS well over S9 here.




 bye, Maurice ([e-mail])

PGP key on request



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:09 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Tom Skelton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (skeltt)
References: <4grmpn$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 17:49:22 GMT


>==========Joe Fitter  BV/N0IAT, 2/25/96==========
>
>[e-mail] (Steve Ellington) wrote:
>>Dont' take this wrong but I want to make a very clear statement here.
>>
>>Measuring antenna performance by the number of dx stations
>worked and >their location means absolutely NOTHING.
>>Only direct comparison test, A-B switching done several times or field
>>strength measurements give any meaningful data.
>>
>>Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky
>
>
>I disagree in-part.  While field-strenght indications may be useful
>to determine the amount of RF leaving the antenna, it alone tells little
>about the angle of maximum radiation.  Angle of radiation is
>important when "working DX".   I'd rather have an antenna of 50%
>efficiency optimized for maximum raddiation angle of 16 to 18 degrees
>with a 5 degree beamwidth, than an antenna of 95% efficiency with a
>radiation angle of 45 degrees and same beamwidth.  The high angle is
>ineffective.
>
>Now the problem....how does one measure field strength at a specific
>angle of radiation?    Anyone have some ideas?
>
>Thanks, Joe
>----------------------------------------------------------
>Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China
>
>ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
>Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
>----------------------------------------------------------
>
>

JOE!

Please say hello to my former host Tony BV2TA.  I visited Tony
in November
of 1994 for an evening, and had the pleasure of operating his
station to work
some W/K, UA and JA's on 40 meter CW.  If he has email, please
let me know
his address. 73, Tom WB4iUX
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:11 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 17:54:46 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gvjcr$[e-mail]>

In article <4gvjcr$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Maurice Andries) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Maurice Andries)
>Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
>Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 17:31:45 GMT

>[e-mail] (Wes Stewart) wrote:


>>>I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
>>>to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
>>>built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.

>>>Barry Himes KF6AZU


>>As one of only about 350 hams who contacted the first shuttle op, W5LFL, I
>>suggest that you forget trying with an HT. There will be hundreds of people
>>calling and on FM, it's the big guy that captures the receiver. I recommend
>>1500W and 20 dB of antenna gain. Worked for me:-)

>>73, Wes -- N7WS

>Right, go for the power..... this is ridicoulous. It's because of 'big
>guns' that no one else gets a chance. I worked almost all shuttles in
>packet for the last 2,5 years and some in fone with 8 (yes eight)
>watts on a dualband colinear COMET antenna with 6dB gain. The only
>thing you achieve with high power is 'hogging' the frequency.

>Don't forget that the shuttle itself only uses a 2 watt transmitter
>and omnidirectonal antenna.. they are ALWAYS well over S9 here.

Somebody's got to hog it ;-) I hogged it for about 10 seconds, just long
enough for Owen to say "N7WS, 5x9 one of the loudest signals heard in the
spacecraft." heh heh heh.

I have this on tape from my end and his because I bought from the ARRL the
complete set of tapes of what he heard. There were approximately four hours
worth and I believe over 10000 SWL cards were sent out. So, 3.5% of those
calling made QSOs and I "Hogged the frequency" for .07% of the time available.

Shame on me, I'm going off to stand in the corner. Bye,  N7WS





From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:12 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: NVIS Antenna Question
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 96 18:48:23 GMT
Message-ID: <4gvjk3$[e-mail]>
References: <4gi24o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
>AHa!, you pick an interesting subject.
>am for short range communications and the only professional refence I can
>recall was in a  British book call HF Communications Systems which of
course I
>do not have now.
>I am working in Guatemala for an International Organization and this is a
>subject that is extremely importaqnt for me.
>So far any cloud warmer antenna should be suitable, lika a dipole close to
>ground or a short vertical.
>Any other info will be welcome.

There have been a number of articles in _Army Communicator_, a magazine of
the Army Signal Corps. "NVIS Propagation at Low Solar Flux Indices"
in the Spring 1994 issue (Vol 19 No 1) contains several references. Public
distribution is permitted; you might try finding it in a library or calling
them at 706-791-7204. There was a good article in _QST_ just about a year
ago about NVIS by Ed Farmer, AA6ZM.

Low dipoles work well for NVIS, but I don't think a short vertical would.

73,
Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (Paul Aidukas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV on 160 meters
Date: 27 Feb 1996 20:07:28 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4gvoa0$[e-mail]>
References: <4g8ers$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Keywords: G5RV

In article [e-mail], Al Konschak <[e-mail]> () writes:

>Does anyone have the dimensions for a G5RV to be used on 160.
>I've tried the method of shorting out the input and driving
>it as a "T" but have had limited success. There must be a longer
>design that will work on 160.
>Thanks
>WI3Z
>Al

Hi Al, sure you can use a G5RV on 160M but not sure if you have the room.
A double-sized G5RV works great on 160 and tunes up easily. Just double all th
e
dimensions... 204 feet dipole with 65 feet stub of 450 ohm ladder line. I boug
ht
one of these on sale and am very happy with it. works great on 80 meters too.

--... ...--  -.. .

Paul  KT4DI
Weekdays: 407-724-7879
Email: [e-mail]
Packet: KT4DI @ KT4DI.#MLBFL.FL.USA.NA



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:14 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Tom Skelton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Why long wire TVI
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (skeltt)
References: <4gtl4r$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 22:15:57 GMT


>==========David P. van De Kerk, KE6GXD, 2/26/96==========
>
>Simple question: why do long wire antennas cause more TVI than most
>other types of antennas?
>
>All responses appreciated.  Correct answers appreciated even
>more.
>
>[e-mail].

IMHO, they don't cause more TVI than most other types of
antennas.  However, the ones I have used and seen used had
no solid ground.  And, the tuner is usually in the shack.  Thus,
you have a higher ambient RF level in the shack which couples
onto house AC and telephone wiring.  Compare this to the ambient
RF level with a resonant antenna 60 feet away fed by high
quality coax.  Or, a properly designed dipole with open wire
feeders and a tuner.

I haven't tried it, but I would bet you could use a random/long
wire antenna, good short ground strap, complete in-shack
grounding, and some resonant 1/4 radials from the tuner,
and basically not have a problem.

I will remember for many years the RF burns on my lip from a
Yaesu FTdx560 transceiver into an "ultimate" tuner and a 100
ft piece of wire (with no ground, poor interstation grounding, etc).
OUCH! It still hurts....

73, Tom WB4iUX
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:15 1996
From: gary <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 27 Feb 1996 23:59:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4h05ts$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <4gi5n2$[e-mail]>


>   I think I'd reexamine my antenna choice.
>                  Jim WD9AHF

Obviously, but that wasn't the *QUESTION*, was it!

--
Gary....KJ6Q    *** I AM THE NRA! ***





From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:16 1996
From: gary <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 28 Feb 1996 00:06:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4h069f$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gcs28$[e-mail]> <4gd2b8$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

>You are better off with an antenna that requires no tuner  i.e.
>parallel dipoles, seperate antennas that require no matching etc.
>
>Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky

 SIGHHH - AGAIN, *OBVIOUSLY*, but that was NOT the question, and may not
be practical for ALL situations. Some folks using tuners are operating
from restricted locations such as apartments. Telling these folks they
should be using a resonant dipole or beam 80 ft. in the air may be TRUE,
but for them, totally impossible!

Stick to the subject!

--
Gary....KJ6Q    *** I AM THE NRA! ***




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:18 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gcs28$[e-mail]> <4gd2b8$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4h069f$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 00:47:59 GMT

: be practical for ALL situations. Some folks using tuners are operating
: from restricted locations such as apartments. Telling these folks they
: should be using a resonant dipole or beam 80 ft. in the air may be TRUE,
: but for them, totally impossible!

May be but there are thousands of hams out there that have been led to
believe that using a tuner and open wire feeders is more efficient. Over
the years there have been many QST articles, especially back in the 70's,
written by Lew Mccoy and others which claimed great and mighty things for
tuners. Never was there any mention of loss in the tuner! I personally
know several hams who swear that because they use open line and a tuner
their signals are superior and they scoff at anyone using coax.

One fellow I know has plenty of space for resonant dipole. Instead, he
snakes the ladder line up the side of his house, across a gutter then up
the tower to his CF zepp. Using a $2000+, new solid state rig, he
carefully adjust his tuner for a dip in the swr, meantime causing qrm
while tweeking the thing up. He brags; NO COAX HERE OM!






--
Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:19 1996
From: stan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Home brew antenna towers
Date: 28 Feb 1996 00:52:05 GMT
Message-ID: <4h08vl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi Rich,
 do'nt know if this idea will be of any use to you however I am
constructing this mast which I designed myself after looking at many
diffrent commercial types which did not suite.

A 25ft square pole 2" dia, is pernemently bolted to the wall using
standoff brackets at top and bottom, A 2nd section of 4"x 3ft square
pole with a base plate for a rotator weilded at the bottom and a support
bearing at the top is fitted over the 2" mast before it is bolted into
place. This section supports the antenna, rotator and another 10ft pole
which are
fitted into the rotator and are raised and lowered to the ground by means
of a winch.The use of a square pole is what makes the desihn simple to
build no guieds are necessary to prevent thr lift section from twisting.
The system works similar to the Hazier for lattice towers. hope this
makes sense to you,

73's de Stan EI7DGB




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (Waynekrob)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Slide Rule Wanted
Date: 28 Feb 1996 01:08:02 -0500
Message-ID: <4h0rg2$[e-mail]>
References: <4ften0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Waynekrob)

I am a new ham in possession of two slide rules: a K&E Decilon and a
Pickett log log slide rule, but no radio gear!  Will consider swaps for
anything a T+ could use.


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:21 1996
From: [e-mail] (OrangeCounty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 3 Repeaters, 1 Antenna??
Date: 28 Feb 1996 02:55:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4h0g7i$[e-mail]>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.90.960221225733.7990A-100000@zippy>

In article <Pine.SUN.3.90.960221225733.7990A-100000@zippy>,
[e-mail] says...
>
>Anyone know of someone who has tried this one?
>
>Our club, in an effort to consolidate antennas up on the hill, is
>purchasing a Comet Tri-band antenna (144/220/440) and a Comet triplexor
>and will be running the 2 meter repeater, 220 repeater, and the 440
>repeater on it.  Each of the repeaters already has it's own duplexors so
>we will be tying those in to the triplexor and then to the antenna.
>
>Sound feasible?  Any hints or kinks that we might want to aware of or
>look out for?
>
>If this works, our next move will be for another of the same set-ups for
>a 2 meter digipeater, a 220 digipeater, and the 440 control link.
>
>Ken
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>Ken Harrison   ---      [e-mail]      ---   Amateur Radio:  N6MHG
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Hello Ken.  First off....STAY AWAY FROM THE COMET ANTENNA!  Spend the extra
money and have Austin Antennas make you an antenna cut for your frequencies!

As far as the triplexors go, you will just need to get then tuned up.  I
suggest talking to Chip Angle of Angle Linear (Southern CA).  Be prepared if
you do, he is BRUTTALLY honest.  You will not regret it!

Dino Darling   KC6RiX
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:22 1996
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Butternut HF Multiband Vertical
Date: 28 Feb 1996 05:23:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4h0osl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4gvhk7$[e-mail]>

I have the older HF6V and I am completely happy with it. it works well,
although 80 m is narrow. The vertical is mechanically strong, having
withstood two tornados in the area, and about 9 years worth of Canadian
winters.


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:23 1996
From: "David W. Knisely" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: [Q] Frequency of Jupitor emissions
Date: 28 Feb 1996 05:49:22 GMT
Message-ID: <4h0qd2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Hi there.  The Decameter radio bursts do not stay on a particular frequency.
They
are quite broad banded and move in frequency as time goes on.  22 Mhz is a goo
d
place to look, but it also has some broadcast stations on when the ionosphere
is
refractive to those freqencies.  It is best heard on a broad band AM shortwave

receiver with a directional antenna (like a Yagi or a loop) pointed at Jupiter
.  The
emissions are very irregular, and seem to be most often observed when the moon
 IO is
in certain positions around the planet.

David Knisely, Prairie Astronomy Club, Inc.



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:24 1996
From: [e-mail] (Russ McCoy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TRISATO Crankup Tower Info??
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 07:51:50
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I recently acquired a crankup tower from TRISATO.  It is 80 feet fully
extended and 20 feet cranked down.  I understand that TRISATO was
in the Visalia, CA area, but is no longer in business.  I would like to
obtain any information about this tower including a copy of the original
manual if possible: wind loading, recommended guying, capacity,
base configurations, parts availability, anything.

Thanks for any help.

Russ - AA5FP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:25 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 09:19:39 GMT
Message-ID: <4h16ln$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gcs28$[e-mail]> <4gsn5j$[e-mail]>

In article <4gsn5j$[e-mail]>, REMAPC05@ wrote:

>. . .

>Why not just use the intended antenna as the load and measure the RF voltage
>and current at the input and output of the tuner - period? Maybe I am
>overlooking something and the issue is not as simple as this?

It is that simple, provided you have the means to measure not only the
magnitudes of the voltage and current but also the phase angle between them.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:26 1996
From: Kent Winrich <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Kiwa Loop Wanted
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 11:38:20 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Still looking for a Kiwa MW loop.  Anyone out there have one to part
with?

Kent, NI9U


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:27 1996
From: Francis Lyn <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 900 Mhz Beam needed
Date: 28 Feb 1996 12:49:25 GMT
Message-ID: <4h1j0l$[e-mail]>
References: <4gvr1b$[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

I saw several (at least 10+ boxes) commercial Yagi antennae at the local
surplus store that covers about 840 to lower part of 900 MHz band for
sale at Can$14.95 the other weekend. I think they were made by Antenna
Specialists, and they were of commercial quality, solid elements, welded
construction, and gold anodized.

Call:



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:28 1996
From: Francis Lyn <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 900 Mhz Beam needed
Date: 28 Feb 1996 12:54:23 GMT
Message-ID: <4h1j9v$[e-mail]>
References: <4gvr1b$[e-mail]>

I saw several (at least 10+ boxes) commercial Yagi antennae at the local
surplus store that covers about 840 to lower part of 900 MHz band for
sale at Can$14.95 the other weekend. I think they were made by Antenna
Specialists, and they were of commercial quality, solid elements, welded
construction, and gold anodized.

Call Active Surplus Annex in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. I don't have the
phone # handy, but they're on Queen Street and the area code is 416.

Send me email if you need more info and I'll get Active's telephone
number for you. I don't think the items are big sellers, so you should
have enough time.

73

Francis Lyn - VE3TDL



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:29 1996
From: [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What's your favorite 6mt FM mobile antenna?
Date: 28 Feb 1996 14:47:43 -0500
Message-ID: <4h2bgv$[e-mail]>
References: <4gu1e8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DeNoid95X)

just take a 10-11 m antenna and cut it for the freq you want.  I did it
and works great.  I cut mine for 51 MHz and boom.  I drilled mine thru the
roof of my car and used a standard mount dor it, the threaded base and i
beleive it was 5/16X28, the mount can be bought at any ham shop or rat
shack.  any questions just email me!
N9RLR/2
[e-mail]
syracuse, NY


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:30 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4gstq5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:30:04 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David St
ockton) writes:
>
>   I think I'd build myself a vector voltmeter before I got desperate
>enough to use lecher lines on a regular basis

The problem with that, David, is that the vector voltmeter would need
resolution even better than that required to use the Bird we were
originally discussing, IE too many significant figures, at the extreme
load impedances Roy was suggesting. That would cost big bucks, if it
were practical to do at all. It seems better to me to take advantage
of the characteristics of the existing feedline to yield the information
needed without resorting to elaborate or expensive measuring equipment.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:31 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dale Chidester)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Good Mobile Antenna
Date: 28 Feb 1996 18:07:01 GMT
Message-ID: <4h25k5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Get a good 5/8 wavelength antenna and mount it smack in the center of the roof
 of
the car.  You can use a mag-mount if your queasy about drilling holes or just
put
a permanent mount in... call it cellular ready when your ready to sell it!  I
use a Diamond dual band and have never had any problems with it.
                73,
                        Dale


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dale H. Chidester, PhD           N3HAL      "Against stupidity, even the
Cyanamid Agricultural Research Center        Gods in vain doth contend."
Agricultural Products Research Divison                          Schiller
PO Box 400,  Clarksville Rd.           Phone: [phone]
Princeton, NJ  08543-0400              Email: [e-mail]
------------------------------------------------------------------------




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:32 1996
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 20:44:21 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gstq5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4guqea$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>,
> Richard Kiefer  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >1.  Tune a tuner to its operating point to match a tranmitter to an
> >antenna.
> >2.  Then, disconnect the tuner and measure its complex input impedance
> >with its output open.
>
> Richard,
>
> It is easy to show that your method does not work:
> Imagine someone had incorporated (without your knowledge) a resistor
> in your tuner just before the output connector in series with the
> coax inner, you would not detect its losses, because it carries no current
> when the output is open circuit.
>
> The way around is to measure all four scattering parameters, if you want a
> result more accurate than what can be got from a reflectometer.
>
> 73, Moritz DL5UH

Moritz,

I see your point, yes if there was a reactive element in series with the
output connector it's losses would not contribute to the resistive part
of the complex impedance measurement.  So, it seems that you could short
the output connector of the tuner, making it a one port device.  Then a
measurement of the complex impedance at the input connector would contain
a real part representing the total loss that would disipate power inside
the box and a complex part.  When some complex impedance is connected to
the ouput connector in the form of an antenna some other real part will
appear in parallel with what you measure but the power disipated inside
the tuner should remain the same unless the losses of the components is
power dependent.  What do you think?


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:34 1996
From: Gary Davidson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 28 Feb 1996 20:50:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4h2f76$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4goe25$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gtrdg$[e-mail]> <4gu8i4$[e-mail]>

>Feel free to ignore the issue.  I don't believe anyone is losing
>sleep over this, but that doesn't mean it is pointless to discuss.
>
>73,
>Todd
>N9MWB
>
THIS all reminds me of the current TV commercial, where the customer in
the restaurant orders coffee, and when asked "regular, or decaf?", stares
blankly off into space as endless scenarios of risk flash thru his mind -
and all activity in the restaurant screeches to a halt.
All the technobabble this *SIMPLE* question presented has *YET* to offer
even the simplest estimate! Meanwhile, the questioner has NO idea whether
his potential tuner will merely perform like a big dummy load, or
actually result, for HIM, in a usable system allowing him reasonable
operation of his station.
*I* can personally state that *MY* past experience with tuners has ALWAYS
provided me with improved operation of equipment that would either
function POORLY without the tuner, or not at all!
The fact that the tuner was used did not magically "improve" the
radiating efficiency of my antenna, it only made my transmitter operate
more efficiently. Tuners are almost always a compromise for a properly
designed and installed antenna, but sometimes these poor antenna
situations are all that is available.
What would you rather do, operate your rig into an inefficient antenna
direct, resulting in 25 watts out of a 100 watt rig, or use the
compromise available with the tuner, increase your output power to 100
watts, and *ACCEPT* whatever reasonable loss the tuner caused to provide
an overall system improvement?
Or are you *STILL* standing there puzzled by "regular, or decaf?"...

--
Gary... KJ6Q... I am the NRA | Annoy a Liberal - say NO to gun control!
============================ | Annoy a Democrat - say BYE BYE CLINTON!
"Did you come here to *LEARN*|==================================
or to nose around, make rude | "It's *EASY* to be a liberal, it's
noises & provide proof our   | OTHER people's money you are giving
educational system stinks?"  | away! (or living off of!)




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:35 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 23:31:45 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4goe25$[e-mail]> <4gveku <4h05jt$[e-mail]>

gary <[e-mail]> writes:

>a better match. While I personally feel this is a "standard" scenario, I
>have no better idea of what sort of setup the original poster had in mind
>than anyone else responding to the question - so why attempt to "make up"
>all sorts of difficult scenarios, complete with correspondingly complex
>ways to check out power loss, when it may simply be stated for the one
>ASKING the question "power loss thru a reasonably designed tuner,
>properly adjusted, will range from 5 to 15 percent, depending on antenna
>and feedline type"

Hi again Gary, I have a slight advantage over you. Tom, WB7ASR and I had
lunch together the day after he asked the question. He had previously
used the unbalanced tuner/balun/ladder-line configuration which is why
I turned it that direction. FYI, I think it's the ARRL Antenna Book that
says in a reasonably well matched system, an antenna tuner shouldn't
soak up more than about 0.5dB. While running 100w, the coil in my MFJ949
melted the plastic supports and the coil kinda sagged. Seems that might
have been more than 5 to 15 percent.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:37 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9:1 Baluns
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 23:45:16 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4gspst$[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>If I have 50 ohm coax feeding into a 450 ohm ladder line, wouldn't I need a
>9:1 balum?  Say, the ladder line connects to a long centerfeed dipole.

I don't know of any 450+j0 impedance antennas. If your SWR is not 1/1
then your 9/1 balun will *never* see 450 ohms. The higher the SWR on
the 450 ohm line the further away from 450 ohms will be the impedances
on the ladder-line. The SWR on ladder-line can be measured with a pickup
loop and a voltmeter. Why not just measure it and ease your mind? I have
done it for all HF bands and now I have an accurate estimate of the SWR
and terminating impedance of my ladder-line for all bands of interest.

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:37 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quads
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 02:11:28 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4h2m17$[e-mail]>

Lee Buller <[e-mail]> writes:

>the thing would stand up to Kansas wind, rain, sleet and snow?  A

Since the Gem Quad was invented in Canada! I do think it has stood up to
[D


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:39 1996
From: [e-mail] (COUGER GORDON)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why long wire TVI
Date: 29 Feb 1996 02:26:49 GMT
Message-ID: <4h32t9$[e-mail]>
References: <4gtl4r$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Gordon Couger <[e-mail]>

>In article <4gtl4r$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>Simple question: why do long wire antennas cause more TVI than most
>>other types of antennas?
>>
>>All responses appreciated.  Correct answers appreciated even
>>more.
At the risk of being over simplistic have you tried rotating the tv
antenna. A high gain antenna gets that gain in one direction at the
expense of others.

Gordon AB5DG

   Gordon Couger
   Biosystems & Agricultural Engineering. 114 AG Hall Stillwater, OK 74075
   [e-mail] 405 744 8392 day 625-2855 evenings



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:41 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Strange Phenonomon on G5RV
Date: 29 Feb 1996 02:46:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4h3433$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

Wow,
  This one will get ya thinking. I live in Northern Indiana and last nite we h
ad
 thunderstorms and relatively spring like weather. I have an 80 meter length G
5RV
 strung between two trees. The antenna is stretched pretty taut and is about 3
5'
 average in height.
  Well, the thunderstorm left the area about midnight. By this morning the wea
ther
 changed drastically and we had a wind chill of -30 degrees. In other words it
 was
 in Hoosier parlance 'whooping it up!'
   I had pulled the PL-259 out of my HF rig last night and left it laying acro
ss a
 book. About 7:30 this morning I started hearing a 'snapping sound' about ever
y 15
 seconds. It was loud enough that the Jethro Tull CD that I had playing was be
ing
 interrupted by this 'snapping'. Low and behold I looked over in the direction
 of the
 PL-259 and the 'snapping' was actually an arc between the center pin and the
 barrel of the connector. I lifted the end of the cable away from the book, an
d
 isolated it from anything combustible. The phenonomon continued on for about
 35 more minutes. During this time, it was snowing, cleared, and flurried agai
n.
   I guess the reason for the post, is that even in a weather situation where
it was
 not 'lightning and thunder' conditions, and ungrounded open end feedline can
 bring you a real surprise. If I had been working with combustibles, this coul
d have
 been a 'post mortem'. Anybody else ever see this?

                                                     Jim WD9AHF



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 29 Feb 1996 02:59:53 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4h34r9$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4goe25$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gtrdg$[e-mail]> <4gu8i4$[e-mail]> <4h2f76$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <4h2f76$[e-mail]>
Gary Davidson <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>Feel free to ignore the issue.  I don't believe anyone is losing
>>sleep over this, but that doesn't mean it is pointless to discuss.

> THIS all reminds me of the current TV commercial, where the customer in
> the restaurant orders coffee, and when asked "regular, or decaf?", stares
> blankly off into space as endless scenarios of risk flash thru his mind -
> and all activity in the restaurant screeches to a halt.

> What would you rather do, operate your rig into an inefficient antenna
> direct, resulting in 25 watts out of a 100 watt rig, or use the
> compromise available with the tuner, increase your output power to 100
> watts, and *ACCEPT* whatever reasonable loss the tuner caused to provide
> an overall system improvement?
> Or are you *STILL* standing there puzzled by "regular, or decaf?"...

Well, given that I rarely drink decaf, I don't believe I am "standing
there puzzled...".  I don't recall the originator of this thread giving
enough information to make a reasonable guess.  If the tuner is
using a coil wound with 40 gauge nichrome wire and really lossy
capacitors, any estimate based upon a reasonable design would be
meaningless.

Personally, I'd rather operate into a resonant antenna that provided
a reasonable match to begin with.  Lacking that, I'd try to understand
the load I was trying to match and work to convert it into a load my
transmitter could handle.  Both require knowledge instead of
ignorance.  That was the only point of my post, i.e., a debate that
uncovers the issues to be considered is a worthwhile debate.
Ignoring the issues to be considered accomplishes nothing.

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:44 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 06:43:25 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4goe25$[e-mail]> <n7ws.

In article <4h2f76$[e-mail]> Gary Davidson <[e-mail].c
om> writes:
>From: Gary Davidson <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
>Date: 28 Feb 1996 20:50:46 GMT

>>Feel free to ignore the issue.  I don't believe anyone is losing
>>sleep over this, but that doesn't mean it is pointless to discuss.
>>
>>73,
>>Todd
>>N9MWB
>>
[Oops, I spilled (regular) coffee on some of this]


>What would you rather do, operate your rig into an inefficient antenna
>direct, resulting in 25 watts out of a 100 watt rig, or use the
>compromise available with the tuner, increase your output power to 100
>watts, and *ACCEPT* whatever reasonable loss the tuner caused to provide
>an overall system improvement?

OK, enough nonsense. The question was how much power does a tuner
consume. The answer is 6 dB. There, a definitive answer. I can give you
(easily) a real world example where this is true. So in your example, you can
get 25 watts out of the bare radio or 25 watts out of the tuner. Which do you
prefer? (As his eyes glaze over, he's thinking, "Do I want bare or tuner? Hmm.

Darn. Lemme see now, if I don't buy a tuner, I could spend the money on some
more ammo...")




From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:45 1996
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Connector losses
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 06:46:02 LOCAL
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
 Coffman) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
>Subject: Re: Connector losses
>Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 18:04:53 GMT

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
>writes:
>>
>>The bottom line is, as in most things, it depends.

>At HF, however, I'd suggest that about the only thing that
>"depends" is the quality of the soldering job done to install
>the connector. If you're getting noticable loss from a coax
>connector at HF, it's almost certainly due to poor installation,
>not due to any mismatch it may be introducing.

Agreed.  But as I said, more connectors equal more opportunities for Murphy;-)


73, Wes -- N7WS


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:46 1996
From: Kent Winrich <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Apartment Antenna
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:21:21 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gub8i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

I have used a downspout as well.  I even tuned it up on 160 and made a
contact with a HK0!  Just watch out for the ol' TVI!

Kent Winrich, NI9U
Waukesha, WI

Bill Starkgraf wrote:
>
> I am in the same situation.  I tried the wire around inside, but
> with all the mesh
> in the stucco, I couldn't really get out.  Since I live on the
> first floor, I ran
> the coax out my patio door hidden in all the ground cover and
> when I get to the
> downspout, I clip the center lead to this and the shield to the
> copper tubing
> of the large air conditioner unit in front of the downspout.  It
> seemed strange that
> at the bottom of the downspout there was some missing paint
> (HI-HI).  This works
> OK but boy is it directional.  Living just NW of LA I can hit
> Northern California
> real well (579 running 30 watts), but anything a few miles in
> the other direction, I
> have no luck.  I was wonderering if anyone out there had any other ideas?
>
> The small guage wire with a weight on the end would work if I
> pitched it onto
> the roof.  I am not sure what the apartment management would
> say.  They did catch
> me hooking my downspout/rain gutter antenna.  I explained that
> it was to improve
> what I can receive on my radio.  Sorry I forgot to tell them
> that I was also
> transmitting.  The next thought that came into their minds was
> the ugly wire connection.
> I explained that it was already connected and showed then the
> coax.  They had to really
> look for it.  Actuall when the coax comes out of the ground
> cover and comes onto the
> air conditioner pad, I cnaged the coax from black to white.
> Hides it a little more even though
> it is in the open.
>
> 73
>
> Bill,  KD6UQB
>
> Bill Starkgraf,   KD6UQB
> [e-mail]
> AT&T Global Information Solutions
> El Segundo, CA


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ed Bathgate)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 29 Feb 1996 11:47:05 -0500
Message-ID: <4h4la9$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4goe25$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gtrdg$[e-mail]> <4gu8i4$[e-mail]> <4h2f76$[e-mail]>


Correct me if Im wrong, but impedance transformation networks are normally not

very lossy.  And all the losses will be as heat.  And that the power ratings
of tuners are not when they overheat, but when they start to arc between the
capacitor plates or the internal connections.

In my actual tests, I believe a tuner is worth its weight in lost hair trying
to get a dipole to resonate correctly, add to that the problems of tuning
more than 1 band, and bandwidth / swr factors for 1 band.  I also am a great
believer in feedline loss under high swr conditions.  I was using a ANTRON 99
/solarcon 10m vertical with 50' rg58 on 10m with no problems.  The manual says
that you can use a tuner to get it clear to 40m.  Well I tried it.  It does tu
ne,
but... signal loss was tremendous!  about s1 on cw portion of 40.  I switched
to a 300 ohm twin lead fed, semi inverted vee dipole, retuned, and the same
signals that were s1 were now s9+20!  And the highest point on the V/dipole is
5' below the base of the A-99.

73

Ed N3SDO


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:48 1996
From: [e-mail] (John Rice)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Alarm decal antenna.
Date: 29 Feb 96 14:08:29 CDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gv3hm$[e-mail]>

In article <4gv3hm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David Stuben)
 writes:

> I would like to know if anyone is using the patch type antenna that was
> advertised in QST some months ago.  This antenna is disguised as a alarm
> decal, and is for the 2m band.  I am interested in this type of an antenna
> for a new truck that I have on order.  I have a glass mount antenna now,
> but the performance is somewhat marginal.

NOTHING you can put finside the cab is going to outperform (or perform
nearly as well) as an external 1/4wave antenna.

--------

   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] Fri Mar 01 21:01:49 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Mike, KN6IS)
Subject: Re: Cubical Quad Antennas for HF
Message-ID: <mike_cash-2902960734210001@cash_mike.chinalake.navy.mil>
References: <4fsgkr$[e-mail]> <4gu415$[e-mail]> <4gur91$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 15:34:21 GMT


> >
> Could anyone Post a way to contact both Cubex and LBA (Lighting Bolt Ant)
>
> Thanks  and 73's
>
> Mike

Mike, you can reach Cubex on the internet at http://www.cubex.com/cubex.htm

Good Luck.

--
Mike, KN6IS


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:50 1996
From: [e-mail] (Grzegorz Brzozowski)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Anteny
Date: 29 Feb 96 16:46:45 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Czy posiadasz schematy dotyczace anten i sprzetu do nich.Jezeli tak to prze
slij je na adres gmp@.tl.krakow.pl


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quads
Date: 29 Feb 1996 17:30:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4h4nr2$[e-mail]>
References: <4h2m17$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] writes:

>Lee Buller <[e-mail]> writes:

>>the thing would stand up to Kansas wind, rain, sleet and snow?  A

>Since the Gem Quad was invented in Canada! I do think it has stood up to

Mine (a 4-el) stands up to northern Alberta wind, snow, and cold just
fine, but the thought of heavy icing (as you often get in warmer
climates) gives me the willies.  Quads don't like ice loads.  GQ
spreaders are open fibreglass lattice trusses, with a lot of surface
area, and they'd pick up a *lot* of ice in the right circumstances.
Fortunately, ice storms are almost unknown around here - doesn't get
warm enough, and winters are dry.  (It was -32 on Monday AM.)

In a slightly more theoretic vein, the GemQuad is an "X" quad; the
spreaders are all at 45o from the vertical, and the wires are either
horizontal or vertical.  But there's a good case from mechanical
considerations to build a quad in the "+" configuration instead, with
the *wires* at 45o and the spreaders either vertical or horizontal.

One advantage is that in icing conditions, the water tends to run down
the sloped wires and drip off; and the second is that a vertical
spreader can carry much more weight than one that's at 45o.

I've considered rotating my GQ 45o to get into a "+" position, but it
would be a major pain in the low back to haul it down and do the work.
And, as I've mentioned, icing isn't much of a concern at my QTH.  The
other reason against the mod is that the hubs of a GQ are angled like
squat pyramids; even if you twisted the boom to get into the "+"
configuration, the spreaders would still be tilted outwards.  That's
the price you pay for getting a shorter boom - everything's a
tradeoff.

regards,
Ross ve6pdq
--
Ross Alexander, ve6pdq  --  [phone]  --  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:52 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (David Stockton)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:44:21 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:

: The problem with that, David, is that the vector voltmeter would need
: resolution even better than that required to use the Bird we were
: originally discussing, IE too many significant figures, at the extreme
: load impedances Roy was suggesting. That would cost big bucks, if it
: were practical to do at all. It seems better to me to take advantage
: of the characteristics of the existing feedline to yield the information
: needed without resorting to elaborate or expensive measuring equipment.



  I think it's a general problem with ultra high VSWR, whatever way you
do it you wind up with nasty measurement accuracy requirements. Still,
immense VSWR on any feedline is probably a more deserving case for
antenna/line redesign than it is for precision measurement.


   The answer to the original question of how much power an antenna tuner
consumes is simple....  "It depends!"

    Most tuners have control redundncy and have an infinite number of
settings that will transform the same impedence, what varies across this
range is the amount of power dissipated in the radiation resistance of
the antenna and the amount of power dissipated in the losses (mostly the
ESR of the inductor) of the tuner.

   Added to this is the 2 dimensional infinities of impedence that the
unit could be working into. Efficiency will degrade dramatically into
extreme load Z's.

    The range of possible efficiency will be getting close to the 0 and
100% limits


      Cheers
                David  GM4ZNX


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:53 1996
From: gary <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 29 Feb 1996 18:46:39 GMT
Message-ID: <4h4sag$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gdfng$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4goe25$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gtrdg$[e-mail]> <4gu8i4$[e-mail]> <4h2f76$[e-mail]> <4h4la9$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Ed Bathgate) wrote:
>
>Correct me if Im wrong, but impedance transformation networks are normally no
t
>very lossy.
>In my actual tests, I believe a tuner is worth its weight in lost hair trying
>to get a dipole to resonate correctly, add to that the problems of tuning
>more than 1 band, and bandwidth / swr factors for 1 band.
>
>Ed N3SDO

THANKS ED! My point *EXACTLY!* Why agonize over what is in MOST cases a
minimal, and acceptable power loss thru a tuner when the overall gain in
power output and efficiency provided to the transmitter is potentially so
great? Some of the proposals offered here would have the original
questioner adding to his tuner purchase, a duplicate tuner (for direct
side by side comparison), a precision wattmeter for readings on both
sides of the tuner (sort of tough when the antenna is an end fed wire!),
and assorted RF ampmeters.
By this time, the questioner has either spent nearly $1000 in measuring
equipment, or given up in disgust, and *STILL* has NO answer, or even an
educated GUESS to his question!
--
Gary....KJ6Q    *** I AM THE NRA! ***





From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:54 1996
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 4 ele Gem Quad
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 19:21:29 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4g1kh4$[e-mail]> <4gfhmn$[e-mail]>

> Robert G. Strickland KE2WY
> [e-mail]
> Syracuse, New York

Hi Bob,  Interesting to read that you have been modeling quads with
EZNEC, same here.  Wondering what you are discovering.  For example, I
find that a two element quad has about 2 db more gain than a two element
yagi, and about 1-2 degrees lower take off angle for the same height of
80 feet.  And, I find that a pair of stacked quads seems to perform about
the same as a pair of stacked yagis.  In practice do you find that the
quad is any more quiet during atmospheric noise events like thunder
storms?  I am putting up a tower in the spring and wondering what kind of
antennas to put on it.  Will be rotating the tower.

Dick Kiefer, K0DK


From [e-mail] Fri Mar 01 21:01:55 1996
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 900 Mhz Beam needed
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 19:25:34 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gvr1b$[e-mail]>

Brian Rayl wrote:
>
> I am building some link radios on 900 MHz for point to point
> and plan to use low power (about 10 MW).  Who has some good deals
> on these.  I used to get stuff from Down East Microwave.  They
> used to have some nice loop yagi antana for 900 and 1200 MHz.
> they no longer seem to be around.
> Any info would be a great help.
>
> Brian Rayl  N7MOE

Larsen makes a 6 element yagi for the 902-928 MHz band, cost about $100.
 I have two of them here.  Seem to work well in the experiments I have
run.

Dick Kiefer, K0DK


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:13 1996
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 900 MHz phones
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 19:38:54 -0800
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Hi all:
>
> Our test team at work is considering buying a 900 MHz cordless phone.  I see
m
> to remember a few years ago there was some health concerns regarding cordles
s
> of cellular phones operated in this frequency range.
>
> Can anyone tell me the latest on this, or am I completely off base?
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob   KD8WUI believe that the currently available 900 MHz cordless phones ar
e spread
spectrum transmitters running a maximum of 1 watt, if that much.
Probably not a problem.  The cell phone band is down around 850 +/- Mhz.

Dick Kiefer, K0DK


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:14 1996
From: [e-mail] (KB2SCA)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wanted: Crank-Up Tower
Date: 25 Feb 1996 21:48:55 -0500
Message-ID: <4gr72n$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (KB2SCA)

Hi, Paul, K2DB here, and I am looking for a fairly NEW 55 to 72 foot
crank-up.
Must be rated at 18 SQ FT. Whatcha got and how many green-stamps ya need
?? Willing to pick up in the northeast !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  73


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:15 1996
From: Mat Eshpeter <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking for manual, Mosley Classic 33
Date: 26 Feb 1996 03:44:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4grabp$[e-mail]>

I am looking for a manual for a Mosley Classic 33
antenna. If you can help me, please email me.

Thanks.
Mat
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:16 1996
From: [e-mail] (Todd Little)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: 26 Feb 1996 04:06:15 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4grbjn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gqtvh$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <4gqtvh$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] wrote:

>   Looks like Wes there is teasing you a little. Maybe he can come with a 50
db
>  antenna design for you that'll boost your 2 watt HT to 200,000 Watts Effect
ive
>  Radiated Power output. Just be careful who you point that thing at!

Just to make sure this doesn't propogate a common myth, it matters little
where he points that thing.  The 2 watt HT is still only producing 2 watts.
Even concentrated in a small area, it is unlikely to be harmful.  So while
200,000 watts ERP sounds like a lot, it would be little worse than placing
your hand over the rubber duck on the HT and transmitting.

And although he may be teasing a little, my experience with trying to
cut through the chaos of a random voice QSO pass of the shuttle
seems to indicate there is a *LOT* of QRM to deal with.  After all, the
shuttle sees a significant portion of the USA at a time.  Line of sight
from 200-400 km of altitude is pretty far.

73,
Todd
N9MWB



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:17 1996
From: sholisky <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 05:20:00 GMT
Message-ID: <4grfu0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

I have tried heights up to 40 feet with the R5. Higher just meant the
local noise was lower. Get it away from those "detuning objects" and
enjoy.

As a compromise antenna, I don't think you could ask for more. No
turning the rotor, just grab the key and "pounce on em'". This is the
BIG advantage of the antenna.

73's Scott

PS- loads on 80..but..the noise...




From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:18 1996
From: [e-mail] (Stransmann)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mounting height of R5?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 13:26:42 -0500
Message-ID: <4gsu12$[e-mail]>
References: <4gmfbk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Stransmann)

I have to agree, Woody. My R5 ain't worth the powder to blow it to hell!
I worked with the factory & ended up shortening it a foot and a half
before the SWR would even begin to come down!  As for the "pileups"
someone mentioned in another post, I think the only "pile" is the line of
BS Cushcraft spews forth in its ads about the R5.  Thank God for my TA-33
Mosley beam. Now THAT'S an antenna!!!


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:18 1996
From: [e-mail] (Chris Terwilliger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Universal Towers-opinions?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 15:04:51 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Fishing for opinion, experiences, etc. with Universal Towers before I order
one...

tnx
73

--
Chris Terwilliger, AA7WD
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:20 1996
From: [e-mail] (Richard Murnane  x2175)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Organic verticals
Date: 26 Feb 96 15:12:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


> Date: 21 Feb 1996 16:17:11 GMT
> From: Rod Dinkins <[e-mail]>
> Subject: GOOFY ANTENNAS -- RF GOTTA GO SOMEWHERE!
:
:
> During WWI, a Signal Corp Manual recommended loading up a frazzled tree
> when all antennas had been knocked down. Another article suggests that
> Palm Trees load well. Run to your nearest juicy tree with some ladder
> line!

The British mag "Electronics World & Wireless World" did a feature on the
wartime loading of banana trees. Sorry I don't recall the date, but it was
sometime in the last five years.

73 Richard VK2SKY

================================================================
Wireless Institute of Australia (VK2) on the Web:
http://sydney.dialix.oz.au/~wiansw
================================================================


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:21 1996
From: REMAPC05@
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 26 Feb 1996 16:29:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4gsn5j$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gcs28$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: REMAPC05@

In <4gcs28$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>In <[e-mail]>, "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> writes:
>>[e-mail] wrote:
>>>
>>> In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR) w
rites:
>>> >How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>>> >when in use?
>>> >
>>> >Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of
it, measure
>>>  the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the p
ower
>>>  out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>>>
>>>                                     73's WD9AHF - JimWell, the wattmeter w
ill have to work at the output impedance of the tuner.......
>>Did anyone read the series of articles last year on tuner losses? Some of th
e comments
>>posted here are contrary to the findings of the author. One that comes to mi
nd is that
>>the loss is independent of the impedance being matched. The articles usually
 showed that
>>losses were greater for the same SWR when the impedance of the load was low
rather than
>>high. The author, Frank Witt AI1H, used the fact that the SWR measured at th
e input of a
>>tuner with loss will not correctly report the mismatch at it's output. The l
osses are
>>proportional to the error in the reported SWR. For example, he adjusts a tun
er to 1:1
>>for a 100 ohm load. Then he replaces the load with a 50 ohm load, and then a
 200 ohm
>>load. The deviation of the SWR from 2:1 in both cases is due to the loss in
the tuner.
>>Read the articles April,May 1995. What do you guys think?
>>--
>>
>>
>>Charles Jack Hawley Jr.
>>Amateur Radio KE9UW (A.K.A. 'Chuck' in Ham Radio)
>>BMW K100RS, BMWMOA #224 (A.K.A. 'Jack' in Motorcycles)
>>[e-mail]
>>Sr. Research Engineer Emeritus
>>Univ of Ill, Urbana-Champaign
>>
>>
>Hi again,
>  I think you are complicating a pretty basic problem. Why not just put a non
> reactive load that matches what you think is your feed point impedance and
> measure Current and voltage there, and back at the transmitter, again using
a
> non reactive load do the same. If the two power readings don't match, that's

> the loss. Did you ever build an amplifier and tune the inductor for the maxi
mum
> efficiency?  Maybe I've landed in the middle of a thread that I don't know w
hats
> gone on before, but I can't see what your hung up on. Sorry
>                                                             Jim

Jim,

        I think that you have offered the most common sense approach to this
issue. However, is it even necessary to use a nonreactive load approximating
the impedance of an intended antenna?  Why not just use the intended antenna
as the load and measure the RF voltage and current at the input and output of
the tuner - period?
        Maybe I am overlooking something and the issue is not as simple as
this?

Regards,

Roy
K9ER


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:22 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hoffman)
Subject: Re: CCD antennas..how do I scale them (dowm!) ???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 16:48:04 GMT
Reply-To: choffman @pelican.davlin.net
References: <4epn4c$[e-mail]> <4fqp8j$[e-mail]>

I have considerable experience designing and building variations on
antennas similar to the one you call CCD.  It is possible to reduce
the physical length required for the antenna.

You should be able to form the length into something of a compressed
square wave design or a sine wave design without difficulty.  A 40m
amateur version may be reduced to lengths ten to twelve feet long and
spaced two or three feet apart.  Do this with each half of the dipole
configeration so that all long lengths are parallel.  DO NOT FORM THE
LENGTH INTO A COIL.  This arrangement may be placed directly on the
ground or on the non metallic rooftop without difficulty.  While the
antenna sensitivity is of course reduced, you will be able to use it
for many general amateur radio purposes.

Even better results may be expected with this configuration if
suspended inside four poles at about ten feet of height, and construct
a poultry netting wire counterpoise on the ground under it.  You may
attach the counterpoise to the rig with a half wave long piece of
insulated wire sucessfully.

I have built dozens of various antenna designs using magnetic wave
component phasing with remarkable sucess on frequencies from 1 mHz to
over 800 mHz.  You have  a good project there.  Just persue with a
specific mission and you will be much happier with the result.

You willl have some fun and just remember, if this project makes you
sick, I am not a real doctor.

73  Ric K5SBU
Richard Hulse <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Thanks Bob...

>I had already built and 80 m version of the CCD which worked very well at
>my last place. It was folded back on itself and ran very close to a large
>tree and part of the roof. Unfortunately the houses next to where I now
>live are very close together....a CCD folded back on itself 4 times would
>no doubt upset the neighbours. Having just writen that I wonder if the
>antenna could be folded _on_top_ of itself to reduce the length?

>> I found this in an article by Harold Wheeler on HF antennas
>>designed to be mounted UNDERGROUND!

>Could you let me know where this was?

>> Some day I will buy a bunch of 1100
>>pF 1000V 5% dipped micas and rebuild the thing, and try again.

>The problems is they are so time consuming to make! I took a week off
>work to make my 80m one about ten years ago. If the performance hadn't
>been so good I wouldn't be contemplating doing it again. Perhaps I should
>wait until my kids grow up a bit more and get them to help!

>Regards
>Richard Hulse
>ZL2AJC





From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:23 1996
From: REMAPC05@
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Feedpoint impedance - Extended double Zepp
Date: 26 Feb 1996 16:49:20 GMT
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4gsoag$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: REMAPC05@

        None of the references I have state the feedpoint impedance of this
type of antenna - only that it is high.  I would like to go for the 3 db
gain advantage of this antenna but an open wire feeder is out of the question
at my site.  Can a balun and coax feed be used or is the recommended open
feed an integral part of the operation of the antenna and not subtitutable?

        What ya think?

Regards,

Roy
K9ER


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:24 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9:1 Baluns
Date: 26 Feb 1996 17:16:13 GMT
Message-ID: <4gspst$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

OK, you are getting close to something I have never really understood.
If I have 50 ohm coax feeding into a 450 ohm ladder line, wouldn't I need a
9:1 balum?  Say, the ladder line connects to a long centerfeed dipole.
If the answer is no, please explain why.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sid George, CPA     [e-mail]
._  _...  .....  _.._  .._
http://www.hal-pc.org/~sid
-------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:25 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Information For C.B. Radio
Date: 26 Feb 1996 17:35:50 GMT
Message-ID: <4gsr1m$[e-mail]>
References: <4gbcf4$[e-mail]>

The simplest antenna might be a half-wave dipole.
I'm not sure what frequency the CB band is, but
the formula is :
the length of wire in feet = 468/(the frequency in Mhz)
For the CB band that might be:
18 feet = 468/26.0 Mhz.

Take this 18 feet of wire and cut it in half.  Attach (solder is best)
one end to the center feed point and attach the other
9 foot wire to the ground feed.  Then connect the antenna
feed line to you CB radio.  Place the 18 foot antenna as high
up as you can get it.  The higher the better, but at least, 9 feet
up.

If this confussing, go to the library and check out an
antenna book, "The ARRL Antenna Book" is best, and look
up DIPLOES.

Good luck and don"t be put off by some of the idiot answers.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sid George, CPA     [e-mail]
._  _...  .....  _.._  .._
http://www.hal-pc.org/~sid
-------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:26 1996
From: [e-mail] (Louise Carkenord)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: protecting fiberglass pole vault poles
Date: 26 Feb 96 17:40:31 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]



I am using several fiberglass pole vault poles in
antenna applications. What is the best protective
"paint" for the poles??  Fiberglass resin,
polyurethane......what would best protect these
poles from UV, smog, etc?????
                                Lee   KA0FPJ


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:27 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Apartment Antenna
Date: 26 Feb 1996 17:45:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4gsrk5$[e-mail]>
References: <4gl9ou$[e-mail]>

>   [e-mail] (William Pulvermacher) writes:
>  Anyone know of a reliable antenna to be used in an apartment.
>  Preferrably something that I dont have to sneek into the attic for.  I
>  live on the second floor and have a balcony outside.  I don't want to
>  kill the nieghbors either.  It's a stock Galaxy DX88HL.  Mostly used on
>  11m.
>
>  Thanks      Snoshu. . .
>
The simplest would be a half-wave dipole.
The best bang for the buck would be a two or three element yagi,
but it would take more room than a dipole.  Both are very simple to
build yourself, see "The ARRL Antenna Book".  Your interference
is more a function of the power you use, assuming you have a good
commercial grade radio, i.e., not homebrew.  The lower the power,
the less chance of interference.  A good antenna can increase your
output 200 to 300 percent.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sid George, CPA     [e-mail]
._  _...  .....  _.._  .._
http://www.hal-pc.org/~sid
-------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:28 1996
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR=3:1  How do I lower it?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 96 18:13:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4gst78$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4gkshn$[e-mail]>

In article <4gkshn$[e-mail]>, Edward Lawrence <eal> wrote:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>>I have a small 6m SQLOOP antenna and my meter says I have a 3:1 SWR.
>>What can I do to lower the SWR?

Just out of curiosity, why do you want to lower the SWR?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:29 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: question on propogation
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 18:42:01 GMT
Message-ID: <4gsutu$[e-mail]>

I am not in ham radio but thought maybe someone out there could answer
a question for me.
I am an RF tech working in satellite communications.
Can someone give me a good definition of PROPOGATION...(propogation
delay, RF propogation or whatever)
We were having a discussion one day at work and cant agree on
it....Yes, I guess we got a liitle to much time on our hand.
Your definition would be greatly apreciated.
Please Email me if you can help.
Thanks in advance,

Mike
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:30 1996
From: Scott Rosen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: test
Date: 26 Feb 1996 20:40:10 GMT
Message-ID: <4gt5ra$[e-mail]>

This is a test message, please ignore, sorry



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:30 1996
From: [e-mail] (jim anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: mobile antennas
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 96 22:07:07 GMT
Message-ID: <4gshk3$[e-mail]>

does anyone have any suggestions on mobile antennas for
2meter and 440 for motorcycles..tnxs will get into hf
later..jim


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:32 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need plans for 6m antenna
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:35:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtc1j$[e-mail]>
References: <4gaqpe$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Mark McAnally) wrote:

>Does anyone know of a source for a simple yet effective dipole or
>vertical 6m homebrew antenna? Thanks in advance   KE4QKN in
>Milton, FL

Hi Mark

Check out my home page under Copper Cactus at
http://www.inlink.com/~raiar
The numbers you need to construct a single band 6-m J-Pole are the
same as for the multi-band.
I use J-Poles almost exclusively now, most are the mirror image J's
which for 6-m I installed it such that I can turn horizontal if need
be.

TTUL
Gary






From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:33 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: a slinky antenna?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:44:36 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtcjl$[e-mail]>
References: <4g3b0f$[e-mail]> <4gb583$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (John N0ISL) wrote:

>Got this reply from Clark.. I had to smile because it greatly parallels
>the experience I had with the slinky....


>>Subj: Re: a slinky antenna?
>>Date: 96-02-18 22:03:27 EST
>>From: [e-mail] (Clark Savage Turner WA3JPG)
>>To:   [e-mail]

>>Most of the comments seem to have been on the "commercial"
>>version, the "slinky" antenna.  However, as usual, I feel
>>the hype was a bit loud back then.....

>>Just buy a pair of slinky's at your local toy store!  What,
>>$8 or something?  OK.  Now get some short clip leads from
>>Radio Shack.  Another $1.  Fine.  Now get some cheap TV
>>twin lead or some coax.  Strip the ends and feed the clip
>>leads to the ends of the slinky's.  Hang them as high as
>>you can and stretch them out to fit your space.  Put it all
>>into a tuner and there you are.

>>It works fine.  I have done it.  I had a small apartment on the
>>3rd floor of a building where no antennas were allowed.  However,
>>there was a clothesline that went through a pulley to a pole
>>about 40 feet away and 20 feet in the air.  I hung one slinky
>>onto the line and pulled it out when it got dark and fed it from
>>the end.  It worked great.  I pulled it back when I was done
>>operating.  Kept me on the air.  Worked DX.  Had fun. Cheap.

>>73

>>Clark
>>WA3JPG

>Has anybody tried the Telex "adjustable dipole" It was two steel measuring
>tapes
>that unrolled to the lengths reuired for the frequency selected. I also
>remeber a military antenna that worked the same way.. Any of you SF folks
>bring one home?..

>73 John N0ISL
>John Douglas, N0ISL
>AX.25 N0ISL@KZ7I.#MSP.MN.USA.NOAM
>I'm in Minnesota only because I must be somewhere!


I just finished building a small adjustable antenna similar to the
Telex using those itsy bitsy slinkies.  1-1/4 inch diameter jobs.

Construction was similar to a mirrored-J rather than dipole type,
using 1/2 inch PVC construction for the mast surrounded by the
slinkies that extended each direction from center and cut to 440 MHz.
within the 1/2 PVC was 3/8 PVC so I could telescope the slinkies out
to 2-meters.  A single pinhole was drilled after the SWR was adjusted
to insure the same length of extension each use.

A small stainless steel rod was used for the matching element and PVC
for the mount.

Previous to this antenna, I had used slinkies as end fed vertical
dipoles with great success.  A string was tied inside the slinky to
limit its extension and a second line was used to toss the topside
over an existing object on field trips.

For VHF/UHF work, I prefer the small diameter slinkies and for HF
work, the larger standard size slinkies.

TTUL
Gary

PS - mirror image J's can be found on my web page at
http://www.inlink.com/~raiar





From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:35 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is good for 6m?
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:53:26 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtd44$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] (Darrell Moody) wrote:

><[e-mail]> wrote:

>>Hello,
>>just want to get some info. on what antennas
>>seem to "do the job" on 6 meters.
>>What is good, what is not.
>As usual, the bigger the better. I've worked stations at 1000 miles+
>with half a watt to a dipole via Sporadic E, but I reckon a 3 ele yagi
>is a minimum for reasonable performance - worked 70 DXCC countries on
>mine until I replaced it with a 5 ele. If I had the space it would be
>a 6 ele Crushcraft but most of us in the UK do not have much land.
>Propagation isn't too hot at the moment, mainly summer Sporadic E, but
>last year we had 2 weeks of short UK-US openings so don't give up.

>--------------------------------------
>Darrell G0HVQ UKSMG#353 Loc IO81VV
>[e-mail]
>--------------------------------------


For local use, I stick with verticals, I have a 6-m ringo that I don't
particularly like too well.  And several home brew J-Pole types of
various designs.

For daily repeater use, a standard J-Pole is great, for mobile to
mobile I use a stacked-J and when band conditions are just right for
DX I have a mirror image J that I installed in such a way that I can
flip it from vertical to horizontal polarization at the push of a
button.

Needless to say, Js are omni-directional, therefore a beam or yagi
would be more appropriate for the serious DXer.  However, I would like
to say that when the band is open, the type of antenna doesn't seem to
matter all that much.  It's those times that are just marginal that a
32 element yagi sure would be nice, Hi Hi....

TTUL
Gary





From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:37 1996
From: [e-mail] (nstn2527)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CB antenna to 2m 5/8?
Date: 27 Feb 1996 00:53:03 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtklg$[e-mail]>
References: <4gf5um$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <Pine.OSF.3.91.960223134103.29199D-100000-100000-100000-100000-100000@internet> <Pine.SUN.3.90.960224155038.10907C-100000@zippy>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <Pine.SUN.3.90.960224155038.10907C-100000@zippy>,
[e-mail] says...
>
>On Fri, 23 Feb 1996, Dan O'Connell wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 1996, Robert Smits wrote:
>>
>> > [e-mail] (Benjamin J. Weiss)KE6HRM writes:
>> >
>> > >Hi!
>> > >
>> > >I bought a used CB mag-mount antenna, as I had hear that it
>> > >was easy to convert one to a 2m 5/8 whip.  I went down to
>> > >the local library and looked at W1FB's Antenna Notebook,
>> > >the ARRL Antenna Compendium Vol 1, and the 1994 ARRL Handbook.
>> >
>>    the article was in CQ magazine sometime before 1988, because I used
>> the article to modify a mag cb antenna. Also used it on 6 meters!
>>    Dan WA7TDZ   [e-mail]
>
>I took an old Radio Shack mag mount CB antenna and cut the radiator down
>and rewound the coil for a 5/8 on 220.  Works just fine.  It just
>happened that the coil form was already the same size as the plans in
the
>ARRL Handbook and Antenna Book for their 220 5/8 antenna.
>
>Ken
>
>________________________________________________________________________
__
>Ken Harrison   ---      [e-mail]      ---   Amateur Radio:
N6MHG
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There was a program for the Commodore 64 that helped one design a mobile
antenna by calculating no. of turns, coil diameter and length, length and
diameter of whip to accommodate a desired frequency.  But who uses the
Commodore anymore?  I don't know of a similar program for the PC but it
would be nice to have for experimentation.


Les Hiltz
Kingston, Nova Scotia
>
>
>



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:39 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Length
Date: 27 Feb 1996 01:38:51 GMT
Message-ID: <4gtnbb$[e-mail]>
References: <4ggesq$[e-mail]>

>   [e-mail] (Glen Reifsnyder) writes:
>  I am in Princeton, NJ and want to receive CBC Radio out of Toronto,
>  Ontario at 740 on the AM band.  I have a GE Super Radio with external
>  connections for an AM antenna.  How long should the antenna be to receive
>  740?  Is there a formula to determine the antenna length knowing the
>  frequency?

Yes, the formula is L = 468/F
where L is the length of a half-wave dipole and F is the frequence in Mhz.
F for 740 kilohertz would be 0.74, which would make your antenna a
little long, but good.  For you, the longer the wire, the better.

 What type of wire do I use?

Basicly, it does not matter.

 I can only have the antenna
>  inside the house, first floor or basement.

The higher, the better.

 Should the wire run around
>  the baseboard of a room?

Does not matter.

Do the number of angles or turns in the length
>  or wire make a difference?

Not really.
>
>  Thanks!
>
>
>  -
>    GLEN REIFSNYDER  [e-mail]
>



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sid George, CPA     [e-mail]
._  _...  .....  _.._  .._
http://www.hal-pc.org/~sid
-------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:40 1996
From: [e-mail] (Pricemw)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Apartment Antenna
Date: 27 Feb 1996 02:18:42 -0500
Message-ID: <4gub8i$[e-mail]>
References: <4gsrk5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Pricemw)

>   [e-mail] (William Pulvermacher) writes:
>  Anyone know of a reliable antenna to be used in an apartment.
>  Preferrably something that I dont have to sneek into the attic for.  I
>  live on the second floor and have a balcony outside.  I don't want to
>  kill the nieghbors either.  It's a stock Galaxy DX88HL.  Mostly used on

>  11m.

You might try a horizontal loop inside.  Start by stringing a wire near
the ceiling, all the way around a room.  Feed the antenna with coax at a
corner, through a tuner.  The antenna will work best on bands where the
loop is a significant part of a full wavelength, or longer.  Experiment
with feedlines and baluns for best results.  A cheap and unobtrusive way
of getting started is to use small gauge solid wire, say #26-#36 gauge.

Wayne W5GIE


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:41 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cubical Quad Antennas for HF
Date: 27 Feb 1996 04:52:01 -0700
Message-ID: <4gur91$[e-mail]>
References: <4fsgkr$[e-mail]> <4gu415$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4gu415$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (mike del pozzo) wri
tes:
>[e-mail] (Karl-Heinz Merscher,,,) wrote:
>
>
>
>>Hi out there,
>
>>is there anybody who operats with a LBA (Lightning Bolt Antennas) or a
>>cubical quad antenna made by CUBEX??
>
>>The LBA antennas are cheaper than the Cubex antennas. In the catalogues
>>it seems that the CUBEX antennas are better in stability.
>
>>Any exerperiences with that antennas??
>
>>I'm searching for a supplier of a good cubical quad antenna ...
>
>>Thanks in advance!
>
>>Charlie
>
>>DL6RDE
>Hello Charlie, like the other gentlemen , Another happy Quad owner
>here. I have replaced the Hygain 5 el monobands with the Cubex 4
>element tribander. Very Heavy-duty stuff. It has since survived Ice
>loading ( even in Atlanta ) 70+ MPH wind and even My installation...
>The tuning is a bit touchy but will come around OK . Performs best if
>elements are fed seperately. 1st QSO on 20 was with KC4AAA in
>Antarctica. Signals are incomparable with Yagis . Hope all goes well
>with yours and well see you durring CQWW WPX somewhere
>73's de KR4TG , Mike
>
>
Could anyone Post a way to contact both Cubex and LBA (Lighting Bolt Ant)

Thanks  and 73's

Mike


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:42 1996
From: [e-mail] (David Stuben)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Alarm decal antenna.
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 96 14:32:02 GMT
Message-ID: <4gv3hm$[e-mail]>

I would like to know if anyone is using the patch type antenna that was
advertised in QST some months ago.  This antenna is disguised as a alarm
decal, and is for the 2m band.  I am interested in this type of an antenna for

a new truck that I have on order.  I have a glass mount antenna now, but the
performance is somewhat marginal.  A quarter wave magmount works better!  I
could just drill a hole in the roof, but something inside seems neat too.
Also any information on loop type antennas for 2m/440, such as feeding,
mounting,etc would be great.  Thanks!!

David C. Stuben          [e-mail]
Electronic Data Systems, Advanced Computing Center


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:43 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Croft)
Subject: ROHN 45 & 55 TOWERS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 15:02:21 GMT



I'm hunting sections of Rohn 45 and/or 55 towers, and the various hardware acc
essories that go with them.
 Additionally, I'm interested in buying a RTS  (Dick Weber)  rotating tower sy
stem or parts  for Rohn 25,45,55.
     PLEASE EMAIL ME WHAT YOU HAVE - EVEN A SINGLE SECTION OF TOWER CONSIDERED
!
With all the swap nets, corners of garages holding 'spares', and plans that ge
t changed, keep this WTB in mind
when you hear someone looking to sell!  Somebody's got to have some somewhere!

Thanks!                       WB9IQI  -  Patrick Croft
                                  Daytime Tel:[phone]
                                          Fax:[phone]
                                        email:[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:44 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 27 Feb 1996 16:15:57 GMT
Message-ID: <4gvant$[e-mail]>
References: <4g2j6u$[e-mail]> <4ga0lt$[e-mail]> <4gfk3h$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

In <4gfk3h$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kenneth Ferguson) writes:
>Theoretically, an antenna tuner does not dissipate power, de k4kxo.
>[e-mail] wrote:
>
>>In <4g2j6u$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (WB7ASR) wri
tes:
>>>How can you tell how much RF power an antenna tuner is consuming
>>>when in use?
>>>
>>>Is this a trick question? How about putting a wattmeter just in front of it
, measure
>> the power in, then put the wattmeter on the output side and measure the pow
er
>> out. The difference should be WATT your loosing in the tuner.
>
>>                                    73's WD9AHF - Jim
>
>

  Ken,

   Theoretically, a bumble bee can't fly.

                                                Jim


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:45 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]> <4gj6ba$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gstq5$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 17:19:24 GMT

In article <4gstq5$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>
>>For a balanced tuner, we'd want to use hot wire ammeters, and a RF
>>voltmeter that we could move along the line, to determine power out.
>>The RF voltmeter would let us directly determine VSWR and give us
>>a direct tuner output voltage reading. Combined with the RF current
>>readings of the hot wire ammeters (one in each leg) we could then
>>determine power out by cranking the formulas.
>
>It's not obvious to me how this would work. Wouldn't we have to know the
>phase angle between the voltage and current to determine the power?
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Yeah, we do. We need another bit of information to get that don't
we? If we knew the terminating load impedance, we'd be home free,
but we don't know that. We discovered the voltage peak with the RF
voltmeter, but we need to find the current peak too. Then the phase
angle can be determined by the length of line between the two peaks.
Looks like we need a current probe, can be relative, that we can
move along the line too. That could be as simple as a NE-2 and
a small loop, mounted on a wooden stick we could move along the
line. Or we could get fancy and use a split ferrite, a diode,
and a meter.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:47 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Transmatch Loss
Date: 28 Feb 1996 16:31:09 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4h200d$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]

I would like to offer a suggestion for finding transmatch loss:

1) Assume the following:
   a) T, Pi or L circuit or the different variations.
   b) For simplicity, no Xfmrs or link coupling.
   c) Neglect common mode currents (usually OK).

2) Using a digital capacitance meter, temporarily disconnect each capacitor
   and get a capacitance vs dial reading calibration for each.

3) Using a known capacitor and a grid dipper, get the coil inductance
   vs its dial setting.

4) If it is not possible to measure coil Q, assume a value, say 300 or
   whatever you feel comfortable with. At low values of L the Q may
   drop off, say 10 percent.

5) Connect transmatch to feedline and tune for *exactly* 1.0 SWR.
   Measure the power.

6) We now know the following:
   a) input resistance Rin = 50 Ohms
   b) power input
   c) input voltage Vin
   d) input current Iin *in phase* with Vin

7) We now have the info to find the following:
   a) all voltages
   b) all currents
   c) the power dissipation in the coil or coils (estimate?)
   d) the value of the complex load impedance.
   e) the power to the load.
   f) transmatch efficiency.

8) Set up a Mathcad work sheet or a spreadsheet to perform
   ladder circuit analysis equations to solve for these quantities.
   If you are not comfortable with the mathematics, get help from
   your neighborhood rocket scientist.

9) Once this is set up it can be used as often as desired to
   completely understand what's going on.

10) If the coil Q is not known precisely, at least we can get
    an approximation and some *comparative* answers. If at all
    possible, try to get Q values for each ham band.  Maybe the
    coil manufacturer can be helpful.

11) If desired, the effects of stray C and L values can be included
    to get a small improvement in accuracy. For extremely reactive loads
    the accuracy of the load impedance calculation will degrade somewhat,
    no doubt.


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:48 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: Bill Starkgraf <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Apartment Antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WPS)
References: <4gub8i$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 16:34:44 GMT

I am in the same situation.  I tried the wire around inside, but
with all the mesh
in the stucco, I couldn't really get out.  Since I live on the
first floor, I ran
the coax out my patio door hidden in all the ground cover and
when I get to the
downspout, I clip the center lead to this and the shield to the
copper tubing
of the large air conditioner unit in front of the downspout.  It
seemed strange that
at the bottom of the downspout there was some missing paint
(HI-HI).  This works
OK but boy is it directional.  Living just NW of LA I can hit
Northern California
real well (579 running 30 watts), but anything a few miles in
the other direction, I
have no luck.  I was wonderering if anyone out there had any other ideas?

The small guage wire with a weight on the end would work if I
pitched it onto
the roof.  I am not sure what the apartment management would
say.  They did catch
me hooking my downspout/rain gutter antenna.  I explained that
it was to improve
what I can receive on my radio.  Sorry I forgot to tell them
that I was also
transmitting.  The next thought that came into their minds was
the ugly wire connection.
I explained that it was already connected and showed then the
coax.  They had to really
look for it.  Actuall when the coax comes out of the ground
cover and comes onto the
air conditioner pad, I cnaged the coax from black to white.
Hides it a little more even though
it is in the open.

73

Bill,  KD6UQB



Bill Starkgraf,   KD6UQB
[e-mail]
AT&T Global Information Solutions
El Segundo, CA


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:49 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Why long wire TVI
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4gtl4r$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:50:20 GMT

In article <4gtl4r$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Simple question: why do long wire antennas cause more TVI than most
>other types of antennas?
>
>All responses appreciated.  Correct answers appreciated even
>more.

The short answer is that they don't.

However, if you bring the antenna into the house in order to
attach it directly to the station, you'll have higher RF potentials
in the house than you would with an antenna whose feedpoint is
outside the house, and that can lead to greater fundamental overload
problems with TVs in the house. It isn't the antenna design, it's
how you feed it that makes the difference.

Gary

--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:51 1996
From: Dan O'Connell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ARRL Ant Handbook VHF Quagi
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:55:32 -0800
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960228174957.117C-100000-100000-100000@internet>
References: <4gtg5v$[e-mail]>



On 26 Feb 1996, Jim Fellows wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was planning on constructing some quagi antennas and noticed a couple of
> strange things about the plans in the ARRL Antenna Handbook 17th ed. 1994
> pg18-33.
>
> Now I thought that it might be a typo and looked at the plans for the 1296
> version and saw some strangeness there also.
>
> Here we see the element taper as as least *I* would expect it (always gettin
g
> shorter), but the spacing goes up from 2.92 to 4.75 then down again to 3.94.

> This I don't expect.
>
> Well, if it works, then it works and I'll give it a try.  But before I waste
 my
> time and money following a plan that may have been mistyped or something, I'
d
> like to know if anybody else has constructed either of these with success or
 if
> my edition has faulty plans.  Or anything else that someone might have to ad
d
> about these designs.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
> KF6AGJ
>
>
  The lengths etc. are correct. have built MANY quagis as they are dirt
cheap, and give lots of gain, but you pay for it in a fairly poor
pattern; side lobes. Great for portable use, as I dont mind to much when
they get broken ( I used to take spare parts on my Grid dxpeditions) I
could give you reasons for the spacing difference etc, but I am at school
and all my ref. is at home. Have fun with them!
   Dan   WA7TDZ  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:52 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Magnetic Mount
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:55:52 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Can anyone give me feedback on using any type of HF antenna with the
>extra large multi-pad magnetic mounts?  Bob AA2UV
>([e-mail])

Be *very* careful where you drive. I bought one of these things to
mount a Comet HF antenna on the roof of my Cherokee. Works fine until
you drive under the first bridge. The magnets won't give, but the antenna
sure does. Now rigging up a bumper mount. :-)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:53 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Connector losses
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 18:04:53 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wes Stewart) w
rites:
>
>The bottom line is, as in most things, it depends.

At HF, however, I'd suggest that about the only thing that
"depends" is the quality of the soldering job done to install
the connector. If you're getting noticable loss from a coax
connector at HF, it's almost certainly due to poor installation,
not due to any mismatch it may be introducing.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:54 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Rabbit ears better than roof top tv antenna?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
References: <4gq1jt$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 18:13:58 GMT

In article <4gq1jt$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dean) writes:
>I know that must sound rather stupid but this is the problem I am having.
>
>I recently moved into a new house.  It has no cable service.  When I first se
t
>up my TV I hooked up a cheap set of rabbit ears.  I received a few stations
>fairly well and a couple others not as well.  I also picked up a UHF station
I
>had never seen before.  (I only moved about a mile from where I lived before)

>Anyway, I figured if I could pick these stations up this good with rabbit
>ears, with a roof top antenna they should be perfect.  I bought a 59 element
>VHF/UHF/FM antenna.  I mounted it in the attic for now just to see how much
>better the reception would be.  To my utter surprise it was not much better
>than the rabbit ears!  One of the stations came in a little better, most of
>the others about the same.  The one UHF channel that I had never seen before
>does not come in at all????
>
>Now I realise that mounting it on the roof would be better and should increas
e
>the performance, but the rabbit ears were laying on their side on top of my
>set. The attic of my house is much higher than that.
>
>I am using RG6 cable for the roof top antenna straight into the TV.  The
>rabbit ears use twin lead.
>
>Could I possibly have a bad matching transformer?  Or is the antenna being in

>the attic the problem?  Or maybe I just have a crappie antenna.  But anything

>has got to be better than rabbit ears, right?
>
>As you may be able to tell I am not real knowledgeable about antennas. And I
>know this is not a radio antenna problem, but this seemed like the place to g
o
>for an educated opinion.

Dean, your new yagi antenna is *directional*. You have to *point* it
at the desired station. If you aren't pointing it toward the desired
station, it will be *worse* than the rabbit ears. In most locations,
not all the stations will be in the same direction, so you need a
way to *rotate* the antenna so that it points at the station you are
watching at the time. With an antenna as large as you describe, I
doubt that's possible in your attic, so you need to get it outside
and mounted above a *rotator* so that you can point it toward the
various stations.

Gary

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:56 1996
From: [e-mail] (WB7ASR)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shuttle communication on 2 meter
Date: 28 Feb 1996 23:51:34 GMT
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4h2pq6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4gqtvh$[e-mail]>

[e-mail] wrote:
>In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Wes Stewart) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry Himes) writ
es:
>>>From: [e-mail] (Barry Himes)
>>>Subject: shuttle communication on 2 meter
>>>Date: 23 Feb 96 22:28:20 -0800
>>
>>>I am interested in building an antenna to contact the Shuttle. I want
>>>to use my HT and a very directional antenna. What sort should be
>>>built? I fear that a yagi my not be focused enough to do the job.
>>
>>>Any ideas?
>>>Barry Himes KF6AZU
>>
>>
>>As one of only about 350 hams who contacted the first shuttle op, W5LFL, I
>>suggest that you forget trying with an HT. There will be hundreds of people
>>calling and on FM, it's the big guy that captures the receiver. I recommend
>>1500W and 20 dB of antenna gain. Worked for me:-)
>>
>>73, Wes -- N7WS
>>
>
>  Barry,
>
>  Looks like Wes there is teasing you a little. Maybe he can come with a 50 d
b
> antenna design for you that'll boost your 2 watt HT to 200,000 Watts Effecti
ve
> Radiated Power output. Just be careful who you point that thing at!
>
>  P.S. I see you've 'hamming' for just about a month. Welcome to the zoo.
>
>                                                         Jim WD9AHF

Unless you have the "BIG" station, forget about working the shuttle.
They only talk with pre-determined scheduled contacts (schools), or
stations with the loudest signals ( EME arrays with 1KW amps). When
their above your horizon, there are about 200+ stations on the average
all calling them at the same time you are. The BIG signal will win!!!

WB7ASR...



From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:57 1996
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feedpoint impedance - Extended double Zepp
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 01:17:55 -0500
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4gsoag$[e-mail]>

<REMAPC05@> writes:

>       None of the references I have state the feedpoint impedance of this
>type of antenna - only that it is high.  I would like to go for the 3 db
>gain advantage of this antenna but an open wire feeder is out of the question

>at my site.  Can a balun and coax feed be used or is the recommended open

Hi again Roy, I quit the other posting too soon. The most logical way
to feed an EDZ may be ala G5RV style. A 0.22 wavelength 300 ohm matching
section should transform the antenna impedance to about 30 ohms. Feed it
at that point with coax through a 1:1 choke. 0.22 WL of 300 ohm ladder-
line on 14.2 MHz is about 12 ft. Hope 12 ft of ladder-line is not out
of the question. What band are you interested in?

73, Cecil, KG7BK, OOTC


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:58 1996
From: [e-mail] (Pat Barthelow)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Rotator
Date: 29 Feb 96 03:40:51 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

 From: [e-mail] (Don Stoner)
 Subject: Antenna Rotator

In article <4gor6j$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
 >
 >In article <4go8mc$[e-mail]>, Don Stoner <[e-mail]>
wrote:
>>I hope to put up a 7-30 MHz log periodic antenna. I'd like
recommendations on
a suitable rotator. Cost not important but am interested in strength of
casting
because of high windloading. Appreciate ur comments and suggestions. 73 W6TNS

Hi Don,

           I am using a Hy-Gain 1017 Log Periodic, good from 6.2 to 30
Mhz.  A spinoff benefit  of the base clousres arond the country, as
we were able to save for amateur radio re-use, the Ft. Ord Army
Mars Station.  The antenna is described in the Hy-Gain
Commercial/Military catalog, and is a monster.  (Even though the
catalog describes it as a smaller, compromise LP, both in price and
size, compared to it's huge big brothers.)  It weighs 382 lbs, has 33
sq feet of area, a 38 foot boom, and max element length of 50 feet.
Mounted at 65 feet, on a standard, cookie cutter design structure
common to MARS installations (3 wooden poles, triangular
orientation, about 15 feet on a side, with a wooden platform on top,
and guyed.)  It is rotated using a Hy-Gain 3501 rotator, itself a 250
lb monster, that has 23,000 inch pounds braking torque, and 9000
inch-pounds rotating torque.
          It is beautiful to a ham, visually, but would raise screams of
protest from any nearby neighbors, if put up in a residential
neighborhood.  Such an installation is not a trivial project, and you
should have a PE (engineer) validate the design of any such
structure.  I wish you luck on your antenna project, and would like
to hear how it turns out.
73 de Pat, [e-mail]





From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:57:59 1996
From: [e-mail] (Marc Holdwick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hole size for NMO ant mount?
Date: 29 Feb 1996 04:07:27 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4ga68v$[e-mail]> <4gg8cd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>



There is a company (I believe MaxRad) that makes a 3/8" NMO mount.  Now
we're in the territory of a twist drill...

I've used one for several years with great results.  Plus a 3/8" hole is
bound to be easier to "repair" if ever need be.

73

Marc - N8KWX/9




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

> [e-mail] (PTracy) wrote:
>
> >In article <4ga68v$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> >(Woodybozak) writes:
> >
> >> However, if you want to use what Larsen recommends, they
> >>sell (or used to sell) their own 3/4" saw that also removed a 1/16" area
> >>of paint beyond the hole to provide a good ground connection for the


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:58:01 1996
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How much RF pwr does an ant tuner consume?
Date: 29 Feb 1996 15:38:54 -0500
Message-ID: <4h52su$[e-mail]>
References: <4h4tns$[e-mail]>

In article <4h4tns$[e-mail]>, gary <[e-mail]>
writes:

>I think that by now, faced with all the proposed work to "measure and
>evaluate tuner losses" to feed my miserable random length end fed wire,
>and the expense of all those wattmeters, RF meters, Bridges and duplicate

>tuners, I would just sell my radios, and take up stamp collecting - it's
>*FAR* less stressful...
>--
>Gary....KJ6Q

Actually not Gary. The rules are simple. Most power loss is in the
inductor or balun.

1. Use the lowest Q possible when adjusting the network. With a T type
tuner this is the maximum capacitance that permits a match.

2. Avoid 4:1 baluns, especially if the load is very reactive and has a
very low or high resistive component. 1:1 choke baluns are always more
efficient.

3. (At more than a few hundred watts) If the tuner's inductor, case (from
inductive heating), or balun doesn't get *real* hot efficiency is almost
certainly good. In one tuner I tested, the loss was very low yet the
inductor got pretty hot. Someone else mentioned it before, think of how
hot a 100 watt bulb gets!

4. With any commercial T net amateur grade tuner, capacitive and low
resistance loads on the lowest frequencies always produce the most loss.
Avoid them.

See, no big deal.
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:58:02 1996
From: [e-mail] (MAILLET.D)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: help me for choise antenna in seal boat
Date: 29 Feb 1996 15:53:45 GMT
Message-ID: <4h4i69$[e-mail]>

in juin y travel baleare in seal. wich sort of antenna and equiment do
you instaled ?
tnx.
[e-mail] /MM




From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:58:03 1996
From: Christopher Trask <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feedpoint impedance - Extended double Zepp
Date: 29 Feb 1996 18:22:01 -0700
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <4h5jfp$[e-mail]>
References: <4gsoag$[e-mail]>

In article <4gsoag$[e-mail]> you wrote:

:       None of the references I have state the feedpoint impedance of this
: type of antenna - only that it is high.  I would like to go for the 3 db
: gain advantage of this antenna but an open wire feeder is out of the questio
n
: at my site.  Can a balun and coax feed be used or is the recommended open
: feed an integral part of the operation of the antenna and not subtitutable?

        Look at the Fall 1995 issue of "Communications Quarterly."  In the
article "Modeling and Understanding Small Beams: Part 3 (The EDZ Family of
Antennas)," you will find a good deal of discussion on this topic, as well
as feedpoint impedances.  The references cited at the end of the article
would probably be well worth looking into as well.

        BTW:  There is nothing sacred about open feed line.  A coax line
with a balun at the antenna feedpoint will work just fine, although coax
is a bit more lossy than open line.

--
                                          Regards,

                                          Chris

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Trask / N7ZWY                       Circuit Design for the RF Impaired
ATG Design Services                       __  __     ____  ___       ___ ____
[e-mail]       _~_            /__)/__) / / / / /_  /\  / /_    /
                         (@ @)          /   / \  / / / / /__ /  \/ /___  /
----------------------ooO~(_)~Ooo---------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:58:04 1996
From: Jim Jennings <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RFD Antenna
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 18:42:16 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Does anyone have experience with the RFD antenna shown on p 20.17 of the
95 ARRL Handbook?  I would like to use it on 80/75 meters.  What about
using a current balun rather than the 8 turn coil at the 1/2 wave point?
 Any comments about using 2 wires at the end to try to broadband the
antenna?  The alternatives would probably be an inverted vee
(broadbanded by putting 2 elements on each end).  The midpoint of the
inverted vee (or top of the RFD) would be at about 150 ft.

Thanks for any discussion.

73 Jim, KE5HE


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:58:06 1996
From: [e-mail] (Minor_Cross)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Connector losses
Date: 29 Feb 1996 21:09:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4h54n7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

Concerning losses in the connectors,  here's an article that was posted
by Alan Bloom back in 1992
  -------------8< cut here >8---------------------------------------
From: [e-mail] (Alan Bloom)  Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1992
Subject: The Truth about UHF Connectors
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA

Ya gotta feel sorry for UHF connectors.  Recent strings on this notes group
lambasted them as worthless at VHF and above, and barely tolerable at HF.  One

poster called them "5 dB attenuators", and many agreed that there must be some

sort of conspiracy among ham equipment manufacturers to inflict such garbage
connectors on the amateur community.

Today I finally remembered to bring some UHF adapters from home so I could do
some relative measurements of UHF versus type-N.  As expected, the type-N
showed lower insertion loss at high frequencies, but the UHF connectors were
hardly "5 dB attenuators."

For the test I connected an HP8753 RF network analyzer through
two short BNC cables into the following arrangement:
   _______    ____________    ___________    ____________    _______
  |       |  | BNC female |  | N female- |  | N male to  |  |       |
__| 10 dB |__| to N male  |__| N female  |__| BNC female |__| 10 dB |__
  | Atten.|  | adapter    |  | adapter   |  | adapter    |  | Atten.|
  |_______|  |____________|  |___________|  |____________|  |_______|

Then I repeated the measurement with the N adapters replaced with UHF.
I normalized the measurements by replacing the 3 adapters with a BNC
double-female.  (That is, this was assumed to have 0 dB loss.)

Since two N or UHF adapters were used, I assume the loss per connector
is half the total.  The vertical scale was .1 dB/division, so I
estimated the insertion loss to the nearest .01 dB or so:

              --------- Type N ----------      ---------- UHF ------------
FREQ (MHz)    TOTAL LOSS    PER CONNECTOR      TOTAL LOSS    PER CONNECTOR
1.8           0 dB          0 dB               0 dB          0 dB
30            0             0                  0             0
100           0             0                  0             0
150           0             0                   .02           .01
200           0             0                   .03           .015
450           0             0                   .18           .09
600           0             0                   .26           .13
900           0             0                   .66           .33
1000           .05           .025               .8            .4
1300           .1            .05                .86           .43
1600           .05           .025               .5            .25
2000           .05           .025               .02           .01

Insertion loss increases until about 1200 MHz, and then starts to decrease
until it is almost zero for the UHF connector at 2 GHz!  At this frequency,
the connectors are about 1/4 wave long (1 inch, assuming .66 velocity factor),

so I assume that the two adapters are providing a conjugate match to each
other.  This confirms my assumption that the insertion loss is due to
reflections (impedance mismatch), not absorption (true power loss).

Bottom line:  UHF connectors work fine through the VHF range, and are not too
bad even on the 420 MHz band if you can stand about .1 dB mismatch loss per
connector.

By the way, I did not do the full 2-port calibration on the HP8753, so there
is a couple hundredth's dB ripple in the plots.  I averaged this out by eye to

come up with the numbers in the above chart.

AL N1AL
  -------------8< cut here >8---------------------------------------
Hope this helps some.

73
Minor

     Insert Standard Disclaimer notice here:
Minor Cross   KD7YJ    e-mail: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Mar 07 09:58:07 1996
From: [e-mail] (Gregory K. Dawson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking for Broadband Linear Amplifier Operating in 20 to 1000megahertz
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 21:41:33 GMT
Message-ID: <4h56m6$[e-mail]>

I'm looking for a broadband linear operating from  20 to 1000
megahertz range.  The minimum final output must be 50 watts.  Please,
e-mail me at [e-mail] if you have one.  Please send asking
price, phone number, and address.

Thanks,
Greg